part of the excavation of an Existing Structure…” However, ADUs pursuant to Government Code section 66323, subdivisions (a)(1) and (a)(3), may not be precluded from development for increasing the height of an existing structure or removing more than 50 Cubic Yards of the existing structure as a condition of ADU approval. While the City may provide a definition for converted ADUs, the definition cannot preclude ADUs pursuant to Government Code Section 66323, Subdivisions (a)(1) and (a)(3). Therefore, the City must amend its ordinance to remove these sections or explicitly clarify that ADUs converted from existing or proposed space may not be precluded from development.
3. Section 23.02.25, subdivisions (A), (B)(5), (E)(3), (E)(4), (F)(2)(a), (F)(3)(a), (G)(1), (G)(2)(a), (G)(3)(a), (H)(16)(a), & (I)(5) – Out of Date Code References – The Ordinance makes repeated references to standards contained within Government Codes 65852.2 and 65852.22. While correct at the time of adoption, these code references are now out-of-date due to the Chaptering of Senate Bill 477. Therefore, the City must amend its ordinance to replace these code references with their, re-chaptered sections.
4. Section 23.02.25 (D)(3) – Application Denial – The Ordinance states, “An application that does not conform to the specific standards set forth in this Section, including the development standards set forth in Section 23.02.25(G) shall not be approved ministerially but shall require design review, a conditional use permit, or variance, as applicable. However, state law requires that when a local agency denies an application for an ADU or JADU, the permitting agency shall, within 60 days, return in writing a full set of comments to the applicant with a list of items that are defective or deficient and a description of how the application can be remedied by the applicant.2 Therefore, the City must amend its ordinance to reflect the lawful permit denial procedure.
Section 23.02.25 (E) – Location and Zoning Requirements – The Ordinance states, “An accessory dwelling unit may be located only on residentially zoned lots or upon a lot with an existing residential dwelling.” However, ADUs must be allowed in all areas zoned to allow single-family or multi-family use, whether these areas are exclusively zoned for residential use or not.3 Therefore, the City must amend its ordinance to reflect state law.
5. Section 23.02.25 (E)(1), (2), and (3) – ADU Allotment – The Ordinance states that, “One JADU and one ADU may be constructed on a single family residential lot where the JADU and ADU meet the requirements in Government Code Section 65852.2(e).” However, this language omits the potential for ADUs constructed on lots zoned for multifamily use.4 Therefore, the City must amend its ordinance to also allow for ADUs constructed on lots zoned for multifamily use.
2 Gov. Code, § 66317, subd. (b).
3 Gov. Code. §§ 66314, 66323, subd. (a)(3).
4 Gov. Code, §§ 66314, 66323, subd. (a)(3). PAGE 186 of 1856 Isidro Figueroa, Community Development Director
Additionally, Government Code section 66323, subdivision (a), states, “Notwithstanding Sections 66314 to 66322, inclusive, a local agency shall ministerially approve an application for a building permit within a residential or mixed-use zone to create any of the following: (1) One accessory dwelling unit and one junior accessory dwelling unit per lot with a proposed or existing singlefamily dwelling…(A) The accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit is within the proposed space of a single family dwelling or existing space of a single-family dwelling or accessory structure.” Paragraph (2) permits “[o]ne detached, new construction, accessory dwelling unit that does not exceed fourfoot side and rear yard setbacks.” The use of the term “any” followed by an enumeration of by right ADU types permitted means that any of these ADU types can be combined on a lot zoned for single-family dwellings.
This permits a homeowner, who meets specified requirements, to create one converted ADU; one detached, new construction ADU; and one JADU. Thus, if the local agency approves an ADU that is created from existing (or proposed) space, and the owner subsequently applies for a detached ADU (or vice versa) that meets the size and setbacks pursuant to the subdivision, the local agency cannot deny the application, nor deny a permit for a JADU under this subdivision.
This subdivision applies equally to ADUs created pursuant to Government Code section 66323, subdivisions (a)(3) and (a)(4) on lots with proposed or existing multifamily dwellings. Limiting lots to one ADU would prevent property owners from creating ADUs by right under subdivision (a). Therefore, the City must amend its ordinance to allow for ADU development pursuant to Government Code section 66323, subdivisions (a).
6. Section 23.02.25 (E)(4) – Fire Safety - The Ordinance states “For fire safety purposes, new ADUs and JADUs may only be located on a residential lot that has: 1) at least a 10-foot wide fire lane within 150 feet of the subject property and 2) a minimum fire flow of 1,000 gallons per minute.” However, Government Code section 66314, subdivision (a) provides that a local agency may, through an ordinance, “Designate areas within the jurisdiction of the local agency where accessory dwelling units may be permitted. The designation of areas may be based on the adequacy of water and sewer services and the impact of accessory dwelling units on traffic flow and public safety.” While the City is authorized to designate specific areas where ADUs may be permitted based on impacts on traffic flow and public safety, they can only do so based on substantial evidence in the record that the construction of the ADU it could have a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety5. Therefore, the City must remove this section of the Ordinance or explicitly incorporate the “substantial evidence” to comply with State ADU Law.
7. Section 23.02.25 (F)(2) – Deed Restriction – The Ordinance requires a deed restriction for ADUs. While Government Code section 66333, subdivision (c) requires the recordation of a deed restriction for JADUs, the deed restrictions for 5 Gov. Code, § 66314 (d)(8). PAGE 187 of 1856
Isidro Figueroa, Community Development Director
JADUs are limited to prohibit the separate sale of a JADU and a restriction on the size and attributes of the JADU. Government Code section 66315 requires that no additional standards, other than those provided in Government Code Section 66314, shall be used, or imposed on accessory dwelling units. The City may not require a deed restriction prior to and as a condition of approval of an ADU building permit application.6 Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance to remove this requirement.
8. Section 23.02.25 (F)(2)(b) – JADU Rental Terms – The Ordinances states, “If the ADU/JADU is rented, it shall not be rented for a period of less than 90(ninety) consecutive days. A minimum 90-day rental requirement imposes rental requirements for JADUs that are inconsistent with state law, which only requires a minimum rental term of 30 (thirty days) for ADUs and JADUs built pursuant to Government Code section 66323.7 Therefore, the City must amend its ordinance to clarify that JADUs rental term must be longer than 30 days consistent with Government Code section 66323 subdivision (d).
9. Section 23.02.25 (F)(2)(d); (H)(1); (H)(2); (H)(6) – Livable Area – The Ordinance states that, “The ADU/JADU shall be restricted to the Livable Area approved at the time of building issuance.” However, State ADU Law allows for the development of multiple accessory dwelling units within the portions of existing multifamily dwelling structures that are not used as livable space.8 Therefore, the City must amend its Ordinance to allow for the development of ADUs pursuant to Government Code section 66323, subd. (a)(3).
Additionally, the Ordinance defines “Livable area” as “the square footage of all floor areas of a building, including basements, measures from the exterior faces of walls….” The Ordinance makes multiple references to “Livable Area” regarding floor area calculations. However, floor area must be calculated according to area within the inside perimeter of the exterior walls of the building under consideration, exclusive of vent shafts and courts, without deduction for corridors, stairways, ramps, closets, the thickness of interior walls, columns, or other features.9 Therefore, the City must amend its ordinance to calculate floor area in alignment with the California Building Code (CBC).
10. Section 23.02.25 (F)(2)(e) – Separate Utilities – The Ordinance states that, “A second unit may not have utility services separate from those of the main residential structure on the same property.” However, for ADUs described in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Government Code Section 66323, a local agency, special district, or water corporation shall not require the applicant to install a new or separate utility connection directly between the ADU and the utility or impose a related connection fee or capacity charge, unless the ADU was constructed with a new single-family dwelling, or upon separate 6 Gov. Code, § 66314.
7 Gov. Code, § 66323, subd. (d).
8 Gov. Code, § 66323, subd. (a)(3).
9 CBC, § 202. PAGE 188 of 1856
Isidro Figueroa, Community Development Director
conveyance of the ADU pursuant to Section 66342.10 Therefore, the City must amend its ordinance to specify that ADUs described in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Government Code Section 66323 are an exception to this standard.
11. Section 23.02.25 (F)(2)(g) – Permit Revocation – The Ordinance states that, “Violations and lack of compliance with any provisions of this Section may result in legal action against the property Owner, including revocation of any right to maintain an ADU/JADU on the property…” While this provision aligns with State ADU Law, a local agency, upon request of an owner of an ADU for a delay in enforcement, shall also delay enforcement of a building standard, subject to compliance with Section 17980.12 of the Health and Safety Code, pursuant to Government Code section 66331. Therefore, the City should amend its ordinance to clarify that San Marino residents may request such a delay in enforcement of building standards prescribed by the Ordinance under certain conditions.
12. Section 23.02.25 (G)(1) – ADUs on Multi-family Lots – The Ordinance outlines the planning application exemptions for ADUs created pursuant to Government Code section 65852.2, subdivisions (e)(1)(A) and (B) (now section 66323, subdivisions (a)(1) and (2)). However, the Ordinance fails to specify, here and elsewhere in Section 23.02.25, the potential for the development of ADUs on lots with proposed or existing multifamily dwellings per Government Code section 66323, subdivisions (a)(3) and (4). As Government Code outlines the standards to be met for this type of ADU on lots with proposed or existing multifamily dwellings, the City’s Ordinance must do the same. Therefore, the City must amend its ordinance to clarify the complete potential for comprehensive ADU development on lots with existing or proposed multi-family dwellings pursuant to state law.
13. Section 23.02.25 (H)(2); (H)(3) – ADU Height and Datum Point Definition – The Ordinance restricts attached and detached ADUs from exceeding “one story or sixteen feet in height”. However, these requirements were superseded on January 1, 2023, by the passage of SB 897. Consequently, local agencies may not impose any height limitation that does not allow for the minimum standards enumerated by Government Code section 66321, subdivision (b)(4). Therefore, the City must amend its ordinance to reflect the respective statutory height limitations Additionally, please clarify what is meant by “datum point” or remove from the Ordinance.
14. Section 23.02.25 (H)(6)(b) – “Street Facing” Setbacks – The Ordinance states, “Attached and detached ADU [sic] on corner lots are required to abide by the front and street-facing side yard setback requirements of the underlying zoning district in which the ADU is located.” Further, a setback of no more than four feet from the side and rear lot lines shall be required for an ADU not converted from an existing structure or a new structure constructed in the same location and to 10 Gov. Code, § 66324, subd. (d). PAGE 189 of 1856
Isidro Figueroa, Community Development Director
the same dimensions as an existing structure.11 Any “street-facing side yard setback” regulations that imposes further restrictive setback requirements would conflict with state law. Therefore, the City must amend its ordinance to remove these requirements.
15. Section 23.02.25 (H)(9); (H)(11); (H)(12) – Design Standards – The Ordinance states, “An ADU shall exactly match the building materials, color, style, and form of the primary residence.” The Ordinance goes on to state that, “Exterior lighting shall be shielded or directed so that it does not glare off-site or illuminate the primary residence or any adjacent property.” Finally, the Ordinance requires that: “Windows shall be located to avoid direct line of sight to windows of adjacent properties. However, local design standards provided by the Ordinance pursuant to Government Code sections 66314 – 66322 may not preclude the development of ADUs pursuant to Government Code sections 66323.
Therefore, the City must amend its ordinance to clarify. .
Additionally, design standards for ADUs must be objective standards, i.e. standards that involve no subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official prior to submittal.12 Terms such as “avoid direct line of sight” are subjective terms. Therefore, the City must adopt objective design standards.
16. Section 23.02.25 (H)(14) – Design Standards – The Ordinance states that, “Any common wall separating the accessory dwelling unit from the main building shall be soundproofed.” However, local design standards provided by the Ordinance pursuant to Government Code sections 66314 – 66322 may not preclude the development of ADUs pursuant to Government Code sections 66323.
Therefore, the City must amend its ordinance to clarify.
17. Section 23.02.25 (H)(16)(b); (H)(16)(e) – Parking Standards – The Ordinance states that ADU parking will not be required if, “The ADU is entirely within a proposed or existing primary dwelling or other structure”, or if “There is a Cityapproved and dedicated parking space for a car share vehicle located within one block of the ADU. However, local agencies shall not impose parking standards on accessory dwelling units that are part of the proposed or existing primary residence, rather those that are entirely within these structures.13 Additionally, local agencies shall not impose parking standards ADUs that are located within one block of a car share vehicle, regardless of City approval.14 Finally, local agencies shall also not impose parking standards on ADUs when a permit application for an ADU is submitted with a permit application to create a new single-family dwelling or a new multifamily dwelling on the same lot.15 11 Ibid.
12 Gov. Code, §§66313, subd. (h); 66314, subd. (b)(1).
13 Gov. Code, § 66322, subd. (a)(3).
14 Gov. Code, §66322, subd. (a)(5).
15 Gov. Code,§ 66322, subd. (a)(6). PAGE 190 of 1856
Isidro Figueroa, Community Development Director
Therefore, the City must amend its ordinance to revise parking exemption conditions for ADUs.
18. Section 23.02.25 (I)(1) – JADU Owner Occupancy – The Ordinance states that, “The Owner of a parcel proposed for a JADU shall occupy as a principal residence…” However, owner-occupancy is required for the owner of the singlefamily residence which will contain the JADU, rather than the owner of the parcel on which the residence sits.16 As a single parcel may contain multiple lots with single family dwellings, the Ordinance fails to specify owner-occupancy requirements in scenarios where the parcel owner and residence owner differ, such as a land lease agreement. Therefore, the City must amend its ordinance to include more precise owner-occupancy language.
19. Section 23.02.25 (I)(4) – JADU Development Standards – The Ordinance states that, “The JADU must be contained entirely within the walls of the existing or proposed Single Family Dwelling Unit.” In addition to this requirement, State JADU Law states that enclosed uses within the residence, such as attached garages, are considered a part of the proposed or existing single-family residence and therefore “contained entirely within the walls of the existing or proposed Single Family Dwelling Unit”.17 Therefore, the City must add this language to comply with State JADU Law.
20. (I)(7) – JADU Interior Entry – The Ordinance states, “An interior entry to the main living area shall be provided to serve a JADU.” However, a requirement for an interior entry from JADU to main living area shall only be required if the JADU lacks a separate bathroom.18 Therefore, the City must amend its ordinance to remove this requirement or specify when, and only when, this requirement may apply.
The City has two options in response to this letter.19 The City can either amend the Ordinance to comply with State ADU Law20 or adopt the Ordinance without changes and include findings in its resolution adopting the Ordinance that explain the reasons the City believes that the Ordinance complies with State ADU Law despite HCD’s findings.21 If the City fails to take either course of action and bring the Ordinance into compliance with State ADU Law, HCD must notify the City and may notify the California Office of the Attorney General that the City is in violation of State ADU Law.22 HCD appreciates the City’s efforts in the preparation and adoption of the Ordinance and welcomes the opportunity to assist the City in fully complying with State ADU Law. 16 Gov. Code, § 66333, subd. (b).
17 Gov. Code, § 66333, subd. (d).
18 Gov. Code, §66333, subd. (e)(2).
19 Gov. Code, § 66326, subd. (c)(1).
20 Gov. Code, § 66326, subd. (b)(2)(A).
21 Gov. Code, § 66326, subd. (b)(2)(B).
22 Gov. Code, § 66326, subd. (c)(1). PAGE 191 of 1856
Isidro Figueroa, Community Development Director
Please feel free to contact Nick Green at [email protected] if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Jamie Candelaria
Senior Housing Accountability Unit Manager
Housing Policy Development Division
PAGE 192 of 1856
New Government Code Sections Previous Government Code Sections Article 1. General Provisions
66310 65852.150 (a)
66311 65852.150 (b)
66312 65852.150 (c)
66313 General Definition Section 65852.2 (j), 65852.22 (j) Article 2. Accessory Dwelling Unit Approvals
66314 65852.2(a)(1)(A), (D)(i)-(xii), (a)(4)-(5)
66315 65852.2 (a)(8)
66316 65852.2 (a)(6)
66317 65852.2 (a)(3), (a)(7)
66318 65852.2 (a)(9) 65852.2 (a)(2)
66319 65852.2 (a)(10)
66320 65852.2 (b)
66321 65852.2 (c)
66322 65852.2 (d)
66323 65852.2 (e)
66324 65852.2 (f)
66325 65852.2 (g)
66326 65852.2 (h)
66327 65852.2 (i)
66328 65852.2 (k)
66329 65852.2 (l)
66330 65852.2 (m)
66331 65852.2 (n)
66332 65852.23.
Article 3. Junior Accessory Dwelling Units
66333 65852.22 (a)
66334 65852.22 (b)
66335 65852.22 (c)
66336 65852.22 (d)
66337 65852.22 (e)
66338 65852.22 (f)-(g)
66339 65852.22 (h)
Article 4. Accessory Dwelling Unit Sales
66340 65852.26 (b)
66341 65852.26 (a)
66342 65852.2 (a)(10)
PAGE 193 of 1856
ORDINANCE NO. O-24-1416
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN
MARINO AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 23.01.01
(DEFINITIONS) AND 23.02.25 (ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS) TO
IMPLEMENT STATE LAW REGARDING ACCESSORY DWELLING
UNITS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. RECITALS
WHEREAS, Chapter XXIII (Zoning and Development, Advertising and Signs, Fences and Walls) of the City of San Marino’s Municipal Code (“Planning and Zoning Code”) provides for the organized, predictable, and efficient development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Code establishes land use districts throughout the City and regulates the development of land in each district, including construction of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs); and WHEREAS, in recent years, the California Legislature has approved, and the Governor has signed into law, a number of bills that have amended Government Code Sections 65852.2 and 65852.22 to impose limits on local authority to regulate ADUs and JADUs; and WHEREAS, the City last updated its Municipal Code sections governing ADUs and JADUs in 2020; and
WHEREAS, since 2020 the California Legislature has approved, and the Governor has signed into law, a number of bills that have amended Government Code Sections 65852.2 and 65852.22 to impose limits on local authority to regulate ADUs and JADUs ((2021: AB 345 (permitting separate conveyance of ADUs from primary dwellings in limited circumstances), AB 3182 and AB 68 (streamlining ADU approvals)); (2022: SB 897 and AB 2221 (increasing height limits of ADUs)); and (2023: AB 976 (owner-occupancy requirements), and AB 1332 (pre-approved ADU plan sets)); and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Marino seeks to update its Municipal Code to bring it into conformance with state law on ADUs and JADUs; and WHEREAS, this Ordinance revises the Municipal Code to increase the allowable height limits for ADUs when the ADU is located near a public transit hub as required by the Government Code and to make other changes to bring the Municipal Code into conformance with state law and clarify existing ambiguities in the City’s regulation of ADUs and JADUs; and WHEREAS, on November 21, 2023, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, at which time it considered all material and evidence, whether written or oral and unanimously PAGE 194 of 1856
voted (5-0) to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. PCR-23-18, recommending that the City Council adopt Ordinance No. O-23-1411 updating the City’s ADU Ordinance; and WHEREAS, on February 23, 2024, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing, at which time it considered all material and evidence, whether written or oral and unanimously voted (5-0) to waive full reading and introduce by title only the Ordinance. On March 14, 2024, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. O-23-1411 updating the City’s ADU Ordinance; and WHEREAS, on August 26, 2024, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) provided the City a letter containing their findings of their review of the City’s ADU Ordinance and found that the Ordinance did not comply with State ADU and JADU Laws; and WHEREAS, on October 23, 2024, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed Ordinance and recommended to the City Council that it adopt the proposed Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, notice of Public Hearing before the City Council was duly given and published in the time, form, and manner as required by law; and
WHEREAS, on November 13, 2024, the City Council considered this Ordinance. Its findings are made based on the entire administrative record including testimony and evidence presented to the Planning Commission on October 23, 2024, and to the City Council at its November 13, 2024 public hearing, including, without limitation, the staff report submitted by the Director of Community Development.
SECTION 2. GENERAL PLAN. Pursuant to Government Code § 65860, the City Council hereby determines that this Ordinance is compatible with, consistent with and integrated with all other elements of the City’s General Plan.
1. The City Council determines that this Ordinance is compatible with Objective L.1 of the General Plan (Estate Residential), which “provide[s] an estate area with large lot sizes in the hilly terrain of the northwestern area of the City for single-family residential use[]” and has a policy of allowing single-family residences to have “‘second units’ as defined by the City of San Marino in order to meet state housing requirements, and limited accessory structures to the primary residence.”
2. The City Council determines that this Ordinance is compatible with Objective L.2 of the General Plan (Very Low Density Residential), which “provide[s] residential area districts with large lots in traditional neighborhood patterns for single-family residential use[]” and has a policy of allowing single-family residences to have “‘second units’ as defined by the City of San Marino in order to meet state housing requirements, and limited accessory structures to the primary residence.”
3. The City Council determines that this Ordinance is compatible with Objective L.3 of the General Plan (Low Density Residential), which “provide[s] residential area districts that reflect the predominant pattern of residential development in the City – single-family development on standard size residential lots[]” and has a policy of allowing single-family residences to have PAGE 195 of 1856
“‘second units’ as defined by the City of San Marino in order to meet state housing requirements, and limited accessory structures to the primary residence.” SECTION 3. AMENDMENT. Section 23.01.01 (Definitions) of the San Marino Municipal Code is amended in its entirety and shall read as shown in Exhibit “A” to this Ordinance (changes shown in redline format for ease of reference).
SECTION 4. AMENDMENT. Section 23.02.25 (Accessory Dwelling Units) of the San Marino Municipal Code is amended in its entirety and shall read as shown in Exhibit “A” to this Ordinance (changes shown in redline format for ease of reference).
SECTION 5. ENVIRONMENTAL. The City Council finds and determines that this ordinance is not subject to further review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.; “CEQA”) for the following reasons: (1) the ordinance is exempt pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.17, which exempts the local adoption of ordinances regarding second units in single or multifamily residential zones; (2) the ordinance is exempt under CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15301), which exempts projects involving the minor alteration of existing residences involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that already in existence; (3) it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15060(c)(2)); (4) there is no possibility that the ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15061(b)(3)); and (5) the ordinance, by itself, does not constitute a “project” as defined in the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal.
Code Regs. § 15378). The Ordinance is for general policies and procedure-making. It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment.
SECTION 6. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, if for any reason is held to be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases of this Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council declares that it would have adopted each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases hereof be declared invalid or unenforceable.
SECTION 7. CONSTRUCTION. This Ordinance must be broadly construed to achieve the purposes stated in this Ordinance. It is the City Council’s intent that the provisions of this Ordinance be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this Ordinance.
SECTION 8. VALIDITY OF PREVIOUS CODE SECTIONS. If this entire Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, any repeal or amendment of the SMMC or other city ordinance by this Ordinance will be rendered void and cause such previous SMMC provision or other city ordinance to remain in full force and effect for all purposes.
PAGE 196 of 1856
SECTION 9. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published as required by law. This Ordinance takes effect 30 days from the date of its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 20th day of November 2024. ________________________
STEVEN W. HUANG, DDS
ATTEST:
_________________________
CITY CLERK
PAGE 197 of 1856
Exhibit A
23.01.01: DEFINITIONS:
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT: Accessory Dwelling Unit (also “ADU”, “second unit,” or “granny unit”) shall mean an attached or detached residential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons. It shall include a kitchen as defined in this Chapter, a full bath, and permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel where the primary single-family residence or multi-family residence is situated. An accessory dwelling unit also includes an “Efficiency Unit” as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 17958.1 and a “Manufactured Home” as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 18007.
1. “ATTACHED ADU” shall mean a new ADU is constructed as a physical expansion (i.e. addition) to the primary dwelling and is attached to the single family dwelling unit by one (1) or more common walls. An Attached ADU shall have a separate exterior access. The exterior access shall be a standard exterior door and shall be located in a manner that will preserve, to the greatest extent feasible, the privacy of the primary residence and any adjoining residences and, to the greatest extent feasible, shall not be visible from the street.
2. “CONVERTED ADU” shall mean an ADU created within the interior of an existing structure that occupies part of the floor area of the existing structure, as defined in this chapter. A converted ADU does not include an ADU that would: (a) increase the height of an existing structure; (b) require removal of more than fifty (SO) cubic yards as part of the excavation of an existing structure; or (c) increase the floor livable area of the existing structure by more than one hundred fifty (150) square feet beyond its existing physical dimensions for the purpose of accommodating ingress and egress; provided, however, that such restrictions cannot preclude an ADU described in Government Code section 66323 (a)(1) or (a)(3) from development.
3. “DETACHED ADU” shall mean a new ADU that is located on the property such that the unit does not share any walls with the single family dwelling unit or multiple family dwelling unit, and the distance between nearest point of any portion of the unit and the single family dwelling unit or multiple family dwelling unit is six feet (6’) or more. A Detached ADU shall be located six feet (6’) or more from each dwelling, building, and other structure on the property.
23.02.25: ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS:
A. Purpose: The purpose of this section is to comply with Government Code sections 65852.2 and 65852.2266310 et seq. and recent amendments to these provisions, which allow the City to enact certain standards for the development of accessory dwelling units in residential zones within the City. It is also the purpose of this section to ensure the availability of affordable housing for family members, students, and the elderly, among PAGE 198 of 1856
others, in the City while mitigating impacts to traffic, utilities, public health and safety and preserving the character of residential neighborhoods.
B. Definitions:
1. The following words and phrases, when used in this chapter shall, for the purpose of this chapter, have the meanings respectively ascribed to them in this section:
2. “High-quality transit corridor” has the same meaning as defined by Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, which as of adoption means a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.
3. “Major transit stop” has the same meaning as defined in Section 21064.3 of the Public Resources Code, which as of adoption means a site containing any of the following: (1) an existing rail or bus rapid transit station; (2) a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service; or (3) the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.
4. “Nearest transit stop” means the closest site containing an existing rail or bus station or stop.
5. “Efficiency Kitchen” has the same meaning as defined Municipal Code Section
23.01.01, which is a cooking facility with appliances, a food preparation counter, and storage cabinets that are of reasonable size in relation to the size of the junior accessory dwelling unit as defined by Government Code § 6633365852.22(fa)(6).
C. Application Approval: Any application for an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) or junior accessory dwelling unit (JADU) that meets the location and development standards contained in this Section shall be approved by the City following a ministerial review for compliance, and within 60 days after submission of a complete application. An application which is denied for failing to comply with the City’s development standards will be returned to the applicant with a written list of items that are defective or deficient and a description of how the application can be remedied by the applicant.
D. Submittal Requirements And Application Processing:
1. An application for an accessory dwelling unit shall be submitted to the Planning Division and Building Division concurrently with the submittal of an application for a building permit. The Director of Community Development shall prescribe the form of application, documents to be submitted, and the type of information to be provided by the applicant.
2. The Director of Community Development or his/her designee shall issue an accessory dwelling unit building permit if the application conforms to the specific standards set forth in this section.
PAGE 199 of 1856
3. An application that does not conform to the specific standards set forth in this Section, including the development standards set forth in Section 23.02.25(G) shall not be approved ministerially but shall require design review, a conditional use permit, or variance, as applicable.
E. Location and Zoning Requirements: An accessory dwelling unit may be located on all areas zoned to allow the construction of single-family or multi-family residential dwellings and the site includes a proposed or existing single-family or multi-family dwellingonly on residentially zoned lots or upon a lot with an existing residential dwelling.
1. One ADU may be constructed on a lot zoned to allow residential use.
2. One JADU may be constructed on a lot zoned to allow residential use.
13. One converted ADU, one JADU, and the construction of one detached ADU may be constructed on a single-family residential lot where the converted ADU, JADU and detached ADU meet the requirements in Government Code Section 66323.65852.2(e). The limit on ADUs and JADUs for multi-family lots shall be as set forth in 66232.
24. For fire safety purposes, new ADUs and JADUs may only be located on a residential lot that has: 1) at least a 10-foot wide fire lane within 150 feet of the subject property and 2) a minimum fire flow of 1,000 gallons per minute if the Building Official makes a written finding that doing so is required to avoid a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety. This restriction shall not apply to ADUs and JADUs that are exempt from Planning Review, pursuant to Subsection(GF)(1) of this Section as required by Government Code Section 6632365852.2.
35. Any ADU/JADU legally created shall be governed by the zoning regulations in effect at the time of approval.
46. Tree Removal and Pruning. Tree permits for the removal and/or pruning of established, heritage, or oak trees shall be required per Municipal Code Chapter 23, Article 19.
57. Applicants shall locate and design ADU/JADUs so that the retention of established, heritage, or oak trees is accommodated unless doing so prohibits the development of an ADU/JADU as required by the Government Code.
F. All ADUs and JADUs shall be subject to the following restrictions:
1. The development and use of the ADU/JADU shall only be valid and permitted based on the terms established in this Section.
2. A Deed Restriction shall be required for all ADUs/JADUs. Prior to final inspection and issuance of a certificate of occupancy, for an ADU/JADU, a deed restriction, approved by the Director of Community Development or his/her designee, on a PAGE 200 of 1856
form approved by the City Attorney, shall be recorded with the County Recorder’s Office and filed with the Planning Division which shall include the restrictions and limitations identified in this Subsection. Said deed restriction shall run with the land and shall be binding upon any successor in ownership of the property. The final recorded deed restriction shall state that:
a. The ADU/JADU shall not be sold separately from the primary residence.
Except as otherwise required by Government Code section 65852.26. b. If the ADU/JADU is rented, it shall not be rented for a period of less than 390 consecutive days.
c. Owner-occupancy is required for parcels with a JADU, consistent with the requirements and limitations of Government Code Section 66333(b)Subsection H( 1) of this Section.
3d. The ADU/JADU shall be restricted to the floor area livable area approved at the time of building permit issuance. Any owner wishing to incorporate the floorlivable area of the ADU/JADU back into the primary dwelling unit must request termination of the ADU/JADU use under this Section, satisfying all zoning and development standards such as setbacks, floor area, and lot coverage. The City will ministerially review ADUs within existing portions of existing multi-family dwelling structures that are not used as livable space, such as storage rooms, boiler rooms, passageways, attics, basements, or garages, if each unit complies with state building standards for dwellings in accordance with Government Code Section 66323. The City will ministerially review applications for ADUs and JADUs for multi-family dwellings that meet the requirements of Government Code Section 66323 as long as they comply with this chapter. 4e. A second unit may not have utility services separate from those of the primary dwelling unit on the same property unless required by State law. 5f. ADU/JADUs shall not be given separate street addresses from the primary dwelling unit, unless the Director of Community Development determines that one is required for public safety purposes. If the Director of Community Development determines that a separate address is required for public safety purposes, then the City will issue an alphanumeric address for the ADU/JADU beginning with “A” and continuing through the alphabet for units on the property. For example, if the address for the primary dwelling unit is 123 Main Street, the address for the ADU/JADU would be 123 A Main Street.
6g. The owner and all successors in interest in the subject property shall maintain the ADU/JADU in accordance with all applicable regulations established in this Section and any approval granted by the City. Violations and lack of compliance with any provisions of this Section may result in PAGE 201 of 1856
legal action against the property owner, including revocation of any right to maintain an ADU/JADU on the property as set forth in Subsection J of this Section and shall be subject to administrative fines and penalties as contained in Article 4 of Chapter 1 of the San Marino Municipal Code. The owner and all successors in interest in the subject property may request a delay in the fenforcement of a building standard, subject to compliance with Section 17980.12 of the Health and Safety Code, pursuant to Government Code section 66331.
G. Process, Review, And Fees For ADUs And JADUs:
1. Projects Exempt From Obtaining a Planning ADU Application: As provided under Government Code Section 65852.2(e)(1),66323 an owner shall not be required to submit a Planning ADU Application for an ADU under subsection(f)(2) below, and may instead seek building permit approval for the following types of units that are located within residential zones or upon a lot with an existing residential dwelling:
a. JADUs meeting the requirements of Government Code Sections 6632365852.2(e)(1)(A) and 65852.2266333-66339.
b. Converted ADUs meeting the requirements of Government Code Section 65852.2(e)(1)(A)66323 and 66314.
c. New construction of detached ADUs meeting the requirements of Government Code Section 6632365852.2(e)(1)(B).
d. Projects that are exempt from submitting a Planning ADU Application under this provision are still subject to tree removal permits, grading permits, and other applicable building permit requirements.
2. Projects Subject To Planning ADU Application Review And Timelines: The Director of Community Development or his/her designee shall ministerially review and approve a Planning ADU Application and shall not require a public hearing, provided that the submitted application is complete and demonstrates that the ADU complies with the requirements contained in this Section. Where a Planning ADU Application is submitted with an application for a single-family or multi-family dwelling that is subject to design review under Chapter 23 of this code, the Planning ADU Application will be considered separately without discretionary review or a public hearing, following action on the portion of the project that is subject to Chapter 23.
a. Planning ADU Applications subject to ministerial approval shall be processed within the timelines established by California Government Code Section 6631765852.2.
b. In addition to obtaining a Planning ADU Application, the applicant shall be required to obtain a building permit, tree removal permit, if applicable, and PAGE 202 of 1856
other applicable building permit requirements prior to the construction of the ADU.
3. Fees and Services:
a. The owner of an ADU or JADU shall be subject to the payment of all sewer, water, and other applicable fees except as specifically provided in California Government Code Sections 65852.2 and 65852.2266324 and 66338.
b. No letters of service availability for water or sewer shall be required to be provided by the applicant.
H. ADU Development Standards: Excepting those ADUs approved under subsection F( 1), an ADU shall comply with the following development standards:
1. ADUs are limited to a maximum of two bedrooms for lots smaller than 12,000 square feet. ADUs are limited to a maximum of three bedrooms for lots 12,000 square feet and larger. Studio and one-bedroom ADUs shall not exceed 850 square feet of floor livable area. Two-bedroom ADUs shall not exceed 1,000 square feet of floor livable area. Three-bedroom ADUs shall not exceed 1,200 square feet of floor area.
2. If there is an existing primary dwelling unit, an attached ADU shall not exceed 50 percent of the floor livable area of the existing primary dwelling unit on the subject lot, but in no case shall the ADU be less than 150 square feet, nor more than 1,0001,200 square feet in floor livable area. The attached ADU also shall not exceed 25 feet in height, as measured from the datum point or the height limit in the underlying zone or the height of the existing primary dwelling unit, whichever is lower, unless it is a ADU or JADU that is located entirely within an existing structureattached to the primary dwelling. Notwithstanding the foregoing, an attached ADU may not exceed two stories.
3. A detached ADU shall not exceed 1,000 1,200 square feet of floor livable area and shall not exceed one story and/or 16 feet in height, as measured from the datum point on a lot with an existing or proposed single-family or multi-family dwelling unit.
a. A detached ADU may be up to 18 feet in height, as measured from the datum point, if located within one-half mile of a “major transit stop” as defined in Section 21064.3 of the Public Resources Code or “high-quality transit corridor” as defined by Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, or if the property has an existing or proposed multi-family, multi-story residential dwelling.
b. A detached ADU may be up to 20 feet in height, as measured from the datum point, if it is eligible to be up to 18 feet in height, to accommodate a PAGE 203 of 1856
roof pitch aligned with the primary dwelling unit but shall not exceed one story.
4. A detached ADU shall be located six feet or more from each dwelling, building, and other structure on the property.
5. No setback shall be required for a converted ADU that is within an existing structure or within the footprint of a structure constructed in the same location, height, and dimensions as an existing structure. For all other ADUs, the required setback from side and rear lot lines shall be four feet, as measured from the point of the ADU or any mechanical equipment or similar devices that serve the ADU and are maintained and operated on the exterior of the ADU and that is closest to the side and rear lot lines.
6. An ADU shall conform to all lot coverage, floor livable area, and front yard setback regulations applicable to the zoning district in which the property is located, except in the following cases:
a. ADUs that are not required to obtain a Planning ADU Application as provided under subsection F( 1) of this section.
b. Attached and detached ADU on corner lots are required to abide by the front and street-facing side yard setback requirements of the underlying zoning district in which the ADU is located; provided however that no more than four feet shall be required from a side lot line shall be required for an ADU meeting the requirements of section 66314(d)(7). Deviation from this section shall require approval of the Community Development Director and a demonstration by the applicant that these setbacks create a safety hazard. c. Where the application of lot coverage, floor livable area, or setback regulations would not permit construction of an 800 square-foot ADU that is 16 feet in height or greater due to proximity to a major transit stop or high-quality transit corridor or other increase permitted by state law with four-foot side and rear yard setbacks, the regulation(s) at issue shall be waived to permit such an ADU.
7. An ADU shall include a kitchen, as defined by Municipal Code Section 23.01.01, for cooking and eating and other permanent provisions for living and sleeping, including a closet or other reasonable storage area. An efficiency kitchen as defined by Municipal Code Section 23.01.01 does not qualify.
8. An ADU shall include a full bath, as defined by Municipal Code Section 23.01.01.
9. ADUs shall exactly match the building materials, colors, style, and form of the primary residence. Architectural details, including, but not limited to, windows, roof pitch and lines, eaves, fascia boards, and trim, shall match the primary residence on the property, provided that no ADU shall include any second-story balcony or similar open space on the second story.
PAGE 204 of 1856
10. ADUs shall comply with the City’s Pre-Approved Roof Materials, Colors, and Application List and the City’s Window and Door Replacement Procedure and PreApproved Window and Door Materials List.
11. Exterior lighting shall be shielded or directed so that it does not glare off-site or illuminate the primary residence or any adjacent property.
12. Windows shall be located to avoid direct line of sight, meaning a straight line between a person standing in the ADU, to the windows of adjacent properties.
Obscured glass and other techniques may be used to avoid direct line of sight.
13. An ADU shall have a separate exterior access from the primary dwelling unit. The exterior access shall be a standard exterior door and shall be located in a manner that will preserve, the privacy of the primary residence and any adjoining residences and, shall not be visible from the street.
14. Any common wall separating the accessory dwelling unit from the main building shall be soundproofed, unless such requirement would preclude development of the ADU. Details of the proposed means of soundproofing shall be submitted with plans for construction. No interior entry to the primary dwelling unit shall be provided.
15. A permanent foundation shall be required for all ADUs.
16. In addition to the off-street parking space(s) required for the primary residence, one off-street parking space shall be provided for each ADU, except when:
a. The ADU is located within one-half mile walking distance of public transit.
For purposes of this chapter, “public transit” has the same meaning as in Government Code Section 6631365852.2(j)(11).
b. The ADU is part of entirely within a proposed or existing primary dwelling unit or other existing structure.
c. The ADU is located within a historic district.
d. On-street parking permits are required but not offered to the occupant of the ADU.
e. There is a City-approved and dedicated parking space for a car-share vehicle located within one block of the ADU.
f. A permit application for an ADU is submitted with a permit application to create a new single-family dwelling or new multi-family dwelling on the same lot.
17. When the ADU is created by converting or demolishing a garage, carport or covered parking structure, replacement of parking space(s) eliminated by the PAGE 205 of 1856
construction of the ADU shall not be required as long as the ADU remains in use as a legal ADU. If the ADU is removed from use, the single-family or multi-family dwelling unit shall be required to comply with parking standards established in Section 23.02.03 of this Chapter, as well as all other development standards applicable to the zoning district. The location of the required parking space(s) shall not obstruct the parking of the primary residence and shall be a minimum of 20 feet in length and 10 feet in width.
a. When an ADU is created by converting or demolishing a garage, carport, or covered parking structure with an existing door, if the door is visible from the public right-of-way it must maintain its architectural style to continue to appear as an entrance for vehicles.
18. The required parking spaces for the ADU may be uncovered.
19. The installation of fire sprinklers and fire alarms shall be required if they exist for the primary dwelling unit or if the primary dwelling unit requires fire sprinklers/fire alarms before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the ADU.
20. An ADU proposed on a property designated as a historical resource listed on the National Register, the California Register of Historic Places or designated as a local historic landmark or located within an area of the City that has been designated as a historic district by the City Council shall be subject to the following standards:
a. No ADU shall be approved that will require a change to the street-facing façade(s).
b. Any changes to the exterior of a historic resource shall exactly match the architectural details, including, but not limited to, windows, roof pitch and lines, eaves, fascia boards, and trim.
c. Properties with a valid Mills Act Contract shall be subject to the standards and conditions of that Contract.
21. The applicant shall submit a map to the Community Development Department demonstrating the distance to the nearest transit stop and major transit stop.
I. JADU Development Standards: Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADU) shall comply with the following:
1. The owner of the single-family a parcel proposeddwelling proposed for a JADU shall occupy as a principal residence either the single family dwelling unit, the JADU, or an ADU if one exists on the property. The JADU shall be considered to be in compliance with this code only so long as the owner occupies either the singlefamily dwelling Unit or the JADU.
2. Notwithstanding subsection 1, owner-occupancy shall not be required if the owner is another governmental agency, land trust, or housing organization.
PAGE 206 of 1856
3. The JADU shall be a minimum of 150 square feet and a maximum of 500 square feet of floor livable area. The floor area of a shared sanitation facility shall not be included in the floor livable area of the JADU.
4. One JADU may be constructed on a lot zoned for single-family residential use, where there is a single- family dwelling unit existing or proposed to be built on the lot. The JADU must be contained entirely within the walls of the existing or proposed single family dwelling unit, which includes attached garages.
5. The JADU shall include an efficiency kitchen meeting the requirements of California Government Code Section 6633365852.22 and Municipal Code Section
23.01.01. 6. A separate exterior entry from the main entrance to the single family dwelling shall be provided to serve a JADU.
7. An interior entry to the main living area shall be provided to serve a JADU if the JADU lacks a separate bathroom. Such interior entry may include a second interior doorway for sound attenuation.
8. A JADU may include separate sanitation facilities, or may share sanitation facilities with the existing structure.
9. Any exterior improvements associated with the development of a JADU shall conform to zoning regulations and any existing land use entitlements on the property.
10. No additional parking is required for a JADU.
J. Termination of Permit and Use for ADUs and JADUs:
1. In his or her sole discretion, the Community Development Director may grant an owner’s request to terminate an ADU/JADU permit and deed restriction. The Community Development Director shall consider the length of time such permit has been in force, the conditions of approval, the exceptions granted for the permit, and the impact on the City’s affordable housing supply.
2. As a condition of termination, the Community Development Director shall require the owner to make modifications to the property to comply with: 1) current building code requirements, and 2) current development standards in effect at the time the request is made to terminate the use of the ADU or JADU, including but not limited to, setbacks, heights, parking and floor area. The owner shall apply for a building permit to make such modifications as required by the City’s building and fire codes.
3. In no case shall the ADU or JADU permit be terminated, if the proposed termination would require a variance to exceed the allowable floor area of the single family dwelling unit.
PAGE 207 of 1856
4. Where a request is to terminate an ADU that was created from the conversion or demolition of a garage, carport or covered parking structure, the garage, carport, or covered parking structure must be converted back to off-street parking.
K. Violations and Enforcement for ADUs and JADUs:
1. It is unlawful for any person to violate any provision or to fail to comply with any of the requirements of this section. An ADU or JADU will be found in violation of this section when the dwelling unit has been created without the required City approvals, or does not comply with the standards and deed restrictions established in this section. Violations are subject to the enforcement penalties and procedures of Article 4 of Chapter 1 of this Code.
2. In addition to the enforcement penalties and procedures included in Article 4 of Chapter 1 of this Code, the City may pursue any remedies provided by law against the owner of an ADU or JADU found to be in violation of this section, or an ADU or JADU not maintained in conformance with this section, including:
a. Revocation of the ADU/JADU permit;
b. Where an ADU/JADU has been improperly terminated and is being used as habitable space for the single family dwelling unit, removal of the floor area serving as habitable space; and
c. In any civil enforcement action, the City is entitled to recover attorneys’ fees and costs from an owner who is determined to have an illegal ADU or JADU, or is in violation of this chapter.
(Ord. 0-17-1331, 11-8-2017; amd. Ord. 0-19-1359-U, 12-11-2019; Ord. 0-20-1360-U, 1-8-2020; Ord. O-20-1368, 11-18-2020)
PAGE 208 of 1856
Attachment 3
RESOLUTION NO. PCR-24-12
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SAN MARINO, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. O-24-1416 AMENDING
MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 23.01.01 (DEFINITIONS) AND 23.02.25 (ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS) TO IMPLEMENT STATE LAW
REGARDING ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
WHEREAS, Chapter XXIII (Zoning and Development, Advertising and Signs, Fences and Walls) of the City of San Marino’s Municipal Code (“Planning and Zoning Code”) provides for the organized, predictable, and efficient development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Code establishes land use districts throughout the City and regulates the development of land in each district, including construction of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs); and WHEREAS, in recent years, the California Legislature has approved, and the Governor has signed into law, a number of bills that have amended Government Code Sections 65852.2 and 65852.22 to impose limits on local authority to regulate ADUs and JADUs; and WHEREAS, the City last updated its Municipal Code sections governing ADUs and JADUs in 2020; and
WHEREAS, since 2020 the California Legislature has approved, and the Governor has signed into law, a number of bills that have amended Government Code Sections 65852.2 and 65852.22 to impose limits on local authority to regulate ADUs and JADUs ((2021: AB 345 (permitting separate conveyance of ADUs from primary dwellings in limited circumstances), AB 3182 and AB 68 (streamlining ADU approvals)); (2022: SB 897 and AB 2221 (increasing height limits of ADUs)); and (2023: AB 976 (owner-occupancy requirements), and AB 1332 (pre-approved ADU plan sets)); and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Marino seeks to update its Municipal Code to bring it into conformance with state law on ADUs and JADUs; and WHEREAS, the City reviewed this text amendment pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., “CEQA”) and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regulations §§15000, et seq., the “CEQA Guidelines”). CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines are collectively referred to as “CEQA Regulations”; and WHEREAS, on November 21, 2023, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, at which time it considered all material and evidence, whether written or oral and unanimously voted (5-0) to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. PCR-23-18, recommending that the City Council adopt Ordinance No. O-23-1411 updating the City’s ADU Ordinance; and WHEREAS, on February 23, 2024, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing, at which time it considered all material and evidence, whether written or oral and unanimously voted (5-0) to to waive full reading and introduce by title only the Ordinance. On March 14, 2024, the City PAGE 209 of 1856
CITY OF SAN MARINO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PCR-24-12
Council adopted Ordinance No. O-23-1411 updating the City’s ADU Ordinance.
WHEREAS, on August 26, 2024, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) provided the City a letter containing their findings of their review of the City’s ADU Ordinance and found that the Ordinance did not comply with State ADU and JADU Laws; WHEREAS, on October 23, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, at which time it considered all material and evidence, whether written or oral; and WHEREAS, on Ocotber 23, 2024, the Planning Commission considered this zoning ordinance text amendment. Its findings are made based on the entire administrative record including testimony and evidence presented to the Planning Commission on October 23, 2024, including, without limitation, the staff report submitted by the Director of Community Development.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of San Marino as follows:
SECTION 1. The Planning Commission declares that the recitals set forth above are true and correct, and incorporated into this resolution as findings of the Planning Commission.
SECTION 2. Findings.
A. That the above recitations are true and correct.
B. That the City seeks to comply with new state laws on ADUs and JADUs by increasing its permitted height limits for ADUs and JADUs as required by state law and making other changes to bring its Municipal Code section into conformance with state law on ADUs and JADUs.
C. That the Planning Commission determines that the proposed ordinance is compatible with, consistent with and integrated with all other elements of the City’s General Plan. • The City Council determines that this Ordinance is compatible with Objective L.1 of the General Plan (Estate Residential), which “provide[s] an estate area with large lot sizes in the hilly terrain of the northwestern area of the City for single-family residential use[]” and has a policy of allowing single-family residences to have “‘second units’ as defined by the City of San Marino in order to meet state housing requirements, and limited accessory structures to the primary residence.”
• The City Council determines that this Ordinance is compatible with Objective L.2 of the General Plan (Very Low Density Residential), which “provide[s] residential area districts with large lots in traditional neighborhood patterns for single-family residential use[]” and has a policy of allowing single-family residences to have “‘second units’ as defined by the City of San Marino in order to meet state housing requirements, and limited accessory structures to the primary residence.”
PAGE 210 of 1856
CITY OF SAN MARINO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PCR-24-12
• The City Council determines that this Ordinance is compatible with Objective L.3 of the General Plan (Low Density Residential), which “provide[s] residential area districts that reflect the predominant pattern of residential development in the City – single-family development on standard size residential lots[]” and has a policy of allowing single-family residences to have “‘second units’ as defined by the City of San Marino in order to meet state housing requirements, and limited accessory structures to the primary residence.”
• Considering the entire proposed Ordinance, the proposed amendment to the SMMC will further the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan and will not obstruct their attainment. The amendment is relatively minor in nature and is intended to bring the Municipal Code into compliance with state law mandates. Therefore, the amendment will not frustrate any goal or policy set forth in the General Plan.
D. That the Planning Commission finds and recommends that the City Council declare that the proposed ordinance is not subject to further review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.; “CEQA”) for the following reasons: (1) the ordinance is exempt pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.17, which exempts the local adoption of ordinances regarding second units in single or multifamily residential zones; (2) the ordinance is exempt under CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15301), which exempts projects involving the minor alteration of existing residences involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that already in existence; (3) it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15060(c)(2)); (4) there is no possibility that the ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15061(b)(3)); and (5) the ordinance, by itself, does not constitute a “project” as defined in the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15378). The Ordinance is for general policies and procedure-making. It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment.
E. That the Planning Commission recommends adoption of the proposed ordinance by the City Council.
SECTION 3. Recommendation of Approval. Based on the above findings, and after receiving evidence and testimony at a public hearing, the Planning Commission recommends approval of the proposed ordinance, attached as Exhibit A, to the City Council.
SECTION 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. The Planning Commission declares that it would have adopted this Resolution and each and every section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, PAGE 211 of 1856
CITY OF SAN MARINO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PCR-24-12
sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions of this Resolution be declared unconstitutional.
SECTION 5. Construction. This Resolution must be broadly construed to achieve the purposes stated in this Resolution. It is the Planning Commission’s intent that the provisions of this Resolution be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this Resolution.
SECTION 6. Office of Record. The record of proceedings upon which this decision is based is in the Community Development Department, which is the office of record for the same.
SECTION 7. This Resolution will remain effective until superseded by a subsequent resolution.
SECTION 8. The Planning Commission Chairman, or presiding officer, is authorized to affix his signature to this Resolution signifying its adoption by the Planning Commission of the City of San Marino, and the Planning Commission Secretary is directed to attest to that act.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of San Marino, California, on this 23rd day of October, 2024.
SHELLY BOYLE,
Chair, San Marino Planning Commission
ATTEST:
ISIDRO FIGUEROA
Secretary, San Marino Planning Commission
PAGE 212 of 1856
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM:
BY:
Philippe Eskandar, City Manager
Isidro Figueroa, Community Development Director
DATE: November 13, 2024
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING IN CONSIDERATION OF:
1) ADOPT AN ADDENDUM TO A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION (SCH 2022010208) AND ADOPT THE
2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE (6TH CYCLE
– AS AMENDED) OF THE SAN MARINO GENERAL
PLAN AND UPDATE THE CITY’S OFFICIAL GENERAL
LAND USE MAP; AND
2) INTRODUCE FOR FIRST READING ORDINANCE NO.
O-24-1415 AMENDING THE CITY’S OFFICIAL
ZONING MAP AND CODE SECTIONS 23.01.01
(DEFINITIONS), 23.01.05 (ZONES AND AREA
DISTRICTS ESTABLISHED, DELINEATION OF ZONES
AND DISTRICTS ON ZONE MAP), 23.01.10
(REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION), 23.02.01 (USES
PERMITTED), 23.03.01 (USES), 23.03.10
(STANDARDS FOR MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT), 23.05.01 (USES PERMITTED AND
CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED), 23.05.03
(STANDARDS FOR MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT), 23.06.04 (YARDS GENERALLY IN
THE R-1 ZONE), 23.06.05 (GARAGES AND OTHER
ACCESSORY BUILDINGS IN THE R-1 ZONE),
23.10.03 (NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED
IN THE C-1 ZONE), 23.10.04 (PARKING
REQUIREMENTS FOR USES NOT SPECIFIED IN THE
C-1 ZONE), 23.10.06 (REQUIRED IMPROVEMENT
AND MAINTENANCE OF PARKING AREA IN THE C-1
Steven W. Huang, DDS, Mayor
Gretchen Shepherd Romey, Vice Mayor
Tony Chou, Council Member
Calvin Lo, Council Member
Steve Talt, Council Member
PAGE 213 of 1856
ZONE), 23.15.04 (MATTERS SUBJECT TO DESIGN
REVIEW), AND 23.15.16 (STANDARD OF REVIEW
FOR APPLICATIONS NOT SUBJECT TO DESIGN
REVIEW), AND CREATING MUNICIPAL CODE
SECTIONS 23.05.04 (APPLICATION APPROVAL AND
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS), AND 23.05.05 (BYRIGHT REQUIREMENTS), AMENDING ARTICLE 20 OF CHAPTER 23 (MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING
ZONES), AND ADDING THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE TO
CHAPTER 23: 1) ARTICLE 21 (MIXED-USE ZONES);
2) ARTICLE 22 (DENSITY BONUS LAW); AND, 3)
ARTICLE 23 (BY-RIGHT APPROVAL) TO BE
CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
ELEMENT AND RELATED UPDATES AND FINDING
THAT ORDINANCE NO. O-24-1415 IS EXEMPT FROM
CEQA PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION
15061(B)(3)
STRATEGIC PLAN CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS
Efficient, Responsive, and Effective City Services
Engaged and Connected Residents
Safe Community Well-Maintained Infrastructure
BACKGROUND
State law requires all cities and counties in California to establish a long-range plan to meet their “fair share” of regional housing needs because local governments play a vital role in the supply and affordability of housing. Cities are required to plan for the existing and projected demands for housing. The Housing Element is the primary tool used by the State to ensure local governments are appropriately planning for and accommodating enough housing across all income levels. The Housing Element is a mandatory part of a jurisdiction’s General Plan but differs from other General Plan elements in two key aspects: the Housing Element must be updated every eight years (Govt. Code § 65588(e)(5)), and must be reviewed and certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to ensure compliance with State requirements (§ 65585). Cities in the region covered by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) are currently in the 6th Housing Element Cycle, which covers the period from PAGE 214 of 1856
October 2021 through October 2029. 6th Cycle housing elements were required to be adopted by jurisdictions in the SCAG region by October 15, 2021. Cities failing to meet this deadline were found to be out of compliance with State law and were at risk of numerous penalties.
While there are many statutory requirements that housing elements must meet in order to be certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), the two primary requirements are to accommodate new homes as determined by the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) and to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH).
One of the first steps in the Housing Element update process is determining each jurisdiction’s RHNA. This determination is conducted by HCD, in consultation with SCAG. HCD assigns each jurisdiction in the region a number of new homes that must be accommodated for within the Housing Element.
This RHNA determination is based on demographic trends and housing conditions, and accounts for both the existing and projected housing need in each jurisdiction. For its 6th Cycle Housing Element, the City of San Marino was assigned a RHNA requirement of 397 new homes, which is broken down into the following income categories:
149 Very-low income
91 Low income
91 Moderate income
66 Above-moderate income
397 Total
The second area of focus within the Housing Element is AFFH. AFFH is a renewed area of focus for HCD, and has not featured as prominently in past housing element cycles. AFFH has been a particular focus in cities that have concentrations of poverty or affluence, either within the city or when comparing the city to its neighbors. AFFH was a particular focus during HCD’s review of the City’s Housing Element because the City of San Marino is relatively affluent compared to its neighboring cities.
The City of San Marino submitted a draft Housing Element to HCD for review on November 1, 2021. HCD reviewed the draft Housing Element and found that it did not meet all of the statutory requirements and that it could not be certified. On December 31, 2021, HCD provided a letter itemizing the requirements that had not yet been met, Attachment 2.
In response to HCD’s December letter, the City revised the Housing Element and in February 2022, the City of San Marino certified and adopted a 6th Cycle Housing Element, which was subsequently sent to HCD for review. HCD found PAGE 215 of 1856
that the Housing Element as adopted, which had been revised to address the December 2021 HCD letter, still did not meet the statutory requirements to be certified as compliant with State law and provided a letter dated April 12, 2022, Attachment 3, with a list of revisions and additional information that needed to be addressed before the City’s Housing Element could be found to be in compliance.
City staff worked with the City’s housing element consultant to prepare a third draft of the Housing Element, which was submitted to HCD for review on May 29, 2024. On July 25, 2024, HCD provided a review letter, Attachment 4, stating that some requirements were still not met and provided a much shorter and more detailed list of requirements that still needed to be addressed.
The City’s housing element consultant prepared a fourth draft of the Housing Element, which was submitted to HCD for review on August 30, 2024. City staff and the City’s housing element consultant met with HCD housing element review staff on October 3, 2024, to discuss HCD’s preliminary review of this fourth draft of the Housing Element. HCD had a few minor revisions, which were addressed quickly, and the Housing Element was resubmitted to HCD on October 9, 2024. On October 11, 2024, HCD provided an informal notification that the Housing Element met all required statutory requirements.
Since the City missed the deadline for adoption of 6th cycle housing elements by more than a year, the City must not only adopt the Housing Element, but must implement the rezoning programs identified in the Housing Element to accommodate the City’s RHNA requirements before it can be found to be in compliance with State housing law.
On October 23, 2024, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to review and take public comment on the 6th Cycle Housing Element, addendum to the adopted negative declaration, updates to the both the City’s General Land Use and Zoning maps and Ordinance No. O-24-1415. The Planning Commission unanimously voted (5-0) to adopt Resolution No. PCR-24-11, recommending that the City Council adopt the 6th Cycle Housing Element, addendum to the adopted negative declaration, updates to the both the City’s General Land Use and Zoning maps and Ordinance No. O-24-1415.
On October 28, 2024, the City received a letter from HCD, Attachment 5, indicating that the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element attached to this staff report meets the statutory requirements described in HCD’s July 26, 2024 review. The October 28th HCD letter also states that the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element will substantially comply with State Housing Element Law (Gov. Code, § 65580 et seq) when it is adopted, submitted to and approved by HCD, in accordance with Government Code section 65585, subdivision (g) PAGE 216 of 1856
and all rezones are completed per Government Code section 65588, subdivision (e)(4).
DISCUSSION
This item includes multiple actions to recommend to City Council for the adoption and implementation of the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element. Included in the recommendations for City Council is for the City to: 1) adopt the 6th Cycle Housing Element; 2) adopt the Addendum to and adopted Initial Study/Negative Declaration (SCH 2022010208); 3) update the City’s official Zoning Map; 5) update the City’s General Plan Land Use Map; and 5) amend the City’s zoning code in accordance with the programs identified in the Housing Element.
Housing Element
The draft Housing Element that has been reviewed by HCD and found to meet the requirements of State law is organized into four sections. Section 1 includes an introduction and summary to the Housing Element. Section 2 covers the City’s housing strategy and includes the goals, policies, and programs the City will need to implement throughout the 6th Cycle. Section 3 details the housing sites that the City has identified to meet its RHNA requirements. Finally, Section 4 includes background data on the City and its region, including demographic data, existing housing resources, and constraints on housing production.
The Housing Element identifies 36 programs that the City will need to implement during the 6th Cycle. These programs address the City’s RHNA and AFFH requirements, among other things. Most notably, these programs commit the City to creating multiple new zoning designations that will allow for the creation of multi-family residential uses in San Marino. These new zones include the Multi-family Residential (RM1) zone, Mixed-Use 1 (MU1) and Mixed-Use 2 (MU2) zones, and the Religious Institution Housing (RIH) zone.
The Housing Element identifies seven housing sites that make use of these new and existing zoning designations to accommodate the City’s RHNA requirements. The seven identified sites are described below.
Huntington Site: The Huntington Library and Gardens has submitted an application to construct 33 employee housing units for graduate students and other researchers affiliated with the Huntington. The housing is anticipated to use approximately 2 acres of the 206-acre site. It is anticipated that these homes will be made available to very-low income residents (i.e. graduate students). This site is currently within the City’s Historical & Cultural (H&C) zone, which already allows for this housing use.
PAGE 217 of 1856
Southwestern Academy: The Southwestern Academy has expressed interest to construct housing for faculty and staff on their existing site. The site is currently zoned R-1 and is proposed to be rezoned to H&C to allow for these residential uses in conjunction with the existing school use. It is anticipated that this rezoning will allow for 20 new homes affordable to moderate income households.
Stoneman: The Stoneman site is a City-owned site that currently is home to the City’s Recreation Department. The Housing Element commits the City to rezone the Stoneman site from R-1 to RM1, which would accommodate 49 homes on the site affordable to very-low income households. The Housing Element specifically calls for the preservation of the existing historic buildings on the Stoneman site, and limits the new housing development to the vacant areas of the site, including the existing field and parking lot. The Housing Element commits the City to offering the Stoneman site to affordable housing developers through an RFP process no later than July 2025.
Mixed-Use Site 1: Mixed-Use Site 1 is a single parcel located at 415 Huntington Drive, on the western edge of the City. This site is currently zoned C-1 and is occupied by a multi-tenant medical office building that is currently partially vacant. The Housing Element commits the City to rezone this site to MU-1, which would allow for the development of residential uses at 30 to 40 units per acre, either with or without a commercial component. It is anticipated that this 1.14 acre site would accommodate at least 34 new homes that would be affordable to moderate income households.
Mixed-Use Site 2: Mixed-Use Site 2 consists of three contiguous parcels located on the 2000 block of Huntington Drive, between Bedford Road and Westhaven Road. These three parcels are currently zoned C-1 and are occupied by single-story commercial retail uses. The Housing Element commits the City to rezoning these parcels to MU-1, which would allow for the development of residential uses at 25-30 units per acre, either with or without a commercial component. It is anticipated that this 1.6 acre site would accommodate at least 40 new homes that would be affordable to moderate income households.
Mixed-Use Site 3: Mixed-Use Site 3 is a single parcel located at 3130 Huntington Drive, on the eastern edge of the City. This site is currently zoned C-1 and is occupied by a Masonic Lodge. The Housing Element commits the City to rezone this site to MU-1, which would allow for the development of residential uses at 30 to 40 units per acre, either with or without a commercial component. It is anticipated that this 0.74 acre site would accommodate at least 22 new homes that would be affordable to moderate income households.
PAGE 218 of 1856
San Marino Community Church: The San Marino Community Church, located at 1750 Virginia Road, is currently zoned R-1. The site is a total of 3.19 acres and consists of a church building and surface parking lot. The Housing Element commits the City to rezone this site to RIH, which would allow for the development of affordable housing alongside the existing church use. The RIH zone would be a local implementation of the State’s SB 4 law which already allows churches to develop housing on their property. It is anticipated that approximately 1.18 acres of the site, currently being used by the parking lot, could be redeveloped into affordable housing. The RIH zone would allow for densities of 20 to 30 units per acre. This site would be able to accommodate up to 23 homes affordable to very-low income households on the parking lot portion of the site.
In addition to these seven identified sites, the City is relying upon the continued construction of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) to help meet its RHNA requirements. Based on the permitting of 100 ADUs between October 15, 2021 and June 30, 2024, it is anticipated that a total of 287 ADUs will be built in the City during the 6th Cycle. Based on research conducted by SCAG and accepted by HCD, it is anticipated that these ADUs will be affordable to households with a range of incomes, as shown below:
43 Extremely-low income
24 Very-low income
128 Low income
6 Moderate income
86 Above-moderate income
287 Total
In total, these sites and the anticipated ADUs meets the City’s RHNA requirements with a surplus at each income category. The surplus is necessary (and required by HCD) so that the City does not fall out of compliance with State law if an identified housing site is built with fewer units than anticipated, which could cause the City to have insufficient housing sites identified to meet its RHNA. The City’s RHNA requirements and the number of housing units accommodated with the implementation of the Housing Element at each income level is shown below:
PAGE 219 of 1856
Total Surplus
Income Level RHNA Capacity Surplus Percent
Very-low 149 172 23 15%
Low 91 128 37 41%
Moderate 91 122 31 34%
Above Moderate 66 87 21 32%
Total 397 509 112 28%
In addition to the programs to meet the City’s RHNA requirements, the Housing Element includes a number of programs that help to affirmatively further fair housing. These programs help ensure that the housing in San Marino can accommodate a wide variety of households with different demographics and incomes. Some of these programs include:
• The adoption of pre-approved ADU plans that have been through the City’s building plan check process, which residents can build without additional City review;
• Community outreach and education regarding the development process.
Hold an annual “open house” at the planning and building department to introduce members of the public to personnel and procedures so that the development process is less daunting;
• Continue the City’s Senior Outreach Program to connect seniors to municipal, recreational, and community service programs, including information and education on ADUs as a viable housing option; • Create a home sharing program to match existing homeowners with people in the community seeking housing; and,
• Consider creating a land trust or partner with an existing land trust to purchase homes as they come on the market and resell the homes, but not the land, to first-time homebuyers.
In addition to these specific programs the City is committing to implement throughout the course of the 6th Cycle, the City will also need to monitor the effectiveness of all of the Housing Element policies to determine if the changes to the City’s zoning and other programs are producing the needed housing to meet the City’s RHNA requirements. The Housing Element commits the City to monitor for effectiveness of ADU policies to achieve production, evaluate the new development standards for the RM1, MU1, MU2, and RIH zones to determine if they are creating a constraint on housing development, and to make necessary changes to the code and policies if it is found that changes are not producing the desired housing production.
PAGE 220 of 1856
Zoning Code Amendment
The proposed zoning code amendment would implement many of the programs identified in the Housing Element, including: 1) creating the RM1, MU1, MU2, and RIH zones; 2) creating objective development standards for multi-family residential development; 3) modifying reasonable accommodation standards and approval to comply with State law; 4) creating new by-right review standards for projects that meet the objective design standards; 5) creating density bonuses for developments with affordable housing to comply with State law; and 6) other changes to ensure consistency between the City’s existing code and the new code sections and amendments.
The zoning code amendments are detailed by article below:
Article 1 – General Provisions: The amendments to Article 1, General Provisions, include three primary revisions. First, the amendment adds and consolidates definitions used throughout the zoning code in one place. Second, the RM1, RIH, MU-1, and MU-2 are added as zones, which are further defined in later articles. Finally, the City’s approval for reasonable accommodations is modified to comply with State law.
Article 2 – R-1 Single-Family Dwelling Zone: Article 2, R-1 Single-Family Dwelling Zone, is amended to permit additional housing types in the R-1 zone.
These additional housing types are: 1) employee housing for six or fewer employees within the zone; and 2) residential care facilities (regardless of licensing) for six or fewer persons.
Article 3 – C-1 Commercial Zone: Article 3, C-1 Commercial Zone, is amended to permit low barrier navigation centers and to modify the requirements of emergency shelters to comply with State law.
Article 5 – Historical and Cultural Zone: The amendments to Article 5, Historical and Cultural Zone, make several changes to allow for residential uses for employee housing and to ensure that the development standards for residential uses in this zone are consistent with the development standards for other multi-family zones in the City. In addition, the amendments add low barrier navigation centers, and transitional and supportive housing to the permitted uses in the zone, to comply with State law. The amendments to Article 5 also add new application approval and submittal requirements, as well as by-right requirements for any project application that includes residential uses in this zone.
Article 6 – Requirements and Restrictions Generally: The amendment to Article 6, Requirements and Restrictions Generally, clarifies that this article only applies to uses in the R-1 zone.
PAGE 221 of 1856
Article 10 – Off-Street Parking: The amendment to Article 10, Off-Street Parking, clarifies that this article only applies to uses in the C-1 zone. Offstreet parking requirements for other zones are identified in the articles for those zones.
Article 15 – Design Review Committee: The amendment to Article 15, Design Review Committee, clarifies that the existing requirements apply to development projects in the R-1 and C-1 zones and adds new requirements for multi-family development applications.
Article 20 – Multi-Family Dwelling Zones: The amendment to Article 20, MultiFamily Dwelling Zones, replaces the City’s existing Article 20 in its entirety.
This amendment provides for the allowed uses and development standards for the RM1 and RIH zones. The Multi-Family Residential Development Standards are shown in Table 1 on the next page. In addition, the amendment includes a number of objective design standards to ensure that new multi-family developments are compatible with the existing buildings in San Marino.
Article 21 – Mixed-Use Zones: Article 21, Mixed-Use Zones, is a new section of the zoning code to regulate the development of the MU-1 and MU-2 zones.
Article 21 provides for the allowed uses and development standards for these zones. In addition, Article 21 includes a number of objective design standards to ensure that new mixed-use developments are compatible with the existing buildings in San Marino.
Table 1: Standards for Multi-Family Residential Development DEVELOPMENT FEATURE RM1 RIH
Residential density 30 to 40 du/ac 20 to 30 du/ac
Maximum height 48 feet 36 feet
Ground floor setbacks
Front 5 feet to accommodate porches and patios
Front setback buffer 4-foot-wide landscaped buffer, which is permitted within the front yard setback between unit entries
Side 5 feet
Side setback buffer 4-foot-wide landscaped buffer, which is permitted within the side yard setback
Side abutting a
residential zone
10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg. exceeds 30 feet in height
PAGE 222 of 1856
Rear None required
Rear abutting a
residential zone
10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg. exceeds 30 feet in height
Parking Requirements
Single room occupancy,
studio, or one bedroom
0.5 space
Two bedroom 1 space
Three bedroom or more 1.5 spaces
Guest parking 1 space per 5 units
Open Space and Common Areas
Common open space At least 15% of the total gross development area shall be common open space, up to a maximum
required area of 20,000 square feet
Unit Type and Minimum Floor Area
Single room occupancy 150 square feet
Efficiency apartment 450 square feet
One bedroom 750 square feet
Two bedroom or more 950 square feet
Table 2: Standards for Mixed-Use Development
DEVELOPMENT FEATURE MU-1 MU-2
Residential density 25 to 30 du/ac 30 to 40 du/ac
Maximum height 36 feet 48 feet
Ground Floor Commercial Setbacks and Build-to-Lines
Front Built-to Line Within 5 feet of right-of-way
Side Built-to Line Within 5 feet of right-of-way
Side abutting a
residential zone
10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg. exceeds 30 feet in height
Rear None required
Rear abutting a
residential zone
10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg. exceeds 30 feet in height
PAGE 223 of 1856
Table 2: Standards for Mixed-Use Development
Ground Floor Residential Setbacks
Front 5 feet to accommodate porches and patios
Front setback buffer 4-foot-wide landscaped buffer, which is permitted within the front yard setback between unit entries
Side 5 feet
Side setback buffer 4-foot-wide landscaped buffer, which is permitted within the side yard setback
Side abutting a
residential zone
10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg. exceeds 30 feet in height
Rear None required
Rear abutting a
residential zone
10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg. exceeds 30 feet in height
Residential Parking Requirements
Single room occupancy,
studio, or one bedroom
0.5 space
Two bedroom 1 space
Three bedroom or more 1.5 spaces
Guest parking 1 space per 5 units
Commercial Parking Requirements
Less than 5,000 sf in floor
area
1 space per 250 sf of floor area
Between 5,000 sf and
20,000 sf in floor area
20 spaces plus 1 space per 300 sf beyond 5,0000 sf
of floor area
More than 20,000 sf in
floor area
70 spaces plus 1 space per 350 sf beyond 20,000 sf
of floor area
Open Space and Common Areas
Common open space At least 15% of the total gross development area shall be common open space, up to a maximum
required area of 20,000 square feet
Unit Type and Minimum Floor Area
Single room occupancy 150 square feet
PAGE 224 of 1856
Table 2: Standards for Mixed-Use Development
Efficiency apartment 450 square feet
One bedroom 750 square feet
Two bedroom or more 950 square feet
Article 22 – Density Bonus Law: Article 22, Density Bonus Law, is a new section of the zoning code to implement the State’s Density Bonus Law. The Density Bonus Law allows developers of residential developments who incorporate affordable housing into their development to access more density and be provided other concessions as part of their development. Adherence to the Density Bonus Law is required by State law.
Article 23 – By-Right Approvals: Article 23, By-Right Approvals, is a new section of the zoning code to provide for by-right approvals for residential developments that meet the requirements set out in the Article. The requirements for projects that are subject to by-right approvals under Article 23 include: 1) projects on sites identified in the housing element that include at least 20% of units affordable to lower income households; 2) permanent supportive housing projects; 3) low barrier navigation centers; 4) 100% affordable projects on land owned by a religious or higher education institutions; 5) emergency shelters; or 6) single room occupancy projects where at least 20% of the units are affordable to lower income households.
Projects meeting these objective design standards may be approved by the City’s Community Development Director without review by the Design Review Committee, Planning Commission, or City Council.
General Plan Land Use and Zoning Map Updates
The proposed General Plan Land Use map and Zoning map updates implement the programs of the Housing Element to reclassify and rezone the identified housing sites to their respective land use and zoning designations as discussed above. In addition, the Zoning Map Update would rezone other parcels along Huntington Drive from C-1 to MU-1 and MU-2. The proposed General Plan Land Use map is attached to this staff report as Attachment 6 and the Zoning map as Attachment 7.
CEQA REVIEW
2021-2029 Housing Element
On February 9, 2022, the San Marino City Council held a public hearing and adopted the 2021-2029 Housing Element, which also allowed for adoption, by the City Council, the 2021-2029 Housing Element IS/ND (State Clearinghouse PAGE 225 of 1856
No. (SCH) 2022010208) at the same public hearing. Please see Attachment
8. The IS/ND for the 2021-2029 Housing Element adopted by the City Council on February 9, 2022, studied the potential environmental effects on aesthetics, agriculture and forest resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, recreation, public services, transportation, tribal cultural resources, utilities and service systems, wildfire, and mandatory findings of significance. The IS/ND found that the IS/ND for the 2021-2029 adopted Housing Element would not result in significant impacts to agriculture, air quality, biological resources and forest resources, cultural resources, energy. hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, recreation, utilities and service systems, wildfire, and less than significant impacts, with no mitigations, related to aesthetics, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, population and housing, public services, transportation, and tribal and cultural resources.
An addendum to the previously adopted MND for the revisions to the adopted Housing Element document has been prepared, pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 14, §15164. The policies and programs have been revised based on the comments provided by HCD, which are intended to help address potential constraints to and further incentivize the development of housing in the City. The amended and new programs added to the State mandated 2021- 2029 Housing Element are required by HCD in an effort to certify the City’s Housing Element as compliant with State and Housing laws. As a result of the amended and added programs, the total number of sites required to be rezoned has decreased from 1,796 properties to 118 properties in order to accommodate for the RHNA numbers and quantified objectives through programs included in the Housing Element.
Given the analysis presented in this Addendum, it is therefore found that the Amendments to the City’s State mandated adopted 2021-2029 Housing Element would not result in a measurable increase in environmental impacts over what was previously analyzed in the adopted IS/ND for the adopted 2021-2029 Housing Element. There are no changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken that will require revisions to the previous IS/ND. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an Addendum to the IS/ND is appropriate and has been prepared to document the minor technical changes and addition of information that have been included in the Amendments to the Housing Element of the City of San Marino.
Zone Code Amendment
PAGE 226 of 1856
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), also known as the "general rule" or "common sense" exemption, CEQA exempts activities that can be seen with certainty to have no possibility for causing a significant effect on the environment. The CEQA Guidelines state in that section that "A project is exempt from CEQA if ... [T]he activity is covered by common sense that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA."
The 2021-2029 Housing Element Zoning Code Amendment reconciles the language of the City’s Zoning Ordinance with the City’s State mandated 2021- 2029 Housing Element policies and programs. It is a policy document and does not propose or approve any physical development. The proposed amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance to reconcile with the City’s State mandated 2021-2029 Housing Element in order to implement State law and is consistent with the adopted 2021-2029 Housing Element IS/ND (SCH 2022010208) and are not anticipated to result in any new changes to the physical environment.
The proposed project would not result in changes to the physical environment, nor would it result in potential environmental impacts beyond those addressed in the adopted 2021-2029 Housing Element IS/ND (SCH 2022010208).
Updating the zoning code to reflect the densities required by the Housing Element programs will necessitate a future amendment to the land use element of the general plan, which the City intends to process in connection with its update of the Safety and Land Use Element within the next twelve (12) months. In the interim, per Government Code sections 66589.5(d)(2)(A) and (j)(4), projects consistent with the revised zoning code provisions would still be approvable prior to the update of the land use element.
As such, 2021-2029 Housing Element Zoning Code Amendment meets the common sense exemption as identified above. The 2021-2029 Housing Element Zone Code Amendment CEQA Exemption Technical Memorandum is attached to this staff report as Attachment 9.
FISCAL IMPACT & PROCUREMENT REVIEW
Apart from the reallocation of staff resources needed to address this matter, there is no new financial impact.
PAGE 227 of 1856
LEGAL REVIEW
The City Attorney's office has reviewed and approved as to form.
RECOMMENDATION
In the case that the City Council considers approval of Resolution No. PR 24- 29, an appropriate motion would be:
“I move to approve Resolution No. PR 24-29, a resolution of the San Marino City Council adopting: 1) an Addendum to an adopted Initial Study/Negative Declaration; 2) adoption of the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element update consistent with the statutory requirements of the California Housing Element Law; 3) update to the General Plan Land Use map; and
I move to waive full reading and introduce by title only Ordinance No. O-24- 1415 updating the City’s official zoning map and amending San Marino Municipal Code Article 20 of Chapter 23 and Sections 23.01.01, 23.01.05,
23.01.10, 23.03.01, 23.03.10, 23.05.01, 23.05.03, 23.06.04, 23.06.05,
23.10.03, 23.10.04, 23.10.06, 23.15.04, and 23.15.16, adding Municipal Code Section 23.05.04, and 23.05.05, and adding Articles 21, 22, and 23 to Chapter 23 of the Municipal Code; and finding that Ordinance No. O-24-1415 is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).”
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft 6th Cycle 2021-2029 Housing Element
2. HCD Letter Dated December 31, 2021
3. HCD Letter Dated April 12, 2022
4. HCD Letter Dated July 25, 2024
5. HCD Letter Dated October 28, 2024
6. Draft Ordinance No. O-24-1415
7. Draft General Plan Land Use Map
8. Draft Zoning Map
9. Addendum to Adopted Initial Study/Negative Declaration (SCH 2022010208)
10. 2021-2029 Housing Element Zone Code Amendment CEQA Exemption Technical Memorandum
11. Planning Commission Resolution No. PCR 24-11
12. City Council Resolution No. R-24-29
PAGE 228 of 1856
Attachment 1
2021-2029
HOUSING ELEMENT
ADOPTED FEBRUARY 9, 2022
Resolution #R-22-06
AMENDED AUGUST OCTOBER 2024
Resolution #R-24-XXX
2200 Huntington Drive
San Marino, California, 91108
(626) 300-0700
https://www.cityofsanmarino.org
PAGE 229 of 1856
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I: INTRODUCTION & SUMMARY ......................................................................................1
1.1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................1
1.2 DEFINITION AND PURPOSE ............................................................................................................1
1.3 CONSISTENCY WITH STATE LAWS AND GENERAL PLAN.................................................2
1.4 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.....................................................................................................................2
1.5 ORGANIZATION OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT......................................................................4
1.6 DEFINITION OF TERMS......................................................................................................................5
1.7 DATA SOURCES ......................................................................................................................................6
1.8 COMMUNITY PROFILE........................................................................................................................7
1.9 CHANGING HOUSING NEEDS AND DEMOGRAPHICS........................................................9
1.10 CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSING STOCK ..............................................................................14
1.11 SUMMARY OF CONSTRAINTS.......................................................................................................18
1.12 SUMMARY OF FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS (FHA)..................................................................19
1.13 REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION .......................................................................20
1.14 2014 SAN MARINO HOUSING ELEMENT REVIEW ..............................................................21
1.15 PROGRAM CHANGES IN 2021 HOUSING ELEMENT..........................................................24 SECTION II: HOUSING STRATEGY...................................................................................................39
2.1 GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS...........................................................................................39
2.2 QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES..............................................................................................................58 SECTION III: HOUSING SITES ...........................................................................................................60
3.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................60
3.2 IDENTIFIED SITES..............................................................................................................................63
3.3 ADUS...................................................................................................................................................... 111
3.4 COMPARISON OF SITE INVENTORY WITH RHNA............................................................ 116
3.5 INFRASTRUCTURE .......................................................................................................................... 118
3.6 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS................................................................................. 119 SECTION IV: TECHNICAL BACKGROUND REPORT................................................................. 120
4.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 120
4.2 PRE-CERTIFIED SCAG DATASET............................................................................................... 120
4.3 LOCAL HOUSING PROGRAMS & RESOURCES ..................................................................... 121
4.4 HOUSING CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS ....................................................................................... 133 PAGE 230 of 1856
4.5 FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................ 166
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: SCAG LOCAL HOUSING DATA
APPENDIX B: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
ATTACHMENT B-1: COMMUNITY SURVEY RESULTS
APPENDIX C: CITY OF SAN MARINO INSIGHT MARKET ANALYTICS, 2019 PAGE 231 of 1856
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1: SAN MARINO LOCATION WITHIN LARGER LOS ANGELES COUNTY .......................................... 7 FIGURE 2: SAN MARINO NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT CHRONOLOGY................................................ 8 FIGURE 3: CURRENT POPULATION BY AGE AND SEX............................................................................................. 9 FIGURE 4: EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY....................................................................................................................10 FIGURE 5: VACANT UNITS BY TYPE..............................................................................................................................16 FIGURE 6: GROWTH IN SAN MARINO AND LA COUNTY HOMES SALE PRICES..........................................17 FIGURE 7: RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN SAN MARINO, BY YEAR BUILT ................................................................61 FIGURE 8: IDENTIFIED SITES ..........................................................................................................................................64 FIGURE 9 BUILDABLE AREA ON H&C SITE................................................................................................................70 FIGURE 10: EMPLOYEE HOUSING PROJECT DEVELOPMENT FOOTPRINT..................................................72 FIGURE 11: SOUTHWESTERN ACADEMY SITE.........................................................................................................75 FIGURE 12: DEVELOPMENT PORTION OF STONEMAN SITE .............................................................................78 FIGURE 13: BUILDABLE AREA ON RM1 SITE............................................................................................................81 FIGURE 14: MIXED-USE ZONES.......................................................................................................................................84 FIGURE 15: BUILDABLE AREA ON MU-1 SITE..........................................................................................................87 FIGURE 16: MU SITE 2.........................................................................................................................................................89 FIGURE 17: BUILDABLE AREA ON MU-2 SITE..........................................................................................................95 FIGURE 18: MU SITE 1.........................................................................................................................................................97 FIGURE 19: MU SITE 3......................................................................................................................................................100 FIGURE 20: RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION HOUSING ZONE.....................................................................................104 FIGURE 21: BUILDABLE AREA ON RIH SITE...........................................................................................................107 FIGURE 22: SAN MARINO COMMUNITY CHURCH................................................................................................109 FIGURE 23: APPROVED ADU PROJECTS...................................................................................................................112 FIGURE 24: DISABILITY BY TYPE................................................................................................................................126 FIGURE 25: DISABILITY BY TYPE – SENIORS 65 AND OLDER........................................................................126 FIGURE 26: DISABILITY BY EMPLOYMENT STATUS ..........................................................................................127 FIGURE 27: DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITY...........................................................................................................128 PAGE 232 of 1856
FIGURE 28: ELDERLY HOUSEHOLDS BY INCOME AND TENURE ..................................................................129 FIGURE 29: HOUSEHOLDS BY HOUSEHOLD SIZE.................................................................................................130 FIGURE 30: FEMALE-HEADED HOUSEHOLDS .......................................................................................................131 FIGURE 31: HOUSEHOLDS BY POVERTY STATUS................................................................................................132 FIGURE 32: FAULT, LIQUEFACTION AND LANDSLIDE ZONES MAP ............................................................156 FIGURE 33: CAL FIRE: FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONE MAP........................................................................... 157 FIGURE 34: CITY OF SAN MARINO ENHANCED FIRE INSPECTION ZONE MAP ......................................158 FIGURE 35: PREDOMINANT POPULATION AFRICAN AMERICAN MAJORITY..........................................170 FIGURE 36: PREDOMINANT POPULATION ASIAN MAJORITY........................................................................171 FIGURE 37: PREDOMINANT POPULATION HISPANIC/LATINO MAJORITY..............................................172 FIGURE 38: PREDOMINANT POPULATION NATIVE AMERICAN MAJORITY.............................................173 FIGURE 39: PREDOMINANT POPULATION WHITE MAJORITY ......................................................................174 FIGURE 40: RACIAL DOT DENSITY MAP OF SAN MARINO, CA.......................................................................175 FIGURE 41: RACIAL DOT DENSITY MAP OF THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS...................................................................................................................................................................176 FIGURE 42: 2018 DIVERSITY INDEX OF SAN GABRIEL VALLEY....................................................................177 FIGURE 43: PERCENTAGE OF ADULTS LIVING WITH A SPOUSE BY CENSUS TRACT ..........................178 FIGURE 44: PERCENTAGE OF CHILDREN LIVING IN A HOUSEHOLD WITH A MARRIED COUPLE BY CENSUS TRACT....................................................................................................................................................................179 FIGURE 45: PERCENTAGE OF CHILDREN LIVING IN FEMALE-HEADED HOUSEHOLDS WITH NO SPOUSE OR PARTNER PRESENT BY CENSUS TRACT..........................................................................................180 FIGURE 46: PERCENT OF DISABLED POPULATION BY CENSUS TRACT 2015-2019 ............................181 FIGURE 47: MEDIAN INCOME BASED ON ACS 5-YEAR ESTIMATES 2010-2014 ....................................182 FIGURE 48: MEDIAN INCOME BASED ON ACS 5-YEAR ESTIMATES 2015-2019 ....................................183 FIGURE 49: LOW- AND MODERATE- INCOME HOUSEHOLDS IN SAN MARINO BY BLOCK GROUP 2011-2015.............................................................................................................................................................................184 FIGURE 50: PERCENTAGE OF LOW- AND MODERATE- INCOME HOUSEHOLDS IN SAN GABRIEL VALLEY REGION BY BLOCK GROUP 2011-2015 ...................................................................................................185 FIGURE 51: LOCATION AFFORDABILITY INDEX ..................................................................................................186 FIGURE 52: TCAC OPPORTUNITY AREA INDEX MAP .........................................................................................188 PAGE 233 of 1856
FIGURE 53: ACHIEVEMENT GAP RESULTS RACIAL/DEMOGRAPHIC BREAKDOWN............................189 FIGURE 54: EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY INDEX SCORES IN SAN GABRIEL VALLEY REGION.....189 FIGURE 55: CALENVIROSCREEN INDEX MAP OF SAN MARINO AND SURROUNDING AREAS .........190 FIGURE 56: PUBLIC TRANSIT .......................................................................................................................................192 FIGURE 57: TRANSIT SCORE IN SAN MARINO AND NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES............................193 FIGURE 58: ECONOMIC INDEX MAP OF SAN MARINO AND SURROUNDING AREAS............................194 FIGURE 59: HUD JOBS PROXIMITY INDEX MAP OF SAN MARINO AND SURROUNDING AREAS .....195 FIGURE 60: INFLOW/ OUTFLOW ANALYSIS OF SAN MARINO.......................................................................196 FIGURE 61: MONTHLY OWNER COSTS FOR MORTGAGE HOLDERS............................................................198 FIGURE 62: CROWDING BY EXTENT AND TENURE ............................................................................................198 FIGURE 63: SUBSTANDARD HOUSING......................................................................................................................199 FIGURE 64: SITES INVENTORY AND AFFH .............................................................................................................202 FIGURE 65: 1930'S HOLC REDLINING GRADE.......................................................................................................208 PAGE 234 of 1856
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1: SAN MARINO INCOME GROUPS, BY TYPE OF TENANCY ................................................ 12 TABLE 2: SAN MARINO RHNA, 2021 - 2029.............................................................................................. 20 TABLE 3: PROGRESS IN ACHIEVING 2014 QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES, BY INCOME GROUP23 TABLE 4: STATUS OF 2014-2021 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION ...... 25 TABLE 5: QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION BY INCOME GROUP.......... 58 TABLE 6: QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES BY INCOME GROUP................................................................... 59 TABLE 7: IDENTIFIED SITES............................................................................................................................ 65 TABLE 8: MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WITHIN THE H&C ZONE ................ 68 TABLE 9: H&C ZONE MINIMUM FLOOR AREA PER UNIT ................................................................... 69 TABLE 10: MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WITHIN THE RM1 ZONE ............. 79 TABLE 11: RM1 ZONE MINIMUM FLOOR AREA PER UNIT ................................................................ 80 TABLE 12: COMPARABLE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENTS IN NEIGHBORING JURISDICTIONS ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 83 TABLE 14: MU-1 ZONE MINIMUM FLOOR AREA PER UNIT............................................................... 85 TABLE 13: MU-1 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS....................................................................................... 86 TABLE 15: RENTS IN SAN MARINO............................................................................................................... 90 TABLE 16: MU-2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS....................................................................................... 92 TABLE 17: MU-2 ZONE MINIMUM FLOOR AREA PER UNIT............................................................... 93 TABLE 18: MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WITHIN THE RIH ZONE.............105 TABLE 19: RIH ZONE MINIMUM FLOOR AREA PER UNIT................................................................106 TABLE 20: ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS PROJECTION..................................................................115 TABLE 21: ASSUMED AFFORDABILITY FOR 6TH CYCLE ADUS (SCAG SURVEY)...................116 TABLE 22: COMPARISON OF SITE INVENTORY AND RHNA WITH REZONING ......................117 TABLE 23: LAND COSTS IN SELECTED LA COUNTY ZIP CODES ....................................................134 TABLE 24: RESIDENTIAL LAND USE CATEGORIES .............................................................................137 TABLE 25: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - CITY OF SAN MARINO ...............................................139 PAGE 235 of 1856
TABLE 26: RESIDENTIAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS........................................................................140 TABLE 27: SAN MARINO ZONES WHERE HOUSING IS ALLOWED................................................141 TABLE 28: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FEE SCHEDULE...............................149 TABLE 29: AVERAGE PLAN CHECK AND PERMIT FEES FOR A NEW HOUSE...........................152 TABLE 30: AVERAGE PLAN CHECK AND PERMIT FEES FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT .....................................................................................................................................................................................152 TABLE 31: LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING TIME.....................................................................154 TABLE 32: LOCAL ORDINANCES TO REDUCE HOUSING CONSTRAINTS...................................161 TABLE 33: COMPARISON OF RACIAL AND ETHNIC COMPOSITION WITH NEARBY COMMUNITIES......................................................................................................................................................169 TABLE 34: CHANGE IN RACIAL AND ETHNIC COMPOSITION (2010 - 2019) ..........................170 TABLE 35: DIVERSITY INDEX DEFINITIONS ..........................................................................................176 TABLE 36: PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION WITH A DISABILITY 2019 .....................................181 TABLE 37: OPPORTUNITY MAP DOMAINS AND INDICATORS.......................................................187 TABLE 38: CALIFORNIA ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE AND PROGRESS ....188 TABLE 39: EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT FOR ADULTS 25 AND OVER.....................................195 TABLE 40: HOUSEHOLDS BY INCOME LEVEL AND SHARE OF INCOME SPENT ON HOUSING .....................................................................................................................................................................................197 TABLE 41: FAIR HOUSING ISSUE, CONTRIBUTING FACTORS, AND MEANINGFUL ACTIONS .....................................................................................................................................................................................210 PAGE 236 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 SECTION I:
INTRODUCTION &
SUMMARY
1.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter of the San Marino General Plan presents goals, policies, programs, and supporting information related to the provision of housing for existing and future residents of the City. The purpose of the Housing Element is twofold: 1) to present specific policies and actions for housing development to meet San Marino’s specific, identified housing needs; and 2) to meet regional standards and achieve State certification, pursuant to statutory requirements. This element includes an assessment of current and future housing needs; constraints to housing production; an inventory of housing resources; and identifies San Marino’s housing goals, policies, and programs to ensure that the existing and future housing needs for all San Marino residents are met. The Housing Element was prepared with participation and input from the San Marino citizens and stakeholders and promotes a wide range of housing types to meet a variety of needs, including housing for families, seniors, special needs groups, and all income levels. As required by State law, the housing element evaluates previous housing programs and a schedule of new programs to further the development, improvement, and preservation of housing in San Marino.
1.2 DEFINITION AND PURPOSE
The Housing Element of the General Plan is a detailed statement of the housing goals, policies, programs, and quantified objectives for the City. The Element is based on a comprehensive technical assessment of existing housing policies and programs; current and projected housing needs, especially related to low income households and special needs populations; an analysis of market, environmental, governmental, and other factors which constrain housing production; an assessment of ways that the City can affirmatively further fair housing for its residents; an inventory of sites available for housing construction; and an assessment of new programs and policies that can enhance housing production in the City.
The purpose of the Housing Element is to guide decision-making by elected and appointed officials.
Specifically, the Housing Element sets forth how the City will address the need for housing, especially 1 PAGE 237 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 by low- and mode rate-income families and special needs families and individuals. The Housing Element also provides housing-related data and information to the public.
1.3 CONSISTENCY WITH STATE LAWS AND GENERAL
PLAN
State law requires that the General Plan include an integrated, consistent set of goals and policies.
The City of San Marino’s General Plan contains elements relating to land use, community services, natural resources, safety (including noise), housing, and circulation. The 2021 Housing Element provides goals, policies and implementation measures that are consistent with all other elements of the General Plan; amendments to the City’s Land Use Element and zoning are planned for immediately after adoption of the Housing Element. As the General Plan is amended in the future, the City will ensure the Housing Element remains consistent with the General Plan.
New State law requires that the Safety Element be updated to address climate adaptation upon revision of the Housing Element. The City will ensure compliance with this requirement by updating and adopting its updated Safety Element concurrent with the 2021 Housing Element. The City will provide a copy of the Housing Element to water and sewer service providers and has coordinated with these agencies in the preparation of this Housing Element. Within 60 days after adoption, the City will send the updated Housing Element to water and sewer providers with a memo regarding the State-mandated water and sewer service priority for housing projects that will help San Marino meet its regional housing need for lower-income households (Government Code Section 65589.7). Because San Marino does not have any disadvantaged communities, an Environmental Justice Element is not required; however, a fair housing analysis has been conducted and policies and programs to affirmatively further fair housing are included within the Housing Element.
1.4 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Housing issues affect the entire community and can be confusing and contentious. State requirements about what Housing Elements must allow often seem at odds with long-standing community values. The public participation requirement of Housing Element law presents an opportunity to engage constituents in defining housing issues, and in creating solutions that both meet the needs of the community and the requirements of state law.
The ongoing restrictions on gatherings due to the COVID-19 pandemic have forced community outreach and engagement into a virtual world. While in some cases this has made it possible for more people to be engaged in the process, a digital divide often exists in cases where households may lack internet connections or may be unable to attend virtual meetings due to work obligations.
To ensure that community outreach during the pandemic was as equitable as possible, the community outreach program was designed to provide participation opportunities via cell phone and 2 PAGE 238 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 at the convenience of the resident. San Marino’s Housing Element Update has included the public outreach efforts summarized below and detailed in Section 4:
December 7, 2020: A Community Town Hall was held via Zoom. The Town Hall was covered by the press.
December 29, 2020: City established a Housing Element Update webpage http://cityofsanmarino.org/housingelement The webpage provides the current update status, access to meeting agendas and materials, document drafts, a dedicated email for comments about the Housing Element Update, and community opinion surveys in Spanish, Chinese and English.
November 2020- January 2021: Community opinion surveys were conducted in English, Spanish, and Chinese.
January-April 2021: Stakeholder interviews conducted with responsive contacts representing for- and not-for-profit developers, advocacy groups, and service providers, including Southern California Non-profit Housing Association; Milestone Housing Development Corporation; the Chinese Club of San Marino; the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation; and the Pasadena-Foothills Association of Realtors.
February 24, 2021: Planning Commission held a publicly noticed workshop on the Housing Element Update. Commission discussed challenges faced by City, took public input, and provided policy direction to staff.
April 16, 2021: City Council held a publicly noticed workshop on the Housing Element Update and reviewed the Draft Housing Strategy (Policies and Programs for the Housing Element), potential sites, and a preliminary rezoning program to address the City’s RHNA shortfall.
Notices for this workshop were sent to the outreach and notification list, as well as to those who had provided contact information on the community surveys and those that had spoken at previous meetings.
July 20, 2021: Public Review Draft Housing Element was released and made available on the established website. Notices of the release of the draft document were sent to the outreach and notification list, including those who had spoken at previous meetings.
July 17, 2021: City Council held a publicly noticed workshop to review the Draft Housing Element for possible transmittal to the State. The City Council took public comments and set another meeting to continue the public discussion.
August 3, 2021: City Council held a publicly noticed meeting to receive public input regarding the Housing Element Update and provided further direction to staff and consultants regarding sites to include on the inventory lists to be considered for rezoning.
August 25, 2021: City held a Town Hall to continue to receive public input on the Draft Housing Element and advise the community of future opportunities to provide comments on the updated Draft Housing Element or to meet with a planner individually to discuss the update process.
September 24, 2021: The City Council held a duly noticed public meeting to take public comment and requested additional changes to be made to the Draft Housing Element. 3 PAGE 239 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
October 29, 2021: The City Council held a public meeting and authorized staff to transmit the Draft to HCD to begin their review.
November 1, 2021: The Draft Housing Element and all public comments received to date were transmitted to HCD to begin their mandatory 60-day review period, during which time all interested parties were invited and encouraged to submit comments directly to HCD.
December31, 2021: HCD responded with several changes needed for the Draft Housing Element to be compliant with State law. These changes were subsequently considered by the Planning Commission.
January 11, 2021: Mitigated Negative Declaration released January 26, 2022: Planning Commission recommended City Council certify the IS-ND and adopt the 2021-2029 (6th Cycle) Housing Element.
February 9, 2022: City Council certified the IS-ND and adopted the 2021-2019 6th Cycle Housing Element.
April 12, 2022: HCD responded with several changes needed for the Adopted Housing Element to be compliant with State law. These changes were incorporated into Housing Element for consideration by decision-makers.
April 23, 2024: City held a Community Conversation to inform residents about the contents of the Draft Housing Element and receive community input.
1.5 ORGANIZATION OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT
The Housing Element is organized into four main sections. Section 1 introduces the overall Housing Element update effort, a summary of housing needs and constraints, a Fair Housing summary, and a review of the effectiveness of the 2014 Housing Element and the City’s progress in its implementation. Section 2 sets forth the City’s Housing Strategy, which is comprised of the Goals, Policies and Programs that it intends to implement over the next 8-year planning cycle. The City’s Quantified Objectives are also included in Section 2. Section 3 presents a detailed housing site inventory, including a discussion of the availability of services, and compares this inventory to the City’s projected housing needs. Section 4, the Technical Background Report, provides statutorily required data including an assessment of housing needs & programs, an analysis of nongovernmental and governmental constraints to affordable housing provision, and a discussion of special needs populations. Pre-certified housing and demographic data provided by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is included as Appendix A. 4 PAGE 240 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
1.6 DEFINITION OF TERMS
Throughout the Housing Element, a variety of technical terms related to income levels are used in describing and quantifying conditions and objectives. The definitions of these terms follow:
Affordable Housingꢀ‐- Housing which costs no more than 30 percent of a low-, very low-, or extremely low-income household’s gross monthly income. For rental housing, the residents may pay up to 30 percent of gross income on rent plus tenant-paid utilities. For homeownership, residents can pay up to 30 percent on the combination of mortgage payments, taxes, insurance, and Homeowners' dues.
Area Median Income (AMI) -- The income figure representing the middle point of all Los Angeles household incomes. Fifty percent of households earn more than or equal to this figure and 50 percent earn less than or equal to this figure. The AMI varies according to the size of the household. For the year 2021, the AMI for a four-person household in Los Angeles County was $80,000.
Extremely Low‐Income Households (ELI) -- Households earning not more than 30 percent of the Los Angeles County AMI.
Very Low‐Income Households (VLI) -- Households earning between 31 and 50 percent of the Los Angeles County AMI.
Low Income Households (LI) -- Households earning between 51 and 80 percent of the Los Angeles County AMI.
Moderate Income Households (MI)-- Households earning 81 to 120 percent of the Los Angeles County AMI.
Above Moderate‐Income Households -- Households earning not less than 120 percent of the Los Angeles County AMI.
5 PAGE 241 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
1.7 DATA SOURCES
The 2021 Housing Element Update makes full use of the pre-certified data package provided by SCAG, which is contained in its entirely within the Technical Background Report. Data provided within this policy document is taken from the SCAG data set and by other sources as noted. In addition to the SCAG dataset, the following sources of data were used to help identify historic patterns of segregation, assess constraints to housing and the market conditions in San Marino; and to better identify specific housing needs:
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
U.S. Census 2010
2014-2018 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates
Realtor.com
Zillow.com
Los Angeles Economic Development Commission 2021 Economic Forecast LACDA Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice/Assessment of Fair Housing Connect SoCal 2020-2045
Los Angeles County Affordable Housing Action Plan, 2018 Los Angeles County Office of the Assessor
Pasadena-Foothills Association of Realtors
Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority 2020 Homeless Count, by City City of San Marino Building Permit Data
San Marino Historic Resource Survey, October 2020
Historic neighborhood development data provided by City of San Marino staff 2013-2017 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data for San Marino EPA’s San Marino Environmental Justice Report
Rich Blocks, Poor Blocks – based on the 2012-2016 American Community Survey for San Marino
●
●
●
●
Income by Neighborhoods Map, CityData.com accessed March 2021 A Portrait of Los Angeles County, San Marino–Measure of America, as of March 2021 Los Angeles County Annual Affordable Housing Outcomes Report, CHP, 30 April 2019 CA Department of Housing and Community Development, Housing Needs Data Certification Letter, 2020
● HdL ECONSolutions, San Marino Insight Market Analytics, 2019 6 PAGE 242 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
1.8 COMMUNITY PROFILE
San Marino is a small city within the very large and diverse Los Angeles County (Figure 1). It is located 11 miles from the City of Los Angeles, and is surrounded by the cities of Pasadena, South Pasadena, San Gabriel, and Alhambra. While San Marino is served by the nearby freeway network (210 and 164) and by the Metro bus line 78/79/379, it does not have high-speed rail services and does not contain any Priority Growth Areas envisioned in Connect SoCal 2020-2045. San Marino’s 2020 population of 12,870 represents a decrease from the 2010 population of 13,187. This lack of growth is consistent with that of Los Angeles County and the State of California, both of which have recently begun decreasing in population.
FIGURE 1: SAN MARINO LOCATION WITHIN LARGER LOS ANGELES COUNTY 7 PAGE 243 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Incorporated in 1913, San Marino was almost completely built out by the 1970s (Figure 2). San Marino is characterized by its beautiful homes and has multiple historic neighborhoods and structures. The intention of the City’s founding fathers was a high-quality, crime-free residential area that provides great schools, parks, and an exclusive lifestyle; the City’s physical form today reflects those early values and development patterns. The City’s limited number of vacant parcels and lack of subdivision potential has impeded development since the 1970s: an average of less than 6 new home permits have been issued annually since 1980, not counting Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).
FIGURE 2:ꢀꢀSAN MARINO NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT CHRONOLOGY Source: San Marino Historical Resources Survey, 2020 and San Marino staff 8 PAGE 244 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
1.9 CHANGING HOUSING NEEDS AND DEMOGRAPHICS
Comparisons between San Marino’s data and that of the larger Los Angeles County show stark differences in many areas, as reflected in the information highlighted below. San Marino’s median household income and median housing price are both more than twice that of the surrounding county or region. As the City ages and demographics change, different housing needs have arisen, and new programs are needed to meet changing demands. This section explores the characteristics and the housing needs of the San Marino community and helps to provide direction in updating the City’s Housing Element goals, policies, and programs.
1.9.1 Population Characteristics and Trends
Los Angeles County’s population increased slightly (1.89%) between 2010 and 2020, from 9,787,747 residents in 2010 to 9,969,510 in 2020. By contrast, San Marino’s population decreased 2.1% over the same period, from 13,147 residents in 2010 to 12,870 residents in 2020. In addition to the population decrease, the average household size in San Marino also decreased and now averages 2.92 persons per household, down from a household size of 3.02 persons in 2010. This decrease in household size coupled with a decrease in population is not unexpected in a community that has both a growing number of seniors and a shrinking number of young families.
Age Composition
Figure 3 helps to tell San Marino’s housing needs story: it has an aging population that needs to be housed and cared for. Additionally, San Marino will need to create reasonably inexpensive housing opportunities for young families if it is to stop the outmigration of young adults and families seeking a more affordable place to live.
FIGURE 3: CURRENT POPULATION BY AGE AND SEX
Source: American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates 9 PAGE 245 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Race and Ethnicity
The U.S. Census provides statistics regarding the race and ethnicity of a city's population. The 2010- 2019 population estimates show that the City of San Marino is made up of persons classified as “Asian alone” at 60.5 % of the population, and with persons classified as “White alone” at 31.5% of the population. Hispanic or Latino persons formed 6.3% of the population; Blacks or African Americans formed about 2% of the population; and about 3% of the population identified as two or more Races. Additional discussion of San Marino’s racial and ethnic composition is included in the Technical Background Report (Section 4).
Employment and Income
According to the American Community Survey 2014-2018, the City of San Marino has 5,474 residents in the workforce. This represents a 7.4% decrease from the 5,904 residents reported to be in San Marino’s workforce by the American Community Survey 2007-2011, consistent with the City’s aging workforce and its recent decrease in population. The industries with the highest percentage of employees are education and social services with 1,389 employees (25.4% of total). Professional services and finance make up another large segment of occupations. Figure 4 illustrates the breakdown of employment by industry.
FIGURE 4: EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY
Source: American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates w/ groupings of 2‐digit NA/CS codes.
San Marino has relatively few low-paying jobs. It is primarily residential in nature and has only 2 streets (Mission and Huntington) with commercial uses that could support local employment. These areas are primarily made up of small-scale retail and professional office spaces. The City’s largest employers are the San Marino Unified School District with 315 employees and the Huntington Library, Art Collections and Botanical Gardens with 459 employees. 10 PAGE 246 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 2019 Regional Locational Demographic and Employment Profile The City of San Marino’s 2019 Insight Market Study (Appendix C) compiles key regional household, consumer, and employment metrics from three drivesheds centered at the downtown intersections of Huntington Drive and San Marino Avenue and Euclid Avenue and Mission Street. The three radius areas studied were within a 10-, 15-, and 20- minute drive from these intersections.
The Insight Market Study area, inclusive of San Marino and adjacent urban areas in and around Los Angeles and the San Gabriel Valley focused on the following regional area indicators.
Population projections
Ancestry
Educational Attainment
Family Structure
Household Profiles
Consumer Demand and Market Supply
Income
Wages
Industry Groups
Employee #s
Occupations
Employment Trends
The Insight Market Study provides a regional comparative context inclusive of San Marino that shows the percentage of Asians, Whites, and Blacks generally decrease with distance, while the percentage of Hispanics increases with distance. The data also shows that the American Indian population is relatively consistent in the region. Per capita, average household, and median household incomes are higher closer to San Marino and lower in the region. Educational attainment is higher near San Marino. Household sizes are generally smaller in San Marino and homeownership is higher.
Unemployment was slightly higher in the region. The percentage of the population not in the labor force was similar in the region. The number of higher paying white-collar jobs are higher in the San Marino area while blue-collar jobs were higher in the greater region. Median and average salaries were generally higher in the area including San Marino and generally decreased with distance. 11 PAGE 247 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
1.9.2 Household Incomes and Housing Affordability
As noted, San Marino’s median household income of $159,509 is more than twice that of greater Los Angeles County at $77,300. While most San Marino residents have higher incomes than Los Angeles County in general, there are still a considerable number of San Marino households (970) with 2017 incomes at the “lower” level (80% or less of AMI). The distribution of incomes for 2018 is shown in Table 1.
TABLE 1: SAN MARINO INCOME GROUPS, BY TYPE OF TENANCY
Income Distribution
Overview
Owner
Households
Renter
Households
Total
Households
Percentage of
Households
Extremely Low Income
Very Low Income
Low Income
275 165
45 440 10%
235 280 6%
210 40 250 6%
Moderate Income
Above Moderate
Total
240 90 330 7%
2,840
3,800
370
710
3,210
4,510
71%
100%
Sources: Consolidated Planning /CHAS Data for San Marino; 2013‐2017 ACS Source: SCAG Dataꢀꢀ
Housing Costs and Overpayment
When housing prices are very high, many households must “overpay” for housing. Households are considered housing cost-burdened when their total housing costs exceed 30% of their gross monthly income, and to be “severely cost burdened” when their total housing costs exceed 50% of their gross monthly income. As would be expected, households with very-low and extremely low incomes are disproportionately housing cost-burdened. In San Marino, 22% of households are severely cost burdened and are paying more than 50% of their gross monthly incomes for housing. Another 15% of households are paying more than 30% of their incomes on housing, and 62% are paying less than 30% of their incomes for housing. While the high median household incomes in San Marino result in a relatively low overpayment rate, there are still 1,697 San Marino households who are overpaying for housing.
12 PAGE 248 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
1.9.3 Special Needs Populations
Homeless
The Los Angeles County Community Development Commission conducts bi-annual point-in-time surveys of homeless populations. San Marino is occasionally reported to have 1 unhoused person, but typically is reported to have zero unhoused persons. Services for homeless individuals are available in neighboring Pasadena. San Marino allows emergency shelters to be established in any commercially zoned property as a permitted use; however, at this time no interest has been shown on the part of homeless service providers in initiating homeless services in San Marino.
Disabled
Census data indicate that San Marino has 461 persons with an independent living disability, 248 with a self-care disability, 413 with an ambulatory disability, 229 with a vision disability, 199 with a cognitive disability and 163 with a hearing disability. The most commonly occurring disabilities among seniors 65 and older were independent living and ambulatory disabilities, each experienced by more than ten percent of San Marino’s seniors. These numbers are not exclusive, as some residents have more than one type of disability. These numbers include persons with developmental disabilities, which is defined as a severe and chronic disability attributable to a mental or physical impairments that begins before individuals reach adulthood (e.g., cerebral palsy, epilepsy, or autism).
According to local housing data provided by SCAG, 95 persons with developmental disabilities are 17 or younger and 45 persons are 18 or older. Additionally, SCAG data indicates that there are 85 persons with developmental disabilities living in the home of a parent, family member, or guardian; 5 persons living in an independent or supported living unit; and 5 persons living in a “other” residence (not categorized). Therefore, in the City of San Marino, most persons with developmental disabilities are children who live with a family member or guardian.
The provision of residential care facilities, ADUs, reasonable accommodation procedures, and the adoption of a voluntary Universal Design program, can help to address these special needs.
Elderly
According to the 2019 U.S. Census population estimates, about 21 percent of San Marino’s population are aged 65 and above. As shown earlier in Figure 3, a large and growing percentage of San Marino’s population is elderly; by the end of the Housing Element period, the 70-75 age group will be the most prevalent, followed by the 65-70, 60-65, and 55-60 age groups. Elderly persons often have fixed incomes in addition to other special needs related to housing and may require physical improvements to their homes such as ramps, handrails, lower cupboards and counters, creation of a downstairs bedroom, and other modifications to enable them to remain in their homes. They may also need additional assistance in the form of a part-time or live-in caretaker. In most instances the elderly would like to stay in their own homes rather than move to a retirement community. In San Marino, and particularly among the Asian community, it is common for multiple generations of a family to live together. Residential care facilities, the development of ADUs, and homesharing opportunities will become increasingly important in accommodating the housing needs of this aging 13 PAGE 249 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 community. Encouraging new homes, additions, and remodels to include Universal Design elements will also be important to serving the needs of the mobility- or vision-impaired.
Large Households
Household size can be influenced by a lack of affordable housing options, an increase or decrease in family formations, or families leaving an area. Ethnicity can also affect sizes of households if a particular ethnic group has a tradition of living with family members upon retirement age. In San Marino, the average household size has continued to decrease, from 3.02 to 2.92 persons per household, while the number of smaller households (1-3 persons) has increased. San Marino has a relatively small number of large households, but when they do occur, they tend to be rental households.
Female‐headed households
State law requires an analysis of female-headed households to ensure adequate childcare and job training resources. Of San Marino’s 4,566 households, only 8.8% were female-headed (compared to
14.3% in the SCAG region); of those, just 3.9% had children at home and none had children under age six.
Farmworkers
Statewide, farmworker housing is of unique concern and importance. While only a small number of SCAG jurisdictions have farmworkers living in them, they are essential to the region’s economy and its food supply. According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), more than 80 percent of hired crop farmworkers are not migrant workers but are considered settled and work farm(s) within 75 miles of their residences. This share is up significantly from 41 percent in 1996- 1998, reflecting a fundamental change in the nature of the crop farming workforce. The majority of farmworkers in California reside in metropolitan areas, where the average hourly wage of $16.05 puts them in the extremely low to very-low-income category (between 30-50 percent of the area median income). The 2014 – 2018 ACS indicated that no farmworkers live in San Marino, and there is no nearby farmland that would indicate a need for farmworker housing in San Marino.
1.10 CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSING STOCK
Type
San Marino’s housing stock consists almost exclusively of single-family homes (98.8%), compared to
54.4% for the greater SCAG region. Slightly more than 86% of San Marino’s homes are owneroccupied, compared to 52.5% for the SCAG region. Conversely, only 13.6% of San Marino’s homes are renter-occupied, compared to 47.5% of the SCAG region. The age group most likely to be renting in San Marino are those between 35 and 44; however, owners outnumber renters across all age groups.
Age & Condition
San Marino’s housing stock is much older than the SCAG regional average. As previously noted, San Marino was built-out by 1960 and has seen very little construction after 1980. The time period where 14 PAGE 250 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 the highest share of San Marino’s housing was built is before 1939, while in the larger SCAG region the period when most housing was built was during the 1970s. According to the City’s Code Enforcement Department, the City’s housing stock is well maintained and there are approximately 4 homes in the City that are in need of rehabilitation or replacement.
Overcrowding
The ACS definition of overcrowding is more than 1.0 occupants per room, where the number of rooms includes all except kitchens, bathrooms, and hallways. Severe overcrowding is defined as more than 1.5 occupants per room. In San Marino, just 3.4% of households were overcrowded and less than 1% were severely overcrowded. Rental units were more likely to be overcrowded than were owner-occupied units.
Vacancy
The vacancy rate is a measure of the general availability of housing. It also shows how well the available units meet the current housing market demand. A low vacancy rate suggests that households will have difficulty finding housing within their price range. While the average vacancy rate across the US is approximately 7%, in metropolitan areas rates are generally about 3% - 4%. San Marino’s vacancy rate is 4.6%, with about 200 vacant units.
A “Vacancy” occurs for several reasons; a home may be listed for sale or being prepared for a rental tenant. Homes can also be held for seasonal or occasional use by their owners. The American Community Survey has categorized vacancy in San Marino by type as displayed in Figure 5.
Public input received during preparation of the Housing Element included anecdotal information about “investor” houses, which are bought by investors who do not live in San Marino and are held, vacant, purely for investment purposes. These vacant homes are reflected as “other” by the ACS data of vacancy type in Figure 5; they are not used for housing people. This phenomenon has recently been seen in high-value real estate markets on both coasts, most notably in Vancouver, Seattle, and San Francisco. A 2021 Report by Strategic Actions for a Just Economy (SAJE) and UCLA Law found the same phenomenon occurring is the City of Los Angeles, where over 46,000 units are being held in this manner and thus not available for housing. If the census data and presence of speculative investor housing accurately represents the vacant home situation in San Marino, then the true housing vacancy rate for the City is actually much lower – less than 1 percent. As noted above, this shows there are not enough units to meet market demand and that households will have difficulty finding housing in San Marino.
15 PAGE 251 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 5: VACANT UNITS BY TYPE
Source: American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates. The type of vacancy can be instructive when one type varies significantly from the norm, such as the “Other” category for San Marino in Figure 5 above. This may occur in vacation‐destination communities, where short‐term vacation rentals drive the “seasonal” vacancy type higher. For ACS data, vacant units are subdivided according to their housing market classification shown in the sidebar. Units held vacant for “other” reasons make up 67%, or about 134 of San Marino’s vacant units as shown in Figure 5.
Types of Vacancy in Census Data:
For Rentꢀ‐ These are vacant units offered "for rent," and vacant units offered either "for rent" or "for sale."
Rented, Not Occupied - These are vacant units rented but not yet occupied, including units where rent has been paid or agreed upon, but the renter has not yet moved in.
For Sale Onlyꢀ‐ These are vacant units being offered "for sale only," including units in cooperatives and condominium projects if the individual units are offered "for sale only." If units are offered either "for rent" or "for sale" they are included in the "for rent" classification.
Sold, Not Occupied - These are vacant units sold but not yet occupied, including units that have been sold recently, but the new owner has not yet moved in.
For Seasonal, Recreational, or Occasional Useꢀ‐ These are vacant units used or intended for use only in certain seasons or for weekends or other occasional use throughout the year.
Seasonal units include those used for summer or winter sports or recreation, such as beach cottages and hunting cabins. Seasonal units also may include quarters for such workers as herders and loggers. Interval ownership units, sometimes called shared-ownership or timesharing condominiums, also are included here.
For Migrant Workersꢀ‐ These include vacant units intended for occupancy by migratory workers employed in farm work during the crop season.
Other Vacantꢀ‐ If a vacant unit does not fall into any of the categories specified above, it is classified as "Other vacant." For example, this category includes units held for occupancy by a caretaker or janitor, and units held for personal reasons of the owner. 16 PAGE 252 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Prices
San Marino’s housing prices have continued to accelerate at a greater rate than costs in Los Angeles County (Figure 6). While median household incomes in San Marino are high, even moderate- and middle-income households cannot afford a home in San Marino where the median sales price exceeds $2 million, and the median rental price exceeds $4,000 per month (2021 figures). A moderate-income family of three could afford a home with a sales price of $385,859 or a monthly rent of $1,818. San Marino currently lacks homes for these households, which include young families and first-time homebuyers.
FIGURE 6: GROWTH IN SAN MARINO AND LOS ANGELES COUNTY HOMES SALE PRICES, 2012 ‐ 2021 Source: Realtor.com
Preservation of Assisted Units at Risk of Conversion
There are no existing assisted housing units that are deed-restricted for lower-income households in San Marino. Therefore, there are no lower-income units at risk of conversion to above-moderate housing.
17 PAGE 253 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
1.11 SUMMARY OF CONSTRAINTS
As discussed in Section 4, the primary constraints to housing in San Marino are the limited number of vacant parcels and extremely high land values. Discussions with both market-rate and affordable housing developers revealed that the high land costs, together with San Marino’s relatively small lot sizes and lack of available land, render San Marino unattractive for the development of affordable or market-rate housing. While these forces are beyond the City’s control, they are some of the primary drivers of high land costs and high median home prices. Affordable housing developers indicated that if larger lots (one acre or more) could be identified and rezoned, or if smaller lots could be combined and rezoned, it would help achieve the economies of scale needed to develop 100 percent affordable multi-family housing. The City will explore a lot consolidation program; however, the potential to combine adjacent lots is somewhat limited by the lack of common parcel ownership in the City.
Two developers interviewed indicated areas where the City has potential (beyond ADUs) to develop housing for multiple income levels. One opportunity is in the City’s two commercial areas; the adopted objective design standards for multi-family projects may increase the viability of these types of projects. Other places where affordable housing could occur include employee housing within the private Southwestern Academy campus and a portion of the Huntington property. Another promising opportunity lies in the redevelopment of the City-owned Stoneman site, where the City could make the land available to an affordable housing developer consistent with the Surplus Land Act. Refer to Section 2 for a full description of programs included in this Housing Element to make sufficient sites available and appropriately zoned for housing.
One of the secondary constraints to the development of housing in San Marino is community opposition. The public opinion survey and public input received during preparation of the Housing Element indicate that a significant number of residents feel that San Marino should not build any multi-family housing. Many residents feel that either all of San Marino’s housing needs have been met, or that any needs that do exist can be satisfied by the development of ADUs. Additionally, stakeholder interviews revealed that San Marino can be a difficult City to get a project through, even if the project type and design are allowed by the City Codes. The development of objective design and development standards for the ministerial approval of qualified development projects, including ADUs (Program 1.5), will be important steps to ensure that San Marino is able to accommodate its fair share of the region’s housing needs.
18 PAGE 254 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
1.12 SUMMARY OF FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS (FHA)
Assembly Bill 686 (Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, or AFFH) was adopted into law in 2018 and became effective on January 1, 2019. The law requires state and local agencies to take proactive measures to correct any housing inequalities related to race, national origin, color, ancestry, sex, marital status, disability, religion, or other protected characteristics. Agencies must ensure that their laws and programs affirmatively further fair housing, and that they take no actions that do not do so.
Under State law, affirmatively furthering fair housing, or AFFH, means “taking meaningful actions, in addition to combatting discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics.
Specifically, affirmatively furthering fair housing means taking meaningful actions that, taken together, address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity, replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns, transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity, and fostering and maintaining compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws. The duty to affirmatively further fair housing extends to all a public agency’s activities and programs relating to housing and community development. (Gov. Code, § 8899.50(a)(1).” Agencies must include in their Housing Elements a program that promotes fair housing opportunities for all persons. In the context of a community’s housing needs, AFFH is not just about the number of units needed, but also about where the units are located and who has access to them. The City’s Fair Housing Analysis is provided in Section 4.5 and summarized here.
AB 686 makes certain requirements for the analysis of fair housing issues. During preparation of the Adopted San Marino 2021-2029 Housing Element, HCD completed its guidance document for AFFH analysis within Housing Elements.
In accordance with HCD’s guidance, the fair housing analysis is organized into five different subsections: enforcement and outreach capacity, segregation and integration patterns and trends, areas of concentration in poverty and affluence across racial and ethnic groups, disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs, including displacement. Additionally, the analysis identifies the location of housing sites and capacity (e.g. number of units) by income category and evaluates whether the location of units by income category exacerbates or improves existing patterns for all components of the assessment of fair housing.
The City determined that it’s fair housing issues include: strong patterns of familial (e.g., married couples and married couples with children) and income (high median incomes) segregation, cost burden due to high housing costs in the City, and displacement of lower-income residents, including female-headed households, elderly residents, and younger residents who grew up in the City but cannot afford to purchase a home. While there have been no Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity complaints in the City, the City has determined that this may be due to a lack of awareness and education regarding fair housing issues and/or the proper training for code enforcement officials. As such, fair housing enforcement is also included as a fair housing issue in the City. Additionally, the 19 PAGE 255 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 City determined that the development of identified sites would not result in the concentration of poverty or wealth during the planning period. Furthermore, the City determined that the development of sites would improve segregation patterns in the City and result in a better integrated community
1.13 REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION
The Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) is a requirement of State housing law and is a process that determines projected housing needs for all jurisdictions in California. The Southern California Association of Governments, or SCAG, conducts the RHNA process every eight years and assigns a specific allocation, or RHNA, to each jurisdiction. Every jurisdiction must plan for its RHNA allocation in its Housing Element by ensuring there are enough sites with appropriate zoning to accommodate their RHNA. The goal is to ensure that local plans have enough appropriately zoned land to accommodate their existing and projected housing needs for all income levels for the entire 8- year planning period. Jurisdictions are not expected to build the housing, but they must plan and zone for it.
The RHNA methodology applies several factors to further the objectives of State law and meet the goals of the Connect SoCal plan. After a RHNA total is calculated, a social equity adjustment is applied to determine the four income categories. The social equity adjustment is based on household income and access to resources. One of the five objectives of State housing law is to ensure that there is not an overconcentration of households by income group in comparison to the county or regional average. To ensure that the RHNA methodology does not overburden low-income jurisdictions with more low-income households, a social equity adjustment is applied during the Income Group process.
The result is that higher income jurisdictions like San Marino must plan and zone more affordable units, while lower income jurisdictions must plan and zone for more above-moderate income units and fewer affordable units.
San Marino’s RHNA for the period between October 2021 – October 2029 is 397 units, divided between income groups as follows:
TABLE 2: SAN MARINO RHNA, 2021 ‐ 2029
Very Low
149
Low
91 Moderate
91 Above Moderate
66 Total
San Marino 397
Source:https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning‐and‐community‐development/housing‐elements/building‐ blocks/extremely‐low‐income‐housing‐needs (accessed August 31, 2023) While the RHNA is assigned based on the four income categories above, the law also requires that communities plan for the needs of extremely low-income households, defined as those making less than 30% of the County AMI. According to the HCD, an agency can calculate the projected housing 20 PAGE 256 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 need for ELI households by applying one of the following two methodologies to the RHNA for very low-income households: (1) Use available U.S. Census data to calculate the percentage/number of very low-income households that qualify as ELI households or (2) Presume that 50 percent of very low-income households qualify as ELI households. The City has chosen to apply the latter. The provided number of ELI households and very low-income households must equal the jurisdiction's RHNA for very low-income households. As such, the City’s housing need during this 6th Cyle planning period for ELI households and VL households is 75 units and 74 units, respectively.
Because San Marino is a high-income and high-resource community, it has a much greater RHNA for affordable and moderate-income units than it does for Above-moderate units. San Marino is primarily built out and does not allow for multi-family development at densities that accommodate lower-income units, which is considered to be at least 20 units per acre. Therefore, the RHNA cannot be accommodated on existing sites with existing zoning and the City must identify and rezone adequate new sites to meet its RHNA. Section 3 provides the housing sites inventory and realistic capacity analysis, which demonstrates that the City can meet its RHNA obligation for each income category.
1.14 2014 SAN MARINO HOUSING ELEMENT REVIEW
The City has taken multiple steps to facilitate an increased mix of residential development since adoption of the 2014 Housing Element, including the following:
● Expanded opportunities for low- and moderate-income housing by adopting a revised Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance and a new Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance, in compliance with State law.
●
●
Provided no-cost ADU/JADU pre-application consultations with planning staff to ensure complete application submittals and the shortest possible processing time.
Drafted a mixed-use ordinance for City Council consideration (this was ultimately not adopted, but residential uses continue to be allowed in the C-1 and the City Council has requested that staff prepare objective design standards to guide their development).
Approved the first mixed-use project at 2405 Huntington Drive (3 commercial ground floor units, 2 residential units above).
●
●
●
Produced and distributed public handouts on Fair Housing.
Established a specific page within the City’s website that includes housing-related information.
● Moved to an online permitting system to facilitate continued permit issuance during pandemic closure and beyond.
Progress Implementing Programs
The City was successful in implementing most of the programs in its 2014 Housing Element and is implementing others with the adoption of this 2021 Housing Element Update. Table 3 below reports how many housing units were realized during the 5th Housing Element by income level. See Table 4 at 21 PAGE 257 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 the end of this Section for full program implementation status. Table 4 summarizes results of the 5th Housing Element programs and where information is available, provides quantitative results to evaluate the effectiveness of programs. Table 4 also identifies how 5th Cycle Housing Element programs, if continued, have been integrated into current (6th Cycle) programs.
Progress in Achieving RHNA and Quantified Objectives
The City was only partially successful in achieving its 5th cycle Quantified Objectives, as shown in Table 3. The City reached and exceeded its objectives for above-moderate and total units, and almost reached its objective for lower-income units. It saw the most success in converting existing pool houses and similar accessory structures to Accessory Dwelling Units, and in the construction of new Accessory Dwelling Units. This is not an unexpected outcome in a city that is fully built out. The City also gained its first multi-family units as part of a mixed-occupancy project near the end of the planning period.
Progress in Meeting Housing Needs of Special Needs Populations As previously discussed in Section 1.9.3, the City’s special needs populations primarily include elderly and disabled residents. The City has a very low percentage of homelessness, large households, female-headed households, and farmworkers. The City fell short of its goal to provide affordable ADUs to lower-income households, which can often include elderly and disabled persons. As such, new Programs 1.2 and 1.3 can are included in this 6th Cycle Housing Element to ensure the needs of lower-income households, including elderly and disabled residents are better achieved during the planning period. However, disabled and elderly residents also have special housing design needs.
While the previous element included Program 3.1 to implement the City’s reasonable accommodation ordinance, there were only 2 reasonable accommodation requests during the previous planning period. The City intends to take a more proactive approach to addressing disabled and elderly housing needs by adopting a Universal Design Program (new Program 3.5) to promote building techniques that accommodate physical limitations typical of aging and disabled persons. Additionally, new Programs 1.3 and 3.6 are included in this Housing Element to incentivize the use of Universal Design in new construction through fee waivers and pre-approvals. 22 PAGE 258 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 3: PROGRESS IN ACHIEVING 2014 QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES, BY INCOME GROUP Income
Group
New
Construction
Rehabilitation Conservation 2014
Quantified
Objective
Total Units
Realized
2014-2021 Projected/Actual Projected/Actual
Projected/Actual
Very Low 6/3 5/0
5/2
0/0
0/0
2/0
2/0
0/0
0/0
13 13
0 3
Low 6/9
0 11
Moderate 0
Above 6/37 6 37
Moderate
Total 18/49 10/2 4/0 32 51
Lessons Learned
The low level of permitting in San Marino is typical for a small, fully built-out City. The adoption of the new Accessory Dwelling Unit ordinance required by the State has had the greatest effect in adding housing units to San Marino’s housing stock, as the program allows additional housing units to be integrated into the City’s existing neighborhoods. Removal of the minimum parcel size requirement to establish an ADU more than doubled the number of eligible parcels and interest – and applications – increased exponentially. ADU programs included in this Housing Element (Programs
1.1 through 1.5) are expected to continue to add units within San Marino’s existing neighborhoods during the planning period.
The City also struggled to revise its C-1 standards to specifically allow and set standards for mixeduse developments. While the standards were drafted by staff and brought forward for approval, the new provisions were not adopted due to community concerns. The City was successful in achieving one mixed-use project under its existing C-1 provisions, which allows housing units at a density of one unit per 5,000 square feet of parcel size. Some local developers continue to be interested in pursuing mixed-use projects, and the City recognizes that a higher density of residential development in and near the commercial areas could assist in revitalizing these areas. Adaptive re-use and other redevelopment strategies would be appropriate for this area.
Additionally, with the recent strengthening of the Housing Accountability Act and the passage of SB 35 (Government Code § 65913.4), the San Marino City Council adopted Objective Design Standards in 2023 for all projects involving multi-family residential uses in the C-1 and H&C zones, which may encourage the development of multi-family uses in commercial areas. As the City looks forward to the 6th Cycle, recent adoption of the new Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU) ordinance and new Program 1.5, requiring the City to adopt objective design standards for ADU developments, will both work to remove regulatory constraints on the production of ADUs in 23 PAGE 259 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 San Marino. However, since the quantified objectives for lower-income households were not met (see Table 3), new Program 1.2 is included in this Housing Element to help fund development of attached ADUs in exchange for continued affordability. San Marino has always prided itself on having the best schools in the State, and one of the most difficult lessons for the City has been the loss of its student population. As reflected in Census data and school enrollment figures, young families cannot afford to live in San Marino because of the lack of housing affordable to lower, moderate, and middle-income households. The City recognizes the need to ensure that young families, including first-time homebuyers can live in San Marino and includes new Programs 1.7, 1.8, 1.13, and 2.6 to increase housing opportunities for younger families with lower incomes during the planning period.
1.15 PROGRAM CHANGES IN 2021 HOUSING ELEMENT
The 2021 Housing Element update is not a comprehensive "new" Housing Element, but rather an update of the 2014 Housing Element. The focus of the update process has been to keep the programs that are working, adding new policies and programs where community needs have changed or where necessary to comply with new State laws. The same three goals of the existing 2014 Housing Element have been maintained, with new or revised policies and programs proposed to meet changing needs and legal requirements. As shown in Table 4 below, most ongoing policies and programs are successful and are continued in the Housing Element update; limited-term programs that have already been accomplished have not been carried forward. 24 PAGE 260 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 4: STATUS OF 2014‐2021 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION Goal Policy Description Program Description Status*
GOAL 1: Provide a range of
housing opportunities for all
income levels.
Policy 1.1: Encourage the
development of housing on vacant unit applications through the R-1 land to meet Above-moderate
housing demand.
Program 1.1: Fast track all second Achieved with adoption of the City’s ADU Ordinance (Ordinance
No. O-20-1386 in 2020) and TwoUnit Residential Development Ordinance (Ordinance No. O-21-
1386 in 2021).
permitting process.
Ultimately, the 5th Cycle ADU
programs resulted in the
construction of 47 new ADUs and 2
rehabilitated ADUs.
Of these, 37 units are affordable to
above moderate households, 3
units are affordable to very lowincome households, and 9 units are affordable to low- income
households.
There were no applications or
approvals for two-unit projects
during the 5th Cycle planning
period.
Program 1.1 is expanded in the 6th
Cycle to require the City to update
its ADU Ordinance as necessary to
remain consistent with State law,
25 PAGE 261 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Goal Policy Description Program Description Status*
and to monitor and track ADU
development annually.
Policy 1.2: Continue to encourage
the development of second units as unit construction by revising the a housing resource.
Program 1.2: Facilitate second Achieved with adoption of the City’s ADU Ordinance (Ordinance
No. O-20-1386 in 2020). This
program is not included in the 6th
Cycle Housing Element.
Second Unit Ordinance.
6th Cycle Programs 1.1 through 1.5
will promote the development of
ADUs during the planning period.
Policy 1.3: Encourage the Program 1.3: Distribute Partially achieved and ongoing with adoption of the City’s ADU
Ordinance in 2020.
construction of attached second
units for multi-generational
families, and as a source of
affordable housing for extremely
low/ lower income households
and persons with disabilities.
information on second units and
the required development
standards to achieve two second
units annually for a total of 16
second units over the eight-year
planning period.
During the 5th Cycle, the City
approved 47 new and 2
rehabilitated ADUs. Of the
approved ADUs, 3 units are
affordable to very low-income
households, and 9 units are
affordable to low-income
households. However, the City fell
short of meeting its quantified
objectives for lower-income
households.
26 PAGE 262 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Goal Policy Description Program Description Status*
This program is continued during
the 6th Cycle and renamed as new
Program 1.4. New programs are
included in this 6th Cycle Housing
Element to ensure this goal is
better achieved during the
planning period.
New Program 1.2 is included to
establish a pilot program to help
fund development of attached
ADUs in exchange for continued
affordability, which will help the
City reach its Quantified Objectives
for the lower income households
detailed in Table 6.
Additionally, new Program 3.5 is
included in this Housing Element
to require the City to pre-approve
ADU applications that incorporate
Universal Design techniques into
ADU design to accommodate
physical limitations of aging and
disabled persons (e.g., stepless
entry, ground floor living,
environmental controls at
accessible heights).
27 PAGE 263 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Goal Policy Description Program Description Status*
To ensure the City is on track to
meet its goal of providing 195
ADUs for lower-income
households, new Program 1.3 is
also included to implement specific
incentives (e.g., reduced fees, relief
for unpermitted units), including
incentives for ADUs that provide
affordability to lower-income
households and/or incorporate
universal design techniques, if the
City does not approve a total of 70
ADUs made affordable to lowerincome households by the end of 2024.
Policy 1.4: Continue to allow
residential uses in the C-1 zone as
a conditionally permitted use.
Program 1.4: Three years from
Housing Element adoption
evaluate the City Code for
residential development in the C-1
Zone. Assess possible barriers to
development and re-evaluate the
City’s policies.
Not yet achieved; still pursuing.
The City approved the first mixeduse project at 2405 Huntington Drive (3 commercial ground floor
units, 2 residential units above).
New Programs 1.6, 3.7, and 3.8
have been added, which require
the City to revise the Zoning Code
to expand the types of residential
uses allowed in the C-1 Zone.
28 PAGE 264 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Goal Policy Description Program Description Status*
Policy 1.5: Allow for development Program 1.5: Encourage the use of housing for lower income of second units for senior housing Achieved through the permitting of
ADUs as detailed above.
households and seniors in the City and housing for persons with through provision of density bonus disabilities (including persons During the planning period, the City coordinated services to as required by State law. with developmental disabilities). seniors through a Senior Outreach
Program, which connects seniors
to needed municipal, recreational,
and community service programs,
including ADUs as a viable housing
option for seniors
This program is not included in the
6th Cycle; however, outreach to
seniors will be continued as part of
new Program 1.11 (formerly
Program 1.7). Additionally, new
Program 3.5 requires the City to
provide information to ADU
applicants on Universal Design
features and reasonable
accommodations under the Fair
Housing Act. Additionally, Program
3.12 requires the City to provide
information on homesharing
opportunities.
29 PAGE 265 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Goal Policy Description Program Description Status*
Program 1.6: Adopt an
implementing ordinance for
density bonus law.
Not yet achieved; expanded in new
6th Cycle Program 1.10 to include
an additional City density bonus
program that encourages and
rewards projects that meet
demonstrated housing needs, and
is scheduled for review by the City
Council by the end of 2024. State
Density bonus remains available as
an incentive.
Program 1.7: Continue
community outreach and
education regarding the
development process.
Achieved, ongoing, and expanded
in new 6th Cycle Program 1.11,
which requires the City to hold an
annual “open house” at the
planning and building department
to introduce members of the public
to the City’s development process.
GOAL 2: Maintain the existing
housing stock.
Policy 2.1: Ensure that currently
sound housing is maintained
through code enforcement
activities and nuisance abatement
procedures.
Program 2.1: Maintain code
enforcement activities to ensure
building safety and integrity of
neighborhoods.
Achieved and ongoing with results
reported to the City Council
annually.
The City has an active Code
Enforcement program comprising
of two full time officers, one parttime officer, and one division manager.
30 PAGE 266 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Goal Policy Description Program Description Status*
According to the City’s code
enforcement department, the
City’s neighborhoods are well
maintained and contain very few
homes that are in need of
replacement or rehabilitation. The
City’s Code Enforcement Program
uses a neighbors report neighbors
approach, in which violations are
promptly corrected.
During the 5th Cycle, there were
229 code enforcement citations, all
of which were resolved in a timely
manner. Code violation complaints
primarily consist of un-permitted
construction and remodeling
activities.
This program is expanded in the
6th Cycle to require training for
code enforcement officers on
substandard and unsafe housing
conditions, training on fair housing
laws and protocols to address fair
housing complaints, and to be
consistent with the requirements
of AB 838 to ensure property
31 PAGE 267 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Goal Policy Description Program Description Status*
owners address code violations in
a timely manner.
Program 2.2: Continue to
implement the “abatement of
nuisance” ordinance which seeks
to ensure the continued
Achieved and continued in the 6th
Cycle. During the 5th Cycle, there
were 229 code enforcement
citations, all of which were
maintenance and good appearance resolved in a timely manner. Code of the City’s residential structures
and neighborhoods.
violation complaints primarily
consist of un-permitted
construction and remodeling
activities.
Policy 2.2: Pursue programs
offered by State and Federal
Program 2.3: Continue to
implement the Community
The 5th Cycle projected 10 lowerincome units in need of governments to provide monetary Development Block Grant (CDBG) rehabilitation units; however, only assistance to lower and moderate- program. Target limited resources 2 lower-income unit rehabilitation income households (including
extremely low income) for home
maintenance.
to extremely low-income
households and persons with
disabilities (including
projects were realized.
This program was underutilized
during the 5th Cycle. Only 39
percent of total CDBG funds were
used for home repairs and CDBG
funds were not used for home
repairs from 2017 to 2021.
developmental disabilities).
According to the City’s Code
Enforcement Department, there
are approximately 4 homes in need
of rehabilitation or replacement;
32 PAGE 268 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Goal Policy Description Program Description Status*
however, these homeowners, like
many homeowners in the City, do
not qualify to receive CDBG funds.
For these reasons, this program is
not included in the 6th Cycle
planning period.
Program 2.4: Gather and Achieved with information
distribute information to published on the City website. homeowners on the use of rebates
and incentives for making their
homes more energy efficient.
Program 2.4 (renamed Program
2.3) is continued in the 6th Cycle
and will continue to be reviewed
annually, with relevant
information updated to the City
website.
Program 2.5: Continue to
encourage seismic retrofitting.
Achieved with permit information
available on the City website and is
continued in the 6th Cycle
(renamed Program 2.4) with
regular updates to reflect changes
to the State seismic building codes.
GOAL 3: Ensure the accessibility to Policy 3.1: Promote equal housing Program 3.1: Continue housing for all segments of society. opportunity for all economic, implementation of the reasonable accommodation ordinance and
Achieved and ongoing.
33 PAGE 269 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Goal Policy Description Program Description Status*
racial, and social groups currently Program 3.1 is updated to require residing in the City.
allow for exceptions to the zoning
code when necessary to provide an ministerial approval of reasonable equal opportunity for housing.
Monitor the effectiveness of this
ordinance; identify and address
accommodation applications and
to annually reflect changes to State
and federal fair and equal housing
any constraints to accommodating regulations This program is the housing needs of persons with
disabilities.
continued in the during the 6th
Cycle.
There were 2 reasonable
accommodation requests during
the previous planning period.
Although both requests were
approved within a timely manner,
the City intends to take a more
proactive approach during this
planning period by promoting the
use of Universal Design in new
construction (new Programs 1.3,
3.5, and 3.6).
Policy 3.2: Promote housing that Program 3.2: Work with fair Achieved and ongoing. meets the special needs of elderly
and disabled (including those with ensure that procedures are in developmental disabilities).
housing service providers to
Program 3.2 is expanded in the 6th
Cycle to specify the information
required to be posted on the City’s
place if a complaint of housing
discrimination is made. In 2014,
34 PAGE 270 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Goal Policy Description Program Description Status*
update the City’s website to
include fair housing resources,
including a link to the fair housing
service provider’s website.
Annually contact the fair housing
service provider to obtain updated
contact information for questions
and referrals.
website and to require the City to
monitor and track fair housing
cases in the City.
Additionally, Program 2.1 is
expanded to include training for
code enforcement officers on fair
housing laws and how to
coordinate interjurisdictionally to
remedy fair housing complaints if
such complaints are reported
during the planning period
Program 3.3: Distribute Achieved and continued in the 6th information at City counters and Cycle.
other community locations
regarding housing discrimination
and what to do if it occurs.
Policy 3.3: Allow for housing
opportunities for the homeless and Code to allow for emergency special needs populations.
Program 3.4: Update the Zoning The City updated the Code in 2019 to allow emergency shelters by
right in the C-1 zone subject to
certain development and
shelters by right without
discretionary action in the C-1
zone subject to certain operational standards (codified in 35 PAGE 271 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Goal Policy Description Program Description Status*
development and operational
standards.
San Marino Municipal Code §
23.03.01(I)). This program is
continued and modified in the 6th
Cycle to be consistent with the
requirements of AB 2339.
Program 3.5: Update the Zoning
Code to address the provision of
transitional housing and
supportive housing as residential
uses, to be permitted in the same
manner as similar uses in the same
zones.
Not specifically achieved but
deemed possible under existing
allowances for emergency shelters
in the C-1 zone.
This program is renamed Program
3.11 and modified to be consistent
with the requirements of AB 2339.
Program 3.6: Update the Zoning Not specifically achieved but Code to address the provision of deemed possible under existing single-room occupancy housing as allowances for residential uses in a conditionally permitted use in
the C-1 zone.
the C-1 zone.
New Program 1.6 requires the City
to revise the City code to
specifically allow single-room
occupancy residential in the C-1
zone. Additionally, new Program
1.5 requires the City to adopt
objective design standards for
36 PAGE 272 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Goal Policy Description Program Description Status*
single-room occupancy residential
development.
Program 3.7: Update the Zoning
Code to address the provision of
employee housing pursuant to the
State Employee Housing Act
Not achieved.
This program is continued in the
6th Cycle and renamed Program
3.10. * Note: See Section 2 Implementing Programs for Updated 5th Cycle Programs included in the 6th Cyle Housing Element. 37 PAGE 273 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 What ‘s Next in San Marino Housing…?
…for ADUs?
Continued and new 6th Cycle Housing Element programs will strengthen the City’s focus on promoting and facilitating construction of affordable ADUs in the City’s R-1 zone. Specifically, this Housing Element includes new Program 1.2 to help fund the development of attached ADUs in exchange for continued affordability, which will help the City reach its Quantified Objectives for the lower income households detailed in Table 6. Additionally, to address housing for the elderly and disabled, new Program 3.5 is included to promote the development of ADUs that incorporate Universal Design techniques. Finally, new Program 1.3 is included to ensure that the City is on track to meet its quantified objectives for lower-income units and requires specific incentives to be implemented if progress benchmarks are not met. Overall, ADU programs will help the City meet its quantified objectives for lower-income households and also provide new housing for families and persons with special housing needs, including disabled persons, seniors, single parent, and femaleheaded households. …for Objective Design Guidelines?
Objective design guidelines ensure ministerial processing of housing consistent with the need for affordable housing for lower-income and special needs households consistent with Housing Element Law. The City adopted Ordinance No. O-23-1402 on June 30, 2023, which establishes Objective Design Standards to be applied to all multi-family developments within the City, which are allowed in the Commercial (C-1) and Historical and Cultural (H&C) zones. The City also adopted Ordinance No O-21-1386 in January 2022 to establish Objective Design Standards for Two-Unit Residential Developments. Additionally, as required by new Program 1.5, the City will adopt Objective Design Standards for ADU and SRO development to increase housing mobility opportunities and a variety of housing options for residents. New Programs 1.7,1.8, and 1.17 require objective design standards to be adopted for multi-family projects within the new Multi-Family (RM1), Mixed-Use (MU-1 and MU2), and Religious Institution Housing (RIH) zones. As part of Program 1.9, the City will update the adopted development standards and objective design standards prescribed for multi-family residential development in the H&C zone to ensure a maximum density of 30 units per acre can be achieved.
…for Multi‐family Housing and AFFH
The 2021 Housing Element updates housing numbers related to the City’s RHNA and new State Housing Laws intended to ensure national and statewide efforts to affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH) is equally promoted throughout the state. These updates have resulted in Housing Element programs that increase affordable housing opportunities in the City, including multi-family housing and employee housing on identified sites, as well as ADU development and homesharing opportunities within the City’s exclusive single-family neighborhoods. 38 PAGE 274 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 SECTION II: HOUSING
STRATEGY
2.1 GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
The City of San Marino, in adopting the Housing Element, adopts the goals and policies that follow as the framework for implementing its housing policies and programs over the timeframe of the Element.
GOAL 1: Provide a range of housing opportunities for all income levels.
Policies:
Policy 1.1: Encourage the development of housing on R-1 land to meet moderate and abovemoderate housing demand.
Policy 1.2: Continue to encourage and promote the development of ADUs as an important housing resource.
Policy 1.3: Encourage the construction of attached ADUs to house multi-generational families, and as a source of affordable housing for extremely low- and lower-income households and persons with disabilities (including those with developmental disabilities).
Policy 1.4: Continue to allow residential uses in the C-1 zone and H&C zone. Allow single-room occupancy uses as a permitted use by-right if at least 20 percent of project units are affordable to lower-income households, subject to objective design and development standards.
Policy 1.5: Increase the range of housing types and affordability in the City by establishing a new zones that allow multi-family development and incentivizing lot consolidation in the zoning districts that allow residential development.
Policy 1.6: Allow for development of housing for lower-income households and seniors in the City through provision of density bonuses. Consider expanding the state’s density bonus program to provide bonuses and incentives for Extremely Low, Very Low- and Low-income housing. 39 PAGE 275 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Policy 1.7: Maintain a sufficient inventory of sites suitably zoned for housing at all income levels throughout the planning period.
Policy 1.8: Participate in the LACDA’s Home Ownership Program and Mortgage Credit Certificate program to provide opportunities for first-time homebuyers. Encourage local lenders to become approved for these programs.
Policy 1.9 Affirmatively Further Fair Housing by ensuring that housing opportunities for all income levels, including first-time homebuyers, are available throughout San Marino’s neighborhoods.
Implementing Programs:
Program 1.1: Fast track all second unit applications through the permitting process. Update the City’s ADU Ordinance upon HCD’s review of the ADU ordinance within 6 months and as necessary during the planning period to remain consistent with State law.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
Monitor and annually
report on ADU program
use as part of the General
Plan Annual Report.
Community Development Departmental Budget
Department
Program 1.2: Facilitate, inform, and identify funding support for accessory dwelling unit construction. In addition to website and printed promotional materials, the City shall:
Utilize pre-approved plans that have already gone through the City’s building plan check process, and which meet the City’s guidelines for architectural design, to save time and money for applicants. The City shall adopt pre-approved ADU plans by the end of 2025.
Coordinate with regional housing agencies to provide access to programs that will financially assist low-income property owners in the development of attached accessory dwelling units through a low-interest or forgivable loan in exchange for continued affordability. The City shall establish a pilot program by the end of 2025 while ongoing funding is identified and pursued.
As part of this program, the City shall implement an ADU affordability tracking process to track the rent ranges for ADUs approved during the planning period. For ADUs that were approved between October 15, 2021 and the certification of this Housing Element, the City shall contact the property owners and request the rent range of the ADU units. For ADUs that are approved after the certification of this Housing Element, the City shall require property owners to report their rent ranges to the City as a standard condition for ADU construction. 40 PAGE 276 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 This program will help affirmatively further fair housing by addressing issues related to patterns of familial and income segregation, cost burden, and displacement.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
Adopt pre-approved ADU Community Development Departmental Budget plans by the end of 2025. Department
Establish a pilot program
to help fund
development of attached
ADUs by the end of 2025.
Monitor and annually
report on the number of
ADUs permitted that
utilized the City’s
assistance and funding.
Monitor unit affordability
as part of the General
Plan Annual Report.
Program 1.3: Annually monitor the effectiveness of the City’s strategy for facilitating accessory dwelling unit construction, to accommodate the City’s lower-income RHNA. To ensure the City is on track to meet its projected ADU development for lower-income units (195 135 units to meet the City’s RHNA, plus an additional 60 lower-income units beyond the RHNA), the City shall take the following actions to enhance the program effectiveness if the City does not approve a total of 70 ADUs made affordable to lower-income households by the end of 2024:
Adopt reduced fees or fee waivers for ADU permits in exchange for affordability to lower-income households and/or incorporate Universal Design program techniques;
Adopt an amnesty and penalty relief program to allow conversion of unpermitted, existing, accessory structures into accessory dwelling units without penalty, provided that all other applicable Code requirements are met;
Increase efforts to promote ADU development, including joint promotions on a subregional level;
Host open office hours for homeowners to meet with City staff to discuss the possibility of building ADUs on the homeowners’ property; and Conduct further outreach such as city-hosted workshops and mailers to households that could accommodate an ADU on their lot.
41 PAGE 277 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 This program will help affirmatively further fair housing by addressing issues related to patterns of familial and income segregation, cost burden, and displacement.
If the City does not meet its metric of 70 ADUs made affordable to lower-income households by the end of 2024, the City shall adopt the alternative strategies listed above by the end of 2025.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
If required, review &
adopt any needed
changes or alternative
strategies by end of
2025; then continue to
monitor unit production
effectiveness annually
thereafter.
Community Development Departmental Budget
Department
Program 1.4: Distribute information on accessory dwelling units and the required development standards with the goal of achieving a total of 287 175 total accessory dwelling units to meet the City’s RHNA, plus an additional 112 total accessory dwelling units beyond the RHNA, over the eightyear planning period, through new construction (attached or detached) or from conversion of residential accessory structures. Information and/or links about accessory dwelling units, their costs, financing, tax implications, and return on investment will be posted on the City website, available at public counters, and published in the City newsletter.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
Ongoing, reported in the Community Development Departmental Budget Community Development Department
Department’s General
Plan Annual Report.
Program 1.5: Adopt objective design and development standards for all ADU and single-room occupancy developments to increase housing mobility opportunities and a variety of housing options for residents, including allowing for larger ADUs on larger lots in the City.ꢀꢀ This program will help affirmatively further fair housing by addressing issues related to patterns of familial and income segregation.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
By the end of 2024. Community Development Departmental Budget Department
42 PAGE 278 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Program 1.6: The City shall revise its City Code to allow single room occupancy (SRO) residential development in zones that allow multi-family development pursuant to the objective design and development standards adopted for SRO development (see Program 1.5).
Additionally, the City Code shall be revised to allow these developments by-right if at least 20% of project units are provided as affordable to low-income households.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
End of 2024 Community Development Departmental Budget
Department
Program 1.7: The City shall create a Multi-family Residential (RM1) zone that will allow residential uses at a minimum density of 30 du/acre and a maximum density of 40 du/acre. As part of this program, the City shall create objective development standards that ensure maximum densities can be achieved in the RM1 zone. Multi-family projects in the RM1 zone that comply with objective design standards will be approved ministerially and will not be subject to discretionary review.
As part of this program, the City will commit to consult with the development community through outreach efforts at least once a year during the planning period and during public meetings as appropriate to determine whether the standards facilitate or constrain the development of housing in the City. Objective design standards for the RM1 zone shall be reviewed 18 months after adoption of the Housing Element to determine whether the standards are creating a constraint on housing development in the RM1 zone. If it is determined that the standards are creating a constraint, then the City shall revise the objective design standards no later than 30 months after the adoption of the Housing Element.
The Stoneman site shall be rezoned to Multi-family Residential (RM1).
This program will help affirmatively further fair housing by addressing issues related to patterns of familial and income segregation, cost burden, and displacement.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
Rezoning of the Community Development Departmental Budget Stoneman Site shall occur Department
concurrently with
Certification and
Adoption of the Housing
Element.
Review of Objective Community Development Departmental Budget Design Standards for the Department
RM1 zone 18 months
after adoption of the
Housing Element.
43 PAGE 279 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Revise Objective Design
Standards for the RM1
zone 30 months after
adoption of the Housing
Element if 18 month
review determines
Community Development Departmental Budget
Department
changes are needed.
Program 1.8: The City shall create a new Mixed-Use Zoning District that will include two Mixed-Use Zones- Mixed-Use 1 (MU-1) and Mixed-Use 2 (MU-2). The MU-1 and MU-2 zones will allow 100% residential uses at the densities prescribed for each zone.
The MU-1 zone will allow residential uses at a minimum density of 25 units per acre and a maximum density of 30 units per acre. As part of this program, the City shall create objective development standards that ensure maximum densities can be achieved in the MU-1 zone. Multi-family projects in the MU-1 zone that comply with objective design standards will be approved ministerially and will not be subject to discretionary review. As part of this this program, the City shall rezone 104 parcels along Huntington Drive, including MU Site 2 identified in the Site’s Inventory, to the new MU-1 zone.
The MU-2 zone will allow residential uses at a minimum density of 30 units/acre and a maximum density of 40 units/acre. As part of this program, the City shall adopt objective development standards that ensure maximum densities can be achieved in the MU-2 zone. Multi-family projects in the MU-2 zone that comply with objective design standards will be approved ministerially and will not be subject to discretionary review.
As part of this program, the City will commit to consult with the development community through outreach efforts at least once a year during the planning period and during public meetings as appropriate to determine whether the standards facilitate or constrain the development of housing in the City. Objective design standards for the MU zones shall be reviewed 18 months after adoption of the Housing Element to determine whether the standards are creating a constraint on housing development in the MU zones. If it is determined that the standards are creating a constraint, then the City shall revise the objective design standards no later than 30 months after the adoption of the Housing Element. As part of this program, the City shall rezone 11 parcels along Huntington, including MU Sites 1 and 3 identified in the Sites Inventory, to the new MU-2 zone.
This program will help affirmatively further fair housing by addressing issues related to patterns of familial and income segregation, and cost burden.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
Rezoning of parcels shall Community Development Departmental Budget occur concurrently with
Certification and
Department
44 PAGE 280 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Adoption of the Housing
Element.
Review of Objective Community Development Departmental Budget Design Standards for the Department
MU zones 18 months
after adoption of the
Housing Element.
Revise Objective Design
Standards for the MU
zones 30 months after
adoption of the Housing
Element if 18 month
review determines
Community Development Departmental Budget
Department
changes are needed.
Program 1.9: The City shall rezone the Southwestern Academy from R-1 to H&C to allow for the development of 20 employee housing units on approximately 1 acre of the site. The residential development shall not include the demolition of any buildings on-site that are considered historically significant pursuant to City’s historic survey findings property list. As part of this program, the City will update the adopted development standards and objective design standards prescribed for multifamily residential development in the H&C zone to ensure a maximum density of 30 units per acre can be achieved. Multi-family projects in the H&C zone that comply with objective design standards will be approved ministerially and will not be subject to discretionary review.
As part of this program, the City will commit to consult with the development community through outreach efforts at least once a year during the planning period and during public meetings as appropriate to determine whether the standards facilitate or constrain the development of housing in the City. Objective design standards for the H&C zone shall be reviewed 18 months after adoption of the Housing Element to determine whether the standards are creating a constraint on housing development in the H&C zone. If it is determined that the standards are creating a constraint, then the City shall revise the objective design standards no later than 30 months after the adoption of the Housing Element.
This program will help affirmatively further fair housing by addressing issues related to patterns of familial and income segregation, and cost burden.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
Rezoning of the Community Development Departmental Budget Southwestern Academy Department
shall occur concurrently
with Certification and
Adoption of the Housing
Element.
45 PAGE 281 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Review of Objective Community Development Departmental Budget Design Standards for the Department
H&C zone 18 months
after adoption of the
Housing Element.
Revise Objective Design
Standards for the H&C
zone 30 months after
adoption of the Housing
Element if 18 month
review determines
Community Development Departmental Budget
Department
changes are needed.
Program 1.10: Adopt an implementing ordinance to address the recent changes made to the State’s density bonus law. As part of this program, the City will assess additional density bonus standards that better encourage and reward projects that meet the City’s demonstrated housing needs for lower-income households, which may include the following:
Increase density range to 50 du/acre;
Reduce parking requirements; or
Waive Development Impact Fees
Additionally, the City’s implementation of the density bonus law will provide for the City’s Community Development Director to make the final determination for any density bonus request.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
By the end of 2024 Community Development Departmental Budget Department
Program 1.11: Continue community outreach and education regarding the development process.
The City will hold an annual “open house” at the planning and building department to introduce members of the public to personnel and procedures so that the development process is less daunting.
Specifically, the open house will discuss the City’s efforts to increase housing options in the City, including ADUs, mixed-use development, and multi-family housing. As part of this program, the City will continue its Senior Outreach Program to connect seniors to municipal, recreational, and community service programs, including information and education on ADUs as a viable housing option.
This program will help affirmatively further fair housing by addressing issues related to patterns of familial and income segregation.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
46 PAGE 282 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 First Open House to be
held in 2024, then
Community Development Departmental Budget
Department
annually thereafter.
Program 1.12: Create and maintain a list of additional sites with appropriate zoning that could be added to the City’s Sites Inventory if the City hasn’t met 30 percent of its RHNA by the end of 2025.
The City shall have until the end of 2026 to identify additional sites and add suitable sites to the City’s Sites Inventory. This list shall include commercially-zoned properties that could be developed with affordable housing (with a CUP), including underutilized parking lots.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
This program is required Community Development Departmental Budget if City fails to meet 30
percent of its RHNA by
the end of 2025; add sites
to City’s Sites Inventory
by the end of 2026.
Department
Program 1.13 Provide information about the Mortgage Credit Certificate Program and other programs for first-time homebuyers administered by the Los Angeles County Community Development Commission. Provide links to this information from the City’s website. Encourage local lenders to become approved under these programs.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
Information provided on Community Development Departmental Budgets website by end of 2024
and updated annually
Department;
Administration; LACCDC
Program 1.14: The City plans to pursue the Stoneman site identified in the Site’s Inventory for the development of 49 units or 32 units per acre during the planning period, all of which shall be made affordable to lower-income households. The site would be made available for development through either the sale of the property or a long-term lease. Projects undertaken on this site during the planning period will be processed in accordance with the requirements of the Surplus Land Act and all other applicable State laws.
The City will assess the appropriateness of and consider implementing the following: outreach opportunities with housing developers, request for proposals (RFP), development incentives, fee 47 PAGE 283 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 waivers, priority process, and financial assistance (when available) to facilitate and incentivize developers to develop housing units on the Stoneman site.
Specific actions the City is committed to:
Rezone the site and establish and implement objective development standards for the site (as part of Program 1.7) and initiate the lot split by December 2024;
Develop project description, establish an RFP process, and solicit developers by July 2025; Target Exclusive Negotiating Agreement by December 2025; and Target commencement of construction by July 2027.
If by December 2025, the City has not established the necessary developer agreements, the City will pursue the following alternative actions to enable the development of the site for affordable housing:
Increase outreach efforts with non-profit affordable housing developers beginning in January 2026;
Re-issue RFP and solicit developers by July 2026;
Identify additional/alternative sites;
Pursue funding opportunities such as Low Income Housing Tax Credits, Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA), Multifamily Super NOFA, IIG Small Jurisdictions, CDBG Funds, and HOME Investment Partnerships to assist with entitlement and building permit fees (ongoing); and
Develop incentives for developers, including 60-day approval timeline; clear development standards; full cooperation with City staff and elected and appointed officials; accelerated approval process; waiving parking standards for multi-family development.
This program will help affirmatively further fair housing by addressing issues related to cost burden, and displacement.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
The City will release the
RFP to the public in
2024, establish
Community Development General Fund
Department; City
Attorney
development agreements
by December 2025,
pursue alternative
actions by July 2026.
Program 1.15: To incentivize lot consolidation in zones that allow residential development, the City shall establish development incentives for lot consolidations, including but not limited to fee waivers/reductions, allowing additional density, parking requirement waivers, flexibility in development standards, and infrastructure support. The City shall track lot consolidation requests 48 PAGE 284 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 for the purpose of residential development to evaluate the effectiveness of incentives offered as part of this program.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
By the end of 2024. Community Development General Fund
Department; City
Attorney
Program 1.16: The City will work with the property owner of The Huntington to report new units and rent ranges of units as development and occupancy occur. Specific actions to implement this program include:
Construction is anticipated to commence by May 2025. The City will require the property owner to report the rent ranges of units as a condition of occupancy.
By December of 2025, the City will evaluate the affordability of the units to determine if these units are rented at prices that are accessible to ELI and VLI households.
Should the City determine that the rental units are not accessible to ELI and VLI households, the City will commit to rezoning no later than December 2026 to ensure that the number of units anticipated for ELI and VLI households can be accommodated elsewhere in the City.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
Benchmarks in May
2025, December 2025,
and December 2026.
Community Development General Fund
Department; City
Attorney
Program 1.17: The City shall adopt a Religious Institution Housing (RIH) zone that will allow residential uses at a minimum density of 20 units/acre and a maximum density of 30 units/acre. As part of this program, the City shall adopt objective development standards that ensure maximum densities can be achieved in the RIH zoneconsistent with the Affordable Housing on Faith and Higher Education Lands Act of 2023. Multi-family projects in the RIH zone that comply with objective design standards will be approved ministerially and will not be subject to discretionary review.
As part of this program, the City will commit to consult with the development community through outreach efforts at least once a year during the planning period and during public meetings as appropriate to determine whether the standards facilitate or constrain the development of housing in the City. Objective design standards for the RIH zone shall be reviewed 18 months after adoption of the Housing Element to determine whether the standards are creating a constraint on housing development in the RIH zone. If it is determined that the standards are creating a constraint, then the 49 PAGE 285 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 City shall revise the objective design standards no later than 30 months after the adoption of the Housing Element.
St. Edmund’s Episcopal Church, San Marino Congregational United Church of Christ, First Church of Christ Scientist, and San Marino Community Church shall be rezoned to the new RIH zone. All sites within the RIH zone shall comply with the by-right requirements of Government Code section 65583.2 (h) and (i), including:
Permitting owner-occupied and rental multi-family uses by-right for developments in which 20 percent or more of the units are affordable to lower-income households;
Accommodating a minimum of 16 units per site;
Requiring a minimum density of 20 units per acre;
Allow 100 percent residential use in the RIH zone; and
Require at least 50 percent of the floor area to be for residential uses.
In addition, the City will outreach to other local faith-based institutions listed above and qualifying institutions informing them of the new regulations. The City will proactively reach out to churches and affordable housing developers to provide information on state law, city ordinances, and the list of opportunity sites once per year. City staff will connect interested organizations with local affordable housing developers once per year. As part of this outreach effort, the City aims to help facilitate one additional institutional housing development within the planning period.
This program will help affirmatively further fair housing by addressing issues related to patterns of familial and income segregation, and cost burden.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
Rezoning of parcels shall Community Development Departmental Budget occur concurrently with
Certification and
Department
Adoption of the Housing
Element.
Review of Objective Community Development Departmental Budget Design Standards for the Department
RIH zone 18 months after
adoption of the Housing
Element.
Revise Objective Design
Standards for the RIH
zone 30 months after
adoption of the Housing
Element if 18 month
review determines
Community Development Departmental Budget
Department
changes are needed.
50 PAGE 286 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Responsible Agencies: San Marino Community Development Department; City Attorney.
Funding Sources: Departmental Budgets; Administration; and LACCDC General Fund.
GOAL 2: Maintain the existing housing stock.
Policies:
Policy 2.1: Ensure that currently sound housing is maintained through code enforcement activities and nuisance abatement procedures.
Policy 2.2:
Policy 2.3:
Improve conservation of energy and natural resources.
Ensure that the City’s limited housing stock is not lost to non-residential uses.
Implementing Programs:
Program 2.1: Maintain code enforcement activities to ensure building safety and integrity of neighborhoods. Prepare written guidance and training for building officials and code enforcement officers, regarding substandard and unsafe housing conditions and investigate and coordinate interjurisdictionally to remedy fair housing issues.
In accordance with AB 838, as part of this program, the City shall inspect a property when it receives a complaint that alleges violation of Health and Safety Code Sections 17920.3 or 17920.10, including, but not limited to, lack of working bathrooms or kitchens, lack of room dimensions, natural light, or ventilation required by code, or lack of electricity. Inspections shall take place at least as promptly as the City provides final building inspections. If the complaint is substantiated through the inspection, the City shall notify the property owner of the code violations and schedule a reinspection to ensure the violations have been properly addressed.
This program will help affirmatively further fair housing by addressing issues related to fair housing enforcement.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
Ongoing and reported to
the City Council annually.
Training for building
officials will occur
annually and as current
industry practices are
updated.
Code Enforcement Departmental Budget
Program 2.2: Continue to implement the “abatement of nuisance” ordinance which seeks to ensure the continued maintenance and good appearance of the City’s residential structures and neighborhoods.
51 PAGE 287 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
Annual progress
reported to the City
Council.
Community Development Departmental Budgets
Department; Code
Enforcement
Program 2.3: Gather and distribute information to homeowners on the use of rebates and incentives for making their homes more energy efficient. Provide links to related information and applications on the City’s website.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
Ongoing; annually
updated on the City
Website
Community Development Departmental Budget
Department
Program 2.4: Continue to encourage seismic retrofitting.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
Community Development Departmental Budget
Department
Ongoing; annually
updated on the City
Website
Program 2.5: Present the conservation measures in the Energy Action Plan to the City Council to determine implementation where appropriate for San Marino and not duplicative of Building Code requirements.
Timeline:
2026
Responsibility:
Community Development Departmental Budget
Department
Funding:
Program 2.6: Develop either a new housing land trust model or partner with an existing trust fund to present to the City Council to determine whether it’s an appropriate mechanism to enable the City to fund the purchase less-expensive homes when they go on the market, for resale at the cost of the home only (land leased through land trust) to first-time homebuyers. If model is approved, monitor and track number of first-time homebuyers in San Marino each year during the planning period.
This program will help affirmatively further fair housing by addressing issues related to displacement.
52 PAGE 288 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
By the end of 2024 Community Development Departmental Budget Department; LACCDC;
Administration
Responsible Agencies: San Marino Community Development Department; Administration (Code Enforcement); Policy Department (Code Enforcement); Building Department; LACCDC.
Funding Sources: Departmental budgets
GOAL 3: Ensure the accessibility to housing for all segments of society.
Policies:
Policy 3.1: Promote equal housing opportunity for all economic, racial, and social groups currently residing in the City.
Policy 3.2: Promote housing that meets the special needs of elderly and disabled, including those with developmental disabilities. Encourage universal design in all new and remodeled homes and homesharing opportunities.
Policy 3.3: Allow for housing opportunities for the homeless and special needs populations.
Implementing Programs:
Program 3.1: The City shall revise its reasonable accommodation ordinance to require ministerial approval of reasonable accommodation applications in accordance with the required findings by the end of 2024. This includes allowing for exceptions to the zoning code when necessary to provide an equal opportunity for housing. Monitor the effectiveness of this ordinance; identify and address any constraints to accommodating the housing needs of persons with disabilities.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
Revise ordinance by the
end of 2024.
Community Development Departmental Budget
Department; LACCDC
Information about
reasonable
accommodation
ordinance in support of
AFFH will be posted on
the City website and
updated annually.
53 PAGE 289 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Program use metrics will
be tracked annually.
Program 3.2: Work with the fair housing service providers to ensure that procedures are in place if a complaint of housing discrimination is made. Update the City’s website by the end of 2024 to include an informational page that identifies the City’s process to address fair housing complaints.
The City’s website shall also include a description of the fair housing service provider, including a link to the fair housing service provider website. The City shall update the informational page each year to include the most current information regarding the City's fair housing process, fair housing laws, fair housing service providers, and contact information. Monitor and track number of fair housing cases in the City annually.
This program will help affirmatively further fair housing by addressing issues related to fair housing enforcement.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
By the end of 2024 and
updated annually.
Community Development Departmental Budget
Department; LACCDC
Program 3.3: Distribute information at City counters and other community locations regarding housing discrimination and what to do if it occurs. Utilize flyers sent out with utility bills or City newsletters to ensure that fair housing information is broadly available. Encourage landlords to provide fair housing handbooks to all new tenants and real estate offices and lending institutions to display and provide information about discrimination in sales and lending practices.
This program will help affirmatively further fair housing by addressing issues related to fair housing enforcement.
Timeline:
Ongoing
Responsibility:
Community Development Departmental Budget
Department
Funding:
Program 3.4: Update the City Code provisions for emergency shelters to be consistent with the requirements of Government Code 65583, as amended by AB 2339. As part of this program, the all zones that permit multi-family development will allow emergency shelters by-right (without a CUP) pursuant to the objective standards, as amended by AB 2339. Additionally, standards related to the 54 PAGE 290 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 maximum number of persons to be served on any given night and parking for persons to be served shall be removed and the security personnel standard shall be revised to apply when the shelter is open.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
The Zoning Code shall be Community Development Departmental Budget amended by the end of
2024.
Department
Program 3.5: Adopt a Universal Design program by the end of 2025 that promotes and informs building techniques to accommodate physical limitations typical of aging and disabled persons but does not require that new and remodeled homes meet the basic tenets of Universal Design (stepless entry, ground floor living, environmental controls at accessible heights). Produce and distribute information about Universal Design to developers active in the City and region.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
Community Development Departmental Budget
Adopt a Universal Design Department; LACCDC
program by the end of
2025.
Track number of new
units that incorporate the
Universal Design
program.
Program 3.6: Plans for ADUs that incorporate at least two of the basic tenets of Universal Design features and/or reasonable accommodations under the Fair Housing Act shall be pre-approved by the City to encourage ADU development for seniors and for persons with disabilities, including persons with developmental disabilities.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
Ongoing; track number of Community Development Departmental Budget new units that Department; LACCDC
incorporate the Universal
Design program.
Program 3.7: To address the requirements of Government Code section 65660, the City shall adopt an ordinance and amend the Zoning Code to allow for low barrier navigation centers to be a use permitted by-right in zones that allow multi-family housing. 55 PAGE 291 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
The Zoning Code shall be Community Development Departmental Budget; amended by the end of
2024.
Department
Program 3.8: To reduce zoning constraints on housing for persons with special needs (elderly, disabled), the City shall adopt an ordinance and amend the Zoning Code to allow for non-licensed residential care facilities with seven or more bedrooms to be a use permitted by-right (without a CUP) in zones that allow multi-family housing pursuant to the same objective design requirements prescribed for multi-family residential projects. Additionally, the City shall adopt an ordinance and amend the Zoning Code to permit group homes (regardless of licensing) for seven or more persons in all zones allowing residential uses similar to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
The Zoning Code shall be Community Development Departmental Budget; amended by the end of
2024.
Department
Program 3.9: The City shall amend the Zoning Code definition for “family” by removing “This shall not include an individual paying rent to a landlord for the purpose of temporarily residing in a dwelling unit”.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
The Zoning Code shall be Community Development Departmental Budget; amended by the end of
2024.
Department
Program 3.10: Update the Zoning Code to address the provision of employee housing pursuant to the State Employee Housing Act, specifically Health and Safety Code Section 17021.5, which requires employee housing for six or fewer employees to be treated as a single-family structure and permitted in the same manner as other dwellings of the same type in the same zone. The City will specifically define this type of employee housing in the Zoning Code and permit it in all zoning districts that allow single-family residences.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
The Zoning Code shall be Community Development Departmental Budget; amended by the end of
2024.
Department
56 PAGE 292 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Program 3.11: To address the requirements of Government Code section 65651, the City shall amend the Zoning Code to add transitional housing and supportive housing as permitted uses in zones where multi-family uses are permitted pursuant to the City’s objective design standards prescribed for multi-family residential uses.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
The Zoning Code shall be Community Development Departmental Budget; amended by the end of
2024.
Department
Program 3.12: To improve housing mobility and new housing opportunities in the City’s R-1 zone, the City will implement a homesharing program and assist in matching tenants with existing homeowners. The City will prepare homesharing brochures to be made available at the City Hall and other public buildings and provide information on the City’s website by the end of 2024. Additionally, the City shall dedicate at least one publication in the City’s newspaper each year to promote the homesharing program with the first publication published by the end of 2024. As part of this program, the City will aim to complete 4 matches per year starting in 2025, for a total of 16 matches during the planning period. The City shall report the total number of matches per year in the Annual Progress Report to HCD.
This program will help affirmatively further fair housing by addressing issues related to patterns of familial and income segregation, and cost burden.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
End of 2024. Community Development Departmental Budget; Department
Program 3.13: The City shall adopt an ordinance and amend the Zoning Code to permit residential care facilities (regardless of licensing) for six or less persons by-right in the R-1 zone.
Timeline: Responsibility: Funding:
The Zoning Code shall be Community Development Departmental Budget; amended by the end of
2024.
Department
Responsible Agencies: San Marino Community Development Department; Building Department; LACCDC.
Funding Sources: Departmental budgets.
57 PAGE 293 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
2.2 QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES
A Housing Element must include estimates of the number of units, by income level, to be constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved over the planning period of the Housing Element.
2.2.1 New Construction
The following table summarizes the City’s quantified objectives for new construction during the 2021-2029 planning period.
TABLE 5: QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION BY INCOME GROUP Extremely
Low/Very Low
172
Low
128
Moderate
122
Above Moderate
87 Total
509
The different unit types and programs that will be utilized to meet the Quantified Objectives are discussed below.
Existing Capacity
Accessory Dwelling Units
Achieve construction of 287 Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) during the planning period. These figures are based on the actual number of permits issued during the planning period (until June 2024) and the projected number of permits issued for each remaining year during the planning period, as discussed below.
In early 2020, the City’s updated Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance went into effect and removed the minimum parcel size, which had previously been 12,000 square feet and prohibited ADUs on more than half of the City’s residential parcels. Since the new ordinance has been in effect, the City has issued at least 5 more ADU permits each year than the 5th Cycle average (9). Specifically, the City issued 12 permits during 2020, 14 permits during 2021, 25 permits during 2022, and 36 permits during 2023, and 14 permits during 2024 (until June).
With 2021 Housing Element programs that encourage and facilitate the provision of additional accessory dwelling units (Programs 1.1 through 1.5), the City expects to issue 36 permits each year between 2024 and 2028 and 27 permits during 2029 (until October). As indicated in Program 1.3, if the City does not approve a total of 70 ADUs made available for lower-income households between October 15, 2021 and December 31, 2024, the City will implement additional incentives to facilitate the development of lower-income ADUs during the planning period to ensure that a total of 287 ADU permits, including 195 ADUs for lower-income households, are issued during the planning period.
Vacant Sites
The City recently issued a building permit for the development of one single-family unit on a vacant residential parcel (APN 5323-016-030). Therefore, one unit for an above-moderate income 58 PAGE 294 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 household is anticipated to be constructed during the planning period. At this time, there are no other residential projects that have been approved since the beginning of the planning period.
Shortfall of Suitably‐Zoned Sites
Under existing zoning designations, the City does not have adequate sites to fulfill its regional housing need allocation (RHNA). To address the shortfall of suitably-zoned sites, this 2021 Housing Element includes programs that amend the City Code to establish a Multi-Family Residential (RM1) zone and rezone the Stoneman site to the new RM1 zoning designation (Program 1.7), rezone parcels along Huntington Drive to the new Mixed-Use (MU) zone (Program 1.8), and rezone the Southwestern Academy site to the Historical and Cultural (H&C) zone to allow for the development of employee housing on the site (Program 1.9).
Through rezoning efforts and other programs that facilitate development of ADUs, the City will ensure sites are suitably zoned to address its RHNA for each income category.
2.2.2 Rehabilitation and Conservation
According to the City’s code enforcement department, there are approximately 4 homes in the City that are in need of rehabilitation or replacement. There are no affordable units in the City that are at risk of being converted to above-moderate units.
2.2.3 Summary of Quantified Objectives
The following table summarizes the City’s quantified objectives for the 2021-2029 planning period for new construction, rehabilitated units, and conserved units.
TABLE 6: QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES BY INCOME GROUP
Income Category
Extremely Low/Very Low
Income
New Construction
172
Rehabilitated Conserved
0 0
Low Income 128
122
87 0 0
Moderate Income
Above Moderate
Totalꢀꢀ
0 0
4 0
509 4 0
59 PAGE 295 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 SECTION III: HOUSING
SITES
3.1 INTRODUCTION
Assembly Bill 1397 has added additional requirements for the adequacy of inventoried housing sites, including non-vacant sites and sites that were identified in previous elements. This severely limits the sites available to use in the City of San Marino, which is fully built-out with limited vacant sites that can meet the new inventory requirements. San Marino cannot demonstrate adequate sites to meet its RHNA under the current zoning, and rezoning programs will be required as described below and in Section 2.
According to HCD’s Housing Element Sites Inventory Guidebook, there are unusual circumstances where “local governments with limited vacant land resources or with infill and reuse goals may rely on the potential for new residential development on nonvacant sites.” In accordance with Government Code Section 65583.2(g)(1) and the Guidebook, this Section will describe the nonvacant sites to be considered in the rezoning programs and estimate a realistic development potential.
The City’s limited number of vacant parcels and lack of subdivision potential has impeded development since the 1970s. Only 11 percent of the current housing units in San Marino were built in 1970 or after, and the biggest periods of housing growth occurred from 1923 until around 1952, when residential development began experiencing a steady decline. Since 1980, the rate of residential development with the City has remained low at only 214 units since 1980. (Source:
Assessor Parcel Open Data; City of San Marino staff).
60 PAGE 296 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 7: RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN SAN MARINO, BY YEAR BUILT Source: County of Los Angeles Assessor Parcel Data 2019
3.1.1 Housing Element Law Requirements
In accordance with State law, this Housing Element includes an analysis of Sites and Zoning, which consist of four parts: realistic development capacity; analysis of non-vacant and underutilized sites; zoning to accommodate the development of housing affordable to lower-income households; and environmental constraints and adequate infrastructure.
Realistic Development Capacity
California Government Code § 65583.2(c) requires, as part of the analysis of available sites, a local government to demonstrate the projected residential development capacity of the sites identified in the housing element can realistically be achieved. Based on the information provided in subdivision (b) (the land inventory), a city or county shall determine whether each site in the inventory can accommodate some portion of its share of the regional housing need by income level during the planning period, as determined pursuant to Section 65584. The number of units calculated shall be adjusted as necessary, based on the land use controls and site improvements requirement identified in paragraph (4) (5) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583, the realistic development capacity for the site, typical densities of existing or approved residential developments at a similar affordability level in that jurisdiction, and on the current or planned availability and accessibility of sufficient water, sewer, and dry utilities.
Additionally, Government Code § 65583.2(c)(2)(A) states that “[a] site smaller than half an acre shall not be deemed adequate to accommodate lower income housing need unless the locality can demonstrate that sites of equivalent size were successfully developed during the prior planning period for an equivalent number of lower income housing units as projected for the site or unless the locality provides other evidence to the department (HCD) that the site is adequate to accommodate 61 PAGE 297 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 lower income housing.” Government Code § 65583.2(c)(2)(B) states that “[a] site larger than 10 acres shall not be deemed adequate to accommodate lower income housing need unless the locality can demonstrate that sites of equivalent size were successfully developed during the prior planning period for an equivalent number of lower income housing units as projected for the site or unless the locality provides other evidence to the department that the site can be developed as lower income housing.” This means that San Marino must identify parcels (or a group of parcels that can be consolidated) that are between 0.5-acre and 10 acres in size in order to demonstrate that there is adequate area for new low-income housing development.
Analysis of Non‐vacant and Underutilized Sites
California Government Code § 65583.2(g) requires the Housing Element to include an explanation for determining the buildout potential of these sites within the planning period, and consider all of the following:
The extent existing uses may constitute an impediment to additional residential development;
The jurisdiction’s past experience converting existing uses to higher-density residential development;
The current market demand for the existing use, including an analysis of any known existing leases or other contracts that would perpetuate the existing use or prevent redevelopment of the site of additional residential development;
Development trends;
Market conditions; and
The availability of regulatory and/or other incentives, such as expedited permit processing and fee waivers or deferrals.
Additionally, because this Housing Element relies on non-vacant sites to accommodate more than 50 percent of the City’s RHNA for lower-income households, the non-vacant sites’ existing uses are presumed to impede additional residential development, unless the Housing Element describes findings based on substantial evidence that the use will likely be discontinued during the planning period.
Zoning to Accommodate the Development of housing Affordable to Lower‐Income Households California Government Code § 65583.2(c)(3)(A) & (B) requires the Housing Element to demonstrate that the densities of sites identified in the inventory are sufficient to encourage and facilitate the development of housing affordable to lower-income households. This analysis includes market demands and trends, financial feasibility, and information from past residential development. As an alternative to this analysis, California Government Code § 65583.2(c)(3)(B) allows local governments to utilize “default” density standards deemed adequate to mee the “appropriate zoning” test. San Marino has a population of 12,870 persons (2020) and therefore meets the definition of a “Suburban Jurisdiction”, which has a default density of at least 20 dwelling units per acre. 62 PAGE 298 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Environmental Constraints and Adequate Infrastructure
California Government Code § 65583.2(b)(4) requires the Housing Element to provide a general description of any environmental constraints to the development of housing. This analysis should include a general description of any known environmental features that have the potential to impact the development viability of the site (e.g., flood plains), describe the environmental review process, including potential exemptions, anticipated as part of the site being developed with residential uses, and identify environmental benefits (if any).
Additionally, California Government Code § 65583.2(b)(5) requires the Housing Element to include a description of existing or planned water, sewer, and other dry utilities supply, including the availability and access to parcels on the Site’s Inventory.
3.2 IDENTIFIED SITES
The following section identifies sites in San Marino that are anticipated to be developed with new housing to accommodate the City’s RHNA during the planning period. Additionally, this section provides a realistic capacity analysis consistent with State law to identify the number of units each site can realistically accommodate to address the City’s RHNA.
The City includes 7 identified sites for the development of housing during the planning period to accommodate the City’s RHNA. Table 7 below identifies each site’s APN, acreage, existing use, land use designation, zoning designation, existing densities, proposed zoning and its respective density range, realistic capacity, which is the estimated density used to determine number of anticipated units, the number of total units, and the number of units for each income category. Figure 8 below shows the location of the identified sites.
As shown in Table 7 below, the City has identified The Huntington property located at 1151 Oxford Road, the Stoneman site located at 1560 Pasqualito Drive, and the San Marino Community Church site located at 1750 Virginia Road as sites that will be redeveloped with multi-family housing during the planning period to accommodate a portion of the City’s very low-income RHNA. Additionally, the City has identified 1 site (MU Site 2) within the new Mixed-Use 1 (MU-1) zone, 2 sites (MU Sites 1 and 3) with the new Mixed-Use 2 (MU-2) zone, and the Southwestern Academy located at 2800 Monterey Road as sites that will be redeveloped with multi-family housing to accommodate a portion of the City’s moderate-income RHNA. The City also plans to meet its RHNA through development of ADUs, which is discussed in Section 3.3.
63 PAGE 299 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 8: IDENTIFIED SITES
64 PAGE 300 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 7: IDENTIFIED SITES
APN(s) Acres Existing Use Land Use Zoning Existing
Density
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Density
Range
Realistic Units
Capacity
VL LI MI AMI
5328-012-
001
Library, art
museum,
botanical
gardens
Historical
and Cultural 206 H&C 20 H&C Up to 30 17 33 33
33 0
0 0
0 0
0 Total
Acreage1:
Total
Units: 2.0 The Huntington Site 33
5323-013-
029
Total
Southwestern
Academy
Low Density
Residential 5.47 R-1 4-6 H&C
RM1
Up to 30
30-40
20 20 0
0 0
0 20
20 0
0 Total
Units: 1.0 Southwestern Academy Site 20 Acreage1:
5323-008-
900
Play area;
parking lot,
storage structure
Low Density
Residential 2.86 R-1 4-6
4-6
32 49 49
49 0
0 0
0 0
0 Total
Acreage1:
Total
Units: 1.56 Stoneman Site 49
5334-025-
003
Very Low
Density
Residential
Church; parking
lot 3.19 R-1 RIH 20-30
30-40
20 23 23
23 0
0 0
0 0
0 Total
Acreage1:
Total
Units: 1.18 San Marino Community Church Site 23
5323-020-
035
Total
Multi-tenant
offices 1.14 Commercial C-1 8.4 MU-2 30 34 0
0 0
0 34
34 0
0 Total
Units: 1.14 Mixed-Use Zone Site 1 34 Acreage:
5334-016-
016
5334-016-
017
Multi-tenant
retail; parking
Multi-tenant
retail; parking
0.6 Commercial
Commercial
C-1
C-1
8.7 8.7
MU-1
MU-1
25-30
25-30
25 25
15 15
0 0
0 0
15 15
0 0.59 0
65 PAGE 301 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 APN(s) Acres Existing Use Land Use Zoning Existing
Density
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Density
Range
Realistic Units
Capacity
VL LI MI AMI
5334-016-
018
Total
Multi-tenant
retail; parking 0.41 Commercial C-1 8.7 MU-1 25-30 25 10 0 0 0
0 10
40 0
0 Total
Units: 1.6 Mixed-Use Zone Site 2 40 Acreage:
5376-021-
012
Low Density
Residential 0.74 Masonic Lodge R-1 4-6 MU-2 30-40 30 22 0 0 22 0 Total
Acreage:
Total
Units: 0.74 Mixed-Use Zone Site 3 22 0 0 22 0
Total Sites
Acreage:
Total
Sites
Units2
0 0
9.22 221 105 116
1 Total Acreage is the total acreage of the parcel that is available for the development of housing. 2 Total Sites Units may not add up correctly due to rounding. 66 PAGE 302 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
3.2.1 HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL ZONED SITES
Currently, the City’s Historical and Cultural (H&C) zone only applies to The Huntington property. As part of Program 1.9, the City will rezone the Southwestern Academy (APN 5323-013-029) to the H&C zone to allow for the development of employee housing on the site. As shown in Table 7, the City anticipates 33 employee housing units to be developed on approximately 2.0 acres of The Huntington property and 20 employee housing units to be developed on approximately 1.0 acre of the Southwestern Academy property to help accommodate its RHNA.
Realistic Capacity Analysis: H&C Zone
In accordance with the City’s existing objective design standards for multi-family development (Ordinance O-23-1402), residential uses in the H&C zone can be developed to a maximum density of 20 units per acre. However, as part of Program 1.9, these standards will be revised concurrently with the adoption of the Housing Element to ensure that a maximum of up to 30 units per acre can be achieved. As such, the City will use the maximum number of 30 units per acre in this realistic capacity analysis and incorporate revised development standards that the City anticipates to use for multifamily uses in its H&C zone. There is no minimum density prescribed for housing within the H&C zone because the number of units developed on the site is directly related to the number of employees the project is intended to serve.
There are many site planning factors that reduce the buildable area of the site, including but not limited to setbacks, parking requirements, open space requirements, and height limits. To demonstrate that up to 30 units per acre is achievable on a site within the H&C zone, the City applied the land use controls that are anticipated to be used for residential development within the H&C zone to a 1-acre site. The 1-acre parcel size was used in this analysis because 1 acre represents the smallest site size to be developed for housing within the H&C zone during the planning period.
Table 8 below summarizes the development standards that will apply to residential development within the H&C zone.
67 PAGE 303 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 8: MULTI‐FAMILY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WITHIN THE H&C ZONE Height
The maximum building height for a multi-family residential building shall be as dictated by the underlying zoning district. Where a maximum height is not specified in the underlying zoning district, the maximum height shall be 36 feet.
Lot Coverage
The maximum lot coverage for multi-family residential developments shall be sixty (60) percent.
Site Design
Site Planning and Orientation
Ground Floor Residential Setbacks
Front Setback
Front setback buffer
5 feet to accommodate porches and patios
4 foot-wide landscaped buffer, which is
permitted within the front yard setback
between unit entries
Side Setback 5 feet
Side setback buffer 4 foot-wide landscaped buffer, which is permitted within the side yard setback
10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg.
exceeds 30 feet in height
Side abutting a residential zone
Rear Setback None required
Rear abutting a residential zone 10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg. exceeds 30 feet in height
Setback continuity Notwithstanding the front and side yard setback standards established in this section,
the front and side yard setbacks of a new
building shall either be the same as existing
adjacent structures or vary no more than five
feet from the established front or side setback
of adjacent existing structures.
Parking
Residential Parking Requirements
Studio or One Bedroom
Two Bedroom
1 0.5 space
1.5 spaces
Three Bedroom or more
Guest Parking
2 1.5 spaces
1 space per 3 5 units
Open Space and Common Areas
Private Open Space
Common Open Space
100 square feet per unit
At least 15% of the total gross development
area shall be common open space, up to a
maximum required area of 20,000 square
feet
Source: Ordinance No. O‐23‐1402, San Marino Community Development Department The extent development standards can reduce the buildable area of the site depends on factors that are unknown until the site planning phase of the project. For instance, parking requirements are 68 PAGE 304 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 determined by the number of bedrooms of each unit. For the purposes of this analysis, the City made the following assumptions:
The parcel is located adjacent to a residential zone (sides and rear); The project contains 30 units, each consisting of 2-bedrooms; Each 2-bedroom unit is 1,000 square feet;
The required parking would be 45 resident spaces and 15 guest spaces; and Parking is accommodated by two 11,000 sq. ft., 2 level parking garage, with each having a ground floor footprint of 5,500 sq. ft.
Using the assumptions and land use controls provided above, the buildable area on the site would be reduced from 1 acre to 0.43 acre (see Figure 9 below).
There is no minimum floor area per dwelling unit established in the City’s objective design standards for multi-family development. Table 9 below provides the minimum floor area per unit type that will apply to residential development within the H&C zone. To provide a conservative analysis, the City anticipates that each 2-bedroom unit would be 1,000 square feet.
TABLE 9: H&C ZONE MINIMUM FLOOR AREA PER UNIT
Unit Type
Single room occupancy
Minimum Floor Area
150 square feet
Efficiency apartment
1-Bedroom unit
2+-Bedroom unit
450 square feet
750 square feet
950 square feet
ꢀꢀꢀꢀꢀꢀꢀSource: San Marino Community Development Department Using the assumptions provided above, 30 two-bedroom units that are each 1,000 square feet and each provide 100 square feet of private open space would require at least 33,000 sq. ft. As previously noted, a developer would have to be able to fit 30 units within 0.43 acre or 18,766 square feet to demonstrate that 30 units can be constructed on a 1-acre site. In a site planning scenario where there are three 2-story buildings, and the ground floor and 2nd floor for each building are each 6,000 square feet, a developer could realistically fit 30 units requiring a total of 33,000 sq. ft. without exceeding the height limit that will apply to a H&C zoned site (36 feet). Based on this analysis, the City determined that a density of up to 30 units per acre is achievable on a 1-acre site using the land use controls the City anticipates to use for multi-family development projects within the H&C zone. 69 PAGE 305 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 9: BUILDABLE AREA ON H&C SITE1
Side 198 ft. (Adjacent to Residential Zone)
Requirement
Front (5 ft.)
Setback Area
220 ft. x 5 ft.=
1,100 sq. ft. Parking
Garage
Side (10 ft.) 198 ft. x 10 ft.=
1,980 sq. ft.
Side (10 ft.)
Rear (10 ft.)
198 ft. x 10 ft.=
1,980 sq. ft.
220 ft. x 10 ft. =
2,200 sq. ft.
Common Open Space
Area
Open
Space
15% of total
gross
development
area
43,560 sq. ft. x 0.15 =
6,534 sq. ft.
Parking
60 spaces 11,000 sq. ft. total
ground floor footprint
(2 structures with 2
levels each)
Parking
Garage
Net buildable
area:
18,766 sq. ft. or 0.43 acre
Side 198 ft. (Adjacent to Residential Zone)
1Not to scale
The following sections provide the site-specific analyses for The Huntington site and the Southwestern Academy site pursuant to State housing law requirements, including an analysis of non-vacant and underutilized sites; zoning to accommodate the development of housing affordable to lower-income households; and environmental constraints and adequate infrastructure.
The realistic capacity analysis provided above for the H&C zone serves to support the realistic capacity analysis for The Huntington site and Southwestern Academy site because it demonstrates that land use controls for these sites can be used to achieve a maximum density of 30 units per acre, which exceeds the densities anticipated to be developed on these sites. The density anticipated to be developed on The Huntington site (e.g., 17 units/acre) is based on the development application letter received by the City in April 2024 and the density anticipated to be developed on the Southwestern Academy site (e.g., 20 units/acre) is based on the City’s discussions with the property owner. 70 PAGE 306 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Huntington Site
The Huntington is a research and educational institution consisting of a world-renowned library, art museum, and botanical gardens that awards $1.3 million in fellowships each year and educates thousands in art, history, literature, and botanical science through special tours, exhibitions, and programs. The Huntington is located at 1151 Oxford Road in the northern-central portion of the City (see Figure 8). The City anticipates that approximately 2.0 acres in the northeastern portion of the 206-acre Huntington property (APN 5328-012-001) will be developed with 33 employee housing units, including graduate students affiliated with The Huntington.
The City received a development application in April 2024 for the development of 33 units. Of the 33 units, the City anticipates 16 units to be affordable for ELI households and 17 units to be affordable to VLI households. The City allocated all 33 units to be within the ELI and VLI income category because the purpose of building these units is to house graduate students of The Huntington who could not otherwise afford to live in the City due to their lower incomes. While the development application does not indicate whether or not these units would be priced at a rent that would be affordable to ELI or VLI households or if the employees would have to meet a certain income requirement to inhabit these units, this Housing Element includes Program 1.16 to require the property owner to report rent ranges of these units and ensure that there would be no net loss of lower-income units during the planning period if these rent ranges are not accessible to ELI or VLI households.
Figure 8 shows the location of The Huntington property and Figure 10 identifies the development footprint of the employee housing project. As shown in Figure 10, the project will not include the demolition of any historic structures on the property. The City anticipates the project will be constructed during the planning period.
The site is within the City’s Historical and Cultural (H&C) zone, which permits “residential privileges for employees” (San Marino Municipal Code 23.05.01). In 2023, the City adopted development standards and objective design standards for multi-family residential projects, which limits the density to 20 units per acre. As part of Program 1.9, these standards will be revised to permit a density of up to 30 units per acre. With a permitted density of up to 30 units per acre, the 2.0-acre site could accommodate up to 60 units. As previously noted, there is no minimum density prescribed for the H&C zone. As such, 33 units (or 17 units per acre) is within the permitted density prescribed for the site.
71 PAGE 307 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 10: EMPLOYEE HOUSING PROJECT DEVELOPMENT FOOTPRINT Source: San Marino Community Development Department
72 PAGE 308 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Non‐vacant and Underutilized Sites Analysis
The Huntington property is 206 acres and consists of a world-renowned library, art museum, and botanical gardens. As previously discussed, the City received a development application from the property owner to construct 33 employee housing units on the site. The City anticipates construction to be completed by the end of 2025.
The development will occur within the northeastern portion of the property and will not include the demolition of any historic structures on the property (see Figure 10). As such, the existing uses on the housing site would be limited to pavement and landscaping and conversion of these uses would not constitute an impediment to additional residential development on the site.
Affordability for Lower‐Income Households Analysis
Pursuant to California Government Code § 65583.2(c) (3)(B), the City utilizes the “default” density standard deemed adequate to meet the “appropriate zoning” test. San Marino has a population of 12,870 persons (2020) and therefore meets the definition of a “Suburban Jurisdiction”, which has a default density of at least 20 dwelling units per acre. Based on the development application submitted by the property owner, 2 acres of the Huntington property will be developed with 33 employee housing units, which achieves a density of 17 units per acre. Although the density of 17 units per acre falls short of achieving the “default” density required to meet the “appropriate zoning” test for the City of San Marino, the units constructed on the site will be for employees and graduate students of The Huntington who will likely meet the income requirements of ELI and VLI households.
Program 1.16 is included in this Housing Element to track the affordability of these units. Should these units be found to not accommodate ELI and VLI households, the City will commit to rezoning other areas of the City to accommodate these units by the end of 2026.
As such, in this particular case, a density of 17 units per acre does not impede the affordability for lower-income households.
Environmental Constraints and Adequate Infrastructure Analysis Environmental constraints may include environmental hazards that are site specific, such as being located in an area that has a high risk for wildfires, flooding, or seismic-related hazards. Additionally, the site may pose a health risk to the public during construction if ground contamination activities occurred previously on the site. Environmental constraints can also include existing resources on the site that are protected under CEQA, such as biological or historic resources, and therefore may hinder the redevelopment of the site. Adequate infrastructure refers to the site having sufficient access to water, sewer and other dry utilities, and that utility providers have adequate supplies to serve the additional housing units anticipated for development on the site.
Sections 3.5 and 3.6 provide a general analysis of adequate infrastructure and environmental constraints, respectively, and therefore meet the requirements of California Government Code § 65583.2(b)(4) and (b) (5). Additionally, Section 4.4.2 provides a detailed discussion of the potential environmental and infrastructure constraints on housing development in the City. 73 PAGE 309 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 As discussed later in those sections, the entire City, including The Huntington property, has adequate access to water, sewer, and other dry utilities, and there is sufficient supply to accommodate the anticipated need during the planning period. Additionally, the entire City, including The Huntington property, has no special status species or habitat that are protected under CEQA and the seismic, flooding, and fire hazards are mitigated with building regulations intended to address such hazards.
Specifically, The Huntington property is not located in any area of the City that is designated as having a higher risk for flooding or fire hazards. Additionally, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database indicates there have been no past hazardous material leaks or spills on the site and therefore the redevelopment of any portion of The Huntington property would not result in an environmental hazard to the public.
The Huntington property includes a library and art museum, which are both designated as historic resources by the State. However, the 2.0 acre portion of the property that will be chosen for redevelopment will not include any land consisting of or immediately adjacent to these buildings (see Figure 10). As such, the development of housing on The Huntington site will not impact historic resources. Overall, there are no site-specific environmental or infrastructure-related constraints that would hinder the development of housing on The Huntington site.
Southwestern Academy Site
Founded in 1924, Southwestern Academy is a college preparatory school for boarding and day students grades 6 through 12. Southwestern Academy is located at 2800 Monterey Road in the western portion of the City (see Figure 8). The property contains four historically significant buildings that were constructed in the early 1900s. Additionally, the City’s Historic Survey designates these buildings as individually significant and the entire property as an historic district. The property owner has expressed interest to the City to develop 20 housing units on its site for school employees.
Based on preliminary discussions with the property owner, the City anticipates that 1 acre of the
5.47-acre property (APN 5323-013-029) will be developed with housing for employees. As shown in Table 7, the City anticipates 20 units to be developed on this site during the planning period with all units affordable for moderate-income residents.
The site is currently zoned R-1 and will be rezoned to H&C to allow for the development of up to 30 units per acre (Program 1.9). With rezoning, this site could accommodate up to 30 units. However, based on discussions with the property owner and a letter of interest from Southwestern Academy on August 8, 2024, the City anticipates that 20 units will be developed on this site during the planning period, which achieves a density of 20 units per acre (see Figure 11 below). 74 PAGE 310 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 11: SOUTHWESTERN ACADEMY SITE
5323‐013‐029
Total
Units Total Acres
1.0 Density
20 VL
0 LI
0 MI
20 AMI
20 0
Non‐vacant and Underutilized Sites Analysis
As previously discussed, Southwestern Academy is 5.47 acres and consists of a college preparatory boarding and day school. As shown in Figure 11 above, the property consists of several buildings, parking along the eastern boundary, and a large open field. As part of Program 1.9, the site will be rezoned from R-1 to H&C to allow for the development of employee housing on the site. Based on discussions with the property owner, the City anticipates that approximately 1 acre of the site will be redeveloped to include 20 employee housing units during the planning period. As part of Program
1.9, the development of residential uses on-site will not include demolition of any historic structures on the property. As such, the existing uses on the future housing site would be limited to pavement and landscaping and conversion of these uses would not constitute an impediment to additional residential development on the site.
Affordability for Lower‐Income Households Analysis
Pursuant to California Government Code § 65583.2(c)(3)(B), the City utilizes the “default” density standard deemed adequate to meet the “appropriate zoning” test. San Marino has a population of 12,870 persons (2020) and therefore meets the definition of a “Suburban Jurisdiction”, which has a 75 PAGE 311 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 default density of at least 20 dwelling units per acre. As previously discussed, the site will be rezoned to H&C (Program 1.9). The City anticipates that approximately 1 acre of the site will be developed with 20 units during the planning period, which achieves a density of 20 units per acre. As such, the Southwestern Academy site meets the appropriate zoning test.
Environmental Constraints and Adequate Infrastructure Analysis Environmental constraints may include environmental hazards that are site specific, such as being located in an area that has a high risk for wildfires, flooding, or seismic-related hazards. Additionally, the site may pose a health risk to the public during construction if ground contamination activities occurred previously on the site. Environmental constraints can also include existing resources on the site that are protected under CEQA, such as biological or historic resources, and therefore may hinder the redevelopment of the site. Adequate infrastructure refers to the site having sufficient access to water, sewer and other dry utilities, and that utility providers have adequate supplies to serve the additional housing units anticipated for development on the site.
Sections 3.5 and 3.6 provide a general analysis of adequate infrastructure and environmental constraints, respectively, and therefore meet the requirements of California Government Code § 65583.2(b)(4) and (b) (5). Additionally, Section 4.4.2 provides a detailed discussion of the potential environmental and infrastructure constraints on housing development in the City.
As discussed later in those sections, the entire City, including the Southwestern Academy site, has adequate access to water, sewer, and other dry utilities, and there is sufficient supply to accommodate the anticipated need during the planning period. Additionally, the entire City, including the Southwestern Academy property, has no special status species or habitat that are protected under CEQA and the seismic, flooding, and fire hazards are mitigated with building regulations intended to address such hazards.
Specifically, the Southwestern Academy property is not located in any area of the City that is designated as having a higher risk for flooding or fire hazards. Additionally, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database indicates there have been no past hazardous material leaks or spills on the site and therefore the redevelopment of any portion of the Southwestern Academy property would not result in an environmental hazard to the public.
The property includes four buildings that are designated by the City’s Historic Survey as individually significant. These buildings are part of school operations and will not be impacted by the development of employee housing on the property. As part of Program 1.9, the City shall not allow housing development on the site to include the demolition of any buildings on-site that are considered historically significant pursuant to City’s historic survey findings property list. As such, the development of housing on the site will not impact historic resources. Overall, there are no sitespecific environmental or infrastructure-related constraints that would hinder the development of housing on the Southwestern Academy site.
76 PAGE 312 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
3.2.2 MULTI‐FAMILY ZONED SITES (STONEMAN SITE)
As part of Program 1.7, the City will create a new Multi-Family (RM1) zone to allow the development of multi-family housing at densities between 30 units per acre and 40 units per acre. As part of Program 1.7, the City will rezone the Stoneman site to the RM1 zone.
The City-owned Stoneman site has excellent potential for redevelopment. The site is located at 1560 Pasqualito Drive (APN 5323-008-900), north of Huntington Drive in the southwestern portion of the City (see Figure 8). The site is 2.86 acres, with approximately 1.30 acres consisting of the historic Stoneman school building, which is now home to the City’s Recreation Department. The remaining
1.56 acres consists of the play area and portion of the parking lot from the former school, as well as a non-historic vacant storage structure. The City plans to subdivide the property to separate the school building on 1.30 acres from the remaining 1.56 acres to be developed with housing (see Figure 12 below). As part of Program 1.14, the 1.56-acre parcel will be made available to an affordable housing developer through an RFP process that will require the entire 1.56-acre portion of the site to be used for the development of 32 units per acre or at least 49 affordable housing units. In addition, the 1.30- acre school building parcel may be incorporated into the affordable housing development to provide administrative office and resident services space for the residents of the affordable development. The selected developer would be responsible for all aspects of site design and development, including conducting environmental review once the full development project has been identified. The site is located in a Difficult Development Area (DDA) and can score perfectly in an application for 9% tax credits, therefore making it an excellent site for development of a tax credit project.
The site is currently zoned R-1 and will be rezoned to the new RM1 zone to allow for the development of 30 to 40 units per acre (Program 1.7). With rezoning, this site could accommodate between 47 and 62 units. As previously discussed, Program 1.14 ensures that at least 32 units per acre or 49 units are developed on this site during the planning period, with all 49 units affordable to very low-income households.
77 PAGE 313 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 12: DEVELOPMENT PORTION OF STONEMAN SITE
1.56 acres
Realistic Development Capacity Analysis: RM1 Zone
At this time, the Stoneman site is the only site that will be zoned RM1 (Program 1.7); however, more sites could be rezoned to RM1 during the planning period to accommodate lower-income households.
As such, this realistic capacity analysis demonstrates that a maximum density of 40 units per acre is achievable on sites that are a 0.5-acre using the land use controls that are anticipated in the RM1 zone. The 0.5-acre parcel size was used in this analysis, as opposed to the size of the Stoneman site (1.56 acres), because only sites that are 0.5-acre or larger are deemed adequate to accommodate lower income households pursuant to Government Code § 65583.2(c)(2)(A). Additionally, by demonstrating that 40 units per acre is achievable on a 0.5-acre site, this realistic capacity analysis demonstrates that 32 units per acre (or at least 49 units) is achievable on a 1.56 acre site.
The portion of the Stoneman site that is proposed for multi-family housing development is 1.56 acres.
As part of Program 1.7, the site will be rezoned from R-1 to the new RM1 zone, which permits a minimum density of 30 units per acre and a maximum density of 40 units per acre. As part of Program 1.7, the City will establish development standards for the RM1 zone to ensure the maximum density can be achieved, including but not limited to, maximum height, setbacks, parking, and open space requirements.
78 PAGE 314 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 To demonstrate that a maximum density of 40 units per acre is achievable on a site within the RM1 zone, the City applied the land use controls that are anticipated to be prescribed for the RM1 zone to a 0.5-acre site.
Table 10 below summarizes the development standards that will apply to development within the RM1 zone, including the Stoneman site.
TABLE 10: MULTI‐FAMILY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WITHIN THE RM1 ZONE Height
Maximum height
Step backs
48 feet
For buildings taller than twenty five feet (25')
and which are located adjacent to a residential
zone, the building height must be designed so
as to "step back" the building height at least
ten feet (10’) for every ten feet (10’) increase
in height above twenty five feet (25’).
Ground Floor Setbacks
Front
Front setback buffer
5 feet to accommodate porches and patios
4-foot-wide landscaped buffer, which is
permitted within the front yard setback
between unit entries
Side 5 feet
Side setback buffer 4-foot-wide landscaped buffer, which is permitted within the side yard setback
10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg.
exceeds 30 feet in height
Side abutting a residential zone
Rear None required
Rear abutting a residential zone 10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg. exceeds 30 feet in height
Parking Requirements
Studio or One Bedroom
Two Bedroom
1 0.5 space
1.5 spaces
Three Bedroom or more
Guest Parking
2 1.5 spaces
1 space per 3 5 units
Open Space and Common Areas
Private Open Space P
Common Open Space
100 square feet per unit
At least 15% of the total gross development
area shall be common open space, up to a
maximum required area of 20,000 square
feet
Source: San Marino Community Development Department
79 PAGE 315 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 The extent development standards can reduce the buildable area of the site depends on factors that are unknown until the site planning phase of the project. For instance, parking requirements are determined by the number of bedrooms of each unit. For the purposes of this analysis, the City made the following assumptions:
The parcel is located adjacent to a residential zone on one side, which is representative of the Stoneman site’s proximity to R-1 parcels immediately west of the site;
The project contains 20 units, each consisting of 2-bedrooms; Each 2-bedroom unit is 1,000 square feet;
The required parking would be 30 20 resident spaces and 7 4 guest spaces; and Parking is accommodated by a 12,6007,680 sq. ft., 2 one level parking garage, with a ground floor footprint of 6,300 sq. ft.
Using the assumptions and land use controls provided above, the buildable area on the site would be reduced from .50 acre to 0.22 19 acre (see Figure 13 below).
To provide a conservative analysis, the City anticipates that each 2-bedroom unit would be 1,000 square feet. The minimum floor area per dwelling unit is provided in Table 11 below:
TABLE 11: RM1 ZONE MINIMUM FLOOR AREA PER UNIT
Unit Type
Single room occupancy
Minimum Floor Area
150 square feet
Efficiency apartment
1-Bedroom unit
2+-Bedroom unit
450 square feet
750 square feet
950 square feet
Source: San Marino Community Development Department
Using the assumptions provided above, 20 two -bedroom units that are each 1,000 square feet and each provide 100 square feet of private open space would require a total of 2220,000 square feet. As previously noted, a developer would have to be able to fit 20 units within 0.22acre 19 acre or 9,6388,248 square feet to achieve the maximum density. In a site planning scenario where there are two 3-storybuildings, and assuming that each floor is 4,000 square feet, a developer could realistically fit 20 units requiring a total of 2220,000 sq. ft. without exceeding the height requirement (48 feet). Based on this analysis, the City determined that a density of up to 40 units per acre is achievable on a 0.5-acre site using the land use controls the City anticipates to use for multi-family development projects within the RM1 zone.
80 PAGE 316 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 13: BUILDABLE AREA ON RM1 SITE1
Side: 99 ft.
Requirement
Front (5 ft.)
Setback Area
220 ft. x 5 ft.=
1,100 sq. ft.
ide (5 ft.) 99 ft. x 5 ft.=
495 sq. ft.
de (10 ft.)
ear (none)
99 ft. x 10 ft.=
990 sq. ft.
Parking Garage None
Common Open Space
Area
% of total
gross
velopment
area
21,780 sq. ft. x 0.15 =
3,267 sq. ft.
Parking
6,3007,680sq. ft. ground
floor
Open Space spaces
(2 levels)
Net buildable 9,6288,248 sq. ft. or 0.22
area: 19 acre
Side 99 ft. (Adjacent to Residential
Zone)
1Not to scale
Non‐vacant and Underutilized Sites Analysis
The Stoneman site is located on a developed parcel consisting of the historic Stoneman school building. The site also consists of a parking lot, play area, and vacant non-historic storage structure associated with the former school. The school building is now occupied by the City’s Recreation Department, which offers before and after school activities including a day care, homework assistance, and recreation classes.
As previously discussed, the City-owned site would be divided into two parcels to preserve the school building on one 1.3-acre parcel, and allow for the redevelopment of the remaining 1.56-acre parcel with affordable housing (see Figure 12). The portion of the site that would be redeveloped with housing contains the parking lot, play area, and vacant non-historic storage structure. These uses are associated with the former school that is no longer operational, and therefore do not constitute an impediment to additional residential development. Although the play area and parking lot are currently being used by the City’s Recreation Department, the City anticipates these uses will be converted to affordable housing and the City will adjust where its City-offered recreational programs are located as necessary to accommodate its housing need. Alternatively, the City could enter into a 81 PAGE 317 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 joint-use agreement with the developer so that the open space amenities and parking space could be shared between the City’s Recreation Department and residents of the affordable housing development.
As previously discussed, the City will require 32 units per acre or at least 49 units to be developed on the Stoneman site (Program 1.14).
Affordability for Lower‐Income Households Analysis
Pursuant to California Government Code § 65583.2(c)(3)(B), the City utilizes the “default” density standard deemed adequate to meet the “appropriate zoning” test. San Marino has a population of 12,870 persons (2020) and therefore meets the definition of a “Suburban Jurisdiction”, which has a default density of at least 20 dwelling units per acre. As previously discussed, the Stoneman site will be rezoned to RM1, which will have a minimum density of 30 units per acre and a maximum density of 40 units per acre. As part of Program 1.14, the City anticipates that the Stoneman site will be developed with 49 units, which achieves a density of 32 units per acre. As such, the Stoneman site meets the appropriate zoning test.
Environmental Constraints and Adequate Infrastructure Analysis Environmental constraints may include environmental hazards that are site specific, such as being located in an area that has a high risk for wildfires, flooding, or seismic-related hazards. Additionally, the site may pose a health risk to the public during construction if ground contamination activities occurred previously on the site. Environmental constraints can also include existing resources on the site that are protected under CEQA, such as biological or archaeological resources, and therefore may hinder the redevelopment of the site. Adequate infrastructure refers to the site having sufficient access to water, sewer and other dry utilities, and that utility providers have adequate supplies to serve the additional housing units anticipated for development on the site.
Sections 3.5 and 3.6 provide a general analysis of adequate infrastructure and environmental constraints, respectively, and therefore meet the requirements of California Government Code § 65583.2(b)(4) and (b) (5). Additionally, Section 4.4.2 provides a detailed discussion of the potential environmental and infrastructure constraints on housing development in the City.
As discussed later in those sections, the entire City, including the Stoneman site, has adequate access to water, sewer, and other dry utilities, and there is sufficient supply to accommodate the anticipated need during the planning period. Additionally, the entire City, including the Stoneman site, has no special status species or habitat that are protected under CEQA and the seismic, flooding, and fire hazards are mitigated with building regulations intended to address such hazards.
The Stoneman site is not located in any area of the City that is designated as having a higher risk for flooding or fire hazards. Additionally, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database indicates there have been no past hazardous material leaks or spills on the site and therefore the redevelopment of the Stoneman site would not result in an environmental hazard to the public. Although the site includes a building designated for historical significance, the parcel would 82 PAGE 318 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 be divided into two parcels to ensure the historic building is preserved and not impacted by housing development. Overall, there are no site-specific environmental or infrastructure-related constraints that would hinder the development of housing on the Stoneman site.
3.2.3 MIXED‐USE ZONED SITES
As part of Program 1.8, the City will create a new Mixed-Use Zoning District that will include two Mixed-Use Zones – MU-1 and MU-2. Specifically, the City will rezone 104 parcels located along Huntington Drive between N. Granada Avenue and Blackstone Road to the new MU-1 zone to allow for multi-family housing at a density range of 25 to 30 units per acre. Figure 14 shows the location of the MU-1 parcels. Among the 104 parcels to be rezoned to MU-1, the City has identified one site within the new MU-1 zone to be redeveloped with housing during the planning period. This site is identified as MU Site 2 (see Figure 8 for the location of MU Site 2).
Additionally, the City will rezone a total of 11 parcels located along Huntington Drive to the MU-2 zone to allow for multi-family housing at a density range of 30 to 40 units per acre. Three of these parcels are located adjacent to the westernmost boundary of the City between Garfield Avenue and Pasqualito Drive and 8 of these parcels are located adjacent to the easternmost boundary of the City, east of Blackstone Drive. Figure 14 shows the location of the MU-2 parcels. Among the 11 parcels to be rezoned to MU-2, the City has identified two sites within the new MU-2 zone to be redeveloped with housing during the planning period. These sites are identified as MU Sites 1 and 3 (see Figure 8 for the location of MU Sites 1 and 3).
Market Demand for Mixed‐Use Zoned Sites
Neighboring communities that have already allowed for mixed-use development have shown a strong demand for this type of new home construction. The cities of Alhambra, Pasadena, San Gabriel, and South Pasadena have all approved mixed-use projects in recent years that are now either under construction or have been completed.
Table 12, Comparable Mixed‐Use Developments in Neighboring Jurisdictions, shows three projects in these neighboring cities that are roughly comparable to what will be allowed in mixed-use zone as they are detailed below.
TABLE 12: COMPARABLE MIXED‐USE DEVELOPMENTS IN NEIGHBORING JURISDICTIONS Project City Units
62 du
Acreage Density Prior Use Notes
100 S. Monterey St. Alhambra 1.45 ac
1.6 ac
0.7 ac
43 du/ac Single-story
retail
Includes 27,000 s.f.
retail and
subterranean parking.
845 El Centro St. South
Pasadena
57 du
35 du
36 du/ac School Includes 6,000 s.f.
administration retail and
building
50 du/ac Surface
Parking
subterranean parking.
Includes subterranean
parking.
417 N. Madison Ave. Pasadena
83 PAGE 319 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 14: MIXED‐USE ZONES
84 PAGE 320 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Realistic Capacity Analysis: MU‐1 Zone
The MU-1 zone permits a minimum density of 25 units per acre and a maximum density of 30 units per acre. There are many site planning factors that reduce the buildable area of the site, including but not limited to setbacks, parking requirements, open space requirements, and height limits. As part of Program 1.8, the City will create development standards that ensure maximum densities can be achieved within the MU-1 zone.
To demonstrate that a maximum density of 30 units per acre is achievable on a site within the MU-1 zone, the City applied the land use controls that are anticipated to be prescribed for the MU-1 zone to a 0.5-acre site. The 0.5-acre parcel size was used in this analysis because the identified site within this zone is at least 0.5-acre. Additionally, only sites that are 0.5-acre or larger are deemed adequate to accommodate lower income households pursuant to Government Code § 65583.2(c)(2)(A).
Table 12 13 below summarizes the development standards that will apply to development within the MU-1 zone.
The extent development standards can reduce the buildable area of the site depends on factors that are unknown until the site planning phase of the project. For instance, parking requirements are determined by the number of bedrooms of each unit or the floor area of the commercial uses. For the purposes of this analysis, the City made the following assumptions:
The project is 100% residential;
The parcel is located adjacent to a residential zone (rear); The project contains 15 units, each consisting of 2-bedrooms; Each 2-bedroom unit is 1,000 square feet;
The required parking would be 23 resident spaces and 5 guest spaces; and Parking is accommodated by a 10,000 sq. ft., 2 level parking garage, with a ground floor footprint of 5,000 ft.
Using the assumptions and land use controls provided above, the buildable area on the site would be reduced from 0.50 acre to 0.21 acre (see Figure 15 below).
To provide a conservative analysis, the City anticipates that each 2-bedroom unit would be 1,000 square feet. The minimum floor area per dwelling unit is provided in Table 13 14 below:
TABLE 1314: MU‐1 ZONE MINIMUM FLOOR AREA PER UNIT
Unit Type
Single room occupancy
Minimum Floor Area
150 square feet
Efficiency apartment
1-Bedroom unit
2+-Bedroom unit
450 square feet
750 square feet
950 square feet
Source: San Marino Community Development Department
85 PAGE 321 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 1213: MU‐1 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Height
Maximum height
Step backs
36 feet
For buildings taller than twenty five feet (25') and
which are located adjacent to a residential zone, the
building height must be designed so as to "step
back" the building height at least ten feet (10’) for
every ten feet (10’) increase in height above twenty
five feet (25’).
Ground Floor Commercial Setbacks and Build-to- Lines
Front Built-to Line
Side Built-to Line
Within 5 feet of right-of-way
Within 5 feet of right-of-way
10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg. exceeds
30 feet in height
Side abutting a residential zone
Rear None required
Rear abutting a residential zone 10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg. exceeds 30 feet in height
Ground Floor Residential Setbacks
Front
Front setback buffer
5 feet to accommodate porches and patios
4-foot-wide landscaped buffer, which is permitted
within the front yard setback between unit entries
Side 5 feet
Side setback buffer 4-foot-wide landscaped buffer, which is permitted within the side yard setback
Side abutting a residential zone 10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg. exceeds 30 feet in height
Rear None required
Rear abutting a residential zone 10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg. exceeds 30 feet in height
Residential Parking Requirements
Studio or One Bedroom 1 0.5 space
Two Bedroom 1.5 spaces
Three Bedroom or more 1.52 spaces
Guest Parking 1 space per 53 units
Commercial Parking Requirements
Less than 5,000 sf in floor area
Between 5,000 sf and 20,000 sf in floor area
1 space per 250 sf of floor area
20 spaces plus 1 space per 300 sf beyond 5,0000 sf
of floor area
More than 20,000 sf in floor area 70 spaces plus 1 space per 350 sf beyond 20,000 sf of floor area
Open Space and Common Areas
Private Open Space 100 square feet per unit
Common Open Space At least 15% of the total gross development area shall be common open space, up to a maximum
required area of 20,000 square feet
ꢀꢀꢀꢀꢀꢀꢀSource: San Marino Community Development Department 86 PAGE 322 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Using the assumptions provided above, 15 two-bedroom units that are each 1,000 square feet and each provide 100 square feet of private open space would require a total of 16,500 square feet. As previously noted, a developer would have to be able to fit 15 units within 0.21 acre or 9,223 square feet to achieve the maximum density. In a site planning scenario where there is one 3-story building, and assuming that each floor is 6,000 square feet, a developer could realistically fit 15 units requiring a total of 16,500 sq. ft. without exceeding the height requirement (36 feet). Based on this analysis, the City determined that a density of up to 30 units per acre is achievable on a 0.5-acre site using the land use controls the City anticipates to use for multi-family development projects within the MU-1 zone.
Figure 15: Buildable Area on MU-1 Site1
Side: 99 ft.
Requirement
Front (5 ft.)
Setback Area
220 ft. x 5 ft.=
1,100 sq. ft.
Side (5 ft.) 99 ft. x 5 ft.=
495 sq. ft.
Side (5 ft.) 99 ft. x 5 ft.=
495 sq. ft.
Rear (10 ft.) 220 ft. x 10 ft. =
2,200 sq. ft. Parking Garage
Common Open Space
Area
15% of total
gross
development
area
21,780 sq. ft. x 0.15 =
3,267 sq. ft.
Parking
5,000 sq. ft. ground floor
(2 levels)
28 spaces
Open Space
Net buildable
area:
9,223 sq. ft. or 0.21 acre
Side 99 ft.
1Not to scale
As shown in the analysis above, the maximum density of 30 units per acre is achievable on a site that is at least 0.5-acre. As shown on Table 7, MU Site 2 consists of 3 contiguous parcels totaling 1.6 acres that will be rezoned from C-1 to MU-1, which will allow a density of 25 to 30 units per acre. However, maximum densities are not always achieved due to several factors that occur during the development process. Additionally, the City understands that a developer can choose any density within the 87 PAGE 323 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 prescribed density range of 25 to 30 units. As such, the City cannot realistically anticipate MU Site 2 to be developed with a density of 30 units per acre.
Currently, there is no Mixes-Use zones in the City. The C-1 and H&C zones allow mixed-use development; however, there is only one mixed-use development in the City located at 2405 Huntington Drive. The project was subject to the C-1 zoning provisions, which allows housing units at a density of 1 unit per 5,000 square feet of parcel size (or 8.7 units per acre).
Due to the lack of mixed-use developments in the City, it is difficult to accurately predict the densities that will be developed on MU Site 2 by relying on existing densities within the City. For this reason, the City concluded that the minimum density of 25 units per acre is an appropriate density to determine the number of units that will be built on MU Site 2 during the planning period.
The following sections provide the site-specific analyses for MU Site 2 pursuant to State housing law requirements, including an analysis of non-vacant and underutilized sites; zoning to accommodate the development of housing affordable to lower-income households; and environmental constraints and adequate infrastructure. Since the City anticipates 25 units per acre to be developed on MU Site 2, the realistic capacity analysis provided above will serve as the realistic capacity analysis for MU Site 2.
MU Site 2
MU Site 2 consists of 3 contiguous parcels located at 2000 Huntington Drive to 2020 Huntington Drive in the central portion of the City, south of Huntington Drive (see Figure 8). When combined, the site is 1.6 acres and contains three, multi-tenant retail buildings and a large parking lot. These buildings have experienced long-term vacancy problems and the parking lot intended to serve the retail uses is underutilize on a daily basis.
Given the long-term vacancy problems and large, underutilized parking lot, the site was also identified in the City’s 5th Cycle Housing Element as a site that would have the capacity for 13 moderate-income units using a density of 8.7 units per acre. However, no mixed-use development occurred on this site during the 5th Cycle planning period. As previously discussed, the City was unable to adopt a mixed-use ordinance during the 5th Cycle planning period to guide residential development in the C-1 zone. The City believes that creating a MU-1 zone with a permitted density of 25 to 30 units per acre and objective design standards (Program 1.8) will be more effective at facilitating housing development on this site during the 6th Cycle planning period.
The site is currently zoned C-1 and will be rezoned to the new MU-1 zone to allow for the development of 25 to 30 units per acre (Program 1.8). With rezoning, this site could accommodate between 40 and 48 units. Using a density of 25 units per acre, the City anticipates that 40 units will be developed on this site during the planning period, with all 40 units affordable to moderate-income households (see Figure 16 below).
88 PAGE 324 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 16: MU SITE 2
Total Acres
1.6 Density
25 Total Units
40 VL
0 LI
0 MI
40 AMI
0 Non‐vacant and Underutilized Sites Analysis
MU Site 2 is located on 3 contiguous parcels that consist of a commercial retail uses, including a gym, tutoring service, pharmacy, martial arts studio, and vacancies. Each of the existing leases expire or renew during the planning period. Additionally, the site includes a large rear parking lot that is underutilized on a daily basis. There is also street parking located along the frontage of the commercial buildings on Huntington Drive. After consolidation, the City anticipates that the entire
1.6-acre site would be redeveloped to include 40 units.
The City identified this site to be redeveloped for housing during the planning period because of the large size of the site and the existing uses on the site. Given the large underutilized parking lot and long-term and current vacancies on the site, the site is considered underutilized and does not generate substantial revenue for the property owners when compared to the revenue that would be generated with the development of residential uses (see financial feasibility analysis below). . For these reasons, including the financial feasibility analysis below, it is reasonable to conclude that the site’s existing use does not constitute an impediment to residential development on the site and the existing use will likely be discontinued during the planning period. This Housing Element includes 89 PAGE 325 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Program 1.15 to provide incentives for lot consolidation to accommodate multi-family development during the planning period (see Section 2.1).
Financial Feasibility Analysis
This site is currently built out with single-story retail uses. The existing building is approximately 25,812 square feet, according to the Los Angeles County Assessor. The land has an approximate value of $4 million at a valuation of $2.5 million per acre, which is a conservative estimate based on unimproved land for sale in neighboring cities (there are no unimproved parcels for sale currently in San Marino). According to the Los Angeles County Assessor, the improvements to the property have a value of $2.875 million. This site has a property improvement ratio of 0.7, indicating substantial underinvestment and the ability of a property owner to achieve financial gain through redevelopment.
More specifically, Aaccording to current commercial real estate listings in San Marino, commercial rents range from $22-30 per square foot per year. It is anticipated that the rent cost for this building is approximately in the middle of the range found in the City, or approximately $26 per square foot per year. Therefore, the gross income for the existing building on this site is anticipated to be approximately $671,112per year. Net Operating Income for a building that is paid off is approximately 60% of gross income, or approximately $402,667 for this site with its existing improvements. At a cap rate of 0.14, the property value would be $2,876,194. As shown in Table 12, above, there is market demand in neighboring cities for this type of development.
The proposed rezoning of this site would allow for 40 units at a minimum density of 25 units per acre. It is anticipated that this will be an entirely market rate building with a range of unit sizes between one- and three-bedrooms, evenly distributed between each of the sizes. See Table 14 15 below for rents in the San Marino.
TABLE 1415: RENTS IN SAN MARINO
Income Level
Very Low
Low
One-Bedroom1
$1,386.25
Two-Bedroom1
$1,560.00
Three-Bedroom1
$1,733.75
$2,220.00
$2,400.00
$2,497.50
$3,600.00
$2,773.75
Market $4,500.00
NOTES:
1) Rents are based on 30% of the income limit identified in the Official State Income Limits for 2024 for Los Angeles County. The number of persons per household is determined as the number of bedrooms plus one person.
Given these rent limits and the anticipated unit mix, the average monthly rent is $3,502 per unit. With this average monthly rent, the anticipated annual gross income for the property owner would be $1,681,200. It is anticipated that Net Operating Income for a new residential building is approximately 30% of gross income, or approximately $504,360. At a cap rate of 0.14, the property value would be $3,602,571, or 1.25 times higher than the existing property value. By redeveloping 90 PAGE 326 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 this property to include at least 40 units, the property owner would be able to increase their property value by over $800,000.
Affordability for Lower‐Income Households Analysis
Pursuant to California Government Code § 65583.2(c)(3)(B), the City utilizes the “default” density standard deemed adequate to meet the “appropriate zoning” test. San Marino has a population of 12,870 persons (2020) and therefore meets the definition of a “Suburban Jurisdiction”, which has a default density of at least 20 dwelling units per acre. As previously discussed, the site will be rezoned as MU-1, which will have a minimum density of 25 units per acre and a maximum density of 30 units per acre. Additionally, given the realistic capacity analysis conducted for MU-1 zoned sites, the City anticipates that this site will be developed with 40 units, which achieves a density of 25 units per acre. As such, MU Site 2 meets the appropriate zoning test.
Environmental Constraints and Adequate Infrastructure Analysis Environmental constraints may include environmental hazards that are site specific, such as being located in an area that has a high risk for wildfires, flooding, or seismic-related hazards. Additionally, the site may pose a health risk to the public during construction if ground contamination activities occurred previously on the site. Environmental constraints can also include existing resources on the site that are protected under CEQA, such as biological or archaeological resources, and therefore may hinder the redevelopment of the site. Adequate infrastructure refers to the site having sufficient access to water, sewer and other dry utilities, and that utility providers have adequate supplies to serve the additional housing units anticipated for development on the site.
Sections 3.5 and 3.6 provide a general analysis of adequate infrastructure and environmental constraints, respectively, and therefore meet the requirements of California Government Code § 65583.2(b)(4) and (b) (5). Additionally, Section 4.4.2 provides a detailed discussion of the potential environmental and infrastructure constraints on housing development in the City.
As discussed later in those sections, the entire City, including MU Site 2, has adequate access to water, sewer, and other dry utilities, and there is sufficient supply to accommodate the anticipated need during the planning period. Additionally, the entire City, including MU Site 2, has no special status species or habitat that are protected under CEQA and the seismic, flooding, and fire hazards are mitigated with building regulations intended to address such hazards.
MU Site 2 is not located in any area of the City that is designated as having a higher risk for flooding or fire hazards. Additionally, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database indicates there have been no past hazardous material leaks or spills on the site and therefore the redevelopment of the site would not result in an environmental hazard to the public.
Overall, there are no site-specific environmental or infrastructure-related constraints that would hinder the development of housing on MU Site 2.
91 PAGE 327 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Summary of Non‐Vacant Site Suitability Factors
It is anticipated that MU Site 1 will be redeveloped during the planning period due to the following factors:
Underutilization of the site with an existing single-story retail building; Low property improvement ratio of 0.7 indicating substantial underinvestment and the ability of a property owner to achieve financial gain through redevelopment; High return on investment for redeveloping the site into residential uses; and Current demand for mixed-use and higher density residential development in neighboring cities.
Realistic Capacity Analysis: MU‐2 Zone
The MU-2 zone permits a minimum density of 30 units per acre and a maximum density of 40 units per acre. There are many site planning factors that reduce the buildable area of the site, including but not limited to setbacks, parking requirements, open space requirements, and height limits. As part of Program 1.8, the City will create development standards that ensure maximum densities can be achieved within the MU-2 zone.
To demonstrate that a maximum density of 40 units per acre is achievable on a site within the MU-2 zone, the City applied the land use controls that are anticipated to be prescribed for the MU-2 zone to a 0.5-acre site. The 0.5-acre parcel size was used in this analysis because each identified site within this zone is at least 0.5-acre. Additionally, only sites that are 0.5-acre or larger are deemed adequate to accommodate lower income households pursuant to Government Code § 65583.2(c)(2)(A). Table 15 16 below summarizes the development standards that will apply to development within the MU-2 zone.
TABLE 1516: MU‐2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Height
Maximum height
Step backs
48 feet
For buildings taller than twenty five feet (25') and
which are located adjacent to a residential zone, the
building height must be designed so as to "step
back" the building height at least ten feet (10’) for
every ten feet (10’) increase in height above twenty
five feet (25’).
Ground Floor Commercial Setbacks and Build-to- Lines
Front Built-to Line
Side Built-to Line
Within 5 feet of right-of-way
Within 5 feet of right-of-way
10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg. exceeds
30 feet in height
Side abutting a residential zone
Rear None required
Rear abutting a residential zone 10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg. exceeds 30 feet in height
Ground Floor Residential Setbacks
Front 5 feet to accommodate porches and patios
92 PAGE 328 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Front setback buffer 4-foot-wide landscaped buffer, which is permitted within the front yard setback between unit entries
Side 5 feet
Side setback buffer 4-foot-wide landscaped buffer, which is permitted within the side yard setback
Side abutting a residential zone 10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg. exceeds 30 feet in height
Rear None required
Rear abutting a residential zone 10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg. exceeds 30 feet in height
Residential Parking Requirements
Studio or One Bedroom 1 space
Two Bedroom
Three Bedroom or more
1.5 spaces
2 spaces
Guest Parking 1 space per 3 units
Commercial Parking Requirements
Less than 5,000 sf in floor area
Between 5,000 sf and 20,000 sf in floor area
1 space per 250 sf of floor area
20 spaces plus 1 space per 300 sf beyond 5,0000 sf
of floor area
More than 20,000 sf in floor area 70 spaces plus 1 space per 350 sf beyond 20,000 sf of floor area
Open Space and Common Areas
Private Open Space 100 square feet per unit
Common Open Space At least 15% of the total gross development area shall be common open space, up to a maximum
required area of 20,000 square feet
ꢀꢀꢀꢀꢀꢀꢀSource: San Marino Community Development Department The extent development standards can reduce the buildable area of the site depends on factors that are unknown until the site planning phase of the project. For instance, parking requirements are determined by the number of bedrooms of each unit or the floor area of the commercial uses. For the purposes of this analysis, the City made the following assumptions:
The project is 100% residential;
The parcel is located adjacent to a residential zone (rear); The project contains 20 units, each consisting of 2-bedrooms; Each 2-bedroom unit is 1,000 square feet;
The required parking would be 30 resident spaces and 7 guest spaces; and Parking is accommodated by a 12,900 sq. ft., 3 level parking garage, with a ground floor footprint of 4,300 ft.
Using the assumptions and land use controls provided above, the buildable area on the site would be reduced from 0.50 acre to 0.22 acre (see Figure 17 below).
To provide a conservative analysis, the City anticipates that each 2-bedroom unit would be 1,000 square feet. The minimum floor area per dwelling unit is provided in Table 16 below:
TABLE 16: MU‐2 ZONE MINIMUM FLOOR AREA PER UNIT
93 PAGE 329 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element
Unit Type
August 2024
Minimum Floor Area
150 square feet
450 square feet
Single room occupancy
Efficiency apartment
1-Bedroom unit 750 square feet
2+-Bedroom unit 950 square feet
Source: San Marino Community Development Department
Using the assumptions provided above, 20 two-bedroom units that are each 1,000 square feet and each provide 100 square feet of private open space would require a total of 22,000 square feet. As previously noted, a developer would have to be able to fit 20 units within 0.22 acre or 9,923 square feet to achieve the maximum density. In a site planning scenario where there are two 3-story buildings, and assuming that each floor is 4,000 square feet, a developer could realistically fit 20 units requiring a total of 22,000 sq. ft. without exceeding the height requirement (48 feet). Based on this analysis, the City determined that a density of up to 40 units per acre is achievable on a 0.5-acre site using the land use controls the City anticipates to use for multi-family development projects within the MU-2 zone.
94 PAGE 330 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 17: BUILDABLE AREA ON MU‐2 SITE1
Side: 99 ft.
Requirement
Front (5 ft.)
Setback Area
220 ft. x 5 ft.=
1,100 sq. ft.
Side (5 ft.) 99 ft. x 5 ft.=
495 sq. ft.
Side (5 ft.) 99 ft. x 5 ft.=
495 sq. ft.
Rear (10 ft.) 220 ft. x 10 ft. =
2,200 sq. ft. Parking Garage
Common Open Space
Area
15% of total
gross
development
area
21,780 sq. ft. x 0.15 =
3,267 sq. ft.
Parking
4,300 sq. ft. ground floor
(3 levels)
37 spaces
Open Space
Net buildable
area:
9,923 sq. ft. or 0.22 acre
Side 99 ft.
1Not to scale
As shown in the analysis above, the maximum density of 40 units per acre is achievable on a site that is at least 0.5-acre. As shown on Table 7, MU Site 1 will be rezoned from C-1 to MU-2 will be rezoned from R-1 to MU, which will allow a density of 30 to 40 units per acre. MU Sites 1 and 3 each exceed
0.5 acre in size. However, maximum densities are not always achieved due to several factors that occur during the development process. Additionally, the City understands that a developer can choose any density within the prescribed density range of 30 to 40 units. As such, the City cannot realistically anticipate MU Sites 1 and 3 to be developed with a density of 40 units per acre.
As previously discussed, there is no Mixes-Use zones in the City and there is only one mixed-use development in the City, which was subject to zoning provisions that allowed up to 8.7 units per acre.
Due to the lack of mixed-use developments in the City, it is difficult to accurately predict the densities that will be developed on MU Sites 1 and 3 by relying on existing densities within the City. For this reason, the City concluded that the minimum density of 30 units per acre is an appropriate density to determine the number of units that will be built on MU Sites 1 and 3 during the planning period. 95 PAGE 331 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 The following sections provide the site-specific analyses for MU Sites 1 and 3 pursuant to State housing law requirements, including an analysis of non-vacant and underutilized sites; zoning to accommodate the development of housing affordable to lower-income households; and environmental constraints and adequate infrastructure. Since the City anticipates 30 units per acre to be developed on MU Sites 1 and 3, the realistic capacity analysis provided above will serve as the realistic capacity analysis for MU Sites 1 and 3.
MU Site 1
MU Site 1 is located at 415 Huntington Drive (APN 5323-020-035), north of Huntington Drive, in the southwestern portion of the City (see Figure 8). The site is 1.14 acres and contains a 1-story, multitenant office building that has experienced long-term vacancy problems.
Due to its size and vacancy problems, the site was also identified in the City’s 5th Cycle Housing Element as a site that would have the capacity for 9 moderate-income units using a density of 8.7 units per acre. During the City’s 5th Cycle planning period (2013-2021), the City relied on the City’s existing requirements for residential development in the C-1 zone, which permits residential uses at a density of one residential unit per 5,000 square feet of land area and requires a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). To promote the development of residential uses in the C-1 zone during the 5th Cycle planning period, City staff drafted a mixed-use ordinance for City Council consideration; however, the ordinance was not adopted. As such, no mixed-use development occurred on this site during the 5th Cycle planning period. The City believes that creating a MU-2 zone with a permitted density of 30 to 40 units per acre and objective design standards (Program 1.8) will be more effective at facilitating housing development on this site during the 6th Cycle planning period.
The site is currently zoned C-1 and will be rezoned to the new MU-2 zone to allow for the development of 30 to 40 units per acre (Program 1.8). With rezoning, this site could accommodate between 34 and 45 units. Using a density of 30 units per acre, the City anticipates that 34 units will be developed on this site during the planning period, with all 34 units affordable to moderate-income households (see Figure 18 below).
96 PAGE 332 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 18: MU SITE 1
5323‐020‐035
Total Acres
1.14 Density
30 Total Units
34 VL
0 LI
0 MI
34 AMI
0 Non‐vacant and Underutilized Sites Analysis
As shown in Figure 18 above, MU Site 1 is located on one parcel that consists of a multi-tenant office building and parking lot. The City anticipates that the site will be rezoned from C-1 to MU-2 and that the entire 1.14-acre site would be redeveloped to include 34 units during the planning period.
The City identified this site to be redeveloped for housing during the planning period because of the large size of the site and the existing uses on the site. Given the long-term and current vacancies on the site, the site is considered underutilized and does not generate substantial revenue for the property owner when compared to the revenue that would be generated with the development of residential uses (see financial feasibility analysis below). For these reasons, including the financial feasibility analysis below, it is reasonable to conclude that the site’s existing use does not constitute an impediment to residential development on the site and the existing use will likely be discontinued during the planning period.
97 PAGE 333 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Financial Feasibility Analysis
This site is currently built out with an office building that is currently being used as a multi-tenant office space. The existing building is approximately 17,918 square feet, according to the Los Angeles County Assessor. The land has an approximate value of $2.85 million at a valuation of $2.5 million per acre, which is a conservative estimate based on unimproved land for sale in neighboring cities (there are no unimproved parcels for sale currently in San Marino). According to the Los Angeles County Assessor, the improvements to the property have a value of approximately $400,000. This site has a property improvement ratio of 0.14, indicating substantial underinvestment and the ability of a property owner to achieve financial gain through redevelopment.
More specifically, aAccording to current commercial real estate listings in San Marino, commercial rents range from $22-30 per square foot per year. It is anticipated that the rent cost for this building is approximately in the middle of the range found in the City, or approximately $26 per square foot per year. Therefore, the gross income for the existing building on this site is anticipated to be approximately $465,868 per year. Net Operating Income for a building that is paid off is approximately 60% of gross income, or approximately $279,521 for this site with its existing improvements. At a cap rate of 0.14, the property value would be $1,996,577. As shown in Table 12, above, there is market demand in neighboring cities for this type of development.
The proposed rezoning of this site would allow for 34 units at a minimum density of 30 units per acre. It is anticipated that this will be an entirely market rate building with a range of unit sizes between one- and three-bedrooms, evenly distributed between each of the sizes. See Table 14 15 for rents in the San Marino.
Given these rent limits and the anticipated unit mix, the average monthly rent is $3,502 per unit. With this average monthly rent, the anticipated annual gross income for the property owner would be $1,429,200. It is anticipated that Net Operating Income for a new residential building is approximately 30% of gross income, or approximately $428,760. At a cap rate of 0.14, the property value would be $3,062,571, or 1.5 times higher than the existing property value. By redeveloping this property to include at least 34 units, the property owner would be able to increase their property value by over $1.1 million.
Affordability for Lower‐Income Households Analysis
Pursuant to California Government Code § 65583.2(c)(3)(B), the City utilizes the “default” density standard deemed adequate to meet the “appropriate zoning” test. San Marino has a population of 12,870 persons (2020) and therefore meets the definition of a “Suburban Jurisdiction”, which has a default density of at least 20 dwelling units per acre. As previously discussed, the site will be rezoned as MU-2, which will have a minimum density of 30 units per acre and a maximum density of 40 units per acre. Additionally, given the realistic capacity analysis conducted for the MU-2 zoned sites, the City anticipates that this site will be developed with 34 units, which achieves a density of 30 units per acre. As such, MU Site 1 meets the appropriate zoning test. 98 PAGE 334 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Environmental Constraints and Adequate Infrastructure Analysis Environmental constraints may include environmental hazards that are site specific, such as being located in an area that has a high risk for wildfires, flooding, or seismic-related hazards. Additionally, the site may pose a health risk to the public during construction if ground contamination activities occurred previously on the site. Environmental constraints can also include existing resources on the site that are protected under CEQA, such as biological or archaeological resources, and therefore may hinder the redevelopment of the site. Adequate infrastructure refers to the site having sufficient access to water, sewer and other dry utilities, and that utility providers have adequate supplies to serve the additional housing units anticipated for development on the site.
Sections 3.5 and 3.6 provide a general analysis of adequate infrastructure and environmental constraints, respectively, and therefore meet the requirements of California Government Code § 65583.2(b)(4) and (b) (5). Additionally, Section 4.4.2 provides a detailed discussion of the potential environmental and infrastructure constraints on housing development in the City.
As discussed later in those sections, the entire City, including MU Site 1, has adequate access to water, sewer, and other dry utilities, and there is sufficient supply to accommodate the anticipated need during the planning period. Additionally, the entire City, including MU Site 1, has no special status species or habitat that are protected under CEQA and the seismic, flooding, and fire hazards are mitigated with building regulations intended to address such hazards.
MU Site 1 is not located in any area of the City that is designated as having a higher risk for flooding or fire hazards. Additionally, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database indicates there have been no past hazardous material leaks or spills on the site and therefore the redevelopment of the site would not result in an environmental hazard to the public.
Overall, there are no site-specific environmental or infrastructure-related constraints that would hinder the development of housing on MU Site 1.
Summary of Non‐Vacant Site Suitability Factors
It is anticipated that MU Site 1 will be redeveloped during the planning period due to the following factors:
Underutilization of the site with an existing single-story medical office building; Existing and long-term vacancies within the current uses on the site; Low property improvement ratio of 0.14, indicating substantial underinvestment and the ability of a property owner to achieve financial gain through redevelopment; High return on investment for redeveloping the site into residential uses; and Current demand for mixed-use and higher density residential development in neighboring cities.
MU Site 3
MU Site 3 is located at 3130 Huntington Drive (APN 5376-021-012), south of Huntington Drive and adjacent to the eastern boundary of the City (see Figure 8). The site is 0.74 acre and contains the San 99 PAGE 335 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Marino Masonic Lodge 408 building. The Masonic Lodge is not considered a historically significant resource according to the City’s Historic Survey.
The site is currently zoned R-1 and will be rezoned to the new MU-2 zone to allow for the development of 30 to 40 units per acre (Program 1.8). With rezoning, this site could accommodate between 22 and 29 units. Using a density of 30 units per acre, the City anticipates that 22 units will be developed on this site during the planning period, with all 22 units affordable to moderate-income households (see Figure 19 below).
FIGURE 19: MU SITE 3
5376‐021‐012
Total Acres
0.74 Density
30 Total Units
22 VL
0 LI
0 MI
22 AMI
0 Non‐vacant and Underutilized Sites Analysis
As shown in Figure 19 above, MU Site 3 is located on one parcel that consists of the San Marino Masonic Lodge 408 building and parking lot. The City anticipates that the site will be rezoned from R1 to MU-2 and that the entire 0.74-acre site would be redeveloped to include 22 units during the planning period.
100
PAGE 336 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 The City identified this site to be redeveloped to include housing during the planning period because of the large size of the site, existing uses on the site, and property owner interest in redeveloping the site. Given the declining masonic membership rates, the site is considered underutilized and does not generate substantial revenue for the property owner when compared to the revenue that would be generated with the development of residential uses (see financial feasibility analysis below). For these reasons, including the financial feasibility analysis below, it is reasonable to conclude that the site’s existing use does not constitute an impediment to residential development on the site and the existing use will likely be discontinued during the planning period.
Financial Feasibility Analysis
This site is currently built out with a Masonic Lodge. The existing building is approximately 12,274 square feet, according to the Los Angeles County Assessor. The land has an approximate value of $1.85 million at a valuation of $2.5 million per acre, which is a conservative estimate based on unimproved land for sale in neighboring cities (there are no unimproved parcels for sale currently in San Marino). According to the Los Angeles County Assessor, the improvements to the property have a value of approximately $437,000. This site has a property improvement ratio of 0.25, indicating substantial underinvestment and the ability of a property owner to achieve financial gain through redevelopment.
More specifically, aAccording to current commercial real estate listings in San Marino, commercial rents range from $22-30 per square foot per year. It is anticipated that the rent cost for this building is approximately in the middle of the range found in the City, or approximately $26 per square foot per year. Therefore, the gross income for the existing building on this site is anticipated to be approximately $$343,672 per year. Net Operating Income for a building that is paid off is approximately 60% of gross income, or approximately $206,203 for this site with its existing improvements. At a cap rate of 0.14, the property value would be $1,472,880. As shown in Table 12, above, there is market demand in neighboring cities for this type of development.
The proposed rezoning of this site would allow for 22 units at a minimum density of 30 units per acre. It is anticipated that this will be an entirely market rate building with a range of unit sizes between one- and three-bedrooms, evenly distributed between each of the sizes. See Table 14 15 for rents in the San Marino.
Given these rent limits and the anticipated unit mix, the average monthly rent is $3,504 per unit. With this average monthly rent, the anticipated annual gross income for the property owner would be $925,200. It is anticipated that Net Operating Income for a new residential building is approximately 30% of gross income, or approximately $277,560. At a cap rate of 0.14, the property value would be $1,982,571, or 1.35 times higher than the existing property value. By redeveloping this property to include at least 22 units, the property owner would be able to increase their property value by over $500,000.
101
PAGE 337 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Affordability for Lower‐Income Households Analysis
Pursuant to California Government Code § 65583.2(c)(3)(B), the City utilizes the “default” density standard deemed adequate to meet the “appropriate zoning” test. San Marino has a population of 12,870 persons (2020) and therefore meets the definition of a “Suburban Jurisdiction”, which has a default density of at least 20 dwelling units per acre. As previously discussed, the site will be rezoned as MU-2, which will have a minimum density of 30 units per acre and a maximum density of 40 units per acre. Additionally, given the realistic capacity analysis conducted for the MU-2 zoned sites, the City anticipates that this site will be developed with 22 units, which achieves a density of 30 units per acre. As such, MU Site 3 meets the appropriate zoning test.
Environmental Constraints and Adequate Infrastructure Analysis Environmental constraints may include environmental hazards that are site specific, such as being located in an area that has a high risk for wildfires, flooding, or seismic-related hazards. Additionally, the site may pose a health risk to the public during construction if ground contamination activities occurred previously on the site. Environmental constraints can also include existing resources on the site that are protected under CEQA, such as biological, historical, or archaeological resources, and therefore may hinder the redevelopment of the site. Adequate infrastructure refers to the site having sufficient access to water, sewer and other dry utilities, and that utility providers have adequate supplies to serve the additional housing units anticipated for development on the site.
Sections 3.5 and 3.6 provide a general analysis of adequate infrastructure and environmental constraints, respectively, and therefore meet the requirements of California Government Code § 65583.2(b)(4) and (b) (5). Additionally, Section 4.4.2 provides a detailed discussion of the potential environmental and infrastructure constraints on housing development in the City.
As discussed later in those sections, the entire City, including MU Site 3, has adequate access to water, sewer, and other dry utilities, and there is sufficient supply to accommodate the anticipated need during the planning period. Additionally, the entire City, including MU Site 3, has no special status species or habitat that are protected under CEQA and the seismic, flooding, and fire hazards are mitigated with building regulations intended to address such hazards.
MU Site 3 is not located in any area of the City that is designated as having a higher risk for flooding or fire hazards. Additionally, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database indicates there have been no past hazardous material leaks or spills on the site and therefore the redevelopment of the site would not result in an environmental hazard to the public.
Overall, there are no site-specific environmental or infrastructure-related constraints that would hinder the development of housing on MU Site 3.
Summary of Non‐Vacant Site Suitability Factors
It is anticipated that MU Site 3 will be redeveloped during the planning period due to the following factors:
Underutilization of the site with a masonic lodge and large surface parking; 102
PAGE 338 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Low property improvement ratio of 0.25, indicating substantial underinvestment and the ability of a property owner to achieve financial gain through redevelopment; High return on investment for redeveloping the site into residential uses; and Current demand for mixed-use and higher density residential development in neighboring cities.
3.2.4 RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION HOUSING ZONED SITES
As part of Program 1.17, the City will create a new Religious Institution Housing (RIH) zone that will rezone 4 existing church properties within the City to allow for the development of residential uses.
The 4 properties that will be rezoned to the new RIH zone include:
St. Edmund’s Episcopal Church;
San Marino Congregational United Church of Christ;
First Church of Christ, Scientist, San Marino; and
San Marino Community Church
Figure 20 provided below shows the locations of each church property that will be rezoned to the new RIH zone. Among the 4 properties to be rezoned to RIH, the City has identified one property, San Marino Community Church, to be redeveloped with housing during the planning period (see Figure 8 for the location of the San Marino Community Church site). 103
PAGE 339 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 20: RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION HOUSING ZONE
104
PAGE 340 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Realistic Capacity Analysis: RIH Zone
The Religious Institution Housing (RIH) zone allows for a minimum density of 20 units per acre and a maximum density of 30 units per acre. There are many site planning factors that reduce the buildable area of the site, including but not limited to setbacks, parking requirements, open space requirements, and height limits. As part of Program 1.17, the City will prepare development standards consistent with the Affordable Housing on Faith and Higher Education Lands Act of 2023 and that to ensures maximum densities can be achieved.
To demonstrate that a maximum density of 30 units per acre is achievable on a site within the RIH zone, the City applied the land use controls that are anticipated to be prescribed for the RIH zone to a
0.5-acre site. The 0.5-acre parcel size was used in this analysis because the identified site within this zone is at least 0.5-acre. Additionally, only sites that are 0.5-acre or larger are deemed adequate to accommodate lower income households pursuant to Government Code § 65583.2(c)(2)(A).
Table 17 18 below summarizes the development standards that will apply to development within the RIH zone.
TABLE 1718: MULTI‐FAMILY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WITHIN THE RIH ZONE Height
Maximum height
Step backs
36 feet
For buildings taller than twenty five feet (25')
and which are located adjacent to a residential
zone, the building height must be designed so
as to "step back" the building height at least
ten feet (10’) for every ten feet (10’) increase
in height above twenty five feet (25’).
Ground Floor Setbacks
Front
Front setback buffer
5 feet to accommodate porches and patios
4-foot-wide landscaped buffer, which is
permitted within the front yard setback
between unit entries
Side 5 feet
Side setback buffer 4-foot-wide landscaped buffer, which is permitted within the side yard setback
10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg.
exceeds 30 feet in height
Side abutting a residential zone
Rear None required
Rear abutting a residential zone 10 feet, plus 1 foot for each foot the bldg. exceeds 30 feet in height
Parking Requirements
Studio or One Bedroom
Two Bedroom
1 space
1.5 spaces
Three Bedroom or more
Guest Parking
12 spaces
1 space per 3 unitsNone
105 PAGE 341 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Other Parking Requirements Parking for the church uses may be shared with residential uses
Required parking for the church uses may be
reduced through the use of a density bonus
incentive.
Open Space and Common Areas
Private Open Space P 100 square feet per unit
Common Open Space At least 15% of the total gross development area shall be common open space, up to a
maximum required area of 20,000 square
feet
Source: San Marino Community Development Department
The extent development standards can reduce the buildable area of the site depends on factors that are unknown until the site planning phase of the project. For instance, parking requirements are determined by the number of bedrooms of each unit. For the purposes of this analysis, the City made the following assumptions:
The parcel is not located adjacent to a residential zone; The project contains 15 16 units, each consisting of 2-bedrooms; Each 2-bedroom unit is 1,000 square feet;
The required parking would be 23 16 resident spaces and 5 guest spaces; and Parking is accommodated by a 10,0005,120 sq. ft., 2 level parking garage parking lot, with a ground floor footprint of 5,000 5,120 ft.
Using the assumptions and land use controls provided above, the buildable area on the site would be reduced from 0.50 acre to 0.26 acre (see Figure 21 below).
To provide a conservative analysis, the City anticipates that each 2-bedroom unit would be 1,000 square feet. The minimum floor area per dwelling unit is provided in Table 18 below:
TABLE 18: RIH ZONE MINIMUM FLOOR AREA PER UNIT
Unit Type
Single room occupancy
Minimum Floor Area
150 square feet
Efficiency apartment
1-Bedroom unit
2+-Bedroom unit
450 square feet
750 square feet
950 square feet
Source: San Marino Community Development Department
Using the assumptions provided above, 15 16 two-bedroom units that are each 1,000 square feet and each provide 100 square feet of private open space would require a total of 16,500 16,000 square feet. As previously noted, a developer would have to be able to fit 15 16 units within 0.26 acre or 11,42311,303 square feet to achieve the maximum density. In a site planning scenario where there is one 3-story building, and assuming that each floor is 6,000 square feet, a developer could realistically fit 15 16 units requiring a total of 16,500 16,000 sq. ft. without exceeding the height requirement (36 106
PAGE 342 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 feet). Based on this analysis, the City determined that a density of up to 30 units per acre is achievable on a 0.5-acre site using the land use controls the City anticipates to use for multi-family development projects within the RIH zone.
FIGURE 21: BUILDABLE AREA ON RIH SITE1
Side: 99 ft.
Requirement
Front (5 ft.)
Setback Area
220 ft. x 5 ft.=
1,100 sq. ft.
Side (5 ft.) 99 ft. x 5 ft.=
495 sq. ft.
Side (5 ft.) 99 ft. x 5 ft.=
495 sq. ft.
Rear (None) None
Common Open Space
Area
Parking Garage
15% of total
gross
development
area
21,780 sq. ft. x 0.15 =
3,267 sq. ft.
Parking
5,0005,120 sq. ft. ground
floor
28 16 spaces
Open Space (2 levels)
Net buildable
area:
11,423 11,303 sq. ft. or
0.26 acre
Side 99 ft.
1Not to scale
As shown in the analysis above, the maximum density of 30 units per acre is achievable on a site that is at least 0.5-acre. As shown on Table 7, the San Marino Community Church site will be rezoned from R-1 to RIH to allow a density of 20 to 30 units per acre. The site is 3.19 acres; however, the City anticipates that housing will be developed within the portion of the site that consists of a parking lot, which is approximately 1.18 acres. However, maximum densities are not always achieved due to several factors that occur during the development process. Additionally, the City understands that a 107
PAGE 343 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 developer can choose any density within the prescribed density range of 20 to 30 units. As such, the City cannot realistically anticipate the San Marino Community Church site to be developed with a density of 30 units per acre.
As previously discussed, there are no multi-family development in the City that achieves densities between 20 and 30 units per acre. Due to the lack of multi-family development in the City, it is difficult to accurately predict the densities that will be developed on the San Marino Community Church site by relying on existing densities within the City. For this reason, the City concluded that the minimum density of 20 units per acre is an appropriate density to determine the number of units that will be built on the San Marino Community Church site during the planning period.
The following sections provide the site-specific analyses for the San Marino Community Church site pursuant to State housing law requirements, including an analysis of non-vacant and underutilized sites; zoning to accommodate the development of housing affordable to lower-income households; and environmental constraints and adequate infrastructure. Since the City anticipates 20 units per acre to be developed on the San Marino Community Church site, the realistic capacity analysis provided above will serve as the realistic capacity analysis for the San Marino Community Church site.
San Marino Community Church
San Marino Community Church is located at 1750 Viginia Road (APN 5334-025-003), south of Huntington Drive and adjacent to Valentine Elementary School (see Figure 8). The property is 3.19 acres and consists of a church building on approximately 2 acres of the site and a parking lot on approximately 1.18 acres of the site. The City anticipates that the church building will be preserved and 1.18 acre parking lot will be developed with affordable housing during the planning period.
As part of Program 1.17, the site will be rezoned from R-1 to the new RIH zone, which will have a permitted density of 20 to 30 units per acre. With rezoning this site could accommodate between 23 and 35 units. Using a density of 20 units per acre, the City anticipates that 23 units will be developed on this site during the planning period, with all 23 units affordable to very low-income households (see Figure 22 below).
108
PAGE 344 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 22: SAN MARINO COMMUNITY CHURCH
Total Acres
1.18 Density
20 Total Units
23 VL
23 LI
0 MI
0 AMI
0 Non‐vacant and Underutilized Sites Analysis
As shown in Figure 22 above, San Marino Community Church is located on one parcel that consists of a church building and parking lot. The housing site would encompass the 1.18 acre portion of the site that consists of the parking lot and does not include the existing church building.
Given the size of the site (1.18 acres), the existing residential uses west and south of the site, the school uses to the east of the site, and access to public transit along Huntington Drive (The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTS) Route 179), the City believes this site is a good candidate for affordable housing development (see Figure 56). The portion of the site that would be redeveloped with housing contains a parking lot. The City anticipates that the parking needs of the church would be accounted for in the site plan phase of the project with a single-level parking garage podium with residential uses built above the parking that could accommodate residents and church members. As such, the existing use of the site that would be redeveloped for housing does not constitute an impediment to residential development. 109
PAGE 345 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 There are no recent affordable housing developments on church properties the City. However, given the Affordable Housing on Faith Lands Act (SB 4) there have been several churches in the local region that have been redeveloped for affordable housing. For example, the First United Methodist Church in Inglewood and St. Michael’s Episcopal Church in Anaheim have decided to use their existing parking lots for affordable housing. As such, market and development trends in the local region support developer interest in affordable housing development on church properties.
Affordability for Lower‐Income Households Analysis
Pursuant to California Government Code § 65583.2(c)(3)(B), the City utilizes the “default” density standard deemed adequate to meet the “appropriate zoning” test. San Marino has a population of 12,870 persons (2020) and therefore meets the definition of a “Suburban Jurisdiction”, which has a default density of at least 20 dwelling units per acre. As previously discussed, the site will be rezoned as RIH, which will have a minimum density of 20 units per acre and a maximum density of 30 units per acre. Additionally, given the realistic capacity analysis conducted for the RIH zoned sites, the City anticipates that this site will be developed with 23 units, which achieves a density of 20 units per acre. As such, the San Marino Community Church site meets the appropriate zoning test.
Environmental Constraints and Adequate Infrastructure Analysis Environmental constraints may include environmental hazards that are site specific, such as being located in an area that has a high risk for wildfires, flooding, or seismic-related hazards. Additionally, the site may pose a health risk to the public during construction if ground contamination activities occurred previously on the site. Environmental constraints can also include existing resources on the site that are protected under CEQA, such as biological or archaeological resources, and therefore may hinder the redevelopment of the site. Adequate infrastructure refers to the site having sufficient access to water, sewer and other dry utilities, and that utility providers have adequate supplies to serve the additional housing units anticipated for development on the site.
Sections 3.5 and 3.6 provide a general analysis of adequate infrastructure and environmental constraints, respectively, and therefore meet the requirements of California Government Code § 65583.2(b)(4) and (b) (5). Additionally, Section 4.4.2 provides a detailed discussion of the potential environmental and infrastructure constraints on housing development in the City.
As discussed later in those sections, the entire City, including the San Marino Community Church site, has adequate access to water, sewer, and other dry utilities, and there is sufficient supply to accommodate the anticipated need during the planning period. Additionally, the entire City, including the San Marino Community Church site, has no special status species or habitat that are protected under CEQA and the seismic, flooding, and fire hazards are mitigated with building regulations intended to address such hazards.
The San Marino Community Church site is not located in any area of the City that is designated as having a higher risk for flooding or fire hazards. Additionally, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database indicates there have been no past hazardous material leaks or spills on the site and therefore the redevelopment of the site would not result in an environmental 110
PAGE 346 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 hazard to the public. Overall, there are no site-specific environmental or infrastructure-related constraints that would hinder the development of housing on the San Marino Community Church site.
3.3 ADUS
Since 2017, State law requires ministerial approval of ADUs meeting certain requirements.
Additionally, these laws required the City of San Marino to remove its minimum parcel size and discretionary approval process, which resulted in the number of parcels qualifying for ADUs to more than double and a substantial increase in ADU applications. The City is already averaging more than three ADU applications per month and issued 12 ADU permits during 2020 – a year when the global pandemic closed the permitting office for several months. This trend has continued, with the City issuing 14 ADU permits during 2021 (3 of which were during the 6th Cycle planning period), 45 ADU permits during 2022, 36 ADU permits during 2023, and 16 ADU permits during 2024 (until June 30, 2024). Figure 23 below shows the location of ADU projects that have been approved during the 6th Cycle planning period between October 15, 2021 and June 30, 2024. As shown in Figure 23, approved ADUs are well dispersed throughout the City’s residential neighborhoods and are not concentrated in one area of the City.
111
PAGE 347 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 23: APPROVED ADU PROJECTS
112
PAGE 348 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
3.3.1 Accessory Dwelling Units
Given San Marino’s changing demographics and housing needs and limited vacant land for residential development, ADU development is an attractive solution to address the City’s housing needs during the planning period.
According to the California Department of Housing and Community Development, “an ADU is a secondary dwelling unit with complete independent living facilities for one or more persons and generally takes three forms:
Detached: The unit is separated from the primary residential structure Attached: The unit is attached to the primary residential structure Repurposed Existing Space: Space (e.g., master bedroom or garage) within the primary residence is converted into an independent living unit” Section 23.02.25.G of the City’s Municipal Code specifies the development standards for ADUs, which limit ADUs to a maximum of two bedrooms that cannot exceed 1,000 square feet of livable area.
Smaller (maximum of 500 square feet), attached ADUs are referred to as Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs) and are subject to the development standards prescribed in Section 23.02.25.H of the City’s Municipal Code. In this Housing Element, the term JADU falls under the umbrella of ADU, and therefore is not discussed separately in this Housing Element.
Based on available permit data from the City, approved ADUs range in size from 308 square feet to 1,000 square feet, with a median of 745 square feet. The number of bedrooms for approved ADUs range from 0 bedrooms (studio) to 2 bedrooms. Programs are included in this Housing Element to encourage the development of ADUs for lower-income households and residents with special housing needs, including elderly residents and those with disabilities.
There have been 26 approved ADUs that consist of 2 bedrooms, which is large enough to accommodate smaller families. In San Marino, there are approximately 620 households that rent.
Among these renters, 162 households (or 26% of the total renters) consist of 2 people and 118 households (or 19% of the total renters) consist of 3 people. As such, ADUs are adequately sized to collectively provide affordable housing opportunities to approximately 45% of families that rent in the City. As such, given the existing development trends for ADUs in the City, it is reasonable to conclude that ADUs will provide affordable housing and housing mobility opportunities for smaller families (2-3 people per households) during the planning period.
Construction of ADUs can supply housing units for very low- and extremely low-income individuals and small families, and are expected to be especially popular in San Marino given its aging population and the prevalence multi-generational households. Additionally, demographic information and survey data indicate that a significant percentage of San Marino’s elderly households are low-income, despite owning their own homes. To address this need, Program 1.2 is included in this Housing Element to establish a pilot program to assist lower-income homeowners in constructing these small units in exchange for continued affordability. Because ADUs can be created out of existing space and 113
PAGE 349 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 are inexpensive to build (as low as $20,000 per unit), and because of the new program to facilitate and finance their construction with a low-interest forgivable loan if rented affordably, the City expects that they will be affordable to very low and extremely low-income households during the planning period.
ADUs also work well in a city with strong community opposition to development that conflicts with its existing single-family neighborhoods. Since ADUs can carved out of existing space and do not always involve new construction, they can be accommodated in existing neighborhoods without impacting architectural and historic character, which are two qualities that the San Marino community feels strongly about. As such, the City anticipates less community opposition to the development of ADUs when compared to development of higher density housing.
The current ADU approval process requires completing an application and submitting the completed application to the City for review. ADU applications that meets the location requirement (e.g., must be located on R-1 zoned land) and development standards contained in Section 23.02.25 of the City’s Municipal Code are approved ministerially and are not subject to discretionary approval by Planning Commission and City Council (see Section 4.4.2 for a detailed discussion of the ADU approval process).
With new Housing Element Programs 1.1 through 1.5, the City estimates that it will issue 36 ADU permits each year from 2025-2028 and 27 ADU permits in 2029 (until October 15, 2029) for a total of 287 ADU permits (Table 1920). These figures are based on the actual number of permits issued between October 15, 2021 and June 30,2024 and the projected number of permits that are anticipated to be issued by the City each year until October 15, 2029, given the available permit data. 114
PAGE 350 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 1920: ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS PROJECTION
Year ADU Building Permits
2021 (after October 15th) 3
2022 - Actual 45
36 16
16 36
36 36
36 27
287
2023 - Actual
2024 - Through June 30 - Actual
2024 - July 1 through Dec. 31 - Anticipated
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029 (through October 15)
6th Cycle Total
Source: San Marino, Community Development Department
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) conducted a survey of ADU rents and issued pre-certified affordability assumptions for ADUs. Application of these affordability assumptions to the expected number of ADUs through the planning period indicates that San Marino can expect 195 ADUs affordable to households making less than 80% of AMI; 6 ADUs affordable to moderate-income households, and 86 above-moderate ADUs (see Table 2021). 115 PAGE 351 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 2021: ASSUMED AFFORDABILITY FOR 6TH CYCLE ADUS (SCAG SURVEY) Category Affordability Assumption for
Rented ADUs
Affordability Assumption for ADUs
(percent of total)
Extremely Low
Very Low
Low
43 24
128
6 15%
8.5%
44.6%
Moderate 2.1%
Above Moderate
Total
86 287
29.8%
100%*
*Due to rounding, percentages may not always appear to add up to 100%
3.4 COMPARISON OF SITE INVENTORY WITH RHNA
SCAG’s 2021–2029 RHNA has allocated San Marino a total of 397 units for the planning period, which breaks down by affordability level (previously shown in Table 2). As previously discussed, San Marino is fully built out with limited vacant land available for new residential development.
Additionally, the City currently allows only single-family development on parcels zoned for housing.
As such, under current zoning, the City cannot accommodate its RHNA during the planning period.
The City anticipates that the majority of its RHNA will be achieved through the construction of approximately 287 ADUs during the planning period. However, ADU development on its own will not be enough to meet City’s RHNA for very low- and moderate-income categories.
This Housing Element includes programs to facilitate the development of new housing and help the City achieve its RHNA, including programs that promote ADU development (Programs 1.1 through
1.5), rezone the City-owned Stoneman site to the new RM1 zone (Program 1.7), rezone parcels along Huntington Drive to the new MU-1 and MU-2 zones (Program 1.8), rezone church sites to the new RIH zone (Program 1.17), and rezone the Southwestern Academy site to the H&C zone (Program 1.9).
With these programs, the City is able to accommodate its RHNA of 397 units, plus a 28 percent overall surplus, and achieve its RHNA for each income category (see Table 21 22 below). 116
PAGE 352 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 2122: COMPARISON OF SITE INVENTORY AND RHNA WITH REZONING Units ADUs
San Marino
Community Sites 1, 2,
Church Site
23 Mixed-Use Surplus
RHNA
Percent
Income
Group
Total
RHNA Since
6/30/21
Approved Approved Huntington Southwestern Stoneman
Site Academy Site Site
Total
Capacity
Surplus
RHNA
Projected
ADUs Since
6/30/21
and 3
Extremely
Low 149 0 24 43 33 0 49 0 172 23 15%
Very Low
Low 91
91 0
0 44
2 84
4 0
0 0
0 20
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
96 0
128
122
37 31
41%
Moderate 34%
Above
Moderate 66 1 30 56 87 21 32%
Total 397 1 100 187 33 20 49 23 96 509 112 28%
Note: The income levels assigned to the ADUs approved since June 30, 2021 are based on the SCAG ADU affordability analysis. 117
PAGE 353 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
3.5 INFRASTRUCTURE
This subsection provides information about the availability of services to serve new housing and examines any infrastructure limitations within the City. San Marino is entirely developed and is surrounded by other incorporated communities with similar fully developed properties. As a developed city, San Marino has multiple infrastructure services developed and maintained by multiple agencies. Currently, the City’s infrastructure is in good condition and the agencies providing services have indicated there are no foreseeable issues maintaining service to existing housing or providing service to the additional housing anticipated in the 2021 Housing Element.
3.5.1 Water
The City of San Marino is served with water by California American Water and by sewer from the Los Angeles County Sanitation District (District).
California American Water serves the City of San Marino with the “San Marino System” which also serves portions of neighboring cities of Rosemead, Temple City, San Gabriel, El Monte, Pasadena, and some unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County. The San Marino Water System is primarily supplied by groundwater sources in the Main San Gabriel and Raymond Basins; In 2019, the system supply consisted of 90 percent local well water and 10 percent purchased treated surface water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Water District). Since both basins have adjudicated groundwater allocations, additional supplies are purchased to meet seasonal and annual demands. The sources for these additional supplies are the Sacramento River Delta and the Colorado River. Drinking water provided by the Water District receives multiple technological treatments including sedimentation, filtration, and disinfection. Groundwater supplies are disinfected with chlorine and surface water supplies are treated with chloramines for bacteriological quality in the distribution system. The District’s technological treatments and practices are evaluated every five years by the State Water Resources Control Board Division of Drinking Water (Water Board). The water sources for the California American Water - San Marino System were assessed in 2003 to evaluate the pattern of pollutant sources and ensure proper decontamination of the water to make it suitable for human consumption. Ongoing monitoring and annual reporting are performed to ensure that tap water is safe to drink and compliant with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Water Board regulations limiting the quantity of contaminants in public water systems.
3.5.2 Sewer
The Sanitation District serves the City of San Marino through their Districts 15 and 16. Conversations with District staff in early 2021 indicate that the District is confident in the ability to serve the projected number of new residences of the City of San Marino. The District has enough capacity and adequate budget to ensure regular monitoring and maintenance and the ongoing provision of quality services to both residential and commercial properties in the City. San Marino is currently utilizing only 25 to 30 percent of its sewer capacity.
3.5.3 Other Utilities
San Marino is entirely developed and as such, connections for public utilities such as electricity, gas, telephone, cable, and garbage collection are readily available for future development. The streets are paved and receive regular maintenance by the Parks & Public Works Department. The Department 118
PAGE 354 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 facilitates street sweeping, sidewalk maintenance, streetlight repair, enforcement of the tree and landscape ordinance, coordinating trash and recycling materials collection, and is the point of contact for water and sewage services.
3.6 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
Because San Marino is built out and has no special status species or habitat, environmental considerations are not a constraint to the development of housing with the limited exceptions summarized below and discussed in more detail in Section 4.
3.6.1 Seismic Hazards
San Marino is located within an area of high seismic activity due to the proximity of the Raymond Hill fault. The greatest potential danger from seismic hazards is the collapse of older residential units constructed from unreinforced masonry, and explosions of petroleum and fuel lines. The City regulates the construction of new habitable structures within seismic hazard zones through required site investigations, setbacks, and construction standards to comply with State law and minimize risks from seismic events.
3.6.2 Flooding Hazards
While San Marino faces minimal risk from flood hazards, there are three limited areas that are susceptible to short periods of localized flooding during periods of intense rainfall: Huntington Boulevard near Old Mill Road; Lacy Park; and Huntington Boulevard near San Marino High School.
Because there is minimal risk and no history of repeatedly damaged structures due to flooding, there are no additional conditions or requirements imposed on development in these areas that would pose a constraint to development.
3.6.3 Fire Hazards
San Marino contains no State-recognize wildfire hazard zones. However, the City has identified their own locally designated wildfire hazard zone in the Northwest area of the City with stricter requirements, including construction standards and brush clearance, to minimize risk. Past fires have damaged or destroyed structures due to combustible roofing material, wood construction, and lack of defensible space. The City prohibits replacement or installation of new wood roofing and enforces fire safety building practices found within the California Building Code (Source: San Marino Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2019).
119
PAGE 355 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 SECTION IV: TECHNICAL
BACKGROUND REPORT
4.1 INTRODUCTION
The Technical Background Report (TBR) of the 2021 San Marino Housing Element includes statutorily required data, an analysis of governmental and non-governmental constraints to the provision of housing. As part of the new AB 686 requirements to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing, the TBR also includes a brief history of San Marino’s growth and exclusively single-family zoning practices, and an analysis of the economic and ethnic make-up of the City and its neighborhoods.
Section 1 of the Housing Element contains summary information and further analysis where new policies or programs are needed to overcome past exclusionary land use practices and to respond to changing demographics and housing needs.
4.2 PRE‐CERTIFIED SCAG DATASET
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) has compiled a housing needs data package for each jurisdiction. These housing data packages have been pre-certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to meet statutory requirements for the quantification of existing and projected housing needs including:
Identification of population and employment trends;
Household characteristics (i.e., existing households by tenure, existing extremely low-income households, total, lower and extremely low-income households overpaying, overcrowded households);
Special needs (i.e., number of persons with disabilities, number of persons with developmental disabilities, elderly households by tenure, large households by tenure and female headed households); and
Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) by income group, including extremely low-income households.
In order to meet all statutory requirements in Government Code §65583(a) (1 and 2) related to quantification and analysis of existing housing needs, this Technical Background Report also includes locally acquired information and data including but not limited to areas of economic and ethnic segregation, special needs, local knowledge of the housing stock, local housing resources, and an analysis of housing constraints. The San Marino 2020 Pre-Certified Local Housing Data Packet includes the requisite data on farmworkers, persons experiencing homelessness, substandard housing, and units at-risk of conversion to above-moderate uses in the jurisdiction. The packet also 120
PAGE 356 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 includes some analysis of the data; further analysis is provided herein and throughout the Housing Element (Source: Housing Needs Data Certification Letter from HCD).
The SCAG Housing Needs Dataset is included in Appendix A of this Housing Element in its entire original form. This Technical Background Report contains data related to local housing programs and resources and housing constraints.
4.3 LOCAL HOUSING PROGRAMS & RESOURCES
San Marino is served by the Los Angeles County Development Authority (LACDA), formerly known as the Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles. The LACDA was formed from a consolidation of the Los Angeles Housing Authority, Community Development Department, and the Redevelopment Agency. The LACDA provides resources for housing assistance, affordable rental housing, first-time homebuyers, home improvements, community development, construction management, economic development, and traffic services. The jurisdiction of the LACDA includes all unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County and the 70 incorporated cities in Los Angeles County that do not have their own public housing agencies. The City of San Marino is within the jurisdiction of the LACDA.
4.3.1 Resources: Housing Assistance Programs
The following programs are primarily Federal- and State-run programs providing funding for construction, rehabilitation, or rental assistance for very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. This section describes programs that may be locally available and potentially applicable within the City.
The Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher (HCV Program) is the federal government’s major program for assisting very low-income families, the elderly, and the disabled to afford decent, safe, and sanitary housing in the private market. Participants may choose any housing that meet the requirements of the program. The LACDA pays a housing subsidy directly to the property owner, and the participant pays the difference between the actual rent charged and the amount subsidized by the program. (Source: LACDA) The availability of this program depends on LACDA funding, efforts, and priorities. San Marino rental rates general exceed Fair Market Rents for the program and therefore are not eligible properties.
Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) are grants provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to fund a wide variety of projects that implement local housing strategies and create affordable housing for low-income households including building, buying, rehabilitating affordable housing, or providing direct rental assistance (Source: HUD). San Marino’s existing housing stock and lack of developable land hampers the City’s ability to compete for these funds.
Section 203(k) funding provided by HUD facilitates the rehabilitation and repair of singlefamily residential properties by ensuring homeowner loans for purchase or refinancing of properties and can enable homebuyers to purchase homes that need significant repairs. It can also be used for a variety of other improvements, including conversion of properties up to a four-unit structure, enhance accessibility for a disabled person, or elimination of health and safety hazards. Most homes in San Marino are not eligible for this funding due to the well-maintained condition and high home values of the housing stock (Source: HUD). 121
PAGE 357 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Section 202 funding provided by HUD finances construction, rehabilitation, or acquisition of structures for supportive housing for VLI elderly persons through interest-free capital advances and rental assistance funds. This funding is only available to private nonprofit organizations and consumer cooperatives and is highly competitive. The Low‐Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Program provides State and Local agencies the equivalent of approximately $8 billion in annual budget authority to issues tax credits for the acquisition, rehabilitation, or new construction of rental housing targeted to lowerincome households. The California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) competitively administers credits to projects based on priorities they set each year. Interested developers may apply for a 9% tax credit (which is often competitive) or a 4% tax credit. The developers who have been awarded the credits sell the credits to investors. This creates cash equity which provides a significant portion of the funds that developers need to build affordable housing. A 9% tax credit raises about 70% of the cost of a development and a 4% credit raises about 30% of the cost of a development. Since the debt needed to develop is lower, a project can offer more affordable rents while still being a financially viable venture. Investors buy these credits as a tax benefit; tax credits are subtracted directly from a taxpayer’s liability each year for 10 years Buildings eligible for the LIHTC must either have 20% of units must rent-restricted and occupied by tenants with incomes no higher than 50% of the Area Median Income (AMI) or 40% of units rent restricted and occupied by tenants with incomes no higher than 60% of AMI.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) designates Qualified Census Tracts (QCTs) and Difficult Development Areas (DDAs) that have increased eligibility. QCTs must have 50 percent of households with incomes below 60 percent of the AMI or have a poverty rate of 25 percent or more. DDAs are areas with high land, construction, and utility costs relative to the area median income. There are no QCTs in San Marino. All of San Marino is in a DDA. San Marino is also within a ‘Highest Resource’ designation which provides an eligibility bonus in applying for this funding; however, even with the tax credit, affordable housing projects in a high-cost area can be very difficult to fund because of the high cost of land. The ability to apply for this program depends on the level of interest from developers, developable sites, constraints imposed by development standards, and the level of competition in the region for LIHTC funding. (Sources: California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, National Housing Law Project, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development)
Preservation Funding is not currently needed due to the absence of at-risk housing units in the City.
The California Self‐Help Housing Program (CSHHP) is a state program that provides technical assistance and funding for the training and supervision of low- and moderateincome self-help homebuilders. Funding is provided through sponsor organizations, either local government agencies or nonprofit corporations.
The Section 811 Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities Program is managed by HUD and provides funding through interest-free capital advances, operating subsidies, and/or project rental assistance for eligible projects developing affordable housing for 122
PAGE 358 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 persons with disabilities. This program is highly competitive and requires a nonprofit housing sponsor.
The Federal Home Loan Bank Act establishes an Affordable Housing Program (AHP) within the Federal Housing Finance Agency. AHP funds are granted to financial institutions on behalf of a housing sponsor and may be used to finance the purchase, construction, or rehabilitation of owner-occupied housing for low- or moderate-income households and the purchase, construction, or rehabilitation of rental housing where at least 20 percent of the units are affordable for and occupied by very low-income households. Local development costs may deter local developers from applying for this program.
4.3.2 Resources: Homeless Shelters
Homeless shelters provide temporary shelter for the homeless population. Although the City of San Marino has little to no homeless population, the City does allow emergency shelters by-right within its (C-1) downtown commercial zone district (Municipal Code § 23.03.01(I)). Pursuant to Government Code §65583 (a) (4) (A), the C-1 zone allows emergency shelters without a conditional use permit.
Program 3.4 is included in this Housing Element to revise the City Code to be consistent with the requirements of Government Code 65583, as amended by AB 2339. As part of this program, the existing and new zones that permit multi-family development - will allow emergency shelters byright pursuant to the objective standards prescribed by the City Code, as amended by AB 2339.
There are currently no homeless shelters within the San Marino City limits; however, there are shelters available in nearby Pasadena. The closest homeless shelter to San Marino is Union Station Homeless Services, located at 412 S. Raymond Avenue in Pasadena is a 56-bed adult center that provide homeless men and women with separate and safe substance-free shelter, meals, and supportive and employment services.
Union Station also provides a 50-bed family homeless shelter located at 825 E. Orange Grove Blvd. in Pasadena. The Family Center is a place for nurturing place for families who are experiencing homelessness to rebuild their lives and achieve self-sufficiency. Residents meet weekly with a care coordinator and aim to move into permanent housing within 90 days. If an individual or a family experiencing homelessness is in dire need of emergency housing, Union Station may, able to provide emergency housing through a room voucher to a motel in Los Angeles County, depending on available rooms and funding. Based on funds or vouchers available, they provide motel vouchers to their clients who need emergency shelter and have exhausted all other resources (Source:
https://unionstationhs.org/programs).
4.3.3 Resources: Low Barrier Navigation Centers
Low barrier navigation centers (LBNC) are defined as a Housing First, low barrier, temporary, service-enriched shelter focused on helping homeless individuals and families to quickly obtain permanent housing. The purpose of a LBNC is to reduce or remove barriers to entry, including partners, pets, storage of personal items, and privacy. The City of San Marino does not currently have any known LBNCs. However, there are several LBNCs located in the County, with most of these centers located near downtown Los Angeles approximately 13 miles southwest of San Marino.
Although the City of San Marino has little to no homeless population, Program 3.7 requires the City to 123
PAGE 359 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 adopt an ordinance by the end of 2024 to address the requirements of Government Code section 65660. Pursuant to Government Code section 65660, the City must allow LBNCs by-right within zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses.
4.3.4 Resources: Transitional Housing
Transitional housing provides temporary lodging and is designed to move individuals and families into permanent housing within a specified period of time, no longer than 24 months. Although, the City of San Marino does not currently have any known transitional housing facilities., Program 3.11 is included in this Housing Element to amend the City Code to permit transitional housing within zones that allow for multi-family uses pursuant to the City’s objective design standards for multi-family residential developments. The closest transitional housing facilities are located in the Euclid Village Condominium complex in nearby Pasadena. Union Station also provides various bridge housing services locations in the San Gabriel Valley including Project Room Key, which was created in response to the Covid-19 pandemic. Project Room Key is a network of hotel and motel sites providing safe, temporary housing for those who at-risk of homelessness. These sites enable the most vulnerable community members to remain safe and healthy by complying with Los Angeles County’s safer-at-home ordinance. These sites are funded by Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
4.3.5 Resources: Supportive Housing
Supportive housing provides shelter and supportive services to homeless persons with a disability or mental illness. The Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority provides Safe Haven (SH) housing as temporary supportive housing for hard-to-reach homeless persons with severe mental illness that have been unwilling or unable to participate in supportive services, as well as Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) to assist homeless individuals with a disability or families in which one adult or child has a disability to live independently. Although. the City of San Marino does not currently have any known supportive housing facilities operating within the City, Program 3.11 is included to amend the City Code to permit supportive housing within zones that allow for multi-family uses pursuant to the City’s objective design standards for multi-family residential developments.
4.3.6 At‐Risk Assisted Housing Developments.
In compliance with Government Code §65583(a)(9), this section will report a zero inventory of atrisk units (10 years from the Housing Element due date). The City of San Marino contains no assisted housing developments, and therefore contains no at-risk assisted housing developments.
4.3.7 Planning and Zoning Incentives
AB 2345 provides developers with density bonuses or other incentives in exchange for the provision of affordable housing which meets certain requirements. As of January 2021, up to a 50% density bonus can be approved for housing projects consisting of a combination of affordable and Abovemoderate homes. The legislation also reduces specific thresholds for obtaining approvals and allowances from local jurisdictions, requires density bonus reporting, and reduces parking obligations for many projects qualifying for a density bonus. 124
PAGE 360 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
4.3.8 Special Needs Housing and Programs
This analysis discusses the gaps in special needs housing and locally available resources described above. Housing Element programs are identified in each subsection below to address these gaps and ensure special needs housing is adequately addressed by the City during the planning period.
Homeless
Individuals are considered homeless when they lack fixed and regular nighttime residences.
Homeless individuals may be unsheltered, including those living in tents, cars, makeshift shelters, or on the street, or sheltered, including those in emergency shelters or transitional shelters. By the most recent count, the City of San Marino has no homeless residents. Over the past four years, there has occasionally been up to one homeless resident in the City. (Source: Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, 2022).ꢀꢀThe City of San Marino, due to its suburban small-town character, and location off the main regional transportation network routes, does not experience the homelessness that is realized in other urban areas in the immediate region. Currently, there are no emergency shelters or housing for homeless persons in the City. The closest homeless shelter to San Marino is Union Station Homeless Services, which is located approximately 2 miles northwest of the City. This shelter provides 56 beds, meals, and supportive and employment services.
Due to the low number of unhoused persons in the City (0-1 person), the City does not consider the lack of housing for homeless individuals in the City to be a gap between existing resources and persons in need of an emergency shelter.
Pursuant to State law, this Housing Element includes programs to allow emergency shelters, low barrier navigation centers, transitional, and supportive housing to be permitted by-right in all zones that allow multi-family uses (e.g., without discretionary review or approval).
Disabled
As shown below in Figure 24, San Marino has 461 persons with an independent living disability, 248 with a self-care disability, 413 with an ambulatory disability, 229 with a vision disability, 199 with a cognitive disability, and 163 with a hearing disability. These numbers are not exclusive, as some residents have more than one type of disability. As shown below in Figure 25, the most commonly occurring disabilities among seniors 65 and older were independent living and ambulatory disabilities, each experienced by more than ten percent of San Marino’s seniors. From this data, the City determined that most disabled residents in the City, including seniors, have independent living disabilities and ambulatory disabilities.
Existing housing resources to accommodate independent living disabilities include ADUs and residential care facilities. Currently, there is at least one residential care facility with six or less bedrooms and no facilities with seven or more bedrooms. The City has approved approximately 100 ADU applications since the beginning of the planning period; however, it is unknown if these ADUs house persons with disabilities or caretakers of persons with disabilities.
Existing housing resources to accommodate ambulatory disabilities include the City’s reasonable accommodations procedure; however, this procedure requires discretionary approval. 125 PAGE 361 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Additionally, the City offers resources to disabled residents including their Wellness Check-in Call Program, where a member of City staff provides a weekly call to check-in, offer resources, and answer questions. The City participates in the Dial-A-Ride program for disabled residents whose disability prevents the use of regular public transit. The service is free for eligible residents.
FIGURE 24: DISABILITY BY TYPE
FIGURE 25: DISABILITY BY TYPE – SENIORS 65 AND OLDER
As shown in Figure 26 below, 19% of the population with a disability is employed compared to 65% of the population without a disability is employed. Additionally, 78% of the population with a disability is not in the labor force compared to 33% of the population without a disability not in the labor force. While this data may suggest that a person’s disability is what precludes employment or causes them not be in the labor force, the person’s age (younger than 18 or over 65) may also contribute to the lower employment numbers and higher not in labor force numbers when compared to the non-disabled population. Nevertheless, the data indicates that disabled people may be living on fixed-income sources (e.g., government assistance), which may result in a higher need for affordable housing options in the City.
126
PAGE 362 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 The City has approved approximately 100 ADU applications since the beginning of the planning period; however, it is unknown if these ADUs house persons with disabilities or the rental prices of these units.
With the exception of recent ADU development in the City, the City does not provide housing options that are more affordable than single-family homes.
FIGURE 26: DISABILITY BY EMPLOYMENT STATUS
Developmental Disabilities
The data above includes persons with developmental disabilities, which is defined as a severe and chronic disability attributable to a mental or physical impairments that begins before individuals reach adulthood (e.g., cerebral palsy, epilepsy, or autism). According to local housing data provided by SCAG (see Figure 27 below), 95 persons with developmental disabilities are 17 or younger and 45 persons are 18 or older. Additionally, SCAG data indicates that persons with developmental disabilities primarily live in the home of a parent, family member, or guardian (85 persons). Given this data, the City determined that most persons with developmental disabilities are children who live with a family member or guardian. During the planning period, some of these children will become adult-aged and will need access to housing and services serving the City’s adult-aged disabled population.
Adult-aged persons with developmental disabilities will likely need access to housing that provides daily supervision and care from a caretaker, such as ADUs and residential care facilities. Currently, there is at least one residential care facility with six or less bedrooms and no facilities with seven or more bedrooms. The City has approved approximately 100 ADU applications since the beginning of the planning period; however, it is unknown if these ADUs house persons with developmental disabilities or caretakers of persons with disabilities. 127
PAGE 363 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 27: DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITY
Given the above, persons with disabilities, including developmental disabilities, will need better access to affordable housing options, housing that provides increased access to care, and housing that is designed to accommodate special needs during the planning period.
This Housing Element includes a suite of programs to address the gap between existing resources and housing needs, including the following:
Programs 1.2 and 1.3 to facilitate development of affordable ADUs; Program 1.10 to incentivize housing projects to meet the City’s demonstrated housing needs for special needs populations, including the City’s disabled population; Program 3.1 to require ministerial approval of reasonable accommodation requests; Program 3.6 to incentivize the development of ADUs that incorporate universal design features (e.g., stepless entry, ground floor living, environmental controls at accessible heights);
Program 3.8 to permit residential care facilities with 7 or more persons; and Program 3.9 to amend the Zoning Code’s definition of “family” to allow property owners of single-family dwelling units to rent out rooms to family members or non-family members, including disabled persons, while also inhabiting the home; Elderly
According to the 2019 U.S. Census population estimates, about 21 percent of San Marino’s population are aged 65 and above. As shown earlier in Figure 3, a large and growing percentage of San Marino’s population is elderly; by the end of the Housing Element period, the 70-75 age group will be the most prevalent, followed by the 65-70, 60-65, and 55-60 age groups. Elderly persons often have fixed incomes in addition to other special needs related to housing and may require physical improvements to their homes such as ramps, handrails, lower cupboards and counters, creation of a downstairs bedroom, and other modifications to enable them to remain in their homes. They may also need additional assistance in the form of a part-time or live-in caretaker. 128
PAGE 364 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 28: ELDERLY HOUSEHOLDS BY INCOME AND TENURE
As shown in Figure 28 above, there are a considerable number of lower-income senior households in San Marino and most (89.2%) own their homes. In most instances the elderly would like to stay in their own homes rather than move to a retirement community or residential care facility. In San Marino, and particularly among the Asian community which comprise over 60% of the City’s population, it is common for multiple generations of a family to live together. As such, the development of ADUs, including ADUs with universal design features, and/or homesharing would likely best meet the housing needs of the City’s elderly residents. The City has approved approximately 100 ADU applications since the beginning of the planning period; however, it is unknown if these ADUs house elderly residents. Currently, there is at least one residential care facility with six or less bedrooms and no facilities with seven or more bedrooms. The City does not have a homesharing program.
Additionally, elderly residents may need more affordable housing options with less space to maintain, such as apartments and smaller units. Currently, there are no apartments in the City.
This Housing Element includes a suite of programs to address the gap between existing resources and housing needs, including the following:
Programs 1.2 and 1.3 to facilitate development of affordable ADUs; Program 1.7 to rezone the Stoneman site to Multi-Family Residential (RM1) and Program
1.14 to ensure the development of 49 very-low income units on the site; Program 1.8 to rezone parcels along Huntington Drive to Mixed-Use (MU-1 and MU-2) to allow for the development of multi-family housing;
Program 1.10 to incentivize housing projects to meet the City’s demonstrated housing needs for special needs populations, including the City’s elderly population; Program 1.17 to rezone church properties to the Religious Institution Housing (RIH) zone to allow for the development of very-low income housing on church properties; Program 3.1 to require ministerial approval of reasonable accommodation requests; Program 3.6 to incentivize the development of ADUs that incorporate universal design features (e.g., stepless entry, ground floor living, environmental controls at accessible heights);
Program 3.8 to permit residential care facilities with 7 or more persons; and 129
PAGE 365 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Program 3.9 to amend the Zoning Code’s definition of “family” to allow property owners of single-family dwelling units to rent out rooms to family members or non-family members, including disabled persons, while also inhabiting the home; Program 3.12 to implement a homesharing program and assist in matching tenants with existing home-owners.
Large Households
Large households (5 or more persons), whether by choice or need, are considered to have special needs because depending on the number of rooms in the unit, overcrowding can occur leading to substandard living conditions. Household size can be influenced by a lack of affordable housing options, an increase or decrease in family formations, or families leaving an area. Ethnicity can also affect sizes of households if a particular ethnic group has a tradition of living with family members upon retirement age. In San Marino, the average household size has continued to decrease, from 3.02 to 2.92 persons per household, while the number of smaller households (1-3 persons) has increased.
San Marino has a relatively small number of large households (5 or more persons), but when they do occur, they tend to be rental households (see Figure 29 below).
FIGURE 29: HOUSEHOLDS BY HOUSEHOLD SIZE
Source: SCAG Local Housing Data
In San Marino, and particularly among the Asian community, which comprise over 60% of the City’s population, it is common for multiple generations of a family to live together by choice (cultural preference). However, given the high housing costs in the City (median gross rents above $3,000 per month and most mortgages above $4,000 per month), large households may also be due to affordability constraints. In these cases, access to affordable housing is imperative to address large household housing needs.
The City has approved approximately 100 ADU applications since the beginning of the planning period; however, it is unknown if these ADUs are serving residents that came from large households.
With the exception of recent ADU development in the City, the City does not provide housing options that are more affordable than single-family homes.
This Housing Element includes a suite of programs to address the gap between existing resources and housing needs, including the following:
130
PAGE 366 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
Programs 1.2 and 1.3 to facilitate development of affordable ADUs; Program 1.7 to rezone the Stoneman site to Multi-Family Residential (RM1) and Program
1.14 to ensure the development of 49 very-low income units on the site; Program 1.8 to rezone parcels along Huntington Drive to Mixed-Use (MU-1 and MU-2) to allow for the development of multi-family housing; and
Program 1.17 to rezone church properties to the Religious Institution Housing (RIH) zone to allow for the development of very-low income housing on church properties; Female‐headed households
The housing needs of single parents may differ from two-parent households and should be considered as new housing is developed based on the programs of this housing element. Such households have a greater need for housing with convenient access to childcare facilities, public transportation, and other public facilities and services. Because the earning power of single-parent households is generally less than that of two-parent households that have potential for more than one income, single parents constitute a “special needs” group as they will tend to spend a higher percentage of their household income on housing that meets their families’ needs. In particular, women’s incomes continue to be statistically lower than their male counterparts despite some advancements made in recent years, and the historic discrimination in pay levels impacts the ability of female-headed single-parent households to afford appropriate housing. State law requires an analysis of female-headed households to ensure adequate childcare and job training resources.
As shown in Figure 30 below, of San Marino’s 4,566 households, only 8.8% were female-headed (compared to 14.3% in the SCAG region). Of the 8.8%, only 3.9% had children at home and none had children under age six. As shown in Figure 31 below, of the 6.1% of households living in poverty in the City, 3.1% (half) are female-headed households and 1.9% (a quarter) are female-headed households with children.
FIGURE 30: FEMALE‐HEADED HOUSEHOLDS
131
PAGE 367 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 31: HOUSEHOLDS BY POVERTY STATUS
Access to affordable housing is imperative to address female-headed household needs. The City has approved approximately 100 ADU applications since the beginning of the planning period; however, it is unknown if these ADUs are serving female-headed households. With the exception of recent ADU development in the City, the City does not provide housing options that are more affordable than single-family homes.
This Housing Element includes a suite of programs to address the gap between existing resources and housing needs, including the following:
Programs 1.2 and 1.3 to facilitate development of affordable ADUs; Program 1.7 to rezone the Stoneman site to Multi-Family Residential (RM1) and Program
1.14 to ensure the development of 49 very-low income units on the site; Program 1.8 to rezone parcels along Huntington Drive to Mixed-Use (MU-1 and MU-2) to allow for the development of multi-family housing; and
Program 1.17 to rezone church properties to the Religious Institution Housing (RIH) zone to allow for the development of very-low income housing on church properties; Farmworkers
Statewide, farmworker housing is of unique concern and importance. While only a small number of SCAG jurisdictions have farmworkers living in them, they are essential to the region’s economy and its food supply. According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), more than 80 percent of hired crop farmworkers are not migrant workers but are considered settled and work farm(s) within 75 miles of their residences. This share is up significantly from 41 percent in 1996- 1998, reflecting a fundamental change in the nature of the crop farming workforce. The majority of farmworkers in California reside in metropolitan areas, where the average hourly wage of $16.05 puts them in the extremely low to very-low-income category (between 30-50 percent of the area median income). The 2014 – 2018 ACS indicated that no farmworkers live in San Marino, and there is no nearby farmland that would indicate a need for farmworker housing in San Marino. According to the United States Department of Agriculture’s most recent Census of Agriculture, the County has 1,793 persons employed in the Agricultural Industry (farmworkers). Although there are 1,793 farmworkers in the County, the County is very large (4,751 square miles), and farmworkers are not evenly distributed within the County. As such, the number of farmworkers in the County is not useful 132
PAGE 368 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 for the City to address farmworker housing. However, Program 3.10 is included in this Housing Element to provide employee housing pursuant to the State Employee Housing Act.
4.4 HOUSING CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
This section of the Housing Element examines the constraints that could hinder the City’s achievement of its housing objectives and the resources that are available to assist in the production, maintenance, and improvement of the City’s housing stock.
4.4.1 Non‐Governmental Constraints
In compliance with Government Code §65583(a)(6) the following is an analysis of potential nongovernmental constraints:
Vacant Land
The City's vacant land supply is extremely limited. There are approximately 10 vacant residentially zoned parcels in the City, one of which has a building permit issued by the City for development of a single-family home. Since the City is built-out and there are no remaining subdividable parcels, subdivision standards do not form a constraint to development. The City’s established policies of maintaining excellent design standards and very low densities to maintain community character apply to all new development. With less than 10 vacant lots in the City, all of which are less than 0.5 acre, there is limited potential to develop new affordable housing units on vacant land within City limits and most new development must take place on non-vacant parcels. Additionally, many of the City’s non-vacant parcels are also less than a half-acre. Therefore, programs that incentivize lot consolidation for parcels less than a half-acre will be important for affordable housing development in the City.
Land Costs
The cost of land directly influences the cost of housing. In turn, land prices are determined by several factors, most importantly the availability of land. As previously noted, there are less than 10 vacant residential parcels in San Marino. Compared to surrounding jurisdictions, as well as the region, land prices in San Marino significantly constrain the production of housing. Table 22 23 below provides the land cost for a standardized ¼ acre residential lot in San Marino ($1,673,700) compared to the highest-cost jurisdictions in Los Angeles County and the immediate area around the City. San Marino consistently ranks among the top 100 most expensive zip codes in the nation; in 2019 it ranked 34th most expensive in the annual Price Shark survey. Land costs in San Marino are a significant constraint to the development of housing; this is a factor that is outside of the City’s control. Additionally, land cost in addition the City’s relatively small lot sizes and lack of available vacant land render San Marino unattractive for the development of affordable or market-rate housing.
The lack of available land also results in the need to develop residential uses on non-vacant land to accommodate the City’s RHNA. While developers have shown interest in mixed-use development, the City has struggled to revise its C-1 standards to specifically allow and set standards for mixed-use developments. The City only has one mixed-use development in the City comprising of 2 residential units. Therefore, it is evident that the City’s anticipated more residential development to occur in the City’s C-1 Zone during the previous planning than what actually was constructed. Additionally, as 133
PAGE 369 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 previously discussed, the City’s R-1 zone is almost completely built out and the 5th Cycle Housing Element anticipated that new units would have to be constructed in the form of ADUs or mixed-use developments in the City’s C-1 zone. As such, development requests for ADUs in the R-1 zone was anticipated by the City and requests to develop housing at densities below those anticipated by the City did not occur.
TABLE 2223: LAND COSTS IN SELECTED LA COUNTY ZIP CODES
City ZIP Code Land Value
(Per Acre, AsIs)
Land Value (1/4 Land Share of Home Price
Appreciation Rank
USA
Acre Lot, Property Value
Standardized)
Santa
Monica
90402 $15,511,600.00 $3,606,200.00 80.8% 160.7%
160.2%
157.3%
#3
Beverly 90210
Hills
$8,560,500.00
$5,574,100.00
$3,168,300.00
$1,673,700.00
74.1% #4
San 91108 69.8% #34
Marino
ꢀꢀSource: American Enterprise Institute 2019; Property Shark Most Expensive US Zip Codes 2019 Construction Costs
The cost of construction depends primarily on the cost of materials and labor, but it is also influenced by market demand and market-based changes in the cost of materials. The cost of construction depends on the type of unit being built and on the quality of the product being produced. Labor saving materials and construction techniques are available, but they tend to reduce the quality of the finished product. The type of product determines the cost of construction. The cost of labor is based on several factors, including housing demand, the number of contractors in an area and the unionization of workers, but it is two to three times the cost of materials.
Construction costs in the Los Angeles area are significantly higher than the state average with costs in San Marino higher still based on the high quality of living and design standards embraced by the community. According to the City’s Building Official, construction costs in San Marino are as high as $331 per square foot. Additionally, recent wildfires in the region have increased the demand for new construction, which in turn has driven up the cost of materials and resulted in a shortage of skilled labor. The construction cost of housing affects the affordability of new housing and is a significant constraint to housing in San Marino that is outside of the City’s control.
Financing
Interest rates are determined by national policies and economic conditions, and there is little that local governments can do to affect these rates. Government insured loan programs may be available to reduce mortgage down payment requirements.
First time homebuyers are the group affected the most by financing requirements. Mortgage interest rates for new home purchases ranged from 2.3% to 4.5% for a fixed rate 30-year loan in 2021. Lower 134
PAGE 370 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 initial rates are available with other mortgage types. Although rates are currently low, they can change significantly and substantially impact the affordability of the housing stock.
Interest rates at the present time are not a constraint to affordable housing. Financing for both construction and long-term mortgages is generally available in San Marino subject to normal underwriting standards. A more critical obstacle to homeownership involves both the affordability of the housing stock and the ability of potential buyers to fulfill down payment requirements. Typically, conventional home loans will require 5% to 20% of the sale price as a down payment, which is the largest constraint to first time homebuyers. This indicates a need for flexible loan programs and a method to bridge the gap between the down payment required and a potential homeowner's available funds.
According to local realtors, the market continues to experience many all cash offers for homes in San Marino. This makes it difficult for first time home buyers with minimal down payments to compete for a home. Anecdotal information received during the public input process for the Housing Element update indicated that smaller homes were almost always bought by “flippers” for cash with no intent to make it a home. Instead, the houses are enlarged and remodeled, then put back on the market for much higher prices where they sit vacant for months or even years. Vacancy rate data would seem to collaborate this anecdotal information. The City is exploring use of a subregional Housing Land Trust that could help to reduce this constraint.
Community Opposition
Many California homeowners, including those in San Marino, are resistant to new housing development, especially that of higher density, in their towns. Public input received during the Housing Element Update process identified an environment in which negative citizen input can make it difficult to build anything new or creative within the City, even if all zoning, development, and design guidelines are followed. Many residents are concerned that new development will negatively impact their quality of life by decreasing privacy, safety, property value, public health, or service levels.
A 2014 Housing Element program to consider amending the City’s commercial development standards to make it easier to build mixed-use projects was met with significant community opposition and the program was abandoned. As shown by the community opinion surveys, residents have mixed feelings about new housing development in San Marino. While many community members express support for more low-cost housing choices and the introduction of more residential uses in the commercial areas, there are a significant number of community members who feel that all of San Marino’s housing needs are being met and that there should be no changes made to the existing physical form of the City. Many respondents to the survey felt that no apartments should be built in San Marino. To help overcome this opposition, objective design and development standards will need to be adopted to provide for the ministerial review of qualified housing projects.
Community resistance can lead to a variety of constraints on housing development. Community members may pressure the Planning Commission and City Council to deny projects, and in some cases may also threaten legal action. This environment increases risk for developers and may discourage them from bringing development proposals to the City. It also means that development proposals, especially multifamily residential development or development at a higher density than 135 PAGE 371 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 currently exists, will likely require more time and resources in the development process to address community concerns. Constraints from community resistance in discretionary decision-making and design review processes made it even more important for the City to adopt objective design and development standards for multi-family residential projects, which were adopted in 2023.
As part of Program 1.9, the City will revise the adopted objective design standards for multi-family development in the H&C zone to ensure maximum densities can be achieved. Additionally, this Housing Element includes programs to establish new residential zones (e.g., RM1 and RIH) and new mixed-use zones (e.g., MU-1 and MU-2) to permit multi-family development in the City. As part of these programs, objective design standards will be prepared for each of these new zones. Multifamily projects that meet the requirements of the objective design standards will be processed ministerially and will not require a CUP or be subject to Planning Commission or DRC approval, which will significantly reduce constraints from high levels of community input and opposition.
Other
There are also non-governmental constraints that are generally related to the circumstances of a specific project, which can be difficult to quantify and predict. These types of constraints can result in significant time delays between when a project is approved and when applications for building permits are submitted, resulting in projects taking longer to construct and less residential units being constructed during the planning period. Additionally, these types of constraints can also result in projects not being constructed after the City has approved the project.
According to the City’s community development department, the length of time between project approval and application submittal for a building permit is approximately 41 days and a majority of the of approved projects eventually get built. This data is representative of the building industry in Southern California; therefore, these types of constraints are not anticipated to hinder the construction of new residential units in the City during the planning period.
4.4.2 Potential Governmental Constraints
Governmental constraints are policies, standards, requirements, or actions imposed by the various levels of government upon land and housing ownership and development. Although federal and state agencies play a role in the imposition of governmental constraints, these agencies are beyond the influence of local government and are therefore not addressed in this document.
General Plan and Zoning Code
Every city must have a General Plan that establishes policy guidelines for development within the City. The General Plan is the basis for land use decisions in a jurisdiction. The Land Use Element identifies the location, distribution and density of land uses in the City. In implementing the General Plan, the City of San Marino uses Zoning Regulations and the Subdivision Ordinance. General Plan densities are expressed as dwelling units per acre. The San Marino General Plan provides for three residential land use designations in the City, as shown in Table 2324. 136
PAGE 372 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 2324: RESIDENTIAL LAND USE CATEGORIES
Designation Density Range Description Acreage
585.29
Maximum
buildout
Low Density 0 - 2 du/ac Low-density single family 1,170 residential uses
Medium Density 2.1 - 4 du/ac Medium-density single family residential uses
1,032.95 4,131
High Density
TOTAL
4.1 - 6 du/ac High-density single family
residential uses
411.04 2,466
Total
2,029
7,767
Additional
Dwelling Units
Permitted by-right on any
residentially zoned lot
5,023
ADUs
Not applicable
8.7 du/ac
(ADUs)
Residential
Units in C-1
Zone
Residential uses at a density of one 36.14
residential unit per 5,000 SF of land
area, with Conditional Use Permit
314
Source:ꢀꢀCity of San Marino, 2021
Hypothetically, a total of 7,767 dwelling units could be accommodated within the existing City limits, based on build-out of all residentially designated acreage at the maximum of the density range.
Because of lot configurations, however, the City is considered built-out at its current 5,023 dwelling units. The amount of single-family housing stock within the City is not expected to increase beyond the stated maximum build-out of the General Plan. Future growth could only be realized through the provision of ADUs unless new programs are developed.
Density
Density is a critical factor in the development of affordable housing. Maintaining low densities typically increases housing costs per unit, while higher densities lower the per unit land cost. This situation is amplified in San Marino: the land share of property values is nearly 70 percent and the 2019 standardized value for a quarter-acre lot was $1,673,700, making San Marino the 3rd most expensive zip code in the SCAG region and the 34th most expensive in the nation. San Marino’s current highest allowable density is 6.0 dwelling units per acre in residential areas, and about 8.7 units per acre in commercial areas. No multi-family is currently allowed. The City’s founding vision of San Marino as a high quality, low density residential community, together with the fact that it was essentially built out by 1970, has helped to drive up the land costs and results in a market cost for housing in the City that is well beyond the reach of median- or moderate-income households. As reflected in the census data, this has resulted in a sharp decrease of population in the 20-40 age 137
PAGE 373 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 brackets because first-time homebuyers cannot afford San Marino. There are currently no residential designations in the City which permit the density of development that will accommodate multi-family housing that might be affordable to Very Low- and Low-income households and rezoning to allow the City’s default density of 20 units per acre will be required.
Zoning
Zoning, which must be consistent with the General Plan, establishes more specific development standards, allowable uses, and limitations. Zoning regulations control development by establishing requirements related to height, density, lot area, yard setbacks, and minimum parking spaces. Site development standards are comparable to other community requirements and ensure a quality living environment for all household groups in the City. Design standards such as roofing materials, architectural enhancements, and landscaping may also increase the costs of housing. The City's perspective is that all housing should meet the same fundamental high quality design standards.
The City of San Marino's Zoning Code currently contains eight residential zone district classifications within the Residential R-1 Zone that accommodate a range of densities and lot size requirements from 60,000 square feet to 9,000 square feet per unit, as shown in Table 2425. Additionally, residential units may be allowed in the C-1 Zone with a CUP (Conditional Use Permit) and a requirement for 5,000 square feet of land area per residential unit, resulting in allowable densities of
8.7 units per acre.
138
PAGE 374 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 2425: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ‐ CITY OF SAN MARINO
Minimum
Avg.
Width of
Lot
Minimum
Street
Frontage
Permitted Minimum Maximum Front Interior
Setbackꢀꢀ
Rear
Zone Uses Setback
SingleR1 – IE family
dwellings
Lot Area Height Setback
60,000 35 ft. 40 ft. 20 ft. 40 ft.
40 ft.
40 ft.
40 ft.
35 ft.
30 ft.
25 ft.
25 ft.
125 ft.
125 ft.
100 ft.
100 ft.
85 ft.
100 ft.
100 ft.
80 ft.
80 ft.
70 ft.
70 ft.
60 ft.
60 ft.
Singlefamily
dwellings
Singlefamily
dwellings
Singlefamily
dwellings
SingleR1- I 30,000
20,000
17,000
15,000
12,000
10,000
9,000
35 ft.
35 ft.
30 ft.
30 ft.
30 ft.
30 ft.
30 ft.
40 ft.
40 ft.
40 ft.
35 ft.
30 ft.
25 ft.
25 ft.
20 ft.
12 ft.
12 ft.
10 ft.
8 ft.
R1 - II
R1- III
R1 – IV family
dwellings
Singlefamily
dwellings
SingleR1 – V 80 ft.
R1 – VI family
dwellings
5 ft. 70 ft.
SingleR1 – VII family 5 ft. 60 ft.
dwellings
8 ft. for singleSingle- story
family
dwellings
with CUP
buildings
18 ft. for
multi-story
buildings
C-1 5,000 30 ft. 25 ft. 20 ft. - 60 ft.
Source: City of San Marino, 2021
139
PAGE 375 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Parking Requirements
Parking requirements in San Marino are typical for a city of its size and character, as shown in Table 2526. The number of parking spaces required for a single-family unit is related to number of bedrooms. These characteristics do not constrain the development of housing directly, although a greater amount of acreage is required for meeting parking requirements as the number of bedrooms increase.
For residential uses within a Commercial Zone, the parking requirements will be determined by the Planning Commission, based upon either the requirements for the most comparable use specified in the Zoning Code, or upon a special study of parking requirements for that use. The City does have joint use provisions subject to approval of a CUP. The requirements for parking do not directly constrain the development of housing for single-family uses. As zoning changes are made to allow more residential units in commercial areas and to allow multi-family housing, new parking requirements will need to be adopted consistent with state laws.
TABLE 2526: RESIDENTIAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS
Type of Residential Development
Single Family Residential
1 – 4 bedrooms
Required Parking Spaces1 Comments
2 spaces
5 – 6 bedrooms 3 spaces
Plus, one space per every 2
additional bedrooms
7 and above bedrooms 4 spaces
ADU 1 space2
JADU None
To be determined by special
parking study or application of
requirements for a similar use
Residential Units in the C-1 Zone Not Specified
1 All required spaces must be within an enclosed garage; carports are prohibited. 2 Off-street; not subject to enclosed garage requirement Source:ꢀꢀCity of San Marino, 2021
Density Bonus Law
In general, this state law provides developers with density bonuses or other incentives in exchange for the provision of affordable housing which meets certain requirements. San Marino does not currently have its own density bonus ordinance and will comply with the provisions of the State Density Bonus law when or if such a project arises. This Housing Element includes Program 1.10, which requires the City to adopt an ordinance to address the recent changes made to the State’s density bonus law by the end of 2024.
Given that there is no subdividable land and no multi-family housing in San Marino, the City has not yet received an application for a project that would be subject to these laws. The City will review its existing provisions to ensure consistency with the revised density bonus programs under state law.
As part of the zoning code update for Program 1.10, the City will identify the Community Development Director as the deciding authority for density bonus requests. 140
PAGE 376 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Provisions for a Variety of Housing Types
San Marino has expanded its opportunities for different types of housing since the previous planning cycle. A table showing the Zone Districts where housing is allowed is included below:
TABLE 2627: SAN MARINO ZONES WHERE HOUSING IS ALLOWED
Zone District
C-1
Permitted Residential Uses
Emergency shelters.
Residential Uses Subject to Use Permit
Projects with up to 1 residential unit
for each 5,000 SF of lot area.
Historical and Housing for employees of on-site uses
Cultural Zone
Replacement or new residential
structure (unless damaged or
destroyed by natural disasters)
R-1 zones Single family homes; accessory dwelling None. units; junior accessory dwelling units.
Source: City of San Marino, 2021
A. Accessory Dwelling Units
In response to state mandated requirements and local needs, the City of San Marino allows for the development of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). The City strives to ensure the availability of affordable housing for family members, students, and the elderly, among others, while mitigating impacts to traffic, utilities, public health, and safety, and preserving the character of residential neighborhoods. ADUs and JADUs are permitted on single family residential lots without discretionary approval. Any application for an ADU that meets the location and development standards contained in City Code Section 23.02.25(G) is approved following a ministerial review for compliance, and within sixty (60) days after submission of a complete application.
The Zoning Code requires:
The ADU/JADU may be located only on residentially zoned lots; One ADU may be constructed on a lot zoned to allow residential use; One JADU may be constructed on a lot zoned to allow residential use; One JADU and one ADU may be constructed on a single-family residential lot where the JADU and ADU meet the requirements in Government Code Section 65852.2(e); For safety purposes, new ADUs and JADUs may only be located on a residential lot that has:
o
o
At least a 10-foot-wide fire lane within 150 feet of the subject property; and A minimum fire flow of 1,000 gallons per minute.
This restriction shall not apply to ADUs and JADUs that are exempt from planning review; The ADU/JADU shall not be sold separately from the primary residence; If the ADU/JADU is rented, it shall not be rented for a period of less than 90 consecutive days; Owner-occupancy is required for parcels with a JADU;
The ADU/JADU shall be restricted to the Livable Area approved at the time of the building permit issuance; and
The ADU/JADU may not have utility services separate from those of the main residential structure on the same property.
141
PAGE 377 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element
ADU Development Standards:
August 2024
ADUs are limited to a maximum of two bedrooms.
Studio and one-bedroom ADUs shall not exceed 850 square feet of Livable Area.
Two Bedroom ADUs shall not exceed 1,000 square feet of Livable Area.
A Detached ADU shall not exceed 1000 square feet of Livable Area and shall not exceed one story or sixteen feet (16’) in height.
An ADU shall include a kitchen for cooking and eating and other permanent provisions for living and sleeping, including a closet or other reasonable storage area.
Exterior lighting shall be shielded or directed so that it does not glare off-site or illuminate the primary residence or any adjacent property.
Windows shall be located to avoid direct line of sign to windows of adjacent properties.
An ADU shall have a separate exterior access and to the greatest extent feasible, shall not be visible from the street.
Any common wall separating the accessory dwelling unit from the main building shall be soundproofed.
A permanent foundation shall be required for all ADUs.
One off-street parking space shall be provided for each ADU except when:
o
o
The ADU is located within a one-half mile walking distance of Public Transit.
The ADU is entirely within a proposed or existing primary dwelling or other existing structure.
o The ADU is located within an historic district.
The design of the second unit shall be consistent with that of the main building; and The ADU must be served by its own parking space.
An ADU may not have separate utility services.
JADU Development standards:
The Owner of a parcel proposed for a JADU shall occupy as a principal residence either the Single-Family Dwelling Unit or the JADU. Owner-occupancy shall not be required if the Owner is another governmental agency, land trust, or housing organization.
The JADU shall be a minimum of 150 square feet and a maximum of 500 square feet of Livable Area.
The JADU must be contained entirely within the walls of the existing or proposed Single Family Dwelling Unit.
The JADU shall include an efficiency kitchen.
The JADU shall have a separate entry from the main entrance to the Single-Family Dwelling.
An interior entry to the main living area shall be provided to serv a JADU.
No additional parking is required for a JADU.
B. Manufactured Housing
The City has allowed manufactured, prefabricated, and mobile home construction in its R-1 Zone since 1996. No manufactured housing currently exists in the City. It is subject to the same development standards as otherwise required for that zone. Certain additional requirements are included in the City Code:
142
PAGE 378 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
Minimum Dimensions: Thirty feet (30') (excluding garage).
Roof: Pressure treated, fire retardant wood shake or shingle, 300# or heavier composition shingle, clay or cement tile, rock, or gravel; shaped, rolled, or reflective roofs are prohibited.
Eaves: Minimum sixteen-inch (16") eave protection unless otherwise approved by the Commission.
Exterior Wall Treatment:
o
o
o
Permitted Materials: Wood siding, stucco, brick or as approved by the Commission.
Color: Natural earth tones, white, with complementary trim color.
Prohibited Materials: No reflective, glossy, polished, roll-formed, stamped, extruded, plastic, PVC or similar type of materials shall be used for roofing or siding.
Foundation Required: All manufactured homes shall be installed on a foundation system, pursuant to section 18551 of the California Health and Safety Code, and no more than ten (10) years shall have elapsed between the date of manufacture of the home and the date of the application for issuance of a permit to install the manufactured home in the City.
Design Review: Such manufactured homes shall meet all other requirements of this Code and are subject to design review.
C. Emergency Shelters
In accordance with State Law and as set forth in City Code 23.03.01(I) (1-9), emergency shelters are permitted in the C-1 Zone in accordance with the provisions set forth in Government Code 65583 (a) (4) (B). Additionally, pursuant to Government Code 65583 (a) (4) (A), the City will permit emergency shelters by-right in zones that allow multi-family uses. Program 3.4 is included in this Housing Element to amend the City Code’s provisions for emergency shelters to be consistent with the requirements of Government Code 65583 (a) (4) (B). With Program 3.4, the City’s Code will include the following objective development requirements for emergency shelters in zones that allow multifamily uses:
A minimum distance of three hundred feet (300’) shall be maintained from any other emergency shelter.
The maximum stay at the facility shall not exceed ninety (90) days in a three hundred and sixty-five (365) day period.
On site client waiting and intake areas shall be located inside the building.
A minimum of one manager, in addition to security personnel, shall be on duty and remain on site during intake hours.
Security personnel shall be provided on site when the shelter is open.
Exterior lighting shall be provided for the entire outdoor area of the site consistent with the provisions of The Code. Exterior lighting shall be stationary and shall be directed away from adjacent properties and public rights of way.
One parking space for each employee/volunteer on duty during the largest shift, shall be maintained.
Hours of operation for client intake and discharge shall comply with The Code.
There are currently no emergency shelters in the City. Small areas on Huntington Drive and Mission Street are zoned for commercial uses and most of these commercially-zoned parcels are already developed with commercial uses. However, the City’s C-1 zone and zones that allow multi-family uses 143
PAGE 379 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 have sufficient capacity to accommodate at least one emergency shelter pursuant to the development standards identified above.
The City has identified vacant parcel (APN 5335-007-001) located at 810 Huntington Drive as a potential site for an emergency shelter. This site is a rectangular shaped, approximately 0.27-acre parcel (or 12,120 square-foot parcel) with residential uses to the south (across an alley street) and west (across N. Granada Avenue) and commercial uses immediately west and to the north (across Huntington Drive). As an example, to accommodate a ten bed shelter, the site would have to be large enough to accommodate a total of 500 square feet of bed space (10 beds at approximately 50 square feet required for each bed) and 360 square feet of parking space (2 spaces at approximately 180 square feet required for each parking space). Given that the site is 12,120 square feet, the site is large enough to accommodate the total bed space, parking space, and other areas within the shelter, including but not limited to the waiting and intake area, administrative office space, and bathrooms.
Therefore, the City has sufficient capacity to accommodate at least one emergency shelter should the need to construct an emergency shelter arise during the planning period.
D. Transitional Housing and Supportive Housing
Currently, there are no transitional or permanent supportive housing developments in the City. In accordance with Government Code section 65660, this Housing Element includes Program 3.7 to permit low barrier navigation centers by-right in zones where multi-family and mixed-uses are permitted. Additionally, in accordance with Government Code section 65651, this Housing Element includes Program 3.11 to add transitional housing and supportive housing as permitted uses in zones where multi-family uses are permitted.
E. Residential Care Facility
Licensed residential care facilities are state licensed facilities maintained and operated to provide non-medical residential care, day treatment, or foster agency services for six or fewer adults, children, or adults and children. State law requires that these facilities be treated as a single housekeeping unit for zoning purposes. Licensed residential care facilities with six or fewer bedrooms are permitted by-right (without discretionary approval) in the R-1 Zone in accordance with State law. This Housing Element includes Program 3.13 to amend the Zoning Code to permit unlicensed residential care facilities with six or fewer bedrooms by-right (without discretionary approval) in the R-1 Zone. The City currently has at least one residential care facility in the R-1 Zone.
Non-licensed residential care facilities with seven or more bedrooms are considered transitory residential uses and are prohibited within the R-1 Zone and permitted within the C-1 Zone with a CUP pursuant to San Marino Municipal Code Sections 23.02.01 and 23.03.01, respectively. Currently, there are no residential care facilities serving seven or more people in the City. Program 3.8 is included in this Housing Element to allow for non-licensed residential care facilities with seven or more bedrooms to be a use permitted by-right without a CUP in zones that allow multi-family uses pursuant to the same objective design requirements prescribed for multi-family residential projects.
F. SRO (Single Room Occupancy) Housing
While the City of San Marino does not specifically address this use within the zoning code. the C-1 Commercial Zone allows residential uses with the issuance of a conditional use permit. The Code currently allows one residential unit per 5,000 square feet of land. Market conditions and the 144
PAGE 380 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 relatively small size of C-1 zoned parcels are the likely factors as to why higher density housing has not been pursued in the City.
To remove potential constraints to SRO housing, Program 1.6 is included in this Housing Element to revise the City’s Municipal Code to allow SRO development by-right in zones that allow multi-family housing as long as at least 20% of units affordable to low-income households and design and development standards are met.
G. Farmworker Housing/Employee Housing
Statewide, farmworker housing is of unique concern and importance. While only a small number of SCAG jurisdictions have farmworkers living in them, they are essential to the region’s economy and its food supply. According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), more than 80 percent of hired crop farmworkers are not migrant workers but are considered settled and work farm(s) within 75 miles of their residences. This share is up significantly from 41 percent in 1996- 1998, reflecting a fundamental change in the nature of the crop farming workforce. The majority of farmworkers in California reside in metropolitan areas, where the average hourly wage of $16.05 puts them in the extremely low to very-low-income category (between 30-50 percent of the area median income).
According to the United Stated Department of Agriculture, the average age of the agricultural workforce has risen significantly in the last few years and now stands at 41.6 years. A growing percentage (26.1%) are women. While the median farm size in Los Angeles County is only four acres, there are 25 “large” farms of 500 acres or more that rely on farmworkers (2017 County summary highlights, USDA). Most of the large farms in Los Angeles County are located in or near the PalmdaleLancaster area, and not near San Marino. (California Important Farmland: 2016, CA DOC. Lands identified here are indicated as being used for agriculture in the last four years in the Farmlands Mapping and Monitoring Program.) The 2014 – 2018 ACS indicated that no farmworkers live in San Marino, and there is no nearby farmland that would indicate a need for farmworker housing in San Marino. If employee housing were to be proposed under the Employee Housing Act, it would be allowed as a residential use so long as the program was licensed and administered by HCD.
Building Codes and Enforcement
A variety of building and safety codes, while adopted for purposes of preserving public health and safety, and ensuring the construction of safe and decent housing, have the potential to increase the cost of housing construction or maintenance.
The City of San Marino has adopted the California Building Code, 2019 edition, based on the 2018 International Building Code as published by the International Code Council. The Codes are based on regulations necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. The Building Codes and related amendments do not seem to impede the development of housing. Many newer requirements such as fire safety systems and green building requirements had been implemented by residents prior to being required.
Code enforcement is conducted by way of Code Enforcement Officers patrolling the City and investigating complaints received. The main issue that Code Enforcement addresses is construction or remodeling without permits. Very rarely are substandard housing conditions or other health and 145 PAGE 381 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 safety issues identified. The City’s older housing stock is very well maintained. The City’s Code Enforcement program is comprised of two full-time officers, one part-time officer, and one division manager and is able to adequately address issues of substandard and unsafe housing should those issues arise during the planning period. Additionally, this Housing Element includes Program 2.1, which requires code enforcement officers to receive training on substandard and unsafe housing conditions and adhere to the requirements of AB 838 to ensure code violations are addressed by the property owner in a timely manner.
To address the main code enforcement issue of not obtaining necessary permits to remodel homes or construct ADUs, this Housing Element includes programs that require the City to educate the public on the development process and distribute informational materials regarding ADU development to promote the legal construction of ADUs (see Programs 1.2, 1.4, and 1.11).
Housing for People with Disabilities
Americans with Disabilities Act
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) provisions include requirements for a minimum percentage of units in new multi-family developments to be fully accessible to the physically disabled. Development of fully accessible units may also increase the overall project costs. Enforcement of ADA requirements is not at the discretion of the City but is mandated under federal law. The provisions of the ADA applicable to residential uses would apply only to multi-family developments and any residential development in a Commercial Zone.
Compliance with building codes and the ADA may increase the cost of housing production. However, these regulations provide minimum standards that must be followed to ensure the development of safe and accessible housing. Therefore, the local enforcement of these codes does not significantly constrain the development of housing.
Accessible Development
The City has seen an increase in projects such as handicapped accessible bathrooms, elevators, and first floor master suites. These items are treated in the same manner as any other project in terms of fees, permitting, and processing.
Residential Care Facilities
Licensed residential care facilities with six or fewer bedrooms are permitted by-right in the R-1 zone and treated in the manner as a single-family home.
Non-licensed residential care facilities with seven or more bedrooms are considered transitory residential uses and are prohibited within the R-1 Zone; however, they are permitted within the C-1 Zone with CUP pursuant to San Marino Municipal Code Sections 23.02.01 and 23.03.01, respectively.
To reduce zoning constraints on housing for persons with disabilities, new Program 3.8 is included in this Housing Element to amend the Zoning Code to allow for non-licensed residential care facilities with seven or more bedrooms in zones that allow multi-family development without a CUP pursuant to the same objective design requirements prescribed for multi-family residential projects.
Implementation of Program 3.8 will remove potential zoning constraints on housing for persons with disabilities.
146
PAGE 382 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 The City’s aging population, which includes residents with disabilities related to vision and mobility, will need to be accommodated within this eight-year planning period. Pursuant to Program 3.5, the City will adopt a Universal Design program and apply building techniques to new and remodeled dwellings to ensure that residents can age in place and that homes are designed for all stages of life.
Reasonable Accommodation
The City has also adopted a reasonable accommodation ordinance as codified in Section 23.01.10 of the San Marino Municipal Code. Under the ADA, cities must reasonably modify policies when necessary to avoid discrimination because of disability, unless they can show that the modifications “would fundamentally alter the nature of the service, program or activity.” (28 Code of Federal Regulations 35.130(b)(7).) In general, the law states that local agencies retain their ability to regulate land uses and to apply neutral, non-discriminatory regulations, but are required to make accommodations to allow persons with disabilities an equal opportunity to use and enjoy housing in the community.
The City’s reasonable accommodation ordinance establishes a process for considering these types of accommodations and provides findings that must be met for an application to be approved as a reasonable accommodation. The process includes filing an application form specified by the planning and building director. The application shall not include a filing fee, unless the project requires additional discretionary permits. Once filed, the Planning Commission shall review and approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application in accordance with the same notice, hearing, and appeal procedures prescribed for a conditional use permit. The Planning Commission’s decision shall be made in writing and shall be based on the following findings:
1. The requested accommodation is requested by or on the behalf of one or more individuals with a disability protected under the fair housing laws.
2. The requested accommodation is necessary to provide one or more individuals with a disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.
3. The requested accommodation will not impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the city as "undue financial or administrative burden" is defined in fair housing laws and interpretive case law.
4. The requested accommodation will not result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of the city's zoning program, as "fundamental alteration" is defined in fair housing laws and interpretive case law.
5. The requested accommodation will not, under the specific facts of the case, result in a direct threat to the health or safety of other individuals or substantial physical damage to the property of others.
This process makes it easier for a resident to obtain approval for an accommodation, such as a wheelchair ramp or front yard parking space, which may not otherwise meet the Code requirements.
Two reasonable accommodations were requested during the previous planning period (2014-2021) and both were granted within a reasonable time frame (e.g., 2 months).
As described above, reasonable accommodation requests require discretionary approval, similar to a CUP. The City understands that reasonable accommodation should be a unique exception process from a CUP, especially given its importance in addressing barriers to housing for persons with 147
PAGE 383 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 disabilities. This Housing Element includes Program 3.1 to revise the City’s reasonable accommodation ordinance to require ministerial approval of reasonable accommodate applications in accordance with the required findings by the end of 2024.
Additionally, given the City’s elderly population, many of which have ambulatory disabilities, the City intends to take a more proactive approach to meeting elderly and disabled needs by adopting a Universal Design program (Program 3.5) and incentivizing the incorporation of universal design techniques in new construction (Programs 1.3 and 3.6).
Zoning Code Definition of “Family”
The City’s Zoning Code defines “family” as “an immediate family related by blood, marriage or adoption, or a group of individuals who are unrelated and live together as a single housekeeping unit in a dwelling unit. This shall not include an individual paying rent to a landlord for the purpose of temporarily residing in a dwelling unit.”
This definition may constrain housing for persons with disabilities because it would prohibit any person, including a disabled person, from renting a room from a property owner of a single-family dwelling unit who also resides in the unit. Depending on the disability, persons with disabilities may be dependent on care and assistance and cannot live alone; therefore, by not allowing a person to rent a room from a property owner who resides in the home represents a potential constraint on for persons with disabilities. As such, Program 3.9 requires the City to remove this constraints by amending the Zoning Code’s definition for “family” by removing “This shall not include an individual paying rent to a landlord for the purpose of temporarily residing in a dwelling unit”.
Development and Permitting Fees
Various fees and assessments are charged by the City and other agencies to cover the cost of processing development permits and providing local services. These fees help ensure quality development and the provision of adequate public services. The City is legally required to set permit and development fees in amounts that are no more than equal the cost of providing services associated with these fees. The City recently conducted a comprehensive fee study to ensure the cost of providing the services was consistent with the required fee for those services. San Marino is a largely developed, suburban jurisdiction with most of its necessary infrastructure such as streets, electrical, sewer and water facilities in place. Aside from fees collected to offset public school impacts and General Plan maintenance, the City does not require impact fees to make the necessary land improvements to accommodate development. The City does not maintain a different fee schedule for single family or multi-family units.
Development and permitting fees are not believed to be a constraint to housing development in the City. In fact, based on informal input from local contractors, San Marino has reasonable permit fees that are lower than other surrounding cities. Table 27 28 displays the San Marino Community Development Department Fee Schedule. This is a comprehensive list of fees. The City does not charge any development impact fees. School fees are required per State law. Average fees per single-family dwelling are displayed in Table 2829; these fees are generally lower than all surrounding jurisdictions.
148
PAGE 384 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 2728: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FEE SCHEDULE Item/Permit Type
Planning Fees
Base Fee Basis for Valuation/Square Foot Cost
Design Review Committee
- Major $865
$285
N/A
N/A
- Minor
Variance Application
Minor Variance
Major Variance
$1,260
$2,450
Creation of 300-foot Radius $65
Ownership List
$145
Minor Exception
Conditional Use Permit Application
Minor CUP $1,420
$3,165
$65
N/A
Major CUP
Creation of 300-foot Radius
Ownership List
Subdivisions or Lot-Splits
Rezone or Boundary Change
Lot Line Adjustment
$2,175 + $2,000
deposit
N/A
$5,000 deposit + N/A
hourly costs
$295 + $2,000 deposit N/A
Modification to Variance or
Conditional Use Permit
$955 N/A
Appeals N/A
To Planning Commission
To City Council
$805
$805
Negative Declaration Fee $830 N/A
149
PAGE 385 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 2728: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FEE SCHEDULE Item/Permit Type Base Fee Basis for Valuation/Square Foot Cost Inspection Fees
Residential Compliance Inspection $65 N/A
Reports
Special Inspections $160 each
$95 each
N/A
Certificate of Use and Occupancy N/A
Permits, Plan Check, & School Facility
Fees
Building Permit – Dwellings Based on square
footage/ valuation of
work
Type V Wood Frame Additions or
Alterations - $125.00/sq. ft.
Basements - $83/sq. ft.
Garages - $36.00/sq. ft.
Processing $28.70
$3.00
Patio Covers - $36.00/sq. ft.
Block Walls - $11.00 - 13
.00/sq. ft., depending on height.
Microfilming
Electrical Permit
Processing $28.70 Per fixture charge
Microfilming
Other Fees
$3.00
Per electrical permit
schedule
Mechanical Permit
Processing $28.70
Microfilming
Other Fees
$3.00 Per fixture charge
Per mechanical permit
schedule
Plumbing Permit
Processing $28.70
150 PAGE 386 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 2728: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FEE SCHEDULE Item/Permit Type
Microfilming
Other Fees
Base Fee Basis for Valuation/Square Foot Cost
$3.00 Per fixture charge
Per plumbing permit
schedule
Swimming Pool or Spa
Processing $28.70
$3.00
Swimming Pool - $120.00 each
Spa - $60.00 each
N/A
Microfilming
Plan Check Fee Based on valuation of
work
Grading
Plan Check
Permit
Hourly rate from
consultant
N/A
Based on valuation
Solar Panel System $500 Flat fee (permit and plan check) School Facility Fees (applies only to N/A
increase in square footage of 500 sq.
ft. or more)
$3.79/sq. ft. for
projects over
500 sq. ft.
Education Fee 3% of building permit N/A
cost
General Plan Maintenance Fee
Source: City of San Marino, 2021
7% of building permit N/A
cost
151 PAGE 387 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 2829: AVERAGE PLAN CHECK AND PERMIT FEES FOR A NEW HOUSE Fee Average Fees for a New Single-Family House
Plan Check (Building)
Plan Check (Planning)
$4,319
$200
Grading (Plan Check and Permit)
Demo
$757.44
$191.69
$4,280.23
$298.11
$249.46
$385.44
$473.25
$531.96
$5286.13
$16,973.26
Building Permit
Mechanical Permit
Electrical Permit
Plumbing Permit
Fire Sprinkler (Plan Check and Permit)
Fire Alarm (Plan Check and Permit)
School Fees
TOTAL
Source: City of San Marino, 2021
ꢀꢀꢀꢀꢀꢀꢀꢀ
Compared to new houses, Accessory Dwelling Units have lower development costs because they take advantage of already-existing infrastructure and can also be created within an existing structure.
Instead of calculating average costs, a typical one-bedroom ADU of 600 square feet was considered for the fees in Table 29 30 below. Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs) have no development or school fees.
TABLE 2930: AVERAGE PLAN CHECK AND PERMIT FEES FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT Fee Approximate fees for a new ADU
Plan Check (Building)
Plan Check (Planning)
Building Permit
$818.75
$200
$966.56
$84.50
$47.00
$89
Mechanical Permit
Electrical Permit
Plumbing Permit
Fire Sprinkler (Plan Check and Permit)
Fire Alarm (Plan Check and Permit)
School Fees
$473.25
$531.96
$1,920
TOTAL $5,131.02
Source: City of San Marino, 2021
These appear to be reasonable fees given the scope of work for projects in San Marino. Development fees do not seem to impede development in San Marino. The much larger cost involved in developing homes is the high cost of land in San Marino. Because the land cost is removed from the cost of an ADU or JADU on a parcel with an existing home, these housing types have the best potential to be constructed and rented within an affordable range.
152 PAGE 388 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Local Processing and Permit Procedures
The City of San Marino's development approval process is designed to accommodate and not hinder development. Other than legally required public hearing notice and environmental review periods, developers and property owners are not hindered by “down time” in application processing. All new homes, including single-family homes, require Design Review Committee approval, which is a public hearing process. This helps ensure that new homes are compatible with the neighborhood and do not negatively impact the neighbors. The City has Residential and Commercial Design Guidelines which encourage the use of certain design features and materials. The Guidelines are not requirements but assist applicants in designing a project that will move more quickly through the approval process.
The Design Review Committee also holds “open forum” sessions where applicants can get informal, preliminary feedback on a design, which will also help facilitate the approval process.
The design review process consists of the applicant filing an application, processing fee ($865) and one set of plans. Staff then reviews the proposal and responds with a letter indicating any code issues or design concerns that should be addressed. After the applicant addresses the comment letter, they submit eight copies of the revised plan set, which are distributed to the Design Review Committee for their review. Once the revised plan set is submitted, staff assigns the project to the next available agenda and notices the project for a public hearing. This process typically takes about 8 weeks (about 2 months) in total. Once the project is approved, the applicant could submit for building plan check after the 15-day appeal period has expired (Source: City of San Marino, 2021).
The City has adopted Residential Design Guidelines to guide residents as well as review by the DRC (Design Review Committee). The purpose of these design guidelines is to provide a clear and concise summary of the City’s design policies for projects within the City’s residential neighborhoods. The guidelines address neighborhood compatibility, site development, physical design components, and landscaping.
Certain projects that exceed Code allowances or otherwise require an additional level of review will require either a Variance or Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Currently, multi-family projects in the zones where multi-family uses are allowed require a CUP (e.g., C-1 and H&C zones).
These applications are heard by the Planning Commission. If the project also requires Design Review, the Planning Commission will review both actions. City staff tries to work with applicants ahead of time to determine the feasibility of their proposed project. Staff tries to guide applicants toward a solution that has the best chances of approval. Depending on the complexity of the project, initial Community Development Department review for new construction requiring Design Review Committee (DRC) or Planning Commission review averages approximately three to four weeks.
Table 30 31 illustrates the approximate local processing times for developments in San Marino, in line with the requirements of the State Permit Streamlining Act of 1992. 153 PAGE 389 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 3031: LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING TIME
Item Approximate Length of Time from Submittal to
Public Hearing
45-90 days
30-90 days
45-90 days
45-90 days
45-90 days
45-90 days
60 days
Conditional Use Permit
Design Review
Tentative Tract Map/Parcel Map/Subdivision
Variance
Zoning Amendments or Zone Change
General Plan Amendment
Environmental Initial Study
Negative Declaration 90-180 days
Environmental Impact Report 1 year*
Source: City of San Marino, 2021
NOTE: If the applicant modifies the application, or if the applicant submits a written request for a time extension, the maximum time period for review may be extended for up to 90 additional days. *Upon mutual consent of the Director and the project sponsor, this one‐year time limit may be extended once for a period of not more than 90 days pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15108.
Table 30 31 identifies the approximate time from submittal to the initial public hearing. Since projects may require more than one hearing before the Planning Commission or DRC, it is also important to consider the length of time between submittal and approval or denial. For 2021, City staff reviewed the total amount of time it took for a project to go from the initial submittal by the applicant to an approval or denial from the DRC or Planning Commission. Staff found that the average time to process a variance application was 56 days, the average time to process a CUP application was 61 days, and the average time to process a DRC application was 68 days. These time frames include the time that the applicant spends correcting or changing plans at the direction of staff or the approving body, as well as multiple hearings, if necessary.
Once projects have completed the public hearing process, or once staff determines the project does not require a hearing, the applicant may submit for building plan check. The City of San Marino contracts with an outside plan checker for this service. Once the plans are structurally approved, they are reviewed by both the Planning and Fire Departments. Informal conversations with some architects indicate that the City processes plans within a reasonable time frame; however, other architects and some public input has indicated that the time to get a new home approved is extensive even if the design guidelines are followed.
As discussed in Section 4.4.1, there can be a high level of public input and resistance to development projects that include additional housing, especially at higher densities, which can lead to a variety of constraints on housing development. Community members may pressure the Planning Commission and City Council to deny projects, and in some cases may also threaten legal action on some planning applications.
Establishing a set of objective design and development standards will be important to provide developers with a level of certainty, overcome any delays, and to allow ministerial processing of 154 PAGE 390 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 residential permits. The City recently approved objective design and development standards for multi-family development, which applies to all multi-family development projects in the City. As part of Program 1.9, the City will revise the adopted objective design standards for multi-family development in the H&C zone to ensure maximum densities can be achieved. Additionally, Program
1.5 establishes objective design standards for ADU and SRO development.
This Housing Element includes programs to establish new residential zones (e.g., RM1 and RIH) and new mixed-use zones (e.g., MU-1 and MU-2) to permit multi-family development in the City. As part of these programs, objective design standards will be prepared for each of these new zones (see Programs 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, and 1.17) As part of these programs, the City will commit to consult with the development community through outreach efforts at least once a year during the planning period and during public meetings to determine whether the standards facilitate or constrain the development of housing in the City. The City will make a formal evaluation of its development standards 18 months after adoption of the Housing Element. If it is determined that the standards are creating a constraint, then the City shall revise the objective design standards no later than 30 months after the adoption of the Housing Element.
Development projects in these zones that meet the objective design standards will be approved ministerially by the City’s Community Development Director and will not go through the design review process or to public hearing for approval before the Planning Commission or City Council.
With implementation of Housing Element programs, multi-family projects that meet the requirements of the objective design standards prescribed by the respective zone will be processed ministerially and will not require a CUP or be subject to Planning Commission or DRC approval.
Additionally, pursuant to Section 21080 of the Public Resources Code, projects in which public agencies exercise only ministerial authority are exempt from the CEQA compliance process. The City’s Community Development Director will grant CEQA exemptions on qualifying projects.
Historic Preservation
The City of San Marino is dedicated to preserving its Historical Resources. The City administers its own designation program for historic landmarks within the City. These resources are governed at the local level by Chapter 23.18 of the San Marino Municipal Code. While designated historic properties have additional requirements for development or redevelopment, these do not pose as a significant constraint because there are only eleven designated historic properties identified within the City.
However, in the 2020 Citywide Historic Resources Survey Report, field surveyors identified a total of 286 resources that appear eligible for listing as a City of San Marino Historic Landmark, and several historic districts were named by the City.
Environmental and Infrastructure Constraints
Environmental Constraints
Environmental hazards affecting housing units include geologic and seismic conditions that provide the greatest threat to the built environment. The City has identified areas where land development should be carefully controlled. The following hazards may impact future development of residential units in the City:
155 PAGE 391 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Seismic Hazards: The City regulates the construction of new habitable structures within the identified hazard areas, shown in Figure 32, through the requirement of setbacks and construction standards in accordance with State law. Design and construction requirements related to seismic hazards are based on hazard mapping and Seismic Design Categories. The San Marino Municipal Code provides requirements and regulations for different Seismic Design Categories. These building requirements are likely to increase costs of housing development but are necessary to mitigate risks and minimize loss of life and property associated with these hazards.
FIGURE 32: FAULT, LIQUEFACTION AND LANDSLIDE ZONES MAP
Flooding: The City is at minimal risk for flooding; however, three specific flood areas have been identified which are susceptible to localized flooding in an intense storm period. No major water courses traverse the City. There is no threat of water damage from either a seiche or a tsunami condition.
Dust and High Wind Hazards: This condition results in property damage from high winds, wind tunneling and channeling effects of buildings, soil erosion, and unpleasant living conditions. San Marino has experienced isolated high wind events in the past, prompting the City and homeowners to consider high wind hazards. For example, properly maintained trees are an important factor in reducing property damage during wind events.
Toxic and Hazardous Wastes: In San Marino, air pollution is the main area of concern relative to toxic substances. Major point sources of air pollution come from the variety of industrial uses throughout the region. The primary source, however, is automobile traffic.
Fire Hazards: There are no fire hazard severity zones within San Marino as identified by CAL FIRE (see Figure 33) However, the City has established its own locally designated Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) with more stringent fire-safe building requirements. 156 PAGE 392 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 These requirements affect the Estate Residential zone in the northwest area of the City, shown in Figure 34, which has increased fire risk due to its hilly topography, vegetation, and the presence of wood shake shingle roofs. The City has adopted the 2019 California Fire Code, which addresses requirements for fire sprinklers and fire alarms in residential buildings as well as brush clearance for homes in the locally designated VHFHSZ. These building requirements are likely to increase costs of housing development but are necessary to mitigate risks and minimize loss of life and property associated with these hazards.
Furthermore, these hazards should be considered when making changes to residential density in the City, to avoid placing more homes at increased risk due to fire hazards.
FIGURE 33: CAL FIRE: FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONE MAP
Source: CAL FIRE
157 PAGE 393 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 34: CITY OF SAN MARINO ENHANCED FIRE INSPECTION ZONE MAP Source: City of San Marino Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2019 158 PAGE 394 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Noise: Residential uses are considered a noise-sensitive use rather than a noise-generating use and are the most sensitive to loud noise. The principal noise sources in San Marino generate from local traffic, and noise measurement taken in 2021 indicate that traffic noise levels have not increased over the last ten years. Noise is not considered a significant problem in the City. Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations establishes an interior noise standard of 45 dB(A) as suitable for residential spaces; this can typically be achieved through standard construction methods.
Infrastructure Constraints
San Marino is a fully developed city and there are very few on or off-site improvements that are required as part of the development of housing. Most housing construction involves the demolition of an existing housing unit and the construction of a replacement unit, meaning all infrastructure is already in place. As part of the building permit process, the City will occasionally require the provision of on-site and off-site improvements necessitated by the development, such as improvements to curbs and gutters, alleys, streets, sidewalks, streetlights, and utility undergrounding. The cost of such improvements may increase the cost of development, which would ultimately be passed through to future tenants or owners. While these costs may not render a project infeasible, they contribute to the range of factors that affect the affordability of a project. Energy: Compliance with Title 24 of the California Administrative Code on the use of energy efficient appliances and insulation has reduced energy demand stemming from new residential development. Title 24, Part 6, California Energy Efficiency Standards, is a set of requirements for energy conservation, green design, construction maintenance, safety, and accessibility. Title 24 was published by the California Building Standards Code and applies to all buildings in California, not just state-owned buildings and requires all residential construction to meet minimum energy conservation standards through either a prescriptive or performance-based approach. The former approach requires each individual component of a building to meet an identified minimum energy requirement. The performance approach, on the other hand, allows developers to choose a range of measures which, in total, meet specified energy conservation targets. Title 24 regulations and requirements are enforced when an applicant pulls a building permit for a proposed project and have plans reviewed or a building inspected.
In addition to Title 24, all residential projects are required to meet state building codes, which also include energy conservation standards. The California Building Standards Commission adopted the California Building Codes based on model codes produced by various professional organizations.
Promoting energy conservation has become a consistent theme in regulations, green building practices, and general business operations. For San Marino, opportunities flourish to promote energy-efficient practices in the siting, design, construction, and renovation of housing stock. These practices not only respond to regulatory requirements, but also can generate significant community, environmental, and economic benefits and do not constitute constraints on housing development. Water: The California America Water Company provides water services for the City of San Marino. Adequate water is available to serve existing and projected residences through 2021 159 PAGE 395 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 and do not pose a constraint to development. See Section 3.6.1 for additional discussion regarding infrastructure available to support residential development.
4.4.3 Local Ordinances
A city ordinance, or local ordinance, is an authoritative law or regulation made and adopted by a city government as opposed to a law or regulation made by a state or national government. In this Housing Element, local ordinances represent the City’s effort to remove governmental and nongovernmental constraints that hinder the City’s ability to meet its RHNA and address special housing needs, including housing needs for persons with disabilities, supportive housing, transitional housing, and emergency shelters.
Table 31 32 below identifies the City’s housing related ordinances and the housing constraints the ordinance is intended to address. Additionally, the table below identifies Housing Element programs that will ensure the ordinance is adopted and/or will ensure additional ordinances are adopted to enhance the City’s ability to reduce housing constraints during the planning period. 160
PAGE 396 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 3132: LOCAL ORDINANCES TO REDUCE HOUSING CONSTRAINTS Year
Adopted/
To be
Housing Element
Program(s)
Ordinance Objectives Constraints Addressed
Adopted
Accessory Dwelling Units 2020 To comply with State law, allow the City to enact Program 1.1 to standards for development of ADUs in update ordinance
residential zones within the City, and ensure the as necessary to Limited vacant land available
for new residential
development.
availability of affordable housing for family
members, students, and elderly.
remain consistent
with State law. Community opposition to
new housing development,
Program 1.3 to especially higher density.
amend ordinance
to include Single-family land use and
incentives if City is zoning regulations.
not on track to
meet ADU Building code.
projections for
lower-income
households.
Design review process.
Permitting and processing
Program 1.5 to procedures.
adopt objective
design standards
for ADUs.
Program 3.6 to
amend ordinance
to allow preapproval for ADUs
161
PAGE 397 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Year
Adopted/
To be
Housing Element
Program(s)
Ordinance Objectives Constraints Addressed
Adopted
that incorporate at
least 2 tenets of the
Universal Design
program.
Objective Design Standards 2023/
2024
To establish objective design standards for
multi-family residential developments in the
Program 1.5 to
ensure adoption of new housing development,
Community opposition to
RM1 zone, MU-1 and MU-2 zones, H&C zone, and objective design especially higher density.
C-1 zone; ADUs; and SROs to achieve high
quality design that conforms to community
priorities.
standards for ADUs
and SROs. Design review process.
Programs 1.7,1.8,
1.9, and 1.17 to
ensure adoption of
objective design
standards for
Permitting and processing
To remove design review process constraints. procedures. zones that allow
multi-family
development..
Single Room Occupancy 2024 To comply with State law and allow SRO development in the C-1 Zone by-right if at least
20% of the project units are provided as
affordable to low-income households and design
and development standards are met.
Program 1.6 to
ensure adoption of new housing development,
ordinance.
Community opposition to
especially higher density.
Program 1.5 to
adopt objective
Zoning regulations for
residential uses in C-1 Zone.
162
PAGE 398 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Year
Adopted/
To be
Housing Element
Program(s)
Ordinance Objectives Constraints Addressed
Adopted
design standards
for SROs.
Design review process.
Permitting and processing
procedures.
Multi-Family Housing 2024 To allow multi-family housing development at densities between 20 du/acre and 40 du/acre in and 1.17 to ensure the new RM1and MU zones pursuant to design
and development standards.
Programs 1.7, 1.8, Limited vacant land available
for new residential
the RM1 zone, MU development.
zones, and the RIH
zone are
established,
respectively.
State Density Bonus 2024
2024
To comply with State law and incentivize
projects that meet the City’s demonstrated
housing needs for low-income households and
seniors.
Program 1.10 to
ensure adoption of zoning, and density
ordinance.
Single-family land use,
regulations.
Reasonable
Accommodation
To comply with State law and allow for
reasonable accommodations in the City’s zoning revise the City’s Program 3.1 to Land use and zoning
regulations.
and land use regulations when reasonably
necessary to provide an individual with a
disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy
their home.
ordinance to
require ministerial Permitting and processing
approval and
monitor
procedures.
effectiveness of
ordinance.
163
PAGE 399 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Year
Adopted/
To be
Housing Element
Program(s)
Ordinance Objectives Constraints Addressed
Adopted
Universal Design 2024 To inform building techniques that can be Program 3.5 to Land use and zoning incorporated into new and remodeled homes to ensure adoption of regulations. accommodate aging and disabled residents and
incentive residential development that
incorporates these techniques into the building
design.
ordinance.
Building codes.
Low Barrier Navigation
Centers
2024
2024
To comply with State law and allow for low
barrier navigation centers to be a permitted use ensure adoption of residential uses. by-right in zones that allow for multi-family
uses.
Program 3.7 to Zoning regulations for
ordinance.
Permitting and processing
procedures.
Residential Care Facilities
(with seven or more
people)
To allow for non-licensed residential care
facilities with seven or more bedrooms to be a
use permitted by-right (e.g., not subject to a
CUP) in zones that permit multi-family uses.
Program 3.8 to
ensure adoption of residential uses in C-1 Zone.
ordinance.
Zoning regulations for
Design review process.
Permitting and processing
procedures.
Employee Housing
Emergency Shelters
2024
2024
To comply with State law and permit employee
housing for six or fewer employees in the R-1
Zone.
Program 3.10 to
ensure adoption of zoning regulations.
ordinance.
Single-family land use and
Permitting and processing
procedures.
To comply with State law for the provisions of
emergency shelters in the City’s zones that allow ensure the City’s multi-family uses. provisions for
Program 3.4 to Zoning regulations for
residential uses.
164
PAGE 400 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Year
Adopted/
To be
Housing Element
Program(s)
Ordinance Objectives Constraints Addressed
Adopted
emergency shelters Design review process.
is consistent with
the requirements
of State law, as
amended by AB
2339.
Permitting and processing
procedures.
Transitional and
Permanent Supportive
Housing
2024 To comply with State law and permit Program 3.11 to ensure adoption of residential uses.
ordinance.
Zoning regulations for
transitional and supportive housing uses in
zones that allow multi-family housing by-right
pursuant to the City’s objective design standards
prescribed for multi-family residential uses.
Design review process.
Permitting and processing
procedures.
165 PAGE 401 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
4.5 FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
4.5.1 Introduction and Overview of AB 686
Assembly Bill 686 (Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, or AFFH) was adopted into law in 2018 and became effective on January 1, 2019. The law requires state and local agencies to take proactive measures to correct any housing inequalities related to race, national origin, color, ancestry, sex, marital status, disability, religion, or other protected characteristics. Agencies must ensure that their laws and programs affirmatively further fair housing, and that they take no actions that do not do so.
Under State law, affirmatively furthering fair housing, or AFFH, means “taking meaningful actions, in addition to combatting discrimination, which overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics.” Agencies must include in their Housing Elements a program that promotes fair housing opportunities for all persons. In the context of a community’s housing needs, AFFH is not just about the number of units needed, but also about where the units are located and who has access to them.
HCD released its guidance for fair housing assessments after the first administrative draft of the Housing Element Update was completed; however, this guidance was used to prepare the Adopted Housing Element (February 9, 2022) and subsequent drafts. In accordance with HCD’s guidance, this fair housing analysis is organized into five different subsections: enforcement and outreach capacity, segregation and integration patterns and trends, areas of concentration in poverty and affluence across racial and ethnic groups, disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs, including displacement. In accordance with the requirements of AB 686, this section also includes an analysis of the location of identified housing sites and capacity (e.g. number of units) by income category and evaluates whether the location of units by income category exacerbates or improves existing patterns for all components of the assessment of fair housing.
Additionally, this analysis identifies the City’s fair housing issues, contributing factors that perpetuate these issues, and programs included in this Housing Element to address fair housing issues.
For the purpose of the required regional comparative analysis, the Assessment of Fair Housing includes data for the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, the SCAG subregion of which the City of San Marino is included, Los Angeles County, or the SCAG region overall. Prior to release of the Adopted Housing Element (February 2022), this section of the housing element was updated and distributed separately for stakeholder input and public outreach (see Appendix B). Summary of Fair Housing Issues and Contributing
4.5.2 Fair Housing Enforcement and Public Outreach Capacity Federal and State Regulations and Enforcement
Federal, state, and local laws make it illegal to discriminate based on a person’s protected class. At the federal level, the Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, and disability. In California, the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) and the Unruh Civil Rights Act also make it illegal to discriminate based on marital status, ancestry, sexual orientation, source of income, or any other arbitrary forms of discrimination. Federal 166
PAGE 402 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 and state fair housing law both prohibit intentional housing discrimination and prohibit any actions or policies which may have a discriminatory effect on a protected group of people. Examples of policies or practices with discriminatory effects include exclusionary zoning and land use policies, mortgage lending and insurance practices, and residential rules that may indirectly inhibit religious or cultural expression. Both the state and the federal government have structures in place to process and investigate fair housing complaints. In California, the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) maintains the authority to investigate complaints of discrimination related to employment, housing, public accommodations and hate violence. The agency processes complaints online, over the phone and by mail. At a federal level, HUD also processes, investigates, and enforces any complaints in violation of the Federal Fair Housing Act.
Fair Housing Education and Enforcement at a Regional Level Several organizations provide fair housing services in Los Angeles County, including outreach and education, complaint intake, and testing and enforcement activities, for both providers and consumers of housing. These organizations include the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH), which exists as substantially equivalent agency to HUD in the state, and the Housing Rights Center (HRC), which primarily operates in Los Angeles County. The HRC receives a multi-year grant from HUD to conduct systemic testing in areas within Los Angeles County where statistics point to any form of discrimination covered by applicable fair housing laws and, in particular, persistent housing discrimination based on race, national origin, familial status and disability. HRC also provides intake of allegations of housing discrimination and provides resolution for housing discrimination, including mediation. Other activities include: systemic rental tests; design and construction inspections; accessibility surveys of tenants; referring tests that uncover discriminatory activity to HUD; litigation for appropriate enforcement action; fair housing counseling, investigation, and resolution for complainants; intakes of fair housing queries; training of new testers; refresher courses; reasonable accommodation/modification requests for the disabled; monitoring fair housing settlement agreements and zoning changes; as well as a host of education and outreach activities.
The Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles (HACoLA) provides fair housing resources for residents via its website, such as links to file complaints of a violation of fair housing, a link to the Housing Rights Center, a link to HUD’s webpage on Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, link to the National Fair Housing Advocate Online blog, a copy of HACoLA’s non-discrimination policy, and a link to information on the Assessment of Fair Housing.
Fair Housing Education and Enforcement at a Local Level The City has a robust Code Enforcement policy, but it is not relevant to Fair Housing as it is mainly focused on Code violations pertaining to the erection, construction, reconstruction, moving, conversion, and alteration of buildings. As discussed below, there are no fair housing complaints in the City, which could mean a lack of cause for complaint or a potential lack of awareness about fair housing rights. To improve enforcement, this Housing Element expands Program 2.1 to include training for code enforcement officers on fair housing laws and how to coordinate interjurisdictionally to remedy fair housing complaints if such complaints are reported during the planning period. Additionally, to improve fair housing awareness and education in the City, this Housing Element expands Program 3.2 to provide an informational page on the City’s website that 167
PAGE 403 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 identifies the City’s process to address fair housing complaints, a description of the fair housing service provider, and a link to the fair housing service provider website. As part of Program 3.2, the City shall update the informational page each year to include the most current information regarding the City's fair housing process, fair housing laws, fair housing service providers, and contact information.
Fair Housing Complaints
According to the City and data from HUD, there have been zero Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity complaints in the City. The City does not prescribe to any practices or policies that would impede existing fair housing laws and regulations. Should a Fair Housing or Equal Opportunity complaint arise, the City has the capacity to take all necessary actions to remedy the compliant and maintain compliance.
Public Housing
The City of San Marino does not currently have any public housing buildings in the City limits.
Likewise, there are no residents receiving housing choice vouchers.
Public Outreach
The 6th cycle Housing Element Update has been undertaken during the COVID-19 global pandemic.
Public outreach, which is the cornerstone of the preparation process, had to be adjusted to allow and encourage meaningful public participation and input without the ability to meet or gather in-person.
Staff and consultants made use of multiple digital platforms to facilitate the public input. Through community opinion surveys, stakeholder interviews, public workshops, and continued correspondence with advocacy groups, service providers, and developers, the City has consistently put forth efforts to engage the public during the update process. A complete outline of public outreach efforts can be found in Section 1.4.
Specific public outreach was done around the Fair Housing Analysis, including the distribution of the Draft Fair Housing Analysis to housing service providers and other stakeholders in the region, to ensure the data used accurately represents fair housing issues and integrates local knowledge.
Stakeholder input was considered in the preparation of the Fair Housing Analysis, as well as integrating principles of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) into housing policies and programs (found in Section 2) and housing sites (see Section 3), ensuring local concerns are addressed.
Local and Regional Stakeholders participating in AFFH outreach included:
Abundant Housing Los Angeles;
Union Station Homeless Services;
Sycamores Child and Family Service;
Friends in Deed; and
Pomona Homeless Outreach.
Stakeholder and community input received during the public outreach process and how the City incorporated input is provided in Appendix B.
168
PAGE 404 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
4.5.3 Local and Regional Patterns and Trends in Segregation and Integration In accordance with HCD’s guidance, the fair housing analysis must discuss levels of segregation and integration for race and ethnicity, familial status, persons with disabilities, income, and identify the groups that experience the highest levels of segregation. Segregation generally means a condition in which there is a high concentration of persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or having a disability or a type of disability in a particular geographic area when compared to a broader geographic area. Integration generally means a condition in which there is not a high concentration of persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or having a disability or a particular type of disability in a particular geographic area when compared to a broader geographic area.
Racial and Ethnic Groups in San Marino and Subregion of San Gabriel Valley As shown in Table 32 33 below, the Asian population makes up 60.5% of the City’s population, which is substantially higher than the Asian population in nearby communities. The second highest ethnic population in the City is “White” with 31.5%, which is lower than the White population in nearby communities. The third highest ethnic population in the City is “Hispanic or Latino” with 6.3%, which is the same Hispanic or Latino population in Pasadena, and substantially lower than El Monte and Los Angeles County. The “Black” population comprises 1.9% of the City’s population, which is lower than the Black population in Pasadena and Los Angeles County and higher than the Black population in El Monte.
TABLE 3233: COMPARISON OF RACIAL AND ETHNIC COMPOSITION WITH NEARBY COMMUNITIES Racial/Ethnic Group
White
San Marino Pasadena El Monte
38.8%
0.6%
Los Angeles County
31.5% 52.1%
1.9%
49.5%
Black 5.8% 8.1%
Asian 60.5%
0.20%
0.00%
6.3%
17.4%
0.00%
0.2%
28.8%
0.8%
14.7%
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
American Indian and Alaska Native
Hispanic or Latino
Two or More Races
Some other Race
0.3%
0.9% 0.8%
6.3% 65.7%
3.3%
48.6%
3.1% 5.7% 4.1%
2.9% 21.3% 26.9% 19.9%
Totals exceed 100% because all races can include Hispanic or Latino origin.
Source: 2019 U.S. Census Bureau Quick Facts
San Marino’s racial and ethnic composition differs greatly from Los Angeles County, where the population overall is about 49% Hispanic or Latino, 26% Non-Hispanic White, about 8% Black and about 15% Asian. San Marino also differs significantly in racial and ethnic composition from nearby communities in the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, as shown in Table 3233.
Table 33 34 below shows the change in each of these populations in the City between 2010 and 2019.
San Marino’s White population is decreasing while the Asian population is increasing. The Black population also increased slightly over the last ten years, while the Hispanic or Latino population and those who identify as two or more races remained stable. 169
PAGE 405 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 3334: CHANGE IN RACIAL AND ETHNIC COMPOSITION (2010 ‐ 2019) Racial/Ethnic Group 2010 2019
White 41.3%
0.4%
31.5%
Black 1.9%
Asian 53.5%
0.02%
0.04%
6.3%
60.5%
0.20%
0.00%
6.3%
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
American Indian and Alaska Native
Hispanic or Latino
Two or More Races 3.1% 3.1%
Totals exceed 100% because all races can include Hispanic or Latino origin.
Source: 2010 Census; 2019 U.S. Census Bureau Quick Facts Figures 35 - 39 below show which race or ethnicity is predominant in the City of San Marino and the surrounding communities of the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments and by how much. The strength of the color indicates the extent to which one group is dominant over the next most populous. Many neighboring communities have predominately Asian, Hispanic, or Latino, or White Populations.
There is no predominant African American population in San Marino. Sub regionally, there are slim and sizable areas of African American predominance in the Northernmost census tracts of Pasadena.
FIGURE 35: PREDOMINANT POPULATION AFRICAN AMERICAN MAJORITY Source: AFFH Data Viewer, HCD, 2021
170
PAGE 406 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 There is a slim to sizable predominant Asian population in San Marino, with the slim predominant Asian population in the western portion of the City and a sizable predominant Asian population in the eastern portion of the City. Sub regionally, the areas of highest Asian population predominance include census tracts in San Gabriel, Rosemead, Walnut, and Diamond Bar.
FIGURE 36: PREDOMINANT POPULATION ASIAN MAJORITY
Source: AFFH Data Viewer, HCD, 2021
171
PAGE 407 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 There is no predominant Hispanic population in San Marino. Sub-regionally, the areas of highest Hispanic population predominance include census tracts in Pomona, El Monte, and Baldwin Park.
FIGURE 37: PREDOMINANT POPULATION HISPANIC/LATINO MAJORITY Source: AFFH Data Viewer, HCD, 2021
172
PAGE 408 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 There is no predominant Native American population in San Marino or in any of the surrounding areas in the San Gabriel Valley subregion.
FIGURE 38: PREDOMINANT POPULATION NATIVE AMERICAN MAJORITY Source: AFFH Data Viewer, HCD, 2021
173
PAGE 409 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 There is no predominant White population in San Marino. Sub-regionally, the areas of highest White population predominance include census tracts in Claremont, Glendora, Monrovia, and Sierra Madre .
FIGURE 39: PREDOMINANT POPULATION WHITE MAJORITY
Source: AFFH Data Viewer, HCD, 2021
Racial dot maps provide an accessible visualization of geographic distribution, population density, and racial diversity of a population. Figures 40 and 41 show the racial dot density of the City and the surrounding region. As shown in Figures 40 and 41, the City’s population is well integrated with a slightly higher Asian population when compared to the surrounding communities, which show higher rates of concentration of Asian and Hispanic or Latino populations. 174
PAGE 410 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 40: RACIAL DOT DENSITY MAP OF SAN MARINO, CA
Source: ESRI, 2021
175 PAGE 411 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 41: RACIAL DOT DENSITY MAP OF THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS Source: ESRI, 2021
Dissimilarity and Diversity Indexes
A Dissimilarity Index provides a quantitative measure of segregation in an area, based on the demographic composition of smaller geographic units within that area. Dissimilarity Indexes are also referred to as “exposure indices.” This is because they show the exposure a given race group experiences with members of their own and each other race (as a percentage) in an average neighborhood of the city (or metropolitan area) being examined. The table below provides the diversity index values and descriptions
TABLE 3435: DIVERSITY INDEX DEFINITIONS
Measure Values
<40
Description
Diversity Index
[range 0-100]
Low Diversity
Moderate Diversity
High Diversity
40-52
>55
Source: Brown University, Diversity and Disparities 2010ꢀꢀ 176
PAGE 412 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 The Diversity Index summarizes racial and ethnic diversity. The index shows the likelihood that two people, chosen at random from the same area, belong to different race or ethnic groups. The index ranges from 0 (no diversity) to 100 (complete diversity). Based on 2018 demographic estimates from ESRI, the average Diversity Index score for all block groups in San Marino is 56, meaning there is a 56 percent probability the two people randomly chosen would belong to different race or ethnic groups.
As shown in Table 34 35 above, a Diversity Index score of 56 means that that the City has “High Diversity”, making it more ethnically and racially diverse than other cities that are considered to have “Low” or “Moderate” diversity. As shown on Figure 42 below, the diversity in San Marino is lower than the surrounding cities in the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, which is due to a higher Asian population in the City.
FIGURE 42: 2018 DIVERSITY INDEX OF SAN GABRIEL VALLEY
Source: AFFH Data Viewer, HCD, 2021
Given that there is a significantly higher Asian population in San Marino when compared to nearby areas, the City determined that the Asian population in San Marino experiences the highest levels of segregation. However, given that the City is still considered to have “High Diversity” based on its Diversity Index Score, the City determined that the degree of racial and ethnic segregation is less than the degree of segregation of other ethnic groups in other cities within the broader geographic area (see Figure 41).
Familial Status
It is important to analyze familial status to identify areas where a City might need to focus resources (i.e., single-person households, female-headed, large families, and/or elderly persons living alone). 177
PAGE 413 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 According to the 2019 ACS 5 -Year Estimates, there are no single-parent households with children under 6 years old in San Marino. As shown in Figure 43 below, 67.4% of San Marino’s households consist of married couples, which is higher than most of the areas in the region. As shown in Figure 44 below, more than 80% of children in the City live in households with married parents. Within the context of the larger region, most areas consist of 60-80% of children living in households with married parents with some areas consisting of less than 60% of children living in households with married parents.
FIGURE 43: PERCENTAGE OF ADULTS LIVING WITH A SPOUSE BY CENSUS TRACT Source: AFFH Data Viewer, HCD, 2021
178
PAGE 414 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 44: PERCENTAGE OF CHILDREN LIVING IN A HOUSEHOLD WITH A MARRIED COUPLE BY CENSUS TRACT Source: AFFH Data Viewer, HCD, 2021
Of San Marino’s 4,566 households, only 8.8% were female-headed (compared to 14.3% in the SCAG region); of those, just 3.9% had children at home and none had children under age six. San Marino and the majority of the surrounding communities in the subregion have low percentages of children living in Female Headed Households with no spouse or partner. Sub-regionally, census tracts in Northern Pasadena, South San Jose Hills, Baldwin Park, and Pomona have the highest percentages of Children in Female-Headed Households with no spouse or partner present.
The City also has a lower share of single-person households than the SCAG region overall. Of the City’s 12.3% of single-person households, the majority (8.1%) are persons aged 65 or older. 179
PAGE 415 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 45: PERCENTAGE OF CHILDREN LIVING IN FEMALE‐HEADED HOUSEHOLDS WITH NO SPOUSE OR
PARTNER PRESENT BY CENSUS TRACT
Source: AFFH Data Viewer, HCD, 2021
As discussed above, San Marino has a higher population of persons that are married and children with married parents when compared to most other areas in the region. As such, married couples and married couples with children in San Marino represent the familial groups that experience the highest levels of segregation when compared to the region. This pattern of segregation is expected as San Marino is developed with single-family neighborhoods and does not provide multi-family housing options. Single-family homes often provide more bedrooms, living space, and outdoor space, all of which are desired by married couples with children. Additionally, single-family homes are more expensive to own or rent, often requiring two incomes to be able to afford the higher housing costs.
Furthermore, the lower concentration of single-person households and female-headed households in the City is likely due to the lack of smaller and more affordable housing options in the City, such as apartments.
Persons with Disabilities
As seen in Table 35 36 below, there are fewer people living with disabilities in San Marino than in the County, State, or surrounding communities. There are no areas of concentration of disabled individuals in the City (see Figure 46 below). The City offers resources to disabled residents including their Wellness Check-in Call Program, where a member of City staff provides a weekly call to checkin, offer resources, and answer questions. The City participates in the Dial-A-Ride program for disabled residents whose disability prevents the use of regular public transit. The service is free for 180
PAGE 416 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 eligible residents. Given that the City does not have a higher concentration of disabled persons when compared to other areas in the region, disabled persons in the City do not experience high levels of segregation.
TABLE 3536: PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION WITH A DISABILITY 2019 Location 2019
5.5%
7.9%
9.9%
9.9%
10.6%
San Marino
Pasadena
El Monte
The County of Los Angeles
California
Source: 2019 ACS 5‐Year Estimates, U.S Census Bureau
FIGURE 46: PERCENT OF DISABLED POPULATION BY CENSUS TRACT 2015‐2019 Source: AFFH Data Viewer, HCD, 2021
Income
As shown in Figures 47 and 48 below, median incomes are high and well dispersed throughout the City when compared to other areas in the region. Median incomes have risen throughout the San Gabriel Valley region in the last decade, particularly in Baldwin Park, La Puente, and El Monte ( see Figure 48).
181
PAGE 417 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Additionally, median incomes in San Marino are well above the HCD 2020 State Median Income and are also higher than much of the surrounding area. Most census blocks in the San Gabriel Valley Region have incomes at or above the State Median Income.
FIGURE 47: MEDIAN INCOME BASED ON ACS 5‐YEAR ESTIMATES 2010‐2014 Source: AFFH Data Viewer, HCD, 2021 (Please note tracts in white have no available data) 182
PAGE 418 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 48: MEDIAN INCOME BASED ON ACS 5‐YEAR ESTIMATES 2015‐2019 Source: AFFH Data Viewer, HCD, 2021 (Please note tracts in white have no available data) Poverty
As shown previously in Figure 31, 6.1 percent of San Marino's households are experiencing poverty, compared to 7.9 percent of households in the SCAG region. Poverty thresholds, as defined by the ACS, vary by household type. In 2018, a single individual under 65 was considered in poverty with a money income below $13,064/year while the threshold for a family consisting of 2 adults and 2 children was $25,465/year. Notably, half of households experiencing poverty in San Marino are Female-headed and almost 2% of households experiencing poverty are female-headed with children.
As discussed above, San Marino has a higher population of persons that have higher median incomes when compared to most other areas in the region. As such, households with higher incomes represents the income groups that experience the highest levels of segregation when compared to the region. Similar to the familial patterns in the City, this pattern of segregation is expected as San Marino is developed with single-family homes that are more expensive to own or rent when compared to multi-family housing options, which have not been permitted in the City. Furthermore, the lower population of persons with lower incomes in the City is likely due to the lack of more affordable housing options, such as apartments.
As discussed in Figure 49 below, the Westernmost block groups in the City has a higher concentration of low- to moderate- income households when compared to the rest of the City (ACS years 2011-2015). However, incomes can be low to moderate for many reasons and are not always associated with living in poverty, including retirees living on fixed incomes who own property or who have adequate savings. Additionally, as shown in Figures 47 and 48, the median income for households located in this block of the City is greater than $125,000 according to ACS data for years 2010-2014 and years 2015-2019. However, according to ACS data for years 2015-2019, the block 183
PAGE 419 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 shown in light green in the southeastern portion of the City indicates a median income of less than $125,000 (see Figure 48); therefore, this area of the City may also have a higher concentration of lowto moderate-income households.
Subregionally, census block groups with higher percentages of low to moderate household incomes are located El Monte, Pomona, Pasadena, Baldwin Park, and San Gabriel.
As discussed above, San Marino has a higher population of persons that have higher median incomes when compared to most other areas in the region. As such, households with higher incomes represents the income groups that experience the highest levels of segregation when compared to the region. Similar to the familial patterns in the City, this pattern of segregation is expected as San Marino is developed with single-family homes that are more expensive to own or rent when compared to multi-family housing options, which have not been permitted in the City. Furthermore, the lower population of persons with lower incomes in the City is likely due to the lack of more affordable housing options, such as apartments.
FIGURE 49: LOW‐ AND MODERATE‐ INCOME HOUSEHOLDS IN SAN MARINO BY BLOCK GROUP 2011‐2015 Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2021
184
PAGE 420 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 50: PERCENTAGE OF LOW‐ AND MODERATE‐ INCOME HOUSEHOLDS IN SAN GABRIEL VALLEY REGION BY BLOCK GROUP 2011‐2015
Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2021
4.5.4 Areas of Concentration in Poverty and Affluence Across Racial/ Ethnic Groups
According to the metrics set forth by the California Fair Housing Task Force, the City of San Marino does not contain any areas of racial or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/CAPs). However, the lack of concentrated poverty in the City is likely due to the high cost of housing in the City. The City is notably more expensive than the surrounding areas, with median gross rents above $3,000 per month and the majority of mortgages above $4,000 per month (see Figure 51 below). With the exception of one block group that has a median income of less than $125,000, the median income in the City is greater than $125,000 located in the southeastern portion of the City. However, there are no areas in the City where there is 80% or more of the population that is one ethnicity or race. As such, the City is not considered an area of concentrated affluence across racial or ethnic groups.
Overall, there are no areas of racial or ethnic concentrated poverty or affluence in the City. 185 PAGE 421 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 51: LOCATION AFFORDABILITY INDEX
Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2021
4.5.5 Disparities in Access to Opportunities
In accordance with HCD’s guidance, this housing element must identify and analyze significant disparities in access to opportunity, including disparities in access to opportunity for persons with disabilities. Refer to Section 4.3.9 for the analysis of disparities in access to opportunity for persons with disabilities that specifically addresses the housing and community development needs of persons with disabilities.
The Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) convened the California Fair Housing Task Force to “provide research, evidence-based policy recommendations, and other strategic recommendations to HCD and other related state agencies/departments to further the fair housing goals (as defined by HCD).” The taskforce has created Opportunity Maps to identify resource levels across the state to accompany new policies aimed at increasing access to high opportunity areas for families with children in housing financed with Low Income Housing Tax Credits.
The Opportunity Maps measure the level of opportunity of a region, broken down by census tract, by considering levels of poverty or wealth, and degree of segregation. The model identifies indicators which are research based and represent neighborhood conditions and develops measures which can transform data to represent opportunity. These indicators are assigned to a set of domains (see Table 36 37 below), such as Education, Economics, and Health, which capture the extent of an individual’s 186
PAGE 422 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 life outcomes, quality of life, and capabilities (Source: Othering and Belonging Institute at UC Berkeley).
TABLE 3637:OPPORTUNITY MAP DOMAINS AND INDICATORS
Domain Indicator
Economic Poverty
Adult Education
Employment
Job Proximity
Median Home Value
CalEnviroScreen 3.0 Pollution Indicators
Environmental and Values
Education
Math Proficiency
Reading Proficiency
High School Graduation Rates
Student Poverty Rates
Source: TCAC, 2020
The City has been given the designation of “Highest Resource Area of Opportunity” which is based on the consideration of factors affecting quality of life and health outcomes including educational enrollment and attainment, employment rates, lack of overcrowding in housing or overpayment for housing costs, transportation costs, and environmental health. The Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) Opportunity Area Index map is provided as Figure 52 below; the City of San Marino is outlined in black within a larger dark blue area; dark blue denotes the areas of highest resources.
Adjacent cities are also areas of high or highest resources, and only one area (in nearby Pasadena) has high segregation and poverty. The individual opportunity variables, including access to opportunity for education, transportation, economic development, and environment are discussed below.
187
PAGE 423 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 52: TCAC OPPORTUNITY AREA INDEX MAP
Source: AFFH Data Viewer, HCD, 2021
Education
The San Marino Unified School District is well known for its students’ high levels of academic performance. In the 2018-2019 reporting year the district outperformed both the Los Angeles Unified District and the State in the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (Table 3738).
TABLE 3738: CALIFORNIA ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE AND PROGRESS Achievement Level State of California Los Angeles Unified District
San Marino Unified
District
Level 4: Standard Exceeded 22.48% 17.93% 64.41%
Level 3: Standard Met
Level 2: Standard Nearly
Met
28.62%
22.28%
26.18%
23.36%
24.82%
6.83%
Level 1: Standard Not Met 26.63% 32.53% 3.94%
Source: caaspp‐elpac.cde.ca.gov, 2021
There are slight disparities in performance between students of different races. It should be noted that White and Asian students slightly outperformed their Hispanic and Black peers, although this gap appears to be closing in recent years. These gaps in performance could be an indicator of educational disparities; however, the small and irregular sample size for these minority groups does not allow for this conclusion to be drawn with a high level of accuracy. As shown in Figure 54 below, 188
PAGE 424 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 the areas in the City where data is available are designated as areas that have the highest educational opportunity index scores, meaning that students in these areas have more positive education outcomes.
FIGURE 53: ACHIEVEMENT GAP RESULTS RACIAL/DEMOGRAPHIC BREAKDOWN Source: Edsource.org, 2021
FIGURE 54: EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY INDEX SCORES IN SAN GABRIEL VALLEY REGION Source: AFFH Data Viewer, HCD, 2021
189
PAGE 425 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Environment
As shown on Figure 55 below, San Marino has low scores on the CalEnviroScreen Index, which means that San Marino is likely to have more positive environment outcomes based upon aggregate measurements of the following indicators:
Exposure: Air Quality, Lead Risk in Housing, Diesel Particulate Matter, Drinking Water Contaminants, Pesticide Use, Toxic Releases from Facilities, Traffic Density Environmental Effects: Cleanup Sites, Groundwater Threats, Hazardous Waste Generators and Facilities, Impaired Water Bodies, Solid Waste Sites and Facilities Sensitive Populations: Asthma, Cardiovascular Disease, Low Birth Weight Infants Socioeconomic Factors: Educational Attainment, Housing Burden, Linguistic Isolation, Poverty, Unemployment
San Marino has two census tracts. The Western census tract scored in the top 12th percentile, and the Eastern census tract scored in the top 10th percentile for overall environmental health, meaning only 12 and 10 percent of other census tracts in the state had better overall composite scores. Of the individual indicators analyzed, the biggest factors for potential adverse environmental health outcomes in San Marino are pollution exposure, lead risk in housing, and contaminated drinking water.
FIGURE 55: CALENVIROSCREEN INDEX MAP OF SAN MARINO AND SURROUNDING AREAS Source: California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, 2021ꢀꢀ The Western San Marino census tract (seen in lighter green in Figure 55) scored in the 65th percentile for pollution burden, meaning that the tract had a higher pollution burden than 65% of other tracts in 190
PAGE 426 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 the state. This tract was also in the 64th percentile for lead risk in housing, largely due to the age of San Marino’s housing stock, and in the 93rd percentile for drinking water contaminants.
In comparison, the Eastern San Marino census tract (seen in dark green in Figure 55) scored in the 39th percentile, 66th percentile, and 79th percentile for pollution burden, lead risk, and drinking water contaminants, respectively.
Taken together, these specific outcomes are slightly above average for the Los Angeles region but are fairly consistent with adjacent cities. Drinking water contamination and pollution burden continue to be issues for most census tracts in the State. There were not significant differences within San Marino City limits and the City regularly monitors and reports conditions to remain in compliance with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the State’s Water Board Regulations.
Compared to the LA County region, San Marino has better environmental outcomes overall. Most of the San Fernando Valley and areas of Downtown Los Angeles contain disadvantaged communities, while San Marino does not.
Transportation
The LA Metro Bus Lines 179 Local and 487 Express service San Marino with connections to routes that give access to other areas in the region (see Figure 56 below). According to walkscore.com, the City has a Walk Score of 61 (out of 100) and is considered somewhat walkable with some errands able to be carried out on foot. The City has a Bike Score of 50, which means that there is some existing bike infrastructure. The City was not rated for transit. In comparison, the neighboring City of Pasadena was given Walk Score of 69, Bike Score of 70, and Transit Score of 71.
The City is part of a low-cost membership program for curb-to-curb ride services for seniors over 60 and for those under 60 with a disability. The service is available for residents who live in Pasadena, San Marino, Altadena, and unincorporated Los Angeles County areas within the service area.
The City has an AllTransit score of 5.6 which represents a “moderate combination of trips per week and number of jobs accessible enabling moderate number of people to take transit to work.” In San Marino, only 2% of residents report using transit to commute to work.
Neighboring Pasadena has an AllTransit score of 8.3 which represents an “Excellent combination of trips per week and number of jobs accessible enabling numerous people to take transit to work.” Figure 57 below shows the transit score in San Marino and neighboring communities.
Overall, San Marino has a lower transit score, walk score, and bike score when compared to the neighboring City of Pasadena. Additionally, San Marino has a lower transit score when compared most other areas in the region. However, given that LA Metro bus routes service San Marino and only 2% of residents report using transit to commute to work, it likely that most San Marino residents prefer using their vehicles to commute to and from work and that its lower transit score is not related to disparities in access to transit.
191
PAGE 427 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 56: PUBLIC TRANSIT
192
PAGE 428 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 57: TRANSIT SCORE IN SAN MARINO AND NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES Source: AllTransit.com
Economic Development and Access to Jobs
As shown in Figure 58 below, the entire City is rated highly in terms of economic outcomes. San Marino’s neighboring cities have similar positive outcome ratings on the index, while others in the region are rated considerably lower. The index is based on measurements of the following indicators:
Poverty
Adult Education
Employment
Job Proximity
Median Home Values
193
PAGE 429 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 58: ECONOMIC INDEX MAP OF SAN MARINO AND SURROUNDING AREAS Source: AFFH Data Viewer, HCD, 2021
As discussed in Section 1.9.1, the City of San Marino’s 2019 Insight Market Study (Appendix C) revealed that the number of higher paying white-collar jobs are higher in the San Marino area while blue-collar jobs were higher in the greater region. Additionally, median and average salaries were generally higher in San Marino and decreased with distance. The Insight Market Study found that adults are well educated in San Marino and have better educational attainment outcomes than the County, State, and surrounding communities (see Table Error! Reference source not found.38 below).
The Insight Market Study is based on the Market Outlook database and demographic data from Synergos Technologies, Inc. and based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Consumer Expenditure Survey (CE); the US Census Bureau’s monthly and annual Retail Trade (CRT); and Economic Census, with supporting data from PopStats data.
194
PAGE 430 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 TABLE 3839: EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT FOR ADULTS 25 AND OVER Area Highschool Graduate or Bachelor’s Degree or Graduate or Higher
97.8%
88.3%
63.3%
79.1%
83.3%
Higher
78.1%
52.3%
12.2%
21.2%
33.9%
Professional Degree
39.7%
24.0%
2.4%
11.3%
12.8%
San Marino
Pasadena
El Monte
Los Angeles
California
Source: ACS 5‐Year Estimates (2014‐2019)
San Marino has a mid- to high-level rating on the HUD Jobs Proximity Index, which quantifies the accessibility of a given residential neighborhood as a function of its distance to all job locations within a statistical area. The scores in the region vary greatly.
FIGURE 59: HUD JOBS PROXIMITY INDEX MAP OF SAN MARINO AND SURROUNDING AREAS Source: AFFH Data Viewer, HCD, 2021
Data from the U.S. Census “OnTheMap” tool identifies the City as both an economic source and resource. As shown in Figure 60 below, approximately 3,523 people come to San Marino to work and approximately 4,527 San Marino residents leave the City to work in other places. According to the American Community Survey (2014-2018), approximately 5,474 residents are in the workforce.
Therefore, using the ACS 2014-2018 workforce data, approximately 83% of San Marino residents travel outside the City limits to get to work. However, this data does not indicate how far outside of 195 PAGE 431 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 the city these residents work. According to the 2022 American Community Survey, 59.5% of San Marino residents that commute to work have a commute of 30 minutes or less, while 40.5% of residents have a commute of more than 30 minutes. Therefore, even though a majority of San Marino residents commute for work outside of the city, the majority of residents have a commute that is reasonable in duration and distance, and therefore it is reasonable to conclude that the majority of San Marino’s workforce lives in close proximity to their jobs.
FIGURE 60: INFLOW/ OUTFLOW ANALYSIS OF SAN MARINO
Source: OntheMap.ces.census.gov, 2021
4.5.6 Disproportionate Housing Needs Including Displacement Cost Burden and Severe Cost Burden
Housing cost burden is most commonly measured as the percentage of gross income spent on housing, with 30% being the usual threshold for 'cost burden' and 50% being the threshold for 'severe cost burden'. However, a lower-income household spending the same percent of income on housing as a higher-income household will likely experience a truer 'cost burden.' Across San Marino's 620 renter households, 158 (25.5%) spend thirty percent or more of gross income on housing cost, compared to 55.3% in the SCAG region. Another 101 renter households in 196
PAGE 432 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 San Marino (16.3%) spend fifty percent or more of gross income on housing cost, compared to 28.9% in the SCAG region.
While renter households receive much of the focus when it comes to housing cost analysis, owner households make up 86.4% of San Marino and 52.5% of the SCAG region. The data in Table 39 40 below indicates the number of owner-occupied households in San Marino by their income relative to the surrounding area and their share of income spent on housing.
TABLE 3940: HOUSEHOLDS BY INCOME LEVEL AND SHARE OF INCOME SPENT ON HOUSING Income Level <30% 30-50% >50% Total Households
(Cost Burdened) (Severely Cost Burdened) by Income Level <30% HAMFI 25
50 120
180
2,375
0 290
165
105
195
249
1,004
315
275
273
440
3,114
4,447
30-50% HAMFI
50-80% HAMFI
80-100% HAMFI
>100% HAMFI
60 48
65 520
Total Households 2,750 693
Source: HUD CHAS 2012‐2016. HAMFI refers to Housing Urban Development Area Median Family Income.
As shown in Tale 39 above, the majority of households in the City (approximately 62%) are not considered cost-burdened, approximately 16% of households are considered cost-burdened, and approximately 23% of households are considered severely cost burdened. The most commonly occurring mortgage payment in San Marino is >$4,000/month and the most commonly occurring mortgage payment in the SCAG region is $2,000-$3,000/month (Figure 61).
As previously discussed in Section 4.5.3, median incomes are high and well dispersed throughout the City. However, there is a higher concentration of low- and moderate- income households living in the westernmost block of the City, which also may exist in the southeastern block of the City. As such, low- and moderate-income households living in the westernmost block and southeastern block of the City are more likely to be cost burdened and severely cost burdened by housing costs than other blocks in the City. Additionally, elderly residents and female-headed households living in poverty may also be more likely to be cost burdened or severely cost burdened by housing costs. 197
PAGE 433 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 61: MONTHLY OWNER COSTS FOR MORTGAGE HOLDERS
SOURCE: ACS 5‐YEAR ESTIMATES (2014‐2019)
Overcrowding
In San Marino, 29 owner-occupied and 21 renter-occupied households had more than 1.0 occupants per room, which meets the ACS definition for overcrowding. Additionally, 19 owner-occupied households and renter-occupied households had more than 1.5 occupants per room, which meets the ACS definition for severe overcrowding. As shown in Figure 62 below, overcrowding occurs in less than 1 percent of owner-occupied units and less than 4 percent of renter-occupied units, which is much lower than overcrowding rates experienced in the region. As such, overcrowding is not experienced within the City as a whole or within any specific area of the City.
FIGURE 62: CROWDING BY EXTENT AND TENURE
SOURCE: ACS 5‐YEAR ESTIMATES (2014‐2019)
Substandard Housing
The ACS includes surveys about three factors of what may be considered substandard housing, including no telephone service available, lacking plumbing facilities, and lacking complete kitchen facilities. In San Marino, 31 units (or 0.68%) lack telephone service, 20 units (or 0.44%) lack plumbing facilities, and 20 units (or 0.44%) lack complete kitchen facilities, which represents less than 1 percent of total units in the City and is lower than the regional rates for substandard housing. 198
PAGE 434 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 According to the City’s code enforcement department, the City’s older housing stock is well maintained and the City has approximately 4 homes in need of rehabilitation or replacement. As such, substandard housing is not experienced within the City as a whole or within any specific area of the City.
FIGURE 63: SUBSTANDARD HOUSING
Source: ACS 5‐Year Estimates (2014‐2019)
Homelessness
The Los Angeles County Community Development Commission conducts bi-annual point-in-time surveys of homeless populations. San Marino is occasionally reported to have 1 unhoused person, but typically is reported to have zero unhoused persons. Services for homeless individuals are available in neighboring Pasadena. San Marino allows emergency shelters to be established in any commercially zoned property as a permitted use; however, no interest has been shown on the part of homeless service providers in initiating homeless services in San Marino. Additionally, Program 3.4 is included in this Housing Element to allow emergency shelters to be developed in any zone that allows multi-family residential uses. At this time, there are no homeless residents in the City or within any specific areas of the City.
As previously discussed in Section 4.3.9, the City has sufficient capacity to accommodate at least one emergency shelter should the need to accommodate homeless residents in the City arise in the future.
Additionally, this Housing Element includes new Programs 3.7 and 3.11 to amend the City Code to permit transitional housing, including low barrier navigation centers, and permanent supportive housing by-right in zones that allow for multi-family uses.
Displacement
According to the Urban Displacement Project, there are no sensitive populations subject to displacement in San Marino. However, there are approximately 225 very low-income, elderly households in the City. Special attention should be given to these households, as aging in place may become difficult for people with fixed incomes given the prohibitive cost of living in San Marino.
Additionally, female-headed households with very-low incomes are also vulnerable to displacement.
As previously discussed, the westernmost block and the southeastern of the City have a higher 199
PAGE 435 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 concentration of low-and moderate-income households and therefore may be more vulnerable to being displaced as housing costs continue to increase in the City. As previously discussed, in 2021, the median home sales price exceeds $2 million and median rental prices exceed $3,000. As such, young families and first-time homebuyers who may have grown up in the City and wish to remain in the City are also at risk of being displaced due to high housing costs. During the City’s public outreach process, the City learned that many residents are concerned their adult-aged children will not be able to afford to live in the City.
4.5.7 Summary of Fair Housing Issues
Given the above assessment of each fair housing area, the City has determined that it’s fair housing issues include: strong patterns of familial (e.g., married couples and married couples with children) and income (high median incomes) segregation, cost burden due to high housing costs in the City, and displacement of lower-income residents, including female-headed households, elderly residents, and younger residents who grew up in the City but cannot afford to purchase a home. While there have been no Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity complaints in the City, the City has determined that this may be due to a lack of awareness and education regarding fair housing issues and/or the proper training for code enforcement officials. As such, fair housing enforcement is also included as a fair housing issue in the City.
4.5.8 Sites Inventory and AFFH
As required by AB 686, the City is required to identify locations for affordable housing in a way that AFFH. To address this requirement, the City must evaluate the impact of where it plans to locate lower-income units and assess whether or not there is any isolation of the RHNA and if the location of units exacerbates or improves each of the fair housing issue areas, including segregation and integration, racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs, including displacement.
Location of Units by Income Group
The City can be divided into 4 quadrants using the two main arterials in the City, including Huntington Drive which bisects the City east to west and Sierra Madre Boulevard/San Marino Avenue which bisects the City north to south (see Figure 64 below). The City’s four quadrants are predominately developed with single-family residential uses, with commercial uses developed along Huntington Drive and three blocks of Mission Street, which is located in the northwestern portion of the City and within Quadrant 1. The City’s two main open space areas (e.g., Lacy Park and The Huntington) are located in the northern portion of the City and within Quadrant 1. Access to local public transit routes with regional connections are provided by LACMTS Route 179 along Huntington Drive and 487 Express along N. San Gabriel Boulevard (see Figure 56).
The City anticipates to accommodate its low-income RHNA and above moderate-income RHNA with the development of ADUs within single-family neighborhoods. As discussed in Section 3.3, the City has approved 100 ADU permits during the 6th Cycle planning period (from October 15, 2021 to June 30, 2024), which are well dispersed throughout the City’s residential neighborhoods and are not concentrated in one area of the City (see Figure 23). Additionally, as discussed in Section 3.3, ADUs will provide affordable housing and housing mobility opportunities for lower-income households, 200
PAGE 436 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 smaller families, and residents with special housing needs, including elderly residents, female-headed households, and residents with disabilities.
In addition to ADU development, the City will accommodate its very low-income RHNA and moderate-income RHNA with implementation of Housing Element programs that facilitate the development of multi-family housing on 7 identified sites. Figure 64 below shows the location of the 7 sites that are anticipated to be developed with multi-family housing and quantifies the number of units by income category in each quadrant.
201
PAGE 437 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 64: SITES INVENTORY AND AFFH
Quadrant 2
Quadrant 1
Quadrant 4
Quadrant 3
Quadrant VLI Units MI Units
1 2
3 4
82 0
23 0
54 0
40 22
202
PAGE 438 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Quadrant 1
As shown on Figure 64, Quadrant 1 contains 4 out of 7 of the City’s identified sites. Quadrant 1 contains 2 sites that are anticipated to be developed with a total of 82 very low-income units, with one site (The Huntington) providing employee housing and the other site (Stoneman) providing multi-family housing for lower-income households, including families. Additionally, Quadrant 1 contains 2 sites that are anticipated to be developed with a total of 54 moderate-income units, with one site (Southwestern Academy) providing employee housing and the other site (MU Site 1) providing multi-family housing for moderate-income households, including families. While Quadrant 1 contains the most very low-income units when compared to the other quadrants, it also contains the most moderate-income units when compared to the other quadrants. Additionally, given the current development patterns of ADUs being evenly dispersed throughout the City (see Figure 23), the City anticipates a relatively equal share of the 128 low-income ADUs and 86 above moderateincome ADUs to be developed within Quadrant 1. As such, the City anticipates that the development of ADUs and the 4 identified sites within Quadrant 1 will not result in a substantial concentration of poverty or wealth in this area of the City during the planning period.
Quadrant 2
Quadrant 2 does not contain any of the City’s identified sites to accommodate the City’s very lowincome or moderate-income RHNA. However, as shown in Figure 23, there are several approved ADUs located in Quadrant 2. Additionally, given the current development patterns of ADUs being evenly dispersed throughout the City, the City anticipates a relatively equal share of ADUs projected for each income category to be developed within Quadrant 2. As such, the City anticipates that the development of ADUs within Quadrant 2 will encompass all of the income categories and will not result in a substantial concentration of poverty or wealth in this area of the City during the planning period.
Quadrant 3
Quadrant 3 contains 2 of the City’s identified sites, including the San Marino Community Church site, which is anticipated to be developed with a total of 23 very low-income units and MU Site 2, which is anticipated to be developed with a total of 40 moderate-income units. Additionally, given the current development patterns of ADUs being evenly dispersed throughout the City (see Figure23), the City anticipates a relatively equal share of the 128 low-income ADUs and 86 above moderate-income ADUs to be developed within Quadrant 3. As such, the City anticipates that the development of ADUs and the 2 identified sites within Quadrant 3 will not result in a substantial concentration of poverty or wealth in this area of the City during the planning period.
Quadrant 4
Quadrant 4 contains 1 of the City’s identified sites (MU Site 3), which is anticipated to be developed with a total of 22 moderate-income units. Given the current development patterns of ADUs being evenly dispersed throughout the City (see Figure 23), the City anticipates a relatively equal share of ADUs projected for each income category to be developed within Quadrant 4. As such, the City anticipates that the development of ADUs and the 1 identified site within Quadrant 4 will not result in a substantial concentration of poverty or wealth in this area of the City during the planning period. 203
PAGE 439 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Based on the above analysis, the City does not anticipate the that the development of sites will result in a substantial concentration of poverty or wealth in a specific area of the City during the planning period. Additionally, the City anticipates that the development of sites will provide a range of housing types that are more affordable than single-family homes and better meet the diverse housing needs of its residents.
Sections 4.5.3 through 4.5.6 above provide an analysis of each of the fair housing issue areas to identify existing fair housing issues in the City, including integration and segregation patterns and trends, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs within the jurisdiction, including displacement risk. The discussion below considers each component and evaluates whether or not the development of sites is anticipated to exacerbate or improve existing fair housing issues in the City.
Integration and Segregation Patterns and Trends
While there is a higher Asian population in San Marino when compared to other racial and ethnic groups in the City, the City is considered to have a “High Diversity” based on its Diversity Index Score.
Therefore, the City does not consider its Asian population to be a strong pattern of racial segregation, especially when compared to segregation trends of other ethnic groups in other areas of the region.
The City has a higher population of married couples and married couples with children when compared to other familial groups in the City, such as single-person households and female-headed households, which is most likely due to the lack of smaller and more affordable housing options in the City. The City also has a higher population of persons that have higher median incomes when compared to other areas in the region, which is most likely due to the fact that San Marino is developed with single-family homes and lacks housing options that are more affordable. While the City has strong familial and income segregation patterns, the City does not have segregation patterns related to persons with disabilities.
As discussed in the analysis above (location of units by income group), the City does not anticipate that the development of sites will result in a substantial concentration of poverty or wealth in a specific area of the City during the planning period. Additionally, development of the sites will provide a range of housing types that are more affordable than single-family homes and meet the diverse housing needs of its residents, including lower-income residents, single-person households, and female-headed households. Therefore, the City anticipates that the development of sites will better integrate the community and improve the City’s existing patterns of familial and income segregation.
Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty
As discussed in Section 4.5.4, the City is not considered an area of concentrated poverty or affluence across racial or ethnic groups. Additionally, as discussed in the analysis above (location of units by income group), the City does not anticipate that the development of sites will result in a substantial concentration of poverty or wealth in a specific area of the City during the planning period.
Therefore, the development of sites will not exacerbate areas of concentrated poverty or affluence across racial or ethnic groups in the City.
204
PAGE 440 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Disparities in Access to Opportunity
As discussed in Section 4.5.5, the entire City has been given the designation of “Highest Resource Area of Opportunity,” which is based on the consideration of factors affecting quality of life and health outcomes, including educational enrollment and attainment, employment rates, lack of overcrowding in housing or overpayment for housing costs, transportation costs, and environmental health. With respect to education, the City has the highest educational opportunity index scores, meaning that students in these areas have more positive education outcomes. San Marino has low scores on the CalEnviroScreen Index, which means that San Marino is likely to have more positive environment outcomes. Overall, San Marino has a lower transit score when compared to most other areas in the region. However, given that LA Metro bus routes service San Marino and only 2% of residents report using transit to commute to work, it is reasonable to conclude that most San Marino residents prefer using their own vehicles to commute to work and that its lower transit score is not related to disparities in access to transit. With respect to economic development and access to jobs, the entire City has the highest economic index score possible, which means that the entire City is more likely to have positive economic outcomes. Therefore, the sites inventory, including sites that are anticipated to be developed with lower-income units, are all located within areas that have overall access to opportunity, including each of the categories of access to opportunity, therefore, development of the identified sites will improve overall access to opportunity.
Disproportionate Housing Needs, including Displacement Risk As discussed in Section 4.5.6, many households are cost burdened and severely cost burdened from high housing costs and the lack of more affordable housing options in the City. As a result, many of the City’s lower-income residents, including the elderly, female-headed households, and younger adult-aged residents are more vulnerable to being displaced due to rising housing costs. The westernmost block and the southeastern block of the City have a higher concentration of low- and moderate- income households when compared to the rest of the City and therefore may be more likely to experience cost burden and displacement when compared to other areas of the City. One site, which is anticipated to be developed with 22 moderate-income units is located in the southeastern block. There are no sites located in the westernmost block of the City; however, there are three sites, which are anticipated to be developed with 61 moderate-income units and 42 verylow income units are located adjacent to this area of the City. As such, the development of these sites may provide cost burdened residents with more affordable housing options that are located near where they currently live, thereby reducing their risk of displacement. Issues related to overcrowding, substandard housing, or homelessness are not experienced within the City or within any specific area of the City.
As discussed in the analysis above (location of units by income group), the City does not anticipate that the development of sites will result in a substantial concentration of poverty or wealth in a specific area of the City during the planning period. Additionally, development of the sites inventory will provide a range of housing types that are more affordable than single-family homes and meet the diverse housing needs of its residents, including lower-income residents that are cost burdened and/or at risk for displacement. Therefore, the City anticipates that the development of identified sites will improve the City’s existing issues of cost burden and displacement risk. 205 PAGE 441 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
4.5.9 Identification and Prioritization of Contributing Factors Given the assessment of each fair housing issue area, the City’s fair housing issues are primarily found in the issue area of local and regional patterns in segregation and integration. Specifically, the City has strong familial and income segregation patterns that consist of a predominance of married couples and married couples with children and residents with higher median incomes when compared to other areas in the region. Additionally, higher housing costs have resulted in many residents being cost burdened or severely cost burdened, making them more vulnerable to displacement risk. Finally, the City has also included fair housing enforcement as a fair housing issue out of caution that the lack of fair housing complaints have been due to a lack of awareness of fair housing policies.
The following discussion identifies contributing factors to fair housing issues.
Exclusionary Zoning Practices
Segregation patterns and issues of cost burden and displacement are a result of exclusionary zoning practices in the City that have only allowed for the development of single-family homes. From the City’s incorporation in 1913 until this 6th Cycle Housing Element, the City did not have a residential zone that allowed for the development of multi-family housing. Given that single-family homes are often more desirable for certain familial groups (e.g., married couples and married couples with children) and are more expensive to own or rent when compared to multi-family housing options, it makes sense that there are strong familial and income segregation patterns in the City. Furthermore, the City’s lower populations of lower-income households, single-person households, and femaleheaded households are likely due to the lack of smaller and more affordable housing options, such as apartments. For these reasons, exclusionary zoning practices are considered to be the contributing factor with high priority. A discussion of the City’s history of exclusionary zoning practices is provided below to provide more context of the City’s exclusionary zoning practices and its consequences.
History of Exclusionary Zoning Practices
San Marino is almost entirely residential, with its built environment dominated by detached singlefamily homes constructed primarily between the 1920s and the 1960s. As of 2021, there were no areas zoned for multi-family residences, or for industry/manufacturing. Small areas on Huntington Drive and Mission Street are zoned for commercial use. While not intending to be exclusionary, San Marino’s past prohibition of anything but single-family homes has had the effect of excluding persons who do not have incomes high enough to live in the City. Because poverty occurs most often with person of color, these practices may have resulted in the exclusion of protected classes.
San Marino’s rich and varied past spans multiple eras of California history and is associated with cultural and social themes that were definitive in the history of Los Angeles County and Southern California. Since its incorporation in 1913, “the City envisioned itself as a residential enclave for people of means, with zoning that ensured minimal commercial development and no industry or multi-family residences” (Source: San Marino Historic Resources Survey Report, October 2020). This exclusive designation has played out in the City’s zoning practices since its establishment.
In its earliest days of development, zoning in San Marino was so strict that most commercial uses and even churches were restricted. To ensure that property valuation would remain high, developers 206
PAGE 442 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 established expensive minimum home building costs, and racially restrictive covenants were incorporated into home deed sales – a practice that was common throughout Southern California and much of the country in the 1920s. These practices, coupled with the formation of the national Homeowner’s Loan Corporation (HOLC) in 1933 and passage of the National Housing Act (NHA), established systemic redlining practices throughout the Los Angeles region, including San Marino.
This practice led to the physical development pattern and exclusive single-family feel that is still experienced throughout the City today.
This practice illustrates how San Marino was graded “Best” by the Homeowner’s Loan Corporation.
This grade was given to upper- or upper-middle-class White neighborhoods that HOLC defined as posing minimal risk for banks and other mortgage lenders, as they were "ethnically homogeneous" and had room to be further developed. Banks received federal backing to lend money for mortgages based on these grades. Many banks simply refused to lend to areas with the lowest grade, making it impossible for people in many areas to become homeowners. While this type of neighborhood classification is no longer legal thanks to the Fair Housing Act of 1968, the effects of disinvestment due to redlining are still clearly observable today (Source: University of Richmond's Digital Scholarship Lab, 2021).
Throughout the City’s development, it has prided itself on its exclusively single-family, affluent neighborhoods, with well-kept yards and beautiful parks. Apartments and duplexes had never been allowed. As recently as 2003, the City’s General Plan included goals to protect its single-family neighborhoods and to discourage the division of lots. While the 2003 General Plan promoted a wellintegrated community, it failed to promote or allow the variety of housing types that would enable integration. A 2006 City handout for new San Marino residents’ notes:
“The principles upon which the first City Council established San Marino in 1913 have been followed through the ensuing ninety-three years. The founders of this city wished it to be uniquely residential - single-family homes on large lots surrounded by beautiful gardens, with wide streets and wellmaintained parkways. There were to be no manufacturing districts, heavy business areas or any apartment houses or duplexes. To maintain these standards, the City Council has continued to pass and enforce strict zoning regulations.”
207
PAGE 443 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 FIGURE 65: 1930'S HOLC REDLINING GRADE
Source: University of Richmond's Digital Scholarship Lab, 2021 Community Opposition
Given that only single-family development has been allowed since the establishment of the City, the development patterns of the City over time are reflective of what the founders envisioned the City to be, which is a uniquely residential - single-family homes on large lots surrounded by beautiful gardens, with wide streets and well-maintained parkways. During the public outreach process, it was evident that many community members strive to maintain the City’s current development pattern, which has generally resulted in community opposition to multi-family development. The opposition cited concerns regarding the environmental (e.g., Traffic, Noise, Crowding, Aesthetics) impacts associated with increased density in San Marino. Comments also cited concerns for the loss of the quality of life and the historic and open space areas that make up the San Marino community’s character. For these reasons, community opposition is considered to be a contributing factor with high priority.
Lack of Developable Land
Given that only single-family development has been permitted in the City, the City’s residentially zoned land is entirely built out with single-family homes. Additionally, other areas in the City that are zoned for non-residential uses are also nearly built out, resulting in a lack of vacant land available for residential development. The lack of available developable land is considered to be a contributing factor with high priority.
208
PAGE 444 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Lack of a Range of Housing Types
Given that only single-family development has been permitted in the City, there is a lack of a range of housing types to meet the diverse needs of its residents. Specifically, lower-income residents, elderly residents, single-person households, female-headed households, and disabled residents often have different housing needs that would be better accommodated with housing types that aren’t singlefamily homes. The lack of a range of housing types is considered to be a contributing factor with high priority.
Lack of Affordable Housing Options
Given that only single-family development has been permitted in the City, there is a lack of housing options that are more affordable than single-family homes. Lower-income residents, including elderly residents, single-person households, female-headed households, disabled residents, and younger adult-aged residents are likely not able to afford to live in the City without being cost-burdened by high housing costs. The lack of affordable housing options is considered to be a contributing factor with high priority.
Lack of Awareness of Fair Housing Policies
While there have been no fair housing complaints in the City, the City determined that the lack of awareness of fair housing policies might be a contributing factor to the lack of complaints. As such, the lack of awareness of fair housing policies is considered to be a contributing factor with medium priority.
Lack of Fair Housing Training for Code Enforcement Officers While there have been no fair housing complaints in the City, the City determined that the lack of training of fair housing issues for code enforcement officers might be a contributing factor to the lack of complaints. As such, the lack of training for code enforcement officers is considered to be a contributing factor with medium priority.
209
PAGE 445 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024
4.5.10 Meaningful Actions to AFFH
This Housing Element includes meaningful actions the City will take during the planning period to address the contributing factors identified above and AFFH during the planning period. Table 40 41 below identifies fair housing issues, contributing factors, meaningful actions, programs, and priority level. Refer to Section 2.1 for a complete description of AFFH programs, which include timelines and measurable outcomes (where applicable).
TABLE 4041: FAIR HOUSING ISSUE, CONTRIBUTING FACTORS, AND MEANINGFUL ACTIONS Fair Housing Issue Contributing Factor(s) Meaningful Action(s) AFFH Program(s) Priority Familial Segregation High
Patterns
Exclusionary zoning
practices
Establish new residential and mixed-use
zones that permit multi-family
development and rezone sites to new
zones
Program 1.2
Program 1.3
Program 1.5
Program 1.7
Program 1.8
Program 1.9
Program 1.11
Program 1.17
Program 3.12
Community
Married couples and
married couples with
children.
opposition to multifamily development
Lack of affordable
housing options
Lack of a range of
housing types
Educate residents on the development
process, which ensures that
environmental impacts are reduced and
open space areas and historic resources
are protected
Income Segregation
Patterns
Residents with high-median
incomes.
Remove design review process constraints
for multi-family development through the
adoption of objective design standards.
Facilitate other housing opportunities
within the R-1 Zone, including ADUs and
Homesharing.
Cost Burdenꢀꢀ Facilitate the development of lowerincome housing units on undeveloped areas of developed sites (e.g., ADUs,
Stoneman site, San Marino Community
Church site)
Program 1.2
Program 1.3
Program 1.7
Program 1.8
Program 1.9
Program 1.14
Program 1.17
Program 3.12
Lack of developable High
land for additional
residential Renters: 25.5% are cost
burdened and 16.3% are
severely cost burdened
development
Lack of affordable
housing options
Lack of a range of
housing types
Establish new residential and mixed-use
zones that permit multi-family
development and rezone sites to new
zones
210
PAGE 446 of 1856
San Marino – Draft Amended 2021-2029 Housing Element August 2024 Fair Housing Issue Contributing Factor(s) Meaningful Action(s) AFFH Program(s) Priority Homeowners: 16% are
cost-burdened and 23%
are severely cost burdened
Facilitate homesharing as a housing
opportunity
Displacement Lack of affordable
housing options
Facilitate the development of very lowincome units on the Stoneman site Facilitate the development of lowerincome ADUs
Program 1.2
Program 1.3
Program 1.7
Program 1.14
Program 2.6
High
Increase opportunities for first-time
homebuyers
Fair Housing Enforcement
Lack of awareness
of fair housing
policies
Publish fair housing information on the
City’s website with link to the fair housing
service provider website.
Program 2.1
Program 3.2
Program 3.3
Medium
Lack of fair housing
training for code
enforcement
officers
Distribute fair housing information at City
counters and other community locations
Train code enforcement officers on fair
housing policies
211
PAGE 447 of 1856
APPENDIX A: SCAG LOCAL HOUSING DATA
PAGE 448 of 1856
PAGE 449 of 1856
PAGE 450 of 1856
PAGE 451 of 1856
PAGE 452 of 1856
PAGE 453 of 1856
PAGE 454 of 1856
PAGE 455 of 1856
PAGE 456 of 1856
PAGE 457 of 1856
PAGE 458 of 1856
PAGE 459 of 1856
PAGE 460 of 1856
PAGE 461 of 1856
PAGE 462 of 1856
PAGE 463 of 1856
PAGE 464 of 1856
PAGE 465 of 1856
PAGE 466 of 1856
PAGE 467 of 1856
PAGE 468 of 1856
PAGE 469 of 1856
APPENDIX B: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Government Code §65583 (c)(7) requires local government to “Include a diligent effort by the local government to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the housing element, and the program shall describe this effort”. The federal Affirmatively Further Fair Housing Final Rule also requires community participation in the City's Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH). Community engagement efforts undertaken for the 2021 Housing Element are summarized in Section 1.
Public Outreach Summary
Housing issues affect the entire community and can be confusing and contentious. State requirements about what Housing Elements must allow often seem at odds with long-standing community values. The public participation requirement of Housing Element law presents an opportunity to engage constituents in defining housing issues, and in creating solutions that both meet the needs of the community and the requirements of state law.
The ongoing restrictions on gatherings due to the COVID-19 pandemic have forced community outreach and engagement into a virtual world. While in some cases this has made it possible for more people to be engaged in the process, a digital divide often exists in cases where households may lack internet connections or may be unable to attend virtual meetings due to work obligations.
To ensure that community outreach during the pandemic has been as equitable as possible, the community outreach program was designed to provide participation opportunities via cell phone and at the convenience of the resident. San Marino’s Housing Element Update has included the following public outreach efforts:
December 7, 2020: City Council held a virtual Town Hall to introduce the Housing Element update and to present an overview of the Housing Element Update process and new laws.
December 29, 2020: City developed and launched a webpage at http://cityofsanmarino.org/housingelement dedicated to the update of the Housing Element.
The website includes a dedicated e-mail address for the Housing Element Update, a background on the Housing Element and its purpose; opportunities for participation; and links to meeting materials, presentations, and document drafts for public review. An outreach and notification list were developed and used throughout the update process.
November 2020‐ꢀJanuary 2021: Community opinion surveys were conducted in English, Spanish, and Chinese. The surveys were structured to allow full participation via cell phone to overcome any digital divide. Survey results are provided in Section 4.
January‐April 2021: Stakeholder interviews conducted with responsive contacts representing for- and not-for-profit developers, advocacy groups, and service providers, including Southern California Non-profit Housing Association; Milestone Housing Development Corporation; the Chinese Club of San Marino; the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation; and the Pasadena-Foothills Association of Realtors.
February 24, 2021: Planning Commission held a publicly noticed workshop on the Housing Element Update. The Commission discussed the challenges faced by the City, took public input, and provided policy direction to staff in formulating strategies for meeting the State Housing Element mandates and identifying adequate sites to meet the City’s RHNA.
PAGE 470 of 1856
April 16, 2021: City Council held a publicly noticed workshop on the Housing Element Update and reviewed the Draft Housing Strategy (Policies and Programs for the Housing Element) and a preliminary rezoning program to address the City’s RHNA obligation. The City Council reviewed the draft set of policies and discussed options to meet the Housing Element requirements and community housing needs. The City Council provided feedback and direction on the preparation of a draft for review by the public and by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). Notices for this workshop were sent to the outreach and notification list, as well as to those who had provided contact information on the community surveys and those that had spoken at previous meetings.
July 17, 2021: City Council held a publicly noticed workshop to review the Draft Housing Element for possible transmittal to the State.
July 21, 2021: Public Review Draft Housing Element was released and made available on the established website. Notices of the release of the draft document were sent to the outreach and notification list, including those who had spoken at previous meetings.
August 3, 2021: City Council held a publicly noticed meeting to receive public input regarding the Housing Element Update and provided further direction to staff and consultants regarding sites to include on the inventory lists to be considered for rezoning.
August 25, 2021: City held a Town Hall to continue to receive public input on the Draft Housing Element and advise the community of future opportunities to comments on the update document or meet with a planner individually to discuss the update process.
Announcements for this Town Hall were included in two weekly community newsletters, advertised on social media, and mailed to tenants and property owners of the sites added to the updated Sites Inventory list.
September 24, 2021:ꢀꢀThe City Council held a duly noticed public meeting to take public comment and requested additional changes to be made to the Draft Housing Element.
October 29, 2021: The City Council held a public meeting and authorized staff to transmit the Draft to HCD to begin their review.
November 1, 2021: The Draft Housing Element and all public comments received to date were transmitted to HCD to begin their mandatory 60-day review period, during which time all interested parties were invited and encouraged to submit comments directly to HCD.
December31, 2021: HCD responded with several changes needed for the Draft Housing Element to be compliant with State law. These changes were subsequently considered by the Planning Commission.
January 11, 2021: Mitigated Negative Declaration released January 26, 2022: Planning Commission hearing on IS-ND and Draft Housing Element.
February 9, 2022: City Council hearing to adopt IS-ND and Housing Element Community Opinion Survey Results
Community opinion surveys were developed in three languages and have been distributed to residents in several ways: through the City website; through weekly community newsletter from the City Manager’s office; through direct emails to the updated interested persons list from the 2014 Housing Element; to the seniors mailing list; by posting to the City’s social media pages; and through distribution to the Chinese Club and local Realtors. The surveys are designed to elicit residents’ opinions about housing needs and opportunities, both now and in the future, as well as their ideas about new housing types that might help to meet identified needs.
PAGE 471 of 1856
Survey results demonstrate that residents have given housing issues a lot of thought and have some good ideas for meeting housing needs while preserving the City’s single-family neighborhoods and character. While some survey respondents indicated that all of San Marino’s housing needs are being met, many also listed the need for less expensive housing choices including homes affordable to firsttime buyers as a pressing need. About half of respondents agreed that San Marino had grown too expensive for their children to be able to afford a home here, and over 60 percent acknowledged that people who work in San Marino cannot afford to live here. Many respondents provided thoughtful ideas for different types of housing including studios, more ADUs, and both small apartment complexes and mixed-use development in the commercial zones.
Some indicated that existing homes could be divided to allow more than one household or generation to live in the same home. At the same time, most survey respondents agreed that it was important to preserve San Marino’s existing neighborhoods and its beautiful architecture.
Complete survey results are provided as Attachment B-1. Some questions provided participants the opportunity to share their unique input; these questions and additional write-in comments are provided below in Table 1.
TABLE 1: PUBLIC COMMENTS AND INCORPORATION INTO HOUSING ELEMENT Written Comments Incorporation in Housing Element
Question:
The biggest housing needs facing San Marino today are:
“Homes without homeowners living in the country,
rented or empty causing many homes lack of
maintenance and lack of laws for city to take serious
action”
Discussion and program to consider
vacancy tax or other measures
“Do not need housing that sits empty because of LLC
ownership. Don’t allow LLC ownership & add a tax”
Discussion and program to consider
vacancy tax or other measures
“Vacant homes have to be pulled into market. Vacant Discussion and program to consider Homes have a lot of negative impact to our city. Crime, vacancy tax or other measures less property tax income, fewer families with schoolaged kids, etic” “need more housing - staying with an edict of only
single-family house is unrealistic and
bourgeoise. We have commercial spaces that are
vacant and make the City downtown area
look destitute. Mixed use will help bring vibrancy to our community, increase walkable retail
Programs included to allow multifamily housing in the new RM1 and MU zones (Programs 1.7 and 1.8).
spaces and open housing to people who work in our
communities: educators, public safety,
public service workers”
“With-140 homes that are vacant, there is scant need
for additionally housing”
Program to address vacant housing,
otherwise comment not consistent
with RHNA or statutory requirements
“No mixed-use commercial properties. The cost of Noted. housing in San Marino is due to our schools’ academic
standards. We need to make sure those standards are
maintained. that makes homeowners participate in
positive city participation”
PAGE 472 of 1856
“San Marino needs to not just zone for the RHNA
allocation but also zone enough capacity so it will be
built. Since very new units have been built in recent
years, I request a zoning buffer of 50% above the
allocation”
With Housing Element programs, the
City will be zoned to have a surplus
buffer of 70%.
Question:
San Marino’s housing needs in the coming 10 years will include:
“City can ease the building requirement for building
under 100 sq. ft., because now there are
many children moving back into their parents' homes”
Assuming commenter meant 1,000
SF, the Housing Element contains
multiple policies and programs to
encourage and promote ADUs
(Programs 1.1 through 1.5).
Housing Element contains multiple
policies and programs to encourage
and promote ADUs (Programs 1.1
through 1.5).
“ADUs are the appropriate way to provide less
expensive housing”
“Adopt advanced zoning and planning concepts”
“Updating and renovation will continue and meet future
housing needs”
“Our city attracts homeowners who want their children
to be a part of our schools and that will always mean a better city and school system. Our housing prices are
based on that”
Comment not specific
Comment is inconsistent with RHNA
requirements for new units
Comment noted
“More ADUs for family members to live close by” Housing Element contains multiple policies and programs to encourage
and promote ADUs (Programs 1.1
through 1.5).
“Rental housing for young people and seniors. The
rental to owner divide is not balanced”
New provisions and zoning will now
allow multi-family rentals in San
Marino (Programs 1.7 and 1.8).
Additionally, Programs 1.1 through
1.5 support ADU development and
Program 3.12 supports
homesharing, both of which will
benefit young residents and seniors.
Question:
What are some unique features of San Marino that can be housing opportunities for the community? For example: unused office spaces that can be used as artist studio or work/live spaces; carriage houses that can be converted to caretaker facilities; large homes modified to accommodate more family members or multigenerational homes large lots perfect for tiny homes or cottages to be developed, etc. Your idea(s):
“Large homes can be renovated to accommodate more Policy and program are included to family members or become multi-generation homes.” allow development of detached or attached ADUs (Programs 1.1
through 1.5).
“Please quickly approve building of a second unit that is Housing Element contains multiple less than 1000 sq ft on existing home property, which
would allow family members to come back and live
there.”
policies and programs to encourage
and promote ADUs (Programs 1.1
through 1.5).
“Large lots can be developed into smaller single-family homes, but the original appearance of San Marino
should be the priority and not be affected”
Policies and Programs strive to
protect the character and
architecture of the City’s existing
single-family neighborhoods while
allowing additional housing units.
PAGE 473 of 1856
“Provide more convenient public facilities for seniors, such as caretaker facilities, and more public facilities for young adults and children”
Comment noted.
“Maintain the current situation” Noted. Comment is inconsistent with the City’s RHNA obligation and state
law.
“Carriage houses that can be converted to caretaker
facilities”
Housing Element contains multiple
policies and programs to encourage
and promote ADUs (Programs 1.1
through 1.5). Additionally, Program
3.12 promotes a homesharing
program that can benefit seniors.
Housing Element contains multiple
policies and programs to encourage
and promote ADUs (Program 1.1
through 1.5).
“The first item (ADUs)”
“Smaller houses at lower rent” Housing Element contains multiple programs to encourage smaller units
such as ADUs (Programs 1.1
through 1.5. Additionally, Program
3.12 promotes a homesharing
program that will increase housing
opportunities.
“Agree with the creative repurposing ideas listed”
(ADUs, conversions)
Housing Element contains multiple
policies and programs to encourage
and promote ADUs (Programs 1.1
through 1.5). Additionally, Program
3.12 promotes a homesharing
program that will increase housing
opportunities.
“Downtown commercial facilities that can be converted
to residential as well as commercial.”
Underutilized, commercially-zoned
properties along the Huntington
Drive corridor will be included in the
City’s list of additional sites that
could be added to the City’s Sites
Inventory (Program 1.12).
“Allow for multifamily properties” New provisions and zoning will now allow multi-family rentals in San
Marino (Programs 1.7 and 1.8).
Underutilized, commercially-zoned
properties along the Huntington
Drive corridor will be included in the
City’s list of additional sites that
could be added to the City’s Sites
Inventory (Program 1.12).
“Turn commercial space into low-income housing
opportunities”
“Guest houses able to be occupied, developing areas
belonging to SM that are by Carver School”
Housing Element contains multiple
policies and programs to encourage
and promote ADUs (Programs 1.1
through 1.5). Additionally, Program
3.12 promotes a homesharing
program that will increase housing
opportunities.
“Carriage houses” Housing Element contains multiple
policies and programs to encourage
PAGE 474 of 1856
and promote ADUs (Programs 1.1
through 1.5). Additionally, Program
3.12 promotes a homesharing
program that will increase housing
opportunities.
“None of these are a good idea” Comment noted
“More multi-family/multi-unit housing” New provisions and zoning will now allow multi-family rentals in San
Marino (Programs 1.7 and 1.8).
“Like the idea of office spaces being used as artist Opportunities exist for these spaces; studio or work/live spaces. This is appealing because it objective design standards will be would not change the residential look of San Marino” developed and adopted in 2024 (Program 1.5).
“There is no mixed use in our code, and it should stay
that way. Right now, the code does not address the
required separation for living space and other
occupancies. That requires an entire separate section
in the code (overlay zone). It would be very expensive
to try to convert office space to living space; the only exception would be conversion of the whole building to
residential, with fire sprinklers, exits, etc. and *limit it to one story*.”
Comment noted.
“Parking lots should be converted to housing. Allow
people to park their cars on the street
Underutilized, commercially-zoned
properties, including parking lots,
along the Huntington Drive corridor
will be included in the City’s list of
additional sites that could be added
to the City’s Sites Inventory
overnight which would free up driveway and garage
space. Change the zoning from commercial/retail to
residential. There do not need to be that many
businesses in San Marino when there are plenty of
commercial and retail spaces in larger, nearby cities.” “Whatever produces the least amount of density”
(Program 1.12).
Comment noted. The City currently
allows 4-6 dwelling units per acre.
Since the City has limited vacant
land and subdivision potential, the
City needs to increase its allowable
density to meet the City’s RHNA
obligation and comply with state law.
Current ADU ordinance allows
expansion and addition of living area
without discretionary approval.
Housing Element contains policies
and programs to permit missing
multi-family housing (Programs 1.7
and 1.8).
“Easing up current restriction on home expansion and
allowing homeowners to expand their house to meet
their family needs”
“High density homes, townhouses, duplex, multi-family
condo or apartments, allow to convert empty
commercial buildings to live/work studios along
Huntington Dr.”
“I would not like any of the suggestions in 4. to be
considered. San Marino is not suited for
things such as tiny homes. It is a city of single-family residences and should remain that way.”
“Multiple units on lots”
Noted. Comment inconsistent with
state housing element law.
Program to promote ADUs
(Programs 1.1 through 1.5) on
single-family lots.
“Bungalow courts. Live/work above existing commercial Policies and Programs are included units. Un/underutilized city properties
that could be developed as affordable, multi-unit
workforce housing for city and school district
to permit multi-family development at
densities up to 30 units per acre in
the new MU zone (Program 1.8) The
PAGE 475 of 1856
staff (to reduce their commutes to San Marino, make it
easier for their kids to attend local
schools and be active in the community, and make
city/district jobs more competitive with
Housing Element also discusses the
development of employee housing
on The Huntington and
Southwestern Academy properties
other cities )” (Program 1.9).
“To meet our affordable housing assessment, we
should continue to pursue ADU development.
Mixed use construction in the Huntington Dr business
district could also be explored but ONLY if the state
would allow the city to determine its own standards for Housing Element contains multiple
policies and programs to encourage
and promote ADUs (Programs 1.1
through 1.5).
Underutilized, commercially-zoned
development. If the state continues to limit local control, properties, including parking lots, then the city should explore prohibiting any mixed use
in the business districts.”
along the Huntington Drive corridor
will be included in the City’s list of
additional sites that could be added
to the City’s Sites Inventory
(Program 1.12).
“Large homes modified to accommodate more family
members or multigenerational homes”
Housing Element contains multiple
policies and programs to encourage
and promote ADUs (Programs 1.1
through 1.5)
“Large lots for smaller cluster houses in gated
community”
Policy and Program included to allow
detached or attached ADU
development in single-family
neighborhoods (Programs 1.1
through 1.5).
“all of above, including mixed use for our commercial
areas”
Underutilized, commercially-zoned
properties, including parking lots,
along the Huntington Drive corridor
will be included in the City’s list of
additional sites that could be added
to the City’s Sites Inventory
(Program 1.12).
“Allow mixed-use development in the commercial areas Underutilized, commercially-zoned along Huntington Dr. and Mission St. and allowing
housing above the ground retail/commercial spaces.”
properties, including parking lots,
along the Huntington Drive corridor
will be included in the City’s list of
additional sites that could be added
to the City’s Sites Inventory
(Program 1.12).
“San Marino is an upscale housing option. Converting it Noted. to allow for greater density is abhorrent. What we need is to oust the idiots in Sacramento.”
“Why can’t we let our elected city government decide
the situations which the city can comfortably allow?”
“Modular or pre-fabricated tiny homes (or container
houses) that can be quickly erected and streamlined
through permitting process”
Noted.
Programs included to pre-approve
ADU plans, could include smaller
factory-built home types (Program
1.2).
“Convert Stoneman into condos/townhouses. Blend
Carver and Valentine, and use the Carver property to
develop more homes”
Stoneman is on sites inventory list.
Carver was on sites inventory list but
was subsequently removed due to
strong opposition from property
owner and the public.
PAGE 476 of 1856
“Granny housing on residential properties” Housing Element contains multiple policies and programs to encourage
and promote ADUs (Programs 1.1
through 1.5). Additionally, Program
3.12 promotes a homesharing
program that will increase housing
opportunities.
“As Pasadena develops and grows into the city, we
think it will be become: a major city to the east of
downtown drawing people from LA, we can fit the need
of those that are looking for a smaller town feet but
close proximity to the growing city of Pasadena”
“Reduce or eliminate emotionally and politically
motivated restriction of development at the DRC and
Planning Commission”
Comment noted
Comment noted
“all of above” Most of the referenced programs are
provided for in the updated housing
element
“Lacy Park” If desired by City, Lacy Park can be
included on the Sites Inventory list
(Program 1.12).
“Carriage houses for sublet to singles” Housing Element contains multiple policies and programs to encourage
and promote ADUs (Programs 1.1
through 1.5).
“convert larger homes to senior living (maximum 3
people) per home”
Housing Element contains Program
1.7 to allow affordable housing on
the Stoneman Site. Additionally,
Programs 1.1 through 1.5 promotes
development of attached and
detached ADUs on single-family
properties. Additionally, Program
3.12 promotes a homesharing
program that will increase housing
opportunities.
“like the carriage house idea” Housing Element contains multiple policies and programs to encourage
and promote ADUs (Programs 1.1
through 1.5). Additionally, Program
3.12 promotes a homesharing
program that will increase housing
opportunities.
“Spaces above businesses could be used to construct
studios”
Underutilized, commercially-zoned
properties, including parking lots,
along the Huntington Drive corridor
will be included in the City’s list of
additional sites that could be added
to the City’s Sites Inventory
(Program 1.12).
“Allow to reconvert big houses into few smaller houses” Housing Element contains Programs
1.1 through 1.5 to promote
development of attached and
detached ADUs on single-family
properties. . Additionally, Program
PAGE 477 of 1856
3.12 promotes a homesharing
program that will increase housing
opportunities.
“Our commercial areas on Huntington and Mission
should have more mixed-use buildings with living units
above and retail and restaurants below. Our
commercial arteries and dead or dying.”
Program 1.8 creates a new MixedUse zone along Huntington Drive to allow development of mixed-use
buildings. Additionally, underutilized,
commercially-zoned properties,
including parking lots, along the
Huntington Drive corridor will be
included in the City’s list of additional
sites that could be added to the
City’s Sites Inventory (Program
1.12).
“I am concerned that condos, townhouses, and
apartments were not in the list of new housing
typologies? Re-zoning is needed”
Rezoning and zoning code changes
to allow multi-family development,
mixed-use development, and
employee housing (Programs 1.7
through 1.9).
“Mixed use above existing and new Huntington Drive
commercial”
Underutilized, commercially-zoned
properties, including parking lots,
along the Huntington Drive corridor
will be included in the City’s list of
additional sites that could be added
to the City’s Sites Inventory
(Program 1.12).
“I don’t think tiny houses are a good idea, especially for Tiny house comment noted. this community. It’ll be liken to trailer Rezoning to provide for high-density park homes. However, high-end apartment buildings on apartments will be accomplished large lots might be a great way to
expand housing and keep the integrity of San Marino.”
concurrently with the adoption of the
Housing Element.
“Change nothing. Preserve the home architecture and Comment noted. Comment stop allowing for Orange County-style homes to build in inconsistent with RHNA obligation San Marino” and state law.
“ADUs and larger lots to accommodate more
multigenerational homes”
Housing Element contains multiple
policies and programs to encourage
and promote ADUs (Programs 1.1
through 1.5).
“Small Cottages, maybe 2 ADUs on large lots” Housing Element contains multiple policies and programs to encourage
and promote ADUs (Programs 1.1
through 1.5).