647 of 741
CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 6
2 0
CITY OF SAN MATEO
Agenda Report
City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
Agenda Number: 26 Section Name: CONSENT CALENDAR Account Number: 10-4662 File ID: 22-6556 TO: City Council
FROM: Drew Corbett, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Public Works Department
MEETING DATE: September 19, 2022
SUBJECT:
On-Call Private Development Mapping Services – Amendment RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Amendment No. 2 to the agreement with CSG Consultants, Inc. for on-call private development mapping services in the amount of $120,000 for a new agreement total of $300,000; and authorize the Public Works Director to execute the amendment in substantially the form presented.
BACKGROUND:
On October 20, 2017, the City Manager approved an agreement with CSG Consultants, Inc. (CSG) for On-Call Private Development Mapping Services in an amount not-to-exceed $90,000. On October 5, 2020, the City Council approved Amendment No. 1, increasing the agreement amount to $180,000. Services provided by CSG are related to mapping, which includes but is not limited to, map checking, review of tentative, parcel, and final maps, as well as easements, lot line adjustments, and mergers.
Due to a large number of planning applications with maps being submitted to the City for review, the City continues to need outside services to review and process maps within the allowable amount of time. It should also be noted that the majority of mapping services require a professional licensed land surveyor to certify. Public Works currently does not have staff qualified to do so.
The increased budget amount is estimated to be sufficient for two (2) years of map-related work from CSG mapping staff.
This agreement with CSG is only for work relating to maps. All of CSG’s costs will be 100 percent cost recovery, as they will be paid through deposits collected as part of the building permit process or from mapping fees.
BUDGET IMPACT:
There is no net fiscal impact for this amendment as the costs for these services will be paid through deposits collected through the building permit process and mapping fees.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
This agreement is not a project subject to CEQA, because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5).)
NOTICE PROVIDED
All meeting noticing requirements were met.
ATTACHMENTS
Att 1 - Amendment No. 2
648 of 741
CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 6
2 0
STAFF CONTACT
Tracy Scramaglia, Senior Engineer
[email protected]
(650) 522-7316
Jay Yu, Engineering Manager
[email protected]
(650) 522-7323
649 of 741
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN MATEO AND
CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR
PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT SERVICES
($90,000 [Original Amount], $90,000 [Amendment 1], $120,000 [Amendment 2]) W
HEREAS, the City of San Mateo (“City”), a municipal corporation of the State of California, and CSG Consultants, Inc . (“Consultant”), entered into an A greement for Professional Consultant Services (“Agreement”) on November 15th, 2017; and
W
HEREAS, the City requires the services of a professional enginee ring firm specializing in the review and processing of maps; and
W
HEREAS, the Consultant is customarily engaged in these specialized services without control and direction from City staff; and
W
HEREAS, City and Consultant wish to amend the Agreement to i ncrease the payment from $180,000 to a not-to-exceed amount of $300,000.
N
OW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
1. Se
ction 8, “Payment” of the Agreement , the first and second paragraphs are amended to read:
“
Payment shall be made by the CITY only for services rendered an upon submission of a pay
ment request upon completion and CITY approval of the work performed. In consideration for the full performances of the services and any reimbursable expenses set forth in this Agreement, CITY agrees to pay CONSULTANT a fee based on verified time and materials not to exceed $ 300,000. Requests for payments shall be itemized and correspond to the various items of work described in Exhibit A and shall be based on the rate and cost schedule set forth in Exhibit B-2.
Pa
yment for extra work or changes in the work will not be made unless for work authorized in advance in writing by the PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR. Prior to commencing such extra work or changes, CONSULTANT and CITY shall agree upon an estimated not to exceed cost for such extra work. In no event shall CONSULTANT be paid for additional work that is necessary because of CONSULTANT’S errors or oversights.” 2 . Exhibit B of the Agreement shall be replaced with Exhibit B-2.
3. The remaining terms of the Agreement remain in full force and effect. [
SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]
Contract Amendment
650 of 741
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY OF SAN MATEO and CSG Consultants, Inc. have executed this Amendment No. 2 on ____________________, 2022.
CITY OF SAN MATEO CONSULTANT
Azalea Mitch
Public Works Director
Cyrus Kianpour
Its Authorized Agent
President
I
f a Corporation, can be either 1) President or
2) Vice President plus an additional corporate
officer (i.e., Secretary, Treasurer) who shall sign
below.
APPROVED AS TO FORM ADDITIONAL CORPORATE OFFICER
(if necessary per the above)
Linh Nguyen
Assistant City Attorney
Nourdin Khayata
Secretary
Contract Amendment
651 of 741
2 022 Engineering Division Hourly Rates
CSG services are billed on a time-and-materials basis according to our Standard Rates, shown below.
Professional Engineering Services 2022
Hourly Rate
Engineering Trainee $70
Administrative Assistant $80
Analyst $135
Engineering Designer/CASp Inspection & Consultation $145 Construction Inspector $150
Senior Analyst $160
Assistant Resident Engineer $175
Assistant Engineer $150
Associate Engineer $180
Senior Construction Inspector $165
Senior Engineer $205
Senior Land Surveyor $205
Resident Engineer $210
Structure Representative $210
Senior Structural Engineer $225
Senior Project Manager $225
Principal Engineer $240
Senior Principal Engineer $260
Two-Person Survey Crew $340
Sustainability Program Management Services Hourly Rate
Sustainability Program Analyst $140
Sustainability Program Senior Analyst $165
Sustainability Program Manager $195
A
ll hourly rates include overhead costs including, but not limited to, salaries, benefits, Workers Compensation Insurance, travel and office expenses. CSG will coordinate the pickup and return of plans to and from CSG offices.
Overtime work will be billed at 1.5x the hourly rates indicated in the table above. On each anniversary of the contract start date, CSG will initiate a rate increase based on change in CPI-U for the applicable region. CSG will mail/email an invoice every month for services rendered during the previous month.
EXHIBIT B-2
Contract Amendment
652 of 741
CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 6
6 0
CITY OF SAN MATEO
Agenda Report
City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
Agenda Number: 27 Section Name: CONSENT CALENDAR Account Number: 72-4674 File ID: 22-6607 TO: City Council
FROM: Drew Corbett, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Public Works Department
MEETING DATE: September 19, 2022
SUBJECT:
2022 Citywide Sanitary Sewer Cleaning and Inspection: Large Diameter Pipes Project – Contingency Amendment RECOMMENDATION:
Approve an increase to the contingency reserve associated with the Pipe and Plant Solutions, Inc. agreement for the 2022 Citywide Sanitary Sewer Cleaning and Inspection – Large Diameter Pipes Project in an amount of $55,000 for a new total contingency in the amount of $110,000, resulting in a new total contract amount of up to $478,631; and authorize the Public Works Director to issue change orders within the contingency amount.
BACKGROUND:
The City regularly performs cleaning and video inspections of all its sanitary sewer mains to meet the collection system management goals of the Sanitary Sewer Management Plan. The objectives are to maintain the sewer mains and manholes by removing debris that may cause backups, and to perform video inspections of the pipes and manholes for condition assessment.
The 2022 Citywide Sanitary Sewer Cleaning and Inspection – Large Diameter Pipes Project (Project) encompasses cleaning and video inspection of approximately 22,670 linear feet of sewer mains larger than 12 inches in diameter and 51 sewer manholes located primarily along Highway 101 North-bound, Highway 101 North-bound frontage roads, 16th Avenue between Caltrain tracks and Highway 101, and alongside the Caltrain tracks between 21st Avenue and 16th Avenue.
Council approved an agreement for the Project with Pipe and Plant Solutions, Inc. on May 16, 2022 in the amount of $368,631; established a contingency of $55,000; and authorized the Public Works Director to execute the agreement and issue change orders within the contingency amount. The contingency reserve was established to address and mitigate potential unknowns that may arise during construction and was approximately 15% of the agreement value. Contractor activities began July 11, 2022.
In the scope of cleaning a sewer, high velocity hydraulic cleaning equipment is used to scour the pipes and remove roots, debris, and sand from the pipe. The scoured debris is collected for hauling and disposal. Prior to advertisement and award, staff estimated a total of 20 cubic yards (CY) of debris to be disposed. This disposal quantity was based on debris disposal quantities from other annual sewer basin cleaning projects for pipelines smaller than 12 inches in diameter.
As of August 24, 2022, 48% of the Project cleaning and inspection of sewer mains has been completed; however, 60 CY of debris has been collected for disposal – an amount larger than anticipated. At this rate, staff and the contractor estimate the Project will need to dispose of an additional 63 CY of debris to complete the remainder of the Project. Staff underestimated the total debris disposal quantity, likely due to the larger diameter sanitary sewer pipes (up to 48 inches) not being cleaned as frequently as sewers smaller than 12 inches (every 10 years vs. 5 years), and larger pipes having slower flow rates that allow more settling of debris in the pipe. Both of these factors made estimating disposal amounts
653 of 741
CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 6
6 0
difficult during design of the project.
The existing contingency reserve will not be sufficient to fund the additional debris disposal costs and cover any other unforeseen conditions. To reduce contract time extensions and provide flexibility for staff to negotiate contract change orders in a timely manner, staff recommends increasing the contingency reserve by an additional $55,000, for a new contingency reserve total of $110,000.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The initial authorized agreement with Pipe and Plant Solutions, Inc. was in the amount of $368,631. The original contingency reserve established was $55,000. This request increases the contingency by $55,000 to a total of $110,000.
Sufficient funding for this additional contingency is available in the Large Diameter Sewer Cleaning project.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
The City prepared a Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (Final PEIR) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (SCH No. 2015032006). Council on June 6, 2016, certified the PEIR. In accordance with CEQA, the Final PEIR serves as the primary environmental compliance document for the implementation of the Clean Water Program. The City prepared Addenda to the Final PEIR that was approved on July 16, 2018 (Addendum 1) and April 15, 2019 (Addendum 2). This work is within the scope of the Project evaluated in the PEIR and Addendum.
NOTICE PROVIDED
All meeting noticing requirements were met.
ATTACHMENTS
None
STAFF CONTACT
Laura Webb, Associate Engineer
[email protected]
(650) 522-7322
Deryk Daquigan, Engineering Manager
[email protected]
(650) 522-7287
654 of 741
CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 6
9 2
CITY OF SAN MATEO
Agenda Report
City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
Agenda Number: 28 Section Name: CONSENT CALENDAR Account Number: 10-1111 File ID: 22-6653 TO: City Council
FROM: Drew Corbett, City Manager
PREPARED BY: City Clerk's Office
MEETING DATE: September 19, 2022
SUBJECT:
Statewide Proposition 1 – Resolution of Support
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a Resolution to affirm the City Council of the City of San Mateo's support for the passage of Proposition 1 in the November 8, 2022 Statewide Election.
BACKGROUND:
On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned its 1973 decision of Roe v. Wade. The Roe decision had established a constitutional right to abortion, thereby limiting the ability of the states to place restrictions on abortion.
Existing California laws provide that every individual has a fundamental right to privacy in their personal reproductive decisions, which includes the fundamental right to choose to have an abortion and the fundamental right to choose or refuse contraceptives.
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022, voters in the state of California will vote on Proposition 1. Proposition 1 seeks to amend the California Constitution to expressly include these fundamental rights and prohibit the State from denying or interfering with an individual’s reproductive freedom.
The City Council of the City of San Mateo enacted Ordinance No. 2022-6 “Access to Reproductive Health Care Facilities” to promote the full exercise of the right to privacy by patients seeking vital reproductive health service. By adopting this resolution, the City Council of the City of San Mateo affirms its support for the passage of Proposition 1. The resolution also expresses support for the “Women’s Reproductive Freedom and Healthcare Privacy Action Plan” developed by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo. A link to the County’s media release is below.
BUDGET IMPACT:
There is no budget impact associated with this proposed resolution.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
This resolution is not a project subject to CEQA, because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5).)
NOTICE PROVIDED
All meeting noticing requirements were met.
655 of 741
CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 6
9 2
ATTACHMENTS
Att 1 – Proposed Resolution
LINK
County of San Mateo media release – Advocacy Agenda to Support Women’s Reproductive Rights
STAFF CONTACT
Martin McTaggart, Deputy City Clerk
[email protected]
(650) 522-7044
656 of 741
CITY OF SAN MATEO
RESOLUTION NO. __ (2022)
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSITION 1, TO AMEND THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION TO EXPRESSLY INCLUDE AN INDIVIDUAL’S FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM, IN THE NOVEMBER 8, 2022
STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION
WHEREAS, the City of San Mateo supports the ability of all residents to access safe and affordable healthcare; and
WHEREAS, access to safe and legal abortion affects health, safety, economic stability, and quality of life; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Mateo is home to nonprofit health care providers that provide free or low- cost reproductive care, including abortion services; and WHEREAS, the ability of women to safely access reproductive and other healthcare services is increasingly threatened across the country, especially with the United States Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v.
Jackson Women’s Health Organization to overturn Roe v. Wade; and WHEREAS, the City of San Mateo enacted Ordinance No. 2022-6 “Access to Reproductive Health Care Facilities” to promote the full exercise of the right to privacy by patients seeking vital reproductive healthcare services; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Mateo supports the “Women’s Reproductive Freedom and Healthcare Privacy Action Plan” developed by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo; and WHEREAS, Proposition 1 on the November 8, 2022 Statewide General Election would, if passed, amend the California Constitution to expressly include an individual’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom, which includes the fundamental right to choose to have an abortion and the fundamental right to choose or refuse contraceptives.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MATEO, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY RESOLVES that:
1. The City Council of the City of San Mateo affirms the importance of reproductive health, rights and justice, and women’s access to safe, comprehensive and affordable reproductive health care including the right to safe and accessible abortion services.
2. The City Council of the City of San Mateo supports the passage of Proposition 1 at the November 8, 2022 Statewide General Election.
657 of 741
CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 6
1 2
CITY OF SAN MATEO
Agenda Report
City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
Agenda Number: 29 Section Name: PUBLIC HEARING Account Number: 25-3112 File ID: 22-6547 TO: City Council
FROM: Drew Corbett, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Community Development Department
MEETING DATE: September 19, 2022
SUBJECT:
Ordinance Introduction - Senate Bill (SB 9)
RECOMMENDATION:
Introduce an ordinance to amend the San Mateo Municipal Code to add Chapter 27.21 "Two-Unit Development Overlay District" to implement the provisions of SB 9, amend Chapter 27.66 "Historic Preservation" to update the definition of “Individually Eligible Buildings”, and adopt a Resolution to establish interim objective design standards for SB 9 development.
BACKGROUND:
Effective January 1, 2022, Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) seeks to increase housing production in single-family zoned areas (see Attachment 4) by allowing qualifying single-family zoned parcels to be developed with two units (i.e. duplexes) and/or to be subdivided into two parcels through a ministerial1 process. Two main types of development can occur under SB 9: 1) Two-Unit (Duplex) development and 2) Urban Lot Splits where a lot can be split into two and duplex development can occur on each lot.
The City has elected to adopt an ordinance to implement the provisions of SB 9 locally. In two City Council Study Sessions held in February and June of 2022, and two community workshops held in May and August of 2022, staff gathered feedback and initial policy guidance on potential development standards to include in the draft ordinance. On August 23, 2022, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council approve the draft ordinance with a recommendation to increase demolition and height limits for SB 9 units, remove discretionary review for units over 800 square feet in size, increase the number of units permitted on urban lot split properties, remove access corridor requirements for properties that do not require parking, and remove window glazing requirements for certain second story windows. These recommendations with staff responses are further discussed below as some of the recommendations from the Planning Commission were inconsistent with the City Council policy direction at the study sessions.
Summary of City Council Study Sessions
The City Council provided feedback on six policy areas relating to SB 9, with the following direction on each topic:
1.Demolition Limits – Increase demolition limits from 25% to 50% to be consistent with existing zoning requirements.
2.Public Noticing – Provide a courtesy informational public notice prior to project approval.
3.Subdivision Map Extension – Do not increase map terms beyond existing allowance (of up to 8 years).
4.Dwelling Unit Maximum for Urban Lot Splits – Limit urban lot split properties to 2 dwelling units per lot. 1 Ministerial permits are non-discretionary approvals granted at the staff-level when objectives standards are met, require no public hearing or discretion, and are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
658 of 741
CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 6
1 2
5.Unit Size Limits – Allow units greater than 800 square feet as determined by the maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of the underlying zoning district through a discretionary review process.
6.Open Space Requirements – Do not impose open space requirements.
Requested information on how SB 9 is implemented in neighboring jurisdictions (Attachment 7) found that many jurisdictions have restricted urban lot splits to a maximum of two dwelling units and have deferred to the maximum underlying FAR to determine maximum unit size above 800 square feet.
The agenda reports, meeting minutes and videos for the February and June City Council study sessions are available online at this [link].
DISCUSSION:
This report introduces a local SB 9 draft ordinance that is aligned with State law and incorporates Council direction. In addition, staff is proposing:
•Interim objective design standards applicable to all SB 9 development to address the lack of objective standards in the City’s existing residential design guidelines, and
•Minor changes to the municipal code’s definition of historic structures to align the municipal code with the General Plan and codify current City practices to be consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Draft Ordinance Overview
1. Review and Permitting Process
Applications that meet objective standards will be processed ministerially subject to the City’s review and noticing procedures. Project approval would be required prior to submittal of building permits. For urban lot splits, no building permit may be submitted until the final map is recorded.
2. Two-Unit Development Standards
A. Demolition Limits
•Ministerial Permit: Less than 50% demolition of a structure’s exterior structural walls or roof. •Discretionary Permit: 50% or more demolition subject to existing Code requirements (Sec. 27.18.035).
B. Setbacks
•Front: District setbacks apply.
•Side and Rear: Minimum 4 ft.
C. Building Height
•Attached Units: 24 ft. maximum plate and 32 ft. maximum peak height (follows underlying R1 District) •Detached Units: 16 ft. maximum plate and 24 ft. maximum peak height (follows current ADU standards) D. Parking
•0-1 spaces as required by SB 9. (See Attachment 5 for ½ mile transit radius map where 0 spaces may be permitted)
•Parking may be covered or uncovered.
E. Number of Units
•Maximum of 4 units (two SB 9 units, an ADU and a JADU) on a parcel not created through an urban lot split.
F. Unit Size
•Ministerial: Units ≤ 800 sq. ft. in size.
•Discretionary: Units > 800 sq. ft. in size.
•Maximum Size: 800 sq. ft. when a lot has reached its maximum FAR. Units size over 800 sq. ft. dictated by maximum FAR of the underlying zoning district.
G. Deed Restriction
•Prohibition on the establishment of short-term rentals for any unit created through SB 9.
3. Urban Lot Split – Additional Development Standards
A. Number of Units
659 of 741
CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 6
1 2
• Maximum of two dwelling units per lot (inclusive of ADUs and JADUs).
B. Access
•All newly created parcels shall provide access to the nearest public street right-of-way. •Newly created flag lots (i.e. panhandle lots) shall provide a minimum 10-foot wide driveway/access corridor for adequate vehicle and emergency access.
4. Alternative Discretionary Review. To allow additional flexibility, projects that do not meet objective development and design standards may be permitted through a discretionary review process. This process could be used for increased height for detached units, to permit unit sizes larger than 800 sq. ft. and/or for relief from an objective design standard. In no instance may an application for alternative review propose to: further subdivide a parcel using SB 9, increase the number of maximum allowed dwelling units, propose a parcel size less than 1,200 sq. ft., or propose less than one off-street parking space when parking is otherwise required.
Interim Objective Design Standards
SB 9 development is only subject to objective standards in effect at the time a permit is deemed complete. To address the lack of objective standards in the City’s existing Single-Family Dwelling Design Review and Duplex Design Guidelines, staff has proposed interim design standards (Attachment 2) such as standards for neighbor privacy, exterior lighting, massing, window and door placement, and consistency of colors, materials and architectural styles for attached units, that would be applicable to SB 9 development. These standards are based on the current design guidelines and the Department’s multi- family and duplex objective design standards effort. These standards are intended to be interim in nature and will either be superseded by or revised to align with the final adopted version of the City’s Duplex and Multi-family Objective Design Standards.
Text Amendments – Chapter 27.66 Historic Preservation
The provisions of SB 9 do not apply to federal, state, or local historic properties or historic resources. In reviewing the proposed draft ordinance for consistency with current City regulations, staff identified a discrepancy between the General Plan and Municipal Code regarding individually eligible historic resources and proposes the following text amendment to better align the zoning ordinance with the General Plan and current practice.
Policy C/OS 8.1 of the General Plan defines a historic building to include “…buildings which are on or individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historical Resources, or Downtown Historic District contributor buildings as designated in the 1989 Historic Building Survey Report, or as determined to be eligible through documentation contained in a historic resources report.” Chapter 27.66 of the Municipal Code defines a “historic building” as “all individually eligible buildings in the City, all individually eligible and contributor buildings within the Downtown Specific Plan area, and all structures located in the Downtown Historic District, as adopted by resolution of the City Council.” However, Section 27.66.020(c) limits the definition of individually eligible and contributor buildings to only “…those buildings as identified in the City of San Mateo General Plan…buildings identified as [contributor building] and located within the Downtown Historic District as adopted by resolution of the City Council and identified in the City of San Mateo General Plan” and does not include provisions for buildings identified to be individually eligible through a historic resources evaluation (HRE) report prepared by a licensed historic professional.
Currently, when 50% or greater demolition of a structure that is more than 45-years old is proposed, staff requires a HRE to be prepared by or peer reviewed by an independent City-approved historic professional to determine if the structure is eligible for listing before it can be substantially altered or demolished. This practice is consistent with the General Plan policy C/OS 8.1 and environmental review thresholds pursuant to CEQA.
To establish consistency between the General Plan and Municipal code, and to ensure consistency with CEQA requirements, staff is proposing minor amendments to the Municipal Code that would revise Section 27.66.020(c) and (d) to amend the definition of “Individually Eligible” and “Contributor Buildings” to also include buildings determined to be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places or California Register of Historical Resources through
660 of 741
CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 6
1 2
documentation contained in an HRE. A track changes version of the ordinance showing the recommended edits is included in Attachment 4.
It is important to note that the proposed amendments would continue the current practice that HREs be prepared and/or peer-reviewed by a City approved licensed historic professional. The proposed amendments do not affect historic districts as the amendments are to allow for individually eligible historic resources to be determined through an HRE.
Since these amendments to Chapter 27.66 are not directly associated with SB 9, the City Council has the option to adopt them with the SB 9 Ordinance, or defer them to a later date when they can be considered as part of a more comprehensive Historic Preservation Ordinance update.
Planning Commission Recommendations
On August 23, 2022, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted 4-0 (with 1 absence) to recommend approval of the proposed draft ordinance and interim objective design standards with the following modifications, and to not recommend approval of the proposed code amendments to Chapter 27.66 of the Municipal code. The formal recommendations of the Planning Commission are outlined below along with staff responses.
Draft Ordinance:
1. Demolition Limits
Planning Commission Recommendation: Allow up to 100% demolition through a ministerial permit provided the project conforms to objective design standards.
Staff Response: The City Council provided guidance to increase demolition limits from 25% to 50%, consistent with existing demolition thresholds within the Municipal Code. The Planning Commission’s recommendation to allow up to 100% demolition through a ministerial process would affect the preservation of existing housing stock, could result in loss of individually eligible historic resources, and would be inconsistent with existing Zoning Code requirements.
Staff’s recommendation aligns with Section 27.18.035 (Substantial Removal of Existing Residence) of the Municipal Code that requires a Special Use Permit (SUP) and potential historic resources evaluation2 for the major demolition of a structure.
2. Dwelling Unit Maximum for Urban Lot Splits
Planning Commission Recommendation: Through a tiered approach, allow 3-4 units per lot on urban lot split properties based on the size of the resulting lots.
Staff Response: The City Council provided guidance to limit urban lot split properties to a maximum of two dwelling units, which aligns with a majority of surrounding jurisdictions. Staff intends to provide the City Council an update on the effectiveness of the ordinance to determine if any adjustments or updates are warranted such as increasing the number of units permitted or allowing for a tiered approach. Staff would like direction on whether an update should be provided after ten SB 9 applications have been process or within one year, whichever occurs first, or if an update should be provided after ten applications have been processed or within three years, whichever occurs first. Due to a lack of current SB 9 applications (only one application has been submitted), a longer time horizon may be more beneficial as it is likely that there would be more case law at that time and/or there would be a larger sample size of City SB 9 applications to evaluate.
3. Unit Sizes
Planning Commission Recommendation: Remove discretionary review for unit sizes over 800 square feet (sq. ft.) provided the project conforms to objective design standards, allow larger unit sizes as determined by maximum FAR of the underlying zoning district through a ministerial process, and allow at least one unit to be up to 1,200 sq. ft. even if total cumulative development exceeds the maximum FAR.
Staff Response: The City Council recommended allowing unit sizes greater than 800 sq. ft. but expressed concerns related to maximum density/intensity of development on smaller sized parcels. Requiring discretionary review for 2 A historic resources evaluation (HRE) is only required if 50% or more demolition and where the structure proposed for removal is over 45 years old.
661 of 741
CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 6
1 2
units larger than 800 sq. ft. and limiting units to 800 sq. ft. (as opposed to 1,200 sq. ft.) when a parcel has already achieved its maximum FAR is consistent with the requirements of SB 9 and addresses the Council’s concern related to density/intensity of development by providing oversight for larger sized units that could potentially be more impactful to adjacent properties.
4. Building Height
Planning Commission Recommendation: Remove the lower height restrictions for detached units and allow all units to achieve the maximum plate and peak height of the underlying zoning district when outside the required setback areas.
Staff Response: Staff sought to align the height limits for SB 9 units with the City’s ADU regulations as these structures are viewed and treated similarly by the State in terms of setbacks (4 ft. side/rear), unit size (up to 800 sq. ft.), and height (up to 16 ft.). Staff recommends a 24 ft. plate height and 32 ft. peak height for attached units and a 16 ft. plate height and 24 ft. peak height for detached units. This is consistent with the City’s ADU regulations, encourages the development of attached units to preserve usable open space on a property, and seeks to lessen potential privacy impacts to adjacent properties. Detached units may exceed their 16 ft. plate and 24 ft. peak height limits through a discretionary review process in which potential privacy and visual impacts that may occur with a two-story structure 4 ft. from the side and rear property lines would be assessed.
5. Access
Planning Commission Recommendation: Require a 10 ft. access easement/corridor only when parking is required or when necessary per the fire code.
Staff Response: Staff recommends retaining an access corridor requirement for newly created flag lots or landlock parcels, which would provide emergency vehicle access (i.e. fire/emergency services vehicles), an area for the provision of public services (i.e. water, sewer, underground electrical connections etc.), personal access (vehicle or otherwise) to the property, potential space to accommodate additional off-street parking, and conforms with the City’s current driveway requirements. If a property cannot accommodate a 10 ft. wide access corridor, the discretionary review process could be available to assess alternative access configurations.
Interim Objective Design Standards:
6. Planning Commission Recommendation: Remove the second story window glazing requirement.
Staff Response: Staff recommends retaining the window glazing requirement, which matches the privacy requirements contained in the City’s ADU regulations as SB 9 and ADU development have similar heights, setbacks, and size limits and could result in very similar development and potential impacts.
Text Amendments – Historic Preservation: Definition of “Individually Eligible Buildings”
7. Planning Commission Recommendation: Do not update the definition of individually eligible buildings.
Staff Response: The City’s 1989 historic survey was not inclusive of the whole City and it is known that not all individual historic resources in the City were identified in the report. The Planning Commission raised a concern that an HRE could be prepared by anyone and identify a property or grouping of properties as individually eligible, thus exempting them from SB 9. However, the purpose of an HRE is to provide additional evaluation of an individual structure that is 45-years or older and serves to protect a potential historic resource before it is substantially altered or demolished.
These reports are independently prepared, or peer reviewed, by a City approved historic consultant and are used to evaluate individual properties. Establishment of a historic district follows a separate process and requires recognition by the City Council or the State. As noted above, the proposed amendments are intended to codify current practices and to align with the General Plan and CEQA.
Unless Council wishes to revisit its previous direction to staff in response to the Planning Commission’s recommendations and discussion, staff is not currently recommending the above changes.
Additional Planning Commission Comments:
While not part of the formal recommendation, individual Planning Commissioners also made comments related to reducing the minimum size of a projection from 18-inches to 12-inches or less and a general comment that interim design standards may not be necessary and to only apply the final Duplex and Multi-Family Objective Design Standards to SB 9
662 of 741
CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 6
1 2
applications once it is adopted. Individual Commissioners also raised concerns that the prohibited exterior materials listed in the interim objective design standards are too restrictive and could increase the cost of development, which would make SB 9 development less attractive/feasible for property owners. The prohibition of some exterior finishes such as plywood and vinyl outlined in the interim objective design standards is to ensure development consists of high quality and durable materials. A prohibited exterior material may still be proposed through the discretionary review process where staff would review to ensure that the material would still result in a durable and high-quality structure. No change to the interim objective standards are recommended.
Submitted SB 9 Projects
The City has received one application for an urban lot split to demolish an existing residence, evenly split a 13,300 square- foot parcel and build one single-family residence and one ADU on each parcel. This application is currently under review.
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, OUTREACH, AND COMMENTS:
Previous Community Workshops
Two community workshops were held on May 17, 2022 and August 8, 2022. Ten to seventeen people attended these workshops with a majority identifying as residents of the City. Surveys from both workshops found that a majority of respondents were in favor of allowing unit sizes in excess of 800 sq. ft. but were almost evenly split between requiring discretionary review for units greater than 800 sq. ft. versus not requiring discretionary review for units regardless of their size. A majority of attendees also supported allowing 3-4 units either outright or through a tiered approach based on the size of the resulting lots for urban lot split properties. (Survey results and further discussion can be found in the August 23, 2022 Planning Commission Report here).
No public comments on the draft ordinance have been received. Public comments received after the publication of this report will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration at the public hearing and will be posted to this item online as “Post Packet Public Comments.”
BUDGET IMPACT:
Updates to the City’s Municipal Code to align with State law are fully funded by the Community Development Department’s annual budget with no additional impact to the General Fund.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
An ordinance adopted to implement SB 9 shall not be considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and is exempt from CEQA review per Government Code Sections 65852.21(j) and 66411.7(n), which state that the adoption of an ordinance by a city or county implementing the provisions of Government Code Section 65852.21 and 66411.7 and regulating two-unit development and urban lot split projects are statutorily exempt from the requirements of CEQA. The proposed text amendment to Chapter 27.66 of the Municipal Code is also separately and independently exempt from CEQA, pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3), which provides a project is exempt from CEQA 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.
NOTICE PROVIDED
All meeting noticing requirements were met.
ATTACHMENTS
Att 1 – Draft SB 9 Ordinance
Att 2 – Draft Interim Objective Design Standards Resolution Att 3 – Proposed Code Amendments (Chapter 27.66) – Track Changes Att 4 – Zoning Map - R1 Districts
Att 5 – Half-Mile Transit Radius Map
Att 6 – SB 9 Implementation in Neighboring Jurisdictions Att 7 – R2 District Comparison Chart
Att 8 – Senate Bill 9 Government Code
Att 9 – August 23, 2022 Planning Commission Minutes
663 of 741
CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 6
1 2
STAFF CONTACT
Laura Richstone, Associate Planner
[email protected]
(650) 522-7205
664 of 741
7 2
1 0
CITY OF SAN MATEO
DRAFT ORDINANCE
Add Chapter 27.21, “Two-Unit Development Overlay District” to Title 27 of the San Mateo Municipal Code to Provide for Regulations Concerning Two-Unit Residential Developments and Urban Lot Splits in Single Family Residential Zones and Amending Section 27.66 “Historic Preservation” for Consistency with the General Plan WHEREAS, Senate Bill 9 (“SB 9”), which amended Section 66452.6 of the Government Code and added Sections 65852.21 and 6411.7 to the Government Code to allow for streamlined ministerial approval of two-unit development and urban lot splits within single-family zoned areas, was signed by the Governor of California on September 16, 2021; and
WHEREAS, the changes to the Government Code became effective on January 1, 2022; and WHEREAS, SB 9 requires cities and counties, including the City of San Mateo, to ministerially approve a parcel map for an urban lot split and/or a proposed housing development containing a maximum of two primary residential units within a single-family residential zone, if the proposal meets certain statutory criteria; and WHEREAS, SB 9 specifies that proposed projects and subdivisions cannot be proposed in prohibited locations under Government Code Section 65913.4(a)(6)(B)-(K) such as lands within an earthquake fault zone, federally designated flood plan, historic district or property, and high fire hazard severity zone as defined under state law; and
WHEREAS, SB 9 further restricts the standards and regulations that local agencies, including the City of San Mateo, may impose to only objective zoning, subdivision, and design standards that do not conflict with the statue and where those standards must not physically preclude a unit size of at least 800 square feet or qualifying urban lot split; and
WHEREAS, the City seeks to regulate development pursuant to SB 9 through the implementation of regulations concerning two-unit residential development and urban lot splits; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 65852.21(j) and 66411.7(n) of the Government Code, a local agency may adopt an ordinance to implement SB 9; and
WHEREAS, adoption of this ordinance is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to California Government Code Section 65852.21(j) and Section 66411.7(n) relating to the implementation of SB 9; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Zoning Code is codified in Title 27 of the City of San Mateo Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to make a revision to Section 27.66 to amend the definition of Individually Eligible Buildings for consistency with General Plan Policy C/OS 8.1 to clarify that a historic building also includes those buildings determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources through documentation contained within a historic resources report; and
665 of 741
7 2
1 0
WHEREAS, the City wishes to make several minor revisions to Title 27, including amending the definition of “Individually Eligible and Contributor Building” to align with the definition of historic buildings contained in the General Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MATEO ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Chapter 27.21 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is added to Title 27 as follows:
Chapter 27.21
Two-Unit Development Residential Overlay District – R1 Districts Article I – Two-Unit Development
27.21.010 Purpose
The purpose of this Article is to allow up to two detached or attached primary housing units on one parcel, establish objective standards, and regulate subdivision of parcels in single-family zoned areas in accordance with state law. This Chapter shall be implemented and interpreted in conjunction with California Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7, as amended, and applicable objective standards contained within Chapters 26 and 27 of the San Mateo Municipal Code.
27.21.020 Definitions
For the purposes of this Chapter, the following definitions apply. Terms not defined herein shall rely upon the definitions contained in Chapter 26 and Chapter 27 of the San Mateo Municipal Code. (a) “Access Corridor” means an access easement or the ‘pole’ of a flag lot that provides vehicular access to the right-of-way. Access corridors shall consist of paving and be free of landscaping or other permanent features that obstruct ingress/egress and vehicular traffic to a parcel. (b) “Acting in concert” means that the owner, or a person acting as an agent or representative of the owner, knowingly participated with another person in joint activity or parallel action toward a common goal of subdividing the adjacent parcel.
(c) “Car Share Facility” means one or more parking space(s) that have been designated permanently for car share vehicles, where the vehicles are leased for short periods of time, often by the hour. (d) “Department” means the Department of Community Development. (e) “Existing Exterior Structural Wall” means and constitutes the original bottom plate and original top plate in its existing position, original studs (with the exception for new window framing), and capable of standing without support.
666 of 741
7 2
1 0
(f) “Flag or Panhandle Lot” means a parcel which includes a strip of land that is owned in fee that is used primarily for vehicular access from a public or private street to the major portion of the parcel. For the purposes of determining setbacks, the property line parallel to the primary right-of-way and part of the major portion of the parcel shall be the front property line. Maximum floor area ratio (FAR) shall be based on the gross square footage of the parcel.
(g) “High Quality Transit Corridor” means a corridor with fixed bus route service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.
(h) “Major Transit Stop” means a site containing any of the following: (i) an existing rail or bus rapid transit station; (ii) a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service; or (iii) the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service intervals of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.
(i) “Primary Unit” (also called a residential dwelling unit or residential unit) means a single-family residence or a residential dwelling unit within a multifamily residential development. A primary unit is distinct from an ADU or junior accessory dwelling unit (JADU), and may be a single-family residence (i.e. one primary unit) or a duplex (i.e. two primary units detached or attached). (j) “SB 9 Dwelling Unit or SB 9 Unit” means a primary unit that is developed pursuant to the requirements of this Article, applicable San Mateo Municipal Code provisions, and Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7, as amended.
(k) “SB 9 Project or SB 9 Planning Application” means a project application submitted to the City in accordance with this Article, SB 9, and applicable San Mateo Municipal Code provisions to do one or more of the following:
(1) Split a qualifying single-family residentially zoned parcel into two lots; or (2) Develop no more than two primary units on a single lot, or (3) When a lot is subdivided, develop no more than two dwelling units, inclusive of ADUs and JADUs, on a single parcel.
(l) “Senate Bill 9 or SB 9” means the state law signed by the Governor into law on September 19, 2021 that amended Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7 to allow up to two primary units on and/or lot splits of qualifying single-family zoned parcels.
(m) “Substantial Removal” means the demolition of 50% or more of a structure's exterior walls (measured in linear feet) and/or roof (measured in square feet). Existing exterior walls that are converted to interior walls shall be counted as walls to be demolished. For the purposes of this Chapter, substantial removal for a roof shall not apply to permit applications for re-roofing where roof pitch alterations do not exceed an increase in height of more than two (2) feet as measured at the highest point or where a SB 9 planning application has been submitted as part of the proposed improvements. Doors, including garage doors, entry doors, and sliding glass doors, shall not be included in the percentage calculation of an existing structure's
667 of 741
7 2
1 0
exterior walls. This section shall not apply to an accessory building or to a residence that has been declared a public nuisance under this Code.
(n) “Sufficient to Allow Separate Conveyance” means that connected or adjacent units can be sold separately if they conform to condominium standards to allow for the adequate transfer of title, ownership, rights, and interests in the property from one entity to another. (o) “Urban Lot Split” means a subdivision of an existing legal single-family zoned parcel into no more than two separate single-family zoned parcels that meet all of the criteria and standards set forth in this Chapter, applicable objective standards of San Mateo Municipal Code Chapter 26, and Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7, as amended.
27.21.030 Rules of Procedure
Except as otherwise outlined below, the applicable rules of procedure contained in Chapter 27.08 shall apply to all SB 9 planning applications. Where there is a conflict, standards in this Chapter shall prevail. (a) Planning Application Submittal. An SB 9 planning application, on the form(s) prescribed by the Department, for either an attached or detached unit(s) and/or urban lot splits, shall be submitted for all development pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter. (1) An applicant may file concurrent planning applications under this Chapter for one or two-unit development and an urban lot split.
(2) Processing of Applications. Unless an SB 9 application is submitted pursuant to Section
27.21.035 of this Chapter, SB 9 application(s) shall be processed as prescribed in Section 27.08.040 of the San Mateo Municipal Code, except that these applications shall be considered ministerially with no public hearing.
(b) Informational Notice. Upon receipt of an SB 9 planning application, and once the project is deemed complete, the City shall provide an informational notice that an SB 9 application has been filed with the City to all property owners and tenants within a 500-foot radius of the subject parcel and to the applicable neighborhood association(s) in accordance with the noticing procedures adopted by the Department. (c) Ministerial Permit Approval. If an SB 9 planning application complies with the provisions of this Chapter, a ministerial, non-discretionary permit shall be issued. Notwithstanding anything contrary in this code, the issuance of a ministerial SB 9 Two-Unit Development permit and/or a SB 9 Urban Lot Split permit is not appealable.
(d) Submittal Requirements. In addition to the requirements of Section 27.08.010(c), each application shall be accompanied by all of the following:
(1) Application Forms. Completed SB 9 planning application forms as prescribed by the Department;
668 of 741
7 2
1 0
(2) Property Ownership. Verification of property ownership in the form of a preliminary title report that is no more than a year old, showing the current owners of the property, the names of record owners of the land, and all existing easements and other reservations, restrictions, or covenants; and (3) Legal Description. An accurate legal description of the property and any resultant lots in the case of an urban lot split application; and
(4) Plans. Scaled and accurate plans to include required applicable information as outlined in the Planning Application and/or Urban Lot Split Submittal Requirements checklists; and (5) Affidavit. A completed property owner tenant disclosure affidavit and acknowledgement that the application meets SB 9 eligibility requirements. (6) Findings. Findings of Approval. An SB 9 application not submitted pursuant to Section
27.21.035 of this Chapter shall be approved ministerially if the Zoning Administrator or designee makes all the following findings:
(A) The parcel is within the Two-Unit Overlay District and meets all qualifying criteria as outlined in this Chapter;
(B) The development meets all applicable objective standards contained in and required by the General Plan, San Mateo Municipal Code or other City adopted plan; (C) The development does not adversely affect matters regarding police protection, crime prevention, and security because it adheres to the objective standards of Chapter 23.54; (D) The proposed SB 9 unit(s) is consistent with all applicable SB 9 objective design standards of the Two-Unit Overlay District
(7) Findings of Denial. An SB 9 application shall be denied if the Building Official makes written findings, based upon a preponderance of evidence, that:
(A) The proposed housing development would have a specific adverse impact, as defined and determined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, as amended, of the Government Code, upon public health and safety or the physical environment, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact(s).
27.21.040 Recordation of Deed Restriction
A deed restriction shall be submitted in a form approved by the City and recorded to run with the land for all development pursuant to this Article as indicated below:
(a) Prior to the issuance of any building permit(s), development pursuant to this Chapter shall require a deed restriction to be recorded requiring a prohibition of the establishment of short- term rentals and a
669 of 741
7 2
1 0
requirement that a rental or lease of any dwelling unit created pursuant to this Chapter shall be for a period of at least 30 consecutive days.
27.21.045 Discretionary Review as Alternative to Ministerial Approval Projects that do not meet the provisions of this Chapter shall be subject to either a Single-Family Dwelling Design Review (SFDDR) or Site Plan and Architectural Review (SPAR) discretionary review process. (a) In no case shall an application for discretionary review:
(1) Propose to increase FAR above that permitted by the underlying zoning district, except to the extent allowed by state law; or
(2) Propose to further subdivide a parcel that had been established through a previous urban lot split pursuant to Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7, as amended; or (3) Propose to increase the maximum number of permitted dwelling units; or (4) Propose a parcel size smaller than 1,200 sq. ft.; or (5) Propose less than one parking space per unit unless otherwise allowed per Section 27.21.070 of this Chapter.
27.21.050 Lands Not Subject to the Two-Unit Development Residential Overlay District The following lands classified as R1-A, R1-B, and R-C are not subject to the Two-Unit Development Overlay District:
(a) Any parcel that would require the demolition or alteration of any of the following housing types:
(1) Housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low incomes; or, (2) Housing that is subject to any form of rent or price control through a public entity’s valid exercise of its police power; or,
(3) Housing that has been occupied by a tenant within the last three years; or, (4) A parcel(s) on which an owner of residential real property has exercised the owner’s rights under Government Code Chapter 12.75 (commencing with Section 7060) of Division 7 of Title 1 (Ellis Act) to withdraw accommodations from rent or lease within 15 years prior to an SB 9 application submittal. (b) On any parcel designated an historic district or property, or located in a resource or hazard area such as high fire areas, wetlands, fault zones, hazardous waste sites or lands under conservation easements per Government Code Sections 65913.4(a)(6)(B-K), as amended.
670 of 741
7 2
1 0
27.21.060 Limitations
For properties that develop a project pursuant to this overlay, the following limitations apply:
(a) A maximum of four units, with a maximum of two primary dwelling units (attached or detached), except as outlined in Article II below.
(b) Limitation on Rental.
(1) Short Term Rentals Prohibited. No dwelling unit created pursuant to this Chapter shall be rented for a period of less than 30 consecutive days as a short-term rental as set forth in Chapter 5.66.
Rentals longer than 30 consecutive days are permitted.
(c) Limitation on Sale.
(1) If two or more primary units exist on a single parcel, they shall not be sold separately until an urban lot split application has been approved by the City and a final parcel map recorded. (d) Limitation on Use.
(1) Lots created pursuant to Article II of this Chapter shall be limited to residential uses only.
27.21.070 Two-Unit Development Standards
SB 9 units, as defined in this Chapter, shall comply with the following development standards:
(a) Demolition Limits. SB 9 projects that do not involve an urban lot split are subject to the following:
(1) Demolition of less than 50% of a structure’s exterior structural walls or roof shall be subject to a ministerial review process.
(2) Demolition of 50% or more of a structure’s exterior structural walls or roof may be permitted subject the Alternative Discretionary Review process listed in Section 27.21.035 of this Chapter and issuance of a Special Use Permit for the substantial removal of the existing structure pursuant to Section
27.18.035 of the San Mateo Municipal Code.
(b) Maximum Floor Area Ratio. The maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for all structures on site shall be determined by the underlying zoning district with the following exceptions:
(1) Application of development standards of the underlying zoning district shall not preclude the construction of up to two primary dwelling units nor physically preclude either of the two units from being at least 800 square feet in floor area.
(2) SB 9 unit(s) in excess of 800 square feet shall be subject to a Single-Family Dwelling Design Review (SFDDR) or Site Plan and Architectural Review (SPAR) discretionary review process and shall be governed by the maximum floor area established by the underlying zoning district.
671 of 741
7 2
1 0
(3) In instances where the existing floor area allowance of a lot has been fully utilized, an SB 9 unit of up to 800 square feet in size with at least 4-foot side and rear yard setbacks and up to 16-feet in height shall be permitted, unless the proposed development would have a specific adverse impact, as defined and determined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, as amended, of the Government Code, upon public health and safety or the physical environment, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact(s). (c) Height. The specific height maximums outlined below are applicable to all zoning districts subject to the Two-Unit Development Overlay District:
(1) Attached SB 9 Units. The maximum building height is 24 feet to top of plateline and 32 feet to roof peak as measured from existing grade.
(2) Detached SB 9 Units. Maximum building height is 16 feet to top of plateline and 24 feet to roof peak as measured from existing grade.
(d) Setbacks. SB 9 unit(s) shall have setbacks as follows:
(1) Front Setback. A minimum setback from the front lot line, as required by the lot’s underlying zoning district.
(2) Side and Rear Setbacks. A minimum setback of four (4) feet shall be required from the side and rear lot lines.
(3) No setback shall be required for an existing legally permitted structure that is converted into an SB 9 unit or a structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing legally permitted structure.
(e) Parking.
(1) General Requirements. There shall be a minimum of one standard size off-street parking space (either uncovered or covered) for each SB 9 unit. All parking, whether required or voluntary, shall be located entirely on the same lot as the dwelling unit it serves and shall conform to the size requirements of the City’s “Standard Drawings and Specifications” as adopted by resolution of the City Council and on file with the Department of Public Works. Covered parking shall meet all applicable setbacks of the underlying zoning district.
(2) Exemptions. No off-street parking shall be required for an SB 9 unit in the following instances:
(A) The parcel is located within one-half mile walking distance of a high-quality transit corridor, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 2155(b); as amended; or (B) The parcel is located within one-half mile walking distance of a major transit stop, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21064.3(e), as amended; or,
672 of 741
7 2
1 0
(C) The parcel is located within one block of a car share facility. (f) Objective Design Standards.
(1) New residential construction of primary units subject to streamlined ministerial approval shall comply with the Interim Objective Design Standards as adopted by City Council resolution and as may be amended from time to time by further City Council resolution. (g) Other Development Standards.
(1) All development pursuant to this Chapter shall also be subject to the requirements of the California Building Code, Fire Code and local fire sprinkler ordinance requirements. (2) All objective standards of the underlying zoning district, Chapters 27 and 23 and other relevant Chapters of the San Mateo Municipal Code shall apply. If such standards conflict with this Chapter, the standards in this Chapter shall prevail. In no instance shall any objective building or design standard preclude the development of at least two primary dwelling units of at least 800 square feet each in size, unless the development would have a specific adverse impact, as defined and determined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, as amended, of the Government Code, upon public health and safety or the physical environment, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact(s).
Article II- Urban Lot Splits
27.21.100 Purpose
The purpose of this Article is to implement SB 9, establish objective standards and regulate qualified Urban Lot Splits and development in accordance with state law. Article II shall be implemented and interpreted in conjunction with Article I of this Chapter, California Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7, San Mateo Municipal Code Chapter 23.40 and Titles 26 and 27, and any other relevant San Mateo Municipal Code section or other City adopted plan.
27.21.110 Rules of Procedure
Urban Lot Split Development. In addition to the rules of procedure listed in Section 27.21.030 of Article I above, an Urban Lot Split application shall also conform with the following:
(a) Submittal Requirements:
(1) Full Site Survey. A full site boundary survey stamped and signed by a Land Surveyor licensed by the State of California. A topographic and boundary survey shall be required for all properties with grades over 15%.
673 of 741
7 2
1 0
(2) Parcel Map. A parcel map pursuant to Chapter 26 of the San Mateo Municipal Code showing the proposed Urban Lot Split.
(3) Affidavit. A completed owner occupancy affidavit and acknowledgement that the property meets Urban Lot Split eligibility requirements outlined in Section 27.21.050 and that the owner of the property intends to occupy one of the housing units as their principal residence for a minimum of three years from the date of the approved Urban Lot Split and recordation of the Final Map. (A) Exception. This requirement shall not apply to an applicant that is a community land trust as defined in clause (ii) of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (11) of subdivision (a) of Section 402.1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, or if the applicant is a qualified nonprofit corporation as described in Section 214.15 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. (b) Final Parcel Map. Upon an Urban Lot Split application approval, the applicant shall prepare, file, and record a final parcel map with the Department of Public Works pursuant to Article II of Section 26.56 of the San Mateo Municipal Code.
(c) Dedications and Improvements. Unless required to accommodate an urban lot split or provide access to a parcel, no dedications of rights-of-ways or the construction of offsite improvements for parcels created pursuant to this Article shall be required as a condition of approval. (d) Findings. To approve an Urban Lot Split application, the Zoning Administrator shall make the findings listed in Section 27.21.030 of Article I above, in addition to the following findings:
(1) The parcel being subdivided was not established through a prior SB 9 urban lot split application.
(2) The Urban Lot Split conforms to all applicable objective requirements of the Subdivision Map Act (Division 2 commencing with Section 66410), except as otherwise provided in this Section. (3) The parcel being subdivided is not adjacent to another parcel where either the owner of the parcel proposing to be subdivided or any person acting in concert with said owner has previously subdivided the adjacent parcel using the provisions of SB 9.
27.21.120 Recordation of Deed Restriction
A deed restriction shall be submitted in a form approved by the City and recorded to run with the land for all development pursuant to this Article as indicated below:
(a) A prohibition of non-residential uses on any lot created pursuant to this Chapter; (b) A prohibition of the establishment of short-term rentals and a requirement that a rental or lease of any dwelling unit created pursuant to this chapter shall be for a period of at least 30 consecutive days. (c) A prohibition against further subdivision of the parcel using the Urban Lot Split procedures in this Chapter and pursuant to Government Code Section 65852.21 and 66411.7, as amended;
674 of 741
7 2
1 0
27.21.130 Lands Not Eligible for Urban Lot Splits
The following lands classified as R1-A, R1-B, and R1-C are not eligible for an Urban Lot Split under this Article, if the parcel meets either of the following:
(a) Any parcel that was established through prior approval of an Urban Lot Split subdivision as provided for in this Article; or
(b) Any parcel proposed to be subdivided that is adjacent to another parcel where either the owner of the parcel proposing to be subdivided or any person acting in concert (as defined in Section 27.21.020(b)) with said owner has previously subdivided the adjacent parcel using the provisions of this Article.
27.21.140 Urban Lot Split Development Standards
Development standards shall be applied to each parcel individually. Each parcel created by an Urban Lot Split shall conform to the Two-Unit Development Standards in Section 27.21.070 and Chapter 26 of the San Mateo Municipal Code except as otherwise listed below.
(a) Demolition. The demolition of 50% or more a structure’s exterior structural walls or roof shall require the issuance of a ministerial Special Use Permit for the substantial removal of the existing structure pursuant to the applicable sections of Section 27.18.035 of the Municipal Code. (b) Number of Units. On a lot established through an Urban Lot Split pursuant to Government Code 66411.7, a maximum of two dwelling units shall be allowed per resultant parcel. In no case shall more than two dwelling units on a single lot in any otherwise allowed combination of primary units, SB 9 units, ADUs and/or JADUs be permitted.
(c) Parcel Map and Configuration.
(1) Number of Parcels. The parcel map shall create no more than two new parcels. (2) Parcel Size.
(A) Each newly created parcel shall be of approximately equal areas. The smallest subdivided parcel shall not be less than forty percent (40%) of the lot area of the original parcel proposed for subdivision.
(B) Each newly created parcel shall be at least 1,200 square feet in gross area. (d) Access and Driveways.
(1) Parcels resulting from an Urban Lot Split shall have access to, provide access to, or adjoin the public right-of-way through their frontage, access corridor, or access easement(s). (A) A minimum 10-foot-wide strip of land owned in fee (i.e. flag lot ‘pole’) or 10- foot wide access easement shall be provided for all flag lots or landlocked parcels created through an
675 of 741
7 2
1 0
Urban Lot Split. The width of the strip of land owned in fee for flag lots or width of the access easement for landlocked parcels shall not be less than the driveway width requirements of Section 27.64.025.
(B) A minimum 20-foot-wide strip of land owned in fee (i.e. flag lot ‘pole’) or 20- foot wide access easement shall be provided for all flag lots or landlocked parcels created through an Urban Lot Split where the length of the flag lot ‘pole’ or access easement is greater than 150 feet in length.
(2) Access to all new lots and/or units shall be compliant with the San Mateo Consolidated Fire District standard details and specifications for driveways and turnarounds. (3) Easements for the adequate provision of public services and utilities and egress/ingress may be required.
(4) Proposed boundary lines shall be free of jogs in alignment, except where physical conditions and established property lines preclude the establishment of straight boundary lines, or such alignment would prohibit the creation of lots pursuant to this Article which are capable of being developed with two residential units that are at least 800 square-feet in size each. (e) Other Development Standards.
(1) All development pursuant to this Article shall also be subject to additional development standards as outlined in Section 27.21.070(f) of this Chapter above.
Section 2. Interim Objective Design Standards. New residential construction of primary units subject to streamlined ministerial approval shall comply with the Interim Objective Design Standards as adopted by City Council resolution and as may be amended from time to time by further City Council resolution.
Section 3. Subsection (c) of Section 27.66.020 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:
Individually Eligible and Contributor Buildings. For the purposes of this chapter, the terms "individually eligible building" shall mean those buildings as identified in the City of San Mateo General Plan, buildings which are on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or California Register of Historical Resources (CRHP), or buildings determined to be individually eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHP through documentation contained in a historic resources report. "Contributor building" shall mean those buildings identified as such and located within the Downtown Historic District as adopted by resolution of the City Council and identified in the City of San Mateo General Plan.
Section 4. Subsection (d) of Section 27.66.020 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:
For the purposes of this chapter, the terms "individually eligible building" and "contributor building" and "Downtown Historic District" shall mean those buildings and district identified as such by resolution of the City Council, identified in the City of San Mateo Downtown Specific Plan, or as determined to be listed or individually eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHP through documentation contained in a historic resources report.
676 of 741
7 2
1 0
Section 5. Environmental Determination. In accordance with California Government Code Sections 65852.21(j) and 66411.7(n), the adoption of this ordinance implementing the provisions of Government Code sections 664114.7 and 65852.21 and regulating urban lot splits and two-unit development projects in single-family zoned areas is statutorily exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).
Therefore, the proposed amendment is statutorily exempt from CEQA in that the proposed amendments implement the new laws enacted by SB 9. Text amendments to Chapter 27.66 of the San Mateo Municipal Code to update the definition of individually eligible and contributor buildings to align with the General Plan is also exempt from CEQA, pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3), the common sense exemption, which provides a project is exempt from CEQA 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.
Section 6. Severability. In the event any section, clause or provision of this ordinance shall be determined invalid or unconstitutional, such section, clause or provision shall be deemed severable and all other sections or portions hereof shall remain in full force and effect.
Section 7. Publication. This ordinance shall be published in summary in a newspaper of general circulation, posted in the City Clerk's Office, and posted on the City's website, all in accord with Section 2.15 of the City Charter.
Section 8. Legislative History and Effective Date. This ordinance was introduced on Clerk to complete., and adopted on Clerk to complete., and shall be effective 30 days after its adoption.
677 of 741
CITY OF SAN MATEO
RESOLUTION NO. ____ (insert year)
[A RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR SINGLE-FAMILY AND TWO UNIT DEVELOPMENT WITHIN SINGLE-FAMILY (R1) ZONED AREAS]
WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021 the Governor signed Senate Bill 9 (“SB 9) which amended Section 66452.6 of the Government Code and added Sections 65852.21 and 6411.7 to the Government Code; and
WHEREAS, SB 9 allows for streamlined approval for certain two unit residential development and urban lot splits in single-family zoned areas; and
WHEREAS, SB 9 requires cities and counties, including the City of San Mateo, to ministerially approve a parcel map for an urban lot split and/or a housing development containing a maximum of two primary residential units within a single-family residential zone if the proposal meets certain statutory criteria; and
WHEREAS, SB 9 restricts the standards and regulations that local agencies, including the City of San Mateo, may impose on qualifying two-unit and/or urban lot split projects to only objective zoning, subdivision, and design standards that do not conflict with the statue and where those standards must not physically preclude a unit size of at least 800 square feet; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Mateo has adopted Chapter 27.21 “Two-Unit Development Overlay District” of the San Mateo Municipal Code to implement the provisions of SB 9; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Single-Family Dwelling Design Guidelines and Duplex Design Guidelines contain limited objective design standards; and
WHEREAS, to implement Chapter 27.21 of the San Mateo Municipal code it is necessary to specify objective design criteria applicable to new single-family homes and two-unit development; and
WHEREAS, the proposed interim objective design standards attached hereto as Exhibit A set forth objective standards and requirements for the design of single-family and two-unit development projects.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MATEO, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY RESOLVES that:
1. Objective design standards referenced in Chapter 27.21 shall include the standards attached hereto as Exhibit A.
2. Applications to construct new single-family dwellings or two-unit development not subject to the ministerial approval pursuant to Chapter 27.21 shall continue to be subject to the Single-Family Dwelling Design Guidelines or Duplex Design Guidelines.
3. Applications to construct new dwelling units subject to ministerial approval pursuant to Chapter
27.21 shall comply with the attached Interim Objective Design Standards.
678 of 741
4. Nothing in this Resolution or its exhibits is intended to preclude the application of building codes, state and local regulations with respect to accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units, or other laws applicable to housing development projects of one to four units.
5. In the event any section clause or provision of this resolution or its exhibits shall be determined invalid or unconstitutional, such section, clause, or provision shall be deemed severable and all other sections or portions hereof shall remain in full force and effect.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MATEO, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY FINDS that:
1. New primary dwelling units subject to ministerial approval within the single-family (R1) residential zones of the City shall be subject to the Interim Objective Design Standards for single-family and two-unit development contained in Exhibit A.
2. This Resolution will take effect upon adoption.
3. In accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21065, adoption of these objective design standards is not a “project” subject to CEQA, and even if it were a project would be subject to the “common sense exemption,” because adoption of objective design standards will not result in a direct or indirect impact on the physical environment. (Public Resources Code Section 21065; CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3)). Proposals for single-family and two-unit development will be considered as part of individual projects and will evaluated pursuant CEQA at the time of application submittal.
679 of 741
EXHIBIT A
Interim Objective Building and Design Standards
Single-Family and Two-Unit SB 9 Developments
Purpose. The purpose of this document is to establish interim objective building and design standards for ministerial single-family and two-unit SB 9 development planning applications. These standards are intended to provide for high-quality building designs that fit contextually and respect the scale and design of existing single- family neighborhoods and district where new residential development is proposed.
Applicability. The interim standards set forth herein shall be applicable to all ministerial single-family and two- unit SB 9 development projects and shall apply in addition to the development standards in Chapter 27.21. In the event of a conflict between these standards and the standards of Chapter 27.21, the more restrictive standards shall apply except that no standard shall preclude the development of at least two dwelling units that are at least 800 square feet each as permitted by Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7, of the California Government Code, as amended.
Definitions. The following definitions shall apply. Terms not defined herein shall defer to the definitions contained in Chapters 26 and 27 of the San Mateo Municipal Code. Where definitions conflict, the definitions below shall prevail.
(a) “Architectural Features” shall include but are not limited to bay windows, box windows, projections of at least 18 inches, balconies, balconettes, insets of at least 18 inches, and dormers. (b) “Attic” means a non-habitable space within the roof of a building as defined by the California Building Code.
(c) “Dormer” means a roofed projecting window structure, set upright in a sloping roof, that projects vertically beyond the plane of the pitched roof. The face of a dormer shall be setback at least 1 foot from the wall below, with a roof pitch no less than half the main roof and a ridge below the main roof ridge.
(d) “Utilities and Mechanical Equipment” means, but is not limited to, air conditioners; heaters; utility meters; cable and similar telecommunications equipment; backflow preventions; irrigation control valves; electrical transformers; pull boxes; all ducting for air conditioning, heating, and blower systems; fire protection equipment; and all roof-mounted equipment.
Objective Building and Design Standards. All development shall conform with the following:
(a) Architectural Style
(1) Attached units shall be of the same architectural style including:
(A) Roof form
(B) Windows
(C) Entrances
(D) Massing/scale/proportions
(E) Colors/Materials
(F) Architectural detailing/fenestration.
(b) Massing and Scale
(1) Structures shall provide a plane offset of a minimum of two feet per each 30 feet of horizontal length along the primary frontage and a street side yard.
680 of 741
(2) Structures shall provide a minimum 2-foot stepback for second story elements on side elevations and on a rear elevation when it is within 15 feet of the rear lot line. (c) Entries and Entry Ways
(1) Individual entries shall be provided to each dwelling unit. (2) All primary entries to a dwelling unit shall incorporate at least one of the following elements at front entrances:
(A) Front porches
(B) Stoops
(C) Recessed entry with a depth of at least 3 feet
(3) At least one principal entryway shall face the primary street frontage, primary right-of-way, or access corridor.
(4) When an exterior staircase is proposed for an upper-level primary dwelling unit, it shall have a setback of at least 5 feet from nearest lot line and shall have a landing limited to the minimum area required to allow ingress and egress as specified by the California Building Code. (d) Windows
(1) Window type, style, recess depth, and mullions shall be consistent across elevations. (2) Location and Privacy
(A) Second story windows and balconies shall be offset from the window locations and balconies of neighboring residences to maximize privacy. (B) When located within 5 feet of a lot line of an abutting residential lot, second story windows up to 5 feet from the finished floor shall provide and maintain obscured glazing.
(e) Materials and Colors
(1) A building shall carry the same theme on all elevations. A theme includes primary (non- accent) material(s) and color(s).
(2) The following materials are prohibited on building exteriors:
(A) Exterior Foam Molding
(B) Corrugated Metal
(C) Vinyl Siding
(D) Plywood
(E) Exterior Insulation Finishing System (EIFS)
(F) Any material with a light reflection value of <45.
(f) Lightwells. Lightwells shall not be located along the primary front façade of a structure. All light wells shall be screened from public view
(g) Lighting. All exterior lighting shall be downward directed (excluding landscaping uplighting), have a shielded light source, and be designed so that light is not directed-off site. (h) Utilities and Mechanical Equipment
Ground-mounted utilities, mechanical equipment, generators, and AC units that directly serve the development shall be screened from view from adjacent properties and the public right-of-way by either an enclosure designed as part of the building and/or fencing.
681 of 741
Chapter 27.66
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
27.66.020 APPLICABILITY.
(a) Historic Buildings and Downtown Historic District. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all individually eligible buildings in the City, all individually eligible and contributor buildings within the Downtown Specific Plan area, and all structures located in the Downtown Historic District, as adopted by resolution of the City Council.
(b) The City Council by resolution may add to the provisions of this chapter any building which it finds meets the criteria of contributing to the historic importance of downtown and the City. Such an action shall be based on National Register of Historic Places and California Register of Historical Resources criteria and documented in a form consistent with the City of San Mateo Historic Building Survey.
(c) Individually Eligible and Contributor Buildings. For the purposes of this chapter, the terms "individually eligible building" shall mean those buildings as identified in the City of San Mateo General Plan. buildings which are on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or California Register of Historical Resources (CRHP), or buildings determined to be eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHP through documentation contained in a historic resources report. "Contributor building" shall mean those buildings identified as such and located within the Downtown Historic District as adopted by resolution of the City Council and identified in the City of San Mateo General Plan. (d) For the purposes of this chapter, the terms "individually eligible building" and "contributor building" and "Downtown Historic District" shall mean those buildings and district identified as such by resolution of the City Council, or identified in the City of San Mateo Downtown Specific Plan, or as determined to be individually eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHP through documentation contained in a historic resources report.
682 of 741
Zoning Map - R1 Districts
Prepared by Planning Division
Date: 1/28/2022
Disclaimer:
These maps are provided for planning and reference purposes only. Accuracy of boundary information contained is not guaranteed. The official records should be consulted for exact information.
San Mateo City Limits
Zoning Districts
R1A - One Family Dwelling "A"
R1B - One Family Dwelling "B"
R1C - One Family Dwelling "C"
LEGEND
0 0.8 1.60.4 mi
0 1 20.5 km
1:36,000
R1A
CITY OF BELMONT
R1C
R1B
R1A
R1B
R1A
R1B
R1B
R1C
R1B
R1B
R1C
R1C
R1C
R1A
R1C
R1C
R1C
R1C
R1C
R1C
R1C
R1A
R1A
R1B
R1B
R1B
R1C
R1C
R1C
R1C
R1C
R1B
R1B
R1B
CITY OF FOSTER CITY
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
(UNINCORPORATED)
TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
CITY OF BURLINGAME
R1C
683 of 741
P r e p a r e d b y
P la n n in g D iv is io n
D i s c l a i m e r :
T h e s e m a p s a r e p r o v id e d f o r p la n n in g a n d r e f e r e n c e p u r p o s e s o n ly . A c c u r a c y o f b o u n d a r y in f o r m a t io n c o n t a in e d is n o t g u a r a n t e e d . T h e o f f ic ia l r e c o r d s s h o u ld b e c o n s u lt e d f o r e x a c t in f o r m a t io n .
S C A L E
1 " = 1 , 0 0 0 '
L E G E N D
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! ! ! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! ! ! ! ! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
|ÿ
|ÿ
|ÿ
|ÿ
|ÿ
|ÿ
|ÿ
1 0 1
1 0 1
1 0 1
1 0 1
2 8 0
2 8 0
T O W N O F H I L L S B O R O U G H
T O W N O F
H I L L S B O R O U G H
C I T Y O F B U R L I N G A M E
T O W N O F
H I L L S B O R O U G H
C I T Y O F B E L M O N T
C I T Y O F B E L M O N T
C I T Y O F B U R L I N G A M E
T O W N O F
H I L L S B O R O U G H
C I T Y O F B U R L I N G A M E
C I T Y O F F O S T E R C I T Y
C I T Y O F F O S T E R C I T Y
C I T Y O F B E L M O N T
C O U N T Y O F S A N M A T E O
( U N I N C O R P . )
C O U N T Y O F S A N M A T E O
( U N I N C O R P . )
P E N I N S U L A G O L F &
C O U N T R Y C L U B
( C O U N T Y O F S A N M A T E O )
R 1 C
R 1 B
R 1 C
R 1 B / Q 6
R 1 C
R 1 C
R 1 B
R 1 C
R 1 C
R 1 B
R 1 C
R 1 C
R 1 C
R 1 A
R 1 C
R 1 B
R 1 B
R 1 C
R 1 C
R 1 C
R 1 B
R 1 C
R 1 C
R 1 A
FOST ERCITY B L V
D
CHRI S
TI A
N
D R
W E L L I N G T O N D R
ROBINWO
O
D
LN
E L M E R S T
CORON E TB L V D
PO R T
ROYALAVE
COMMONSL N
P A
VOLN
H A R B O R B L V D
W E D G E W O O D D R
V E R N O N W A Y
TE RRACED R
H I L L E R S T
MONSERATAVE
AVONDALERD
O N E I L L A V E
H I L L S T
POLARI S
AVE
H U L L D RE X B
OURNEA V E
L AU RELST
C O N C O U R S E D R
L O RICT
LIV E O
A K
WAY
BLACKMOUNTAIN R
D
SHOREW
AY
RD
O N E I L L A V E
RE ADA V E
P R I M R O S E R D
CR Y
STALSPRIN GSR D
ELCER RITOAV E
C O L U M B A L N
PO LHEMUSRD
D O R A D O L N
CATAMARAN
ST
SHARO
N
AVE
HILL M A
NAVE
VIS T A
RD
NORTH RD
SHELFORDAVE
MONTERE Y
AV E
ELCAMINOREAL
RALSTONA V E
L E X I N G T O N A V E
LAKESIDE
DR
MID DL ER D
LIN C
OLNAVE
MALT ALN
TALBRY N
DR
CHULA
VISTA
DR
HIG
HLANDAVE
B U R L I N G A M E A V E
C A
RINAL N
HA YNERD
A
N
D R
OMEDA
LN
LAK ESHOREDR
STJAMES
R D
EMERALDBAY
L
N
VINEST
ALAMEDA
DELA S P
UL G A
S
P A R K A V E
L A G U N A A V E
C ELESTI A
LLN
NEPTUNELN
L I N D E N A V E
L YALLWA Y
E2 8THAV
T H
ATCHER
LN
HASTINGS D R
LEODR
A RTH U R A V E
D A R T M O U T H A V E
L I D O L N
P L A Z A L N
R I G E L L N
S O U
THR D
RALSTO N R A
NCHRD
VAL LEYV IEW
DR
BE LLE V
UEAVE
PALOMAA V
E
OXFORDW
AY
C H A N N I N G R D
FLORIB U
NDA A
VE
C S M D R
EDGEHILLD R
V E N U S C T
NOTREDAMEAVE
OA K G
RO V
E A V
E
PONCEA V
E
W
SANTAI NEZ
AVE
ORIONLN
VILLAGED R
LACUM B R
E
R
D
N O
RTHAMAV
E
S EME R
IAA VE
EXETERAV E
F O
RESTA V E
C O MS T O CKCIR
HILLCRESTRD
PI ZARRO
LNP O
RT O
FI N
O
L N
LOS A
L T
OSD R
H O W A R D A V E
S T A G A V E
STONE H E
D G
ERD
G R A N A D A S T
MO U
N T
AIN
VIEW
AVE
SUNNY S
LOPE
A VE
N O R M A L N
ECOURTLN
ISLA N
D
PKW
Y
S U S S E X C T
SANJUANBLVD
J U L I A C T
COBBLE H ILLPL
P H O E N I X L N
VALERGA
D R
P A
UL
SCANNELLDR
EUCA LYPTUS A V
E
C I
PRIANIBLVD
HA
R
BORBLVD
B R O A D W A Y
C O R V U S L N
HI LL S
B O R O
UGH
BLV D
B U R L I N G A M E A V E
W
OOSTE R A
V E
LYON A V
E
C A L I F O R N I A D R
P A R K R D
K R I S T I N C T
O R
ISKANYDR
LONGVIEW
R D
BELAI RERD
C A R O L A N A V E
R A M L
N
S ANRAYMUNDORD
S E A
GATEWAY
BELMONTCANYON R D
C A
SA B
ONAA VE
A L B R Y N L N
BIL LINGSGAT E
LN
NEW L
ANDS A
VE
DE
SOTO
L N
P L
Y M
OUTHLN
M E R V A T P L
TRINIDADLN
R O L L I N S R D
A L A
M
E D
A D
E L A
S P U
LGA S
SOUTHDOW
N
RD
PALM
DR
CA R M E LITAAVE
R O B E R T A V E
P A
LOMAAVE
A R A L N
A L T A L N
O L D C O U N T Y R D
V O L A N I S L N
CLIPPERD R
R A L
STONAVE
R A L S T O N A V E
B E
ACH
PARKBLVD
NEWHALLRD
W I N D E M E R E R D
M A L C O L M A V E
ELV E R A
NOWAY
MOUNT AIN
WOO DLN
CHE STNUTS T
FORE STVIEWAVE
T ART ANTRL
W
AVON D A L E
R D
HI LLCRES T D
R
A R B O R A V E
DALEVIEW A V E
C0M M
ONSLN
JUNO
LN
E A S T L N
DE
LEO N
ST
C LIF FSI D ECT
A N I T A C T
SHIRLEY
R
D
CASTLEL N
BRYCE
CT
S A T U R N C T
A R C A D I A P L
O A KCT
HA L L M
ARK
D R
C O R A L L N
S A L M A R K C T
L Y M E L N
ROLL INS RD
LA S S E
N
DR
C E
DAR CT
BALBOAST
ALDEN
C T
TAHO E
DR
M O R R E L L A V E
RIDGE
RD
LA N E
ST
LYN D
HURSTAVE
P L A I D P L
A M B O Y C T
MA Y W
OOD
DR
P A R R O T T D R
D E B B I E L N
WAKEFIELD D
R
AVALON A V E
NO R THAM A V E
B U C K L A N D A V E
OLD C
OUNTYRD
ELM
ST
LIDO
ST
L A T H A M C T
LOWERLOCKAVE
CHA P I N
LN
F R
AN
CISA V E
E L
CA M
INORE A L
NAU G H T O N
A V E
ENGLISH C T
VIRGO
LN
C L U B
DR
R O XBURYL N
SOLAN A D R
L O R T O N A V E
B O
TAN Y CT
BROMFIELDRD
M A
RSTENA V E
MONTEC
RESTADR
MIL L
ER
AV E
B U
CKINGHAM
W
AY
M I R A S O L C T
B UNK ERHI LLD R
A L T A I R A V E
W I N D S O R D R
CA M
AH O
PL
B O W H I L L R D
S C O R P I O L N
T E
VI S
P L
WIL LOWAVE
ESSEX
L N
L A U
RIE L
N
I N
VERNES S
W
AY
ROSSLN
ROBLAR A V E
MA N
ZANITAA V E
G A R D E N C T
DRAK E CT
6 T H
A V
E
A N I T A A V E
JEWELLPL
MAR I N
E V
IEW
A V
E
RIC H
MOND R
D
LAUREL
AVE
C H E S T E R T O N A V E
VE S
PUCCILN
Y A W L E B R O K
ASCEN S
IOND R
B U C K E Y E C T
BROADWAY
C R Y S T A L C T
S A N C H E Z A V E
SANCARL O
S A
VE
OAKKNOLLDR
C A M B R I D G E S T
B R ID LE W A Y
RIDGEWAYR D
CHELMFORDR D
FOL GER DR
M E T R O C E N T E R B L V D
MASO N
ICWA Y
MARLBOR O
U G
H
RD
C HI LTER N R
D
ROCKRIDGERD
TOYON
D R
BISCA Y
NE A V
E
TA M
AR A
CK
DR
W P A R K W A Y L N
P R I M R O S E L N
FA IRFIE L
DRD
V E G A C I R
GALVESTO N
ST
SUGAR H I
LL D
R
C O
LLEGEVIEW
W
A Y
D W I G H T R D
P O R T A L L N
BOOTH B
A Y
A V E
A LDENA VE
MEZESAVE
A V O N D R
L A K E
V I E W
D R
B E L B U R N D R
BODEGA ST
B L O O M F I E L D R D
WILL OWR D
UPLA N D
SD R
HOL L
YRD
W A V E R L Y P L
LARK S P
U R
DR
CHE SAP EA KE AV E
W O O D S T O C K R D
PU LLMANAV E
L I N D E N L N
F O L G
ER C
T
SPRINGL N
D R
ACOLN
C L A R E N D O N R D
B A R B A R A L N
BATESR D
E L M
A V E
PINEKNO LLDR
SH ELLBLVD
N O
TRE
DAME
AV E
N O R T H L N
C H E V Y S T
W A L T E R M IR E S T
F O R G E R D
T I O G A W A Y
B AIR N
DR
S P R I N G S T
YORK T O W
N
R D
SKYM
ONT
DR
WINC H
ESTER
C T
N E W P O R T S T
E N
CHANTEDWAY
Y O S E M I T E D R
SENECAL N
CH I L T E
RN
RD
P L Y M O U TH W A Y
ROSSST
A C
A D
EM
Y
AVE
L U N
DYS
LN
A L L VIEWWAY
NE W
PORT C T
LO H
OM A
C T
W
INCHE S
TERD R
WILLIAMSA V E
B E R
ESFORD
AVE C O T T A G E L N
PL EASAN TST
B A Y S W A TE R A V E
6 T H A V E
VISTA
RD
B RA NDYWINERD
BR E
NTWO
ODRD
B A Y C T
WICKHAMPL
VINT A
GE
P A
R K
DR
P E
NS A
COLA
ST
GARD
E N L
N
OC C
IDEN T
ALA V E
M A J I L L A A V E
PIL A R
CITOSCT
V ALL E YRD
FAIRFIE L
D C
T
O X
FORDWAY
C A R M E L I T A A V E
S H E R
A T
ONPL
N E W B R U N S W I C K D R
D R
A Y
T O
N
R D
LAU RELHILLCT
C R
ESCENTAVE
LO
R ID
R
P ARADIS E C T
VIRGINIA
A V E
CONTIN E N
T A
LSWAY
CLAREMONT
DR
O A K R I M D R
B LUE BELL L
N
BUENAVISTAAVE
KENILWORTHRD
T O U R N A M E N T D R
D E V O N D R
C L Y D E S D A L E D R
S H A R O N A V E
PA R K
SI DE AVE
TO
URN A M
ENT
DR
TROPH
Y
CT
S ANMAT EOAVE
PO RTOFIN O
LN
RIZAL
DR
S K Y L I N E B L V D
B A Y B E R R Y P L
EDGEWATER
BLVD
RAINBOW D
R
S T F R A N C I S R D
HASKIN
S
DR
MONSERATAV E
U P P
ER L O
CKAVE
H E RI T A G ECT
E H I L L S D A L E B L V D
ROSEL N
LA D E R A
W
AY
H I G H L A N D A V E
MIS T
Y
LN
N O R T H C T
OLDBA YS HOR E
BLVD
C O N I F E R L N
MT N
VIEW P L
HI GHGATELN
JO
YCERD
P O E T T R D
LYN D
HUR STCT
AQUARIU S
LN
MAR S
H
DR
COUNTRYCLU B
DR
L Y D I A C T
W EMB E RLE YDR
K AMMERERC T
HAYN E
R D
M I R A N
D A
CT
THURM
A V E
E S T
R D Y A W E T A G
F E RNWOODWAY
P E
PPER
LN
T A R R Y
T O
W
N S T
T O B I N C L A R K D R
B E N N
IN
G
TO N
DR
BRAN D
ON C T
ACACIACT
F S T
E LAUR E LCRE E K RD
C O N C O R D W A Y
CITYHAL L L
N
FAIRWAY
D R
S E A B U R Y R D
EDGEWATE RB LVD
B A Y
VIEW
PL
T O W E R L N
BRAEMARDR
H A
INLINE D
R
PR
INDLERD
B A R
ROIL H E
TAVE
C H A
PINAVE
B U C
KING
HAMCT
M O N R O E A V E
KING
ST
LA H O
NDAR D
BR O O
KECT
COVI N
GTON
R D
V I L L A A V E
WESS E X
WAY
B E N
GL O E L
N
BELMONTC A
NYONRD
CHULAVISTAA V E
LA SALLERD
R O BIN W H
IP PL EWAY
CEDAR
ST
K E N T O N A V E
5 T H A V E
WOODCRESTC T
ECAROLAV E
T E R R
I E R
P L
M A R I N D R
C H E S S D R
CA L
AV E
RA S C T
C A P U C H I N O A V E
VIADELIZIA
KIT T
IELN
SOUTHV IEWCT
ANSELAV E
K I N G S L N
REDWOO D
DR
VELOCITYWAY
BARCLAYWA Y
P E P
PER
AVE
K I M M I E C T
A I R P O R T B L V D
TREN T
O N P
L
FOXPLAZALN
BRIAR F
IELD
W
AY
C A R O L
A
V E
G O R D O N A V E
P A L M E R A V E
ARC
WA Y
CLIF TON A V
E
N E W L A N D S A V E
T R I T O N D R
AN GUID O
CT
NEU C H
ATEL A V E
M O L I T O R R D
KNOLLCRES T R D
WALTONS T
ANCHORLN
LO
MBARDILN
W E S T L N
C R
ESTV IEW
AVE
MERRYMOP P E
TLN
ARDEN
RD
END F
I
ELD
W
A Y
BRIDGER D
M I L
F O
RD
AV E
ERICKSON
L N
C L E E S T
E L M W O O D C T
C Y P R E S S A V E
C U
MB E R
LANDCT
S A
NDYHOO K
CT
E3R DA V E
T W I N P I N E S L N
BOW
HILLRD
LANCASTERRD
Q U E E N S L N
WINDINGWAY
S E A
RS V I
LLE CT
LAKE
RD
C A N T E R B U R Y R D
ARGUSCT
ASCOTRD
C A D
IL L A
CWA Y
A L P I N E A V E
B AR FO RDAVE
M A P L E A V E
LE X I N
GTO N
WAY
P E R
SEUSLN
RESERVOIRRD
COBBLESTO
N
ELN
W
IL L
IAM SLAN DINGLN
NOTREDAM E P L
IR ENECT B ELMONTAVE
READAVE
C O
R N
IS H W
AY
URSALN
TR E N T O N W A Y
K A R E N W A Y
H A T T E R A S C T
W I
LLOWL N
L I N K R D
F I R S T
MID D
LE S
E X
RD
C R Y S T A L D R
SHADY
L N
B A N C R O F T R D
V I C T O R I A R D
S T A N L E Y R D
A R U N D E L R D
A N I T A R D
BREWERDR
M Y R T L E R D
H A T C H L N
A V O N S T
S E
QU O
I A
W
A Y
REPOSO WAY
ELSIER RADR
D ES V IOW A Y
C O R B I T T D R
RO EHAMPTON RD
D A I R Y L N
M A N O R D R
CROSSWAY RD
R U T H A V E
EW
EL L
R D
ALTU
RAWA Y
ARDE NLN
GREENWICHLN
STO
NE P
IN E
RD
W
ILLA R D
LN
T A
MPACT
CRYSTALSPR I N G
STER
B E A C H R D
ACACI A
D R
CASTOR
ST
GLENG A
R R
YWAY
F R A N C I S C O D R
PLATEAUD R
RO X
BU R
YWAY
DOU G
LA S A V E
B E L M
ONTCANYONR D
SANARDO
WAY
DENISE
DR
C H A T H A M R D
S O
UTHDOWNCT
CARLM
ON T
DR
RO
B
INRD
D
E
KOVENA V
E
C O S T A
RICA
AVE
G
EN E
VRA
RD
S E A
SPRAYLN
C U M B E R L A N D R D
PILGRIMDR
ALOMAR W
AY
VERBA L
EE L
N
L A N G R D
D O N N E L L Y A V E
C O U R T
LANDRD
L A U R E L A V E
AST E R A V
E
ELDERDR
ROCKHARBORLN
B E N SO N WAY
O L D C
A N A D
A
RD
CARDIGAN
R
D
F U R L O N G S T
J U D S O N S T
I R W I N S T
K E D I T H S T
ENSENADA
R D
FAR M
LN
B ERRYE S
SA
C
T
Q U A R R Y R D
FAR R
IN G D O N
L N
REGULUSST
SANDRA
RD
CULE BRARD
M I R A M A R T E R
B A Y V I E W A V E
KINGSTON R D
W A LN U T A V E
HARTFOR D A V E
VANIE R
DR
STAR LITEDR
CARLTON
RD
DE
SABL A
RD
E R L I N D R
H A
TCH
DR
LINCOLN
CENTER
DR
L ESSINGIA
CT
LAURELHILLDR
VALDEZ
AVE
LO O K
OUTR D
W
NAUGHTON
AVE
NANTU CKETST
BRAN DTRD
PINEHILL R D
A L LEGH E N Y W
A Y
VIEW
HAVE
NRD
MERNERR D
B E
L LEM O
NTIA VE
LASEN
DARD
L A
GUNA
CIR
R AV ENSCOURTRD
W H I T E W E L L R D
D A V I S D R
BISHOPRD
M
IR A
ST
G
LEN BROOKDR
KINGS W
OODDR
L ODGE D R
C OR NELIA
DR
E L
A R R O
YO
R D
C A N A
DAR D
ANZABLVD
C I V I C C E N T E R D R
LA
C A N
ADA
RD
EL
CENTRO
RD
MANZA N
ITAAVE
FAL L
ENLE A
F
DR
F A
LKIRK
LN
LA
CUE S T
AR D
J A M A I C A S T
WOODBR I
DGE
R D
CORO N
ADO
LN
FAIRWAYCIR
BLACKMOU N T A
IN R D
MON T I C E L L
O
RD
BROOK V
ALER D
ES CON D I D OWAY
ALHAMBRADR
A D E L
A
ID E W
A Y
MAR BURGERAVE
SH E L
DONAVE
ARCTURUS
CIR
BRIDGE RD
TOW
E R R
D
DAVEYGLENRD
B I K E T R A I L
OLDL A K E
RD
LAK E
R D
BARTL E
T T
W A
Y
WSANT A
INEZAVE
N O R T H R D
E3R D
A V E
K E HOE A V E
S U N N Y B R A E B L V D
2NDA V
E
DEAN Z A B L V D
B A R N E S O N A V E
ELCA M I
N O R
EAL
M O N
TE D
IABLO A
V E
ALAM E
D A D
ELASPUL G
A S
VANBU REN
ST
4 1 S T A V E
H A C I E N D A S T
BROMFIELD
RD 2 N D A V E
CSM D
R
W3 R D
AV ES A N R A Y M U N D O R D
2 8 T H A V E
EPOPLARA V E
C O L E G R O V E S T
9 T H A V E
CYPRESSA V E
E A T O N R D
AMYD R
B A H I A
CRESCENTA V E
NAMPHLET T
BLVD
GR E E NFIEL DA VE
E 4
THAV E
E3 R
DA V
E
SNORFOLKST
NKINGSTON
ST
W3 9TH A V E
BORELA VE
ELCAMINOREAL
T I L T O N A V E
1 2 T H A V E
W I L L I A M S P L
E V A C T
E5THAV E
FAT HOMDR
NEWLAN DSA VE
P E
NINSU
LA
AV E
L ANDING A V
E
D E R B Y A V E
WHIL LSDALE BLVD
E28TH
AV E
K I N G L N
E I S E N H O W E R S T
BO
RD E N S
T
LASE LV ACIR
K E N T C T
EDINBU R
GH
ST
BAYRIDGEWAY
P A R R O T
T
DR
B E
RES F
ORD
ST
WPOPLARA V E
FATHOM
D R
Y A L E D R
O R I N D A D R
MURPHYD R
4 2N D
AVE
P A U L S O N C T
LAS E
L V A
ST
NBA Y
SH O R
EBLVD
O C H O A L N
1 6 T H A V E
N H U M B O L D T S T
4 3 R D A V E
H A C
IENDA S
T
G Y M K H A N A R D
E N G L E R D
R E E F D R
P A R R O T T D R
TROLLM A
NA V E
V I N E C T
C S M D R
PORTOL A
D R
E D I N B U R G H S T
HARVARDRD
C U E S T A A V E
S E A L S T
T R I N I T Y S T
B E R M U D A D R
B I R C H A V E
D O L O
R E
SST
CLIPPERST
B A Y S W A TE R A V E
L A U R E L A V E
SEAGATED R
F A L D A A V E
B A R R O I L H E T A V E
J A M E S C T
E M E R A L D C T
L O L A S T
RID G
EC R
E S
TTER
WOODBRIDGE
CIR
S
DELAW
A R E
S T
I R I S C T
RE G A
NDR
GIL L
ISDR
A R C H E R C T
W 2 0T HA V E
J U N I P E R S T
E D I S O N S T
D O R E A V E
NORTON
ST
2 2 N D A V E
S A N J U A N C T
T E R M I N A L P L
N E
LC A
MINOREAL
E2 5THAVE
G I N N E V E R S T
1 6 T H A V E
D A L E A V E
F L O R E S S T
O R E G O N A V E
S A R
ATO G
ADR
O L Y M P I C A V E
7 T H A V E
S C L A R E M O N T S T
B U C K N E L L D R
B E
ACONA V
E
C A R Y A V E
M A P L E S T
M U R P H Y P L
SANMIG UELWAY
NEVES
RD
STATIONP A
RKC
IR
H I L L S D A L E P L
S B S T
P A L M P L
E3 9THA V E
G L O R I A C T
P A L M A V E
H E L E N E C T
C O L L E G E A V E
BUD DCT
VIRGI N I
AAV E
E4 0 T H
AVE
IRVINGST
M O N
TEDIABLOAV E
C A S A N O V A D R
T H O M A S C T
C A S C A D E C T
S E R R A C T
S T A T E S T
C R E E K R I D G E C T
C U
RTISS S
T
K N A P P C T
S U S A N C T
EDGEW
OODRD
P A R R O T T D R
P A
RKW
OODDR
N E W B R I D G E A V E
P A
CIFIC
BLVD
CLARK
DR
S T M A R Y S C T
1 0 T H A V E
L E S L I E S T
B E R E S F O R D C T
D O L O R E S C T
S S A N M A T E O D R
C H E R Y L C T
A F T O N C T
A L L I S O N C T
3 7 T H A V E
3 0 T H A V E
C A M D E N A V E
2 4 T H A V E
2 3 R D A V E
1 0 T H A V E
D A L E H U R S T C T
D A K O T A A V E
3 1 S T A V E
C O Y O T E P O I N T D R
Y O R K A V E
CL E A R V
IEW
W
AY
BALDWINAVE
N B A Y S H O R E B L V D
S F R E M O N T S T
W5THAVE
YAW CINECS
G R E E N F I E L D C T
D O U G L A S C T
C U L V E R C T
I S A B E L L E A V E
COTTAGEGROVEA VE
FE R
NW O O
D
ST
B A L M O R A L C T
MIDV ALE A VE
N I D A H O S T
L A W R E N C E R D
M O N T E R E Y S T
WO ODS IDEWA Y
E A S T W O O D D R
P R
OS P E C
TROW
CED ARWOODDR
J O D Y C T
E L A U R E L C R E E K
DR
WBEL LEVUEAVE
2 7 T H A V E
W38 THA V E
D A R C Y A V E
D O N N E R S T
EDISON
ST
HO L L
AN D
ST
TIM
B E
RLANEW A Y
DALEHURS T A V E
W
ILSHIRE
AVE
P A R K L N
M U R R A Y C T
C H R I S L N
S G R A N T S T
C H U K K E R C T
W20THAVE
42 N D
AV E
ASHWOODDR
E L E A N O R D R
PO RTD R
K E L T O N C T
E H I L L S D A L E B L V D
E S A
NTAI NEZAV E
P A R R O T T D R
P A
CIFIC B
LVD
WI N WAYCIR
S R O C H E S T E R S T
HERSCHEL
ST
H U R O N A V E
PALOSVERDESD R
KIMBERLYWAY
G U M S T
3 6 T H A V E
F O L K S T O N E A V E
2 6 T H A V E
D E E R L A K E C T
P E N I N S U L A A V E
M I S S I O N D R
WOLFEDR
W K Y N E S T
SOUTH
BLVD
6 T H A V E
7 T H A V E
8 T H A V E
H I L L S I D E C T
ROB E
RTAD R
S Q U E B E C S T
I N D I A N A V E
LOS
PRADO S
BIRCH S
T
HARROWDR
AN NA POLISDR
NE L
L S
WORTHA V E
1 S T A V E
K E N T S T
NEL L
SWOR T
HAV E
HARRISONAVE
W E S
TWO O
DC T
CON NIEAV E
P I N E
W
OOD C T
CO S
TAR
ICA
AVE
T R A N S IT C E N T E R W A Y
F I E S T A D R
LO S G ATO S W AY
HIGH
VIEW
DR
O N T A R I O S T
O T T A W A S T
ADAMSST
E N S E N A D A A V E
A N T I O C H D R
P A S A D E N A D R
F I L L M O R E A V E
D A I S Y S T
A D R I A N A V E
HAML E
TST
W A S H IN G T O N S T
B O S T O N A V E
LAFA YETTEST
D A R L E N E A V E
SAN T
IAG O
ST
S H O R E V I E W A V E
N K I N G S T O N S T
YEWST
LAKEWOOD
CIR
V AI LWOO DPL
1 7 T H A V E
L O D I A V E
V A N
NESSA D R
FO O
THILL DR
S U L L I V A N S T
E P O P
LARA V
E
B E T T Y L N
HAV E
N R
IDG E
CT
H A N C O C K A V E
Q U E E N S A V E
C L E V E L A N D A V E
P E R S H I N G A V E
M A S O N L N
R O S I L I E S T
H O B A R T A V E
ROYALA VE
S H
A S T
A
DR
C H A R I N G C R O S S
B A R N E S O N A V E
GRAMERCYDR
R O C K W O O D C T
H O B A R T A V E
S C O T T S T
1 8 T H A V E
P E C K A V E
ECH OA V E
P L A Y A S T
R O G E L L C T
D O L A N A V E
LEA F W
OOD C T
W
ARREN
RD
BETTINAAVE
E
4T H
AVE
AL D E
R
W O O D C
T
K E T T E R I N G C T
G A R F I E L D S T
D A R W I N A V E
F L I N T A V E
OCE A N
VIEW A V
E
DE L M O
NTEPL
H A N S E N D R
N R
AILROADA V
E
AS C E N S I O N
D R
WOODLA NDDR
LA U R
I E
MEADOWSDR
N C L A R E M O N T S T
OAK W
OO D
DR
T A Y L O R S T
RYDERST
ERIC S
ON
RD
S I D A H O S T
B R A N S O N D R
CA XTONCT
NOTREDAMEAVE
2 N D A V E
P A L O S V E R D E S C T
M I C H A E L D R
TRADERLN
F E R N W O O D S T
ARMADAWAY
K ING R I DGED R
E B E
L LEVUE A
V E
V E R A N O C T
P A
RK S
IDEWA Y
A L T A A V E
E2 0THAVE
HIL L S B
OR O U G
H
BLV D
FRANKLINST
SPYGLASSDR
N E
V A
DA
AV E
CR Y
STA L
SP R
INGS R D
F A I R
OA K
SCT
TUL A N E R
D
R A N D S T
LOS A L
TOS P
L
E H I L L S D A L E C T
S H U M B O L D T S T
S E L D O R A D O S T
TICONDEROGADR
C Y P R E S S A V E
S E L
L S W
ORTH A V E
T I M
BERL A
NE
R D
M
ULBER R
Y
DR
T U L A N E C T
P A
TRICIAA V E
CASADECA M
PO
E H I L L S D A L E B L V D
DESA BLARD
GRANDBLVD
G L
EN D O
RA
DR
H I L L B A R N C T
S E L D O R A D O S T
E3 8THA V E
CRAGMONTCT
ALVARADOA V E
1 9
THAVE
FAIRFAX A
VE
H A Y W A R D A V E
OVERLAND
DR
2 9 T H A V E
OVERLOOK C T
N D E L A W A R E S T
E L K H O R N C T
H I C K O R Y L N
DEL M O
NTES T
EDNAW
AY
ROL LING HILLSAVE
NSANM A
TEOD R
HAWTHORNEDR
3 1 S T A V E
NRA IL R
OADAVE
G L E N D A L E R D
B A K E R R a m p
ELCER R
ITOAVE
P I K E L N
4 4 T
H
AVE
S T A T E S T
O T A Y A V E
O C C I D E N T A L A V E
W Y O M IN G W A Y
WOODBERRYAV E
G A R V E Y W Y
W E E P
ING
RIDG
E
CT
NB S
T
V I S T A A V E
A R R O W O O D L N
P A R K V IE W W A Y
S T A T E S T
WHITECLI F
F
W
AY
N C L A R E M O N T S T
RANELAGH
R D
2 9 T H A V E
HIGHLANDAV E
SAMPHLET T
BLVD
A R B O R L N
M U
LRYANCT
4 3 R D A V E
DART M
OU
T H
RD
M A I N S T
C O N C A R D R
H O W A R D A V E
S T J O H N C T
SHOALDR
D E R B Y A V E
MARGARE T
CT
BR O
A D V
IEW
CT
B R I A R L N
ELPORTALAVE
C R E E K S I D E L N
AMESBURYA V E
S E X T A N T C T
MELROSECT
N E L D O R A D O S T
C H E S T N U T L N
ARK S
T
P O L H E M U S R D
ALAN H
ILLL N
WESTMORLANDAVE
M O U N D S R D
EDGEWATER BLVD
K L A M A T H A V E
FAS HIONI SLANDBLVD
CARMELCIR
W 4 0 T
HA VE
W40THA VE
2 9 T H A V E
2 6 T H P L
SUZIE
ST
TR E
ETO P L
N
C A T A L P A A V E
MC
A K E
R C
T
P I C O A V E
L E O N A S T
E K Y N E S TW 25THA V E
31STAVE
S U N S E T T E R
H U
RLIN G H
AMAVE
M A R
INACT
V E N T U R A A V E
CRE STWOOD DR
B A Z E R D
LACAS AA VE
GREEN
OAKCT
BRIDGEPOINTE
CIR
M
ARINERS
ISLANDBL VD
C A R L I S L E D R
FRANKLINST
BUNK E
RHILLD R
LIN D
A
CT
NEPTUNE
CT
C O
NDO N C
T
AR R
OYOCT
GREENWOODAVE
C H E S T E R T O N P L
P A D D O C K W A Y
DOR C
HES
TER R
D
S T A R B O A R D D R
P O W E L L S T
C L A U D I A A V E
C R
OW
N
CT
FRA N
K LINP K
WY
LA S A
L L
E
D R
RAN D
AL L
RD
M A D E R A D R
A N C H O R R D
ELPARQUEC T
H E A T H E R L N
A L D E R L N
FU L T
ON
RD
NASHDR
S I D A H O S T
NRAILROAD
AV E
A V I L A R D
OFA R R E L L
ST
CO L
UMB IAD R
P A R K P L
P O R T S M O U T H W A Y
2 1 S T A V EP I O N E E R C T
BORELPL
VILLATER
N G R A N T S T
N F R E M O N T S T
ASH WO ODCT
I V Y S T
S Y L V A N A V E
TOY O NC T
S O N O R A D R
TERRACE WAY
HOMEWOODAVE
AMHERS TAV E
H I L L T O P R D
B Y R O N A V E
HEMLOCKAVE
L OUISEL N
E 4 1 S T P L
L A N S D A L E S T
B E V E R L Y S T
D E L R A Y S T
E V E R G R E E N S T
C A P IS T R A N O W A Y
EELLSWORTHCT
SA LISB U R Y
WA Y
LODATOAVE
2 7 T H A V E
W C A P IS T R A N O W A Y
SU G
ARLOAFD R
SP R
ING
FIELD
Y A W
1 3 T H A V E
1 5 T H A V E
1 4 T H A V E
1 1 T H A V E
S E V IL L E W A Y
M A R T I N D R
SB A Y
SHOR E
B L V D
I V Y S T
SRAILR O
ADA V
E
S H A R O N P L
P O L K A V E
RAMONA S
T
E L M S T
L O R R A I N E A V E
N F R E M O N T S T
N G R A N T S T
C O B B S T
N I D A H O S T
D I X S T
BUENA VISTAAVE
P R A G U E S T
N Q U E B E C S T
K E
NTUCKYAV E
O S
O
ST
G
ARF IELD
C T
L A U R E L W O O D D R
V O E L K E R D R
S A
NANTONIOST
ME LIS S ACT
LA N D
FA
IRA VE
S T M A T
THEWS A
V E
LAJO LLA A V E
W 3 8
TH A V E
R H U S S T
T I L I A S T
Q U I N C E S T
S H A F T E R S T
M E F F E R D A V E
W 4
THAVE
C A S T IL IA N W A Y
MARISMA
ST
TURNER
TER
REXST
E L L I O T T C T
HADDON D
R
WHILLSDALEB L V D
VENTURAAVE
M A RSHALLAV E
LLANO
ST
W I L M I N G T O N R D
CARIBBEANWAY
FO S T
E R
ST
A N N A S T
C H
ES S
DR
ALM ADEN W AY
Y A W S A X E T
A R A G O N B L V D
Y A W C A M O T O PY A W NI L B U D
S TE PHENRD
M C K I N L E Y S T
M E A D O W V I E W P L
P I E R C E S T
M C
C O
W
NAVE
M A R Y L U L N
L ULA B E L L E L N
W I S N O M A V E
S K I N G S T O N S T
S B
AYSHORE B
L V
D
L I N D B E R G H S T
W E L L E S L E Y A V E
S G R A N T S T
BAYVIEWA V E
B U R B A N K A V E
N A D I N A S T
O A K S T
1 9 T H A V E
ROSSIWAY
SRAILRO A
DA V E
S A
MPHLET T
BLVD
CA N Y
ONOA K
C T
F L E E T W O O D D R
BAKER
W
AY
LYO
NR
IDGELN
C O L G A T E W A Y
L A K E S T
P R I N C E T O N D R
OA K
VALLEYRD
C U P E R T I N O W A Y
GARVEY W
AY
B A Y L A N D I N G
D U R A N D D R
JEF F
ERSONCT
S E Q U O I A A V E
A D A S T
NOE A VE
H O W E S T
E L
S O
BR A N T
E
ST
HIL L
CRE S T
A V E
D E L M A R W A Y
DAYAVE
I O W A D R
D E W E Y S T
M O N R O E A V E
K A L M I A S T
J A S M I N E S T
L O C U S T S T
SYCAMOREDR
D E L R O S A W A Y
N R
AILRO A
D
A V
E
C O R N E L L A V E
RO
SEWO O
DDR
P A R K L N
VERNONTER
ST R A T
FO R
D W
A Y
KATHRYNEAVE
W 2 5 T H A
VE
MCLELLA N
AVE
MIDW
AY
A V E
KENW
OOD
AVE
I S A B E L L E A V E
B R O O K S S T
E S T R E L L A W A Y
CELESTE
DR
K E L L Y S T
G E O R G E T O W N A V E
JOANNED R
S O
UTHW
OOD
AV E
P A R R O T T D R
W O O D L A N D D R
POIN S E
TT IAA VE
D A V I D S T
M A D I S O N A V E
Y O U N G S T
MAGNOLIADR
N R O C H E S T E R S T
V E R D U N A
VE
F O R D
HAMR D
WGRANTPL
T A N
GLEW
O O
D
W
A Y
HOSMER S T
C A V A N A U G H S T
B A Y W O O D A V E
PEBBLEWOODWA Y
STUDIO C
IR
O N E I L L D R
EGRA N
TPL
YATESWAY
RA M BLEWOOD
WAY
CHU R CHAV E
A L H A M B R A R D
G U I L D F O R D A V E
DETROIT
D R
S P U R A W A Y D R
F A L L O N A V E
E3R DA VE
LA GOST
MA XINE AVE
BRIDGE P
OINTEP K
WY
BOV E
TRD
F A I R M O N T D R
V IEWRIDGE
D R
C O U N
TRYSI D
E
D R
SAMP H
LETTBLV D
GEORG
EAVE
C S M D R
WAYNE
WAY
J H A R T C L I N T O N D R
CHERR Y
W
OODDR
C A M P U S D R
S A
NTACLARAWAY
PARK
P
L
9 2
9 2
9 2
9 2
8 2
8 2
8 2
Z o n in g C la s s if ic a t io n
R 1 A
R 1 B
R 1 C
E l C a m in o R e a l H a lf M ile B u f f e r
C a lt r a in H a lf M ile B u f f e r s
C a lt r a in S t a t io n s
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!
S a n M a t e o C it y L im it s
S a n F r a n c is c o B a y & L a g o o n
A s s e s s o r P a r c e ls
684 of 741
1 LOCAL JURISDICTION SB 9 REGULATIONS COMPARSION TABLE 1 Jurisdiction Summary Unit Size & FAR Max Height Units – Urban Lot Split Burlingame Adopted SB 9 Two Unit
Residential Overlay District
32% FAR + 1,100 sq. ft.
+ 400 sq. ft.
30 ft.
10 ft. plate and 15 ft.
peak height limit within
rear 20 ft. of parcel
Restricted to two dwelling
units
Redwood City City Council Study Session
planned June 2022
40% lot coverage
(no FAR standards) 28 ft. or 2.5 stories Restricted to two dwelling units
San Francisco
Adopted SB 9 Objective
Design Standards (ODS)
January 2022
Defers to ODS for setback and
height requirements; Second unit
may not be less than 800 sq. ft.
3-story limit at 45%
rear yard line
2-story limit at 30%
rear yard line
Restricted to two dwelling
units
Sunnyvale
Adopted local Ordinance
(“Dual Urban Opportunity
Housing – Chp. 19.78)
45% FAR or 3,600 sq. ft.
(whichever is less);
50% or 4,000 sq. ft. (which ever is
less) if project meets at least 3
certain findings (Chp.19.78.040(2))
30 ft.
17 ft limit within the
rear 20 ft.
Restricted to two dwelling
units
San Carlos Adopted Interim Urgency
Ordinance through 2022
Max 800 sq. ft. SB 9 unit size cap.
Existing units that remove more
than 50% are considered new
units and will be capped at 800 sq.
ft.
Additions to existing SB 9 units not
permitted.
16 ft for new units
20 ft. for hillside sites
Restricted to two dwelling
units
1 Notes: Local jurisdictions’ development standards shall not preclude at least two SB 9 units that are 800 sq. ft. each in size. Except for San Francisco, the cities shown on this list generally defer to underlying zoning and development standards and have not adopted specific SB 9 standards at this time.
685 of 741
2 Foster City Adopted Interim Urgency
Ordinance on 2/22 50% lot coverage 25 ft, 2 stories Restricted to two dwelling units
Millbrae Adopted Interim Urgency
Ordinance 55% FAR and 50% lot coverage
25 ft
(or up to 30 ft if the
additional 5 ft has a
min 3” roof slope)
Restricted to two dwelling
units
Affordability requirements
Woodside Adopted Urgency
Ordinance
All SB 9 units limited to 800 sq. ft.
Basements prohibited.
11 ft plate
17 ft. peak
Restricted to two dwelling
units
686 of 741
1 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMPARISON TABLE: R1 vs. R2 vs. SB 9-R1 R1 R2 SB 9 R1
Minimum Parcel
Size
R1-A: 10,000 sq. ft.
5,000 sq. ft.
60/40 split; No
less than 1,200
sq. ft.
R1-B: 6,000 sq. ft.
R1-C:5,000 sq. ft.
Maximum FAR
R1-A: 0.4(10,000) +0.2(parcel-10,000)** 0.60 Maximum
permitted by
underlying
zoning district
plus 800 sq. ft.
for SB 9 unit and
800 sq. ft. for
ADU
R1-B & R1-C: 0.5(6,000) +0.2(parcel-
6,000) **
Central & North Central:
0.50 parcels less than
7,500 sq. ft. and 0.60 for
parcels greater than 7,500
sq. ft.
Front Setback
R1-A: 25 ft.
15 ft. Silent*
R1-B and R1-C: 15 ft.
Front Setback –
Private Roads and
Easements
50 ft. from centerline of private road or
access easement
50 ft. from centerline of
private road or access
easement
Silent*
Side Setback –
Interior Side
R1-A (SM Park): 10 ft. for lots 75 ft. wide
or larger; 7 ft. for lots less than 75 ft.
wide.
5 ft. 4 ft.
R1-A: 7 ft.
R1-B & R1-C: 5 ft.
Corner Side Setback
– Street Side Yard
R1-A (SM Park): Additions – 15% lot
width; Min: 10 ft., Max: 25 ft.
New residences – 25 ft. for lots 75 ft.
wide or greater
Ground Floor: 15% lot
width, Min: 7.5 ft., Max:15
ft.
Upper Floors: 10 ft.
4 ft.
R1-A Ground Floor: 15% lot width; Min
7.5 ft., Max: 25 ft.
Upper Floors: 10 ft.
R1-B & R1-C: Ground Floor: 15% lot
width, Min: 7.5 ft., Max:15 ft.
Upper Floors: 10 ft.
Rear Setback
Ground Floor: 15 ft.
Upper Floors: 25 ft.
Ground Floor: 15 ft.
Upper Floors: 25 ft.
4 ft.
687 of 741
2 Garage Setback
R1-A (SM Park): 50 ft when garage faces
street; Or 25 ft. when doors do not face
street. 20 ft. Silent*
R1-B and R1-C: 20 ft.
Height
24 ft. Plate
32 ft. Peak
24 ft. Plate
32 ft. Peak
16 ft. minimum
Daylight Plane 12 ft./45 Degrees 12 ft./45 Degrees Silent* Parking
Under 3,000 sq. ft.: 2-car garage
3,000 - 3,749 sq. ft.: 2- garage plus 1
uncovered
3,750+sq. ft.: Same as above plus 1 space
for ea. 750 sq. ft***.
Studio: 1.3 Resident; 0.2
Visitor
1 Bedroom: 1.6 Resident;
0.2 Visitor
2 Bedroom: 1.8 Resident;
0.2 Visitor
3+Bedroom (or over 1,400
sq. ft.): 2.0 Resident; 0.2
Visitor
1 space per unit
maximum; No
parking required
within 0.5 mi of
major transit
corridor or major
transit stop
Parcel Width
R1-A: 75 ft.
30 ft. Silent* R1-B: 60 ft.
R1-C: 50 ft.
Width at Street
Frontage 30 ft. 30 ft. Silent*
Paving Limits (Front
and Side Yards)
Driveways: 1-car garage, Max 17 ft. wide
or 40% frontage
2-garage, Max 20 ft wide
Pedestrian walkways limited to 5 ft. wide
Driveways: 1-car garage,
Max 17 ft. wide or 40%
frontage
2-garage, Max 20 ft wide
Pedestrian walkways
limited to 5 ft. wide
Silent*
Unit Maximum 3 (1 main, 1 ADU, 1 JADU) 2-4 units 2-4 units**** *Opportunity to defer to underlying zoning district; cannot preclude 16 ft. tall 800 sq. ft. unit with 4 ft. setbacks or a 60/40 urban lot split.
**Max 6,000 sq. ft. FAR limit regardless of parcel size ***Calculation excludes garages, covered patios, uninhabitable structures. May not be located within required front/side yards
****Urban lot split project are limited to two dwelling units. Local jurisdiction can increase to four units.
688 of 741
Senate Bill No. 9
CHAPTER 162
An act to amend Section 66452.6 of, and to add Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7 to, the Government Code, relating to land use.
[Approved by Governor September 16, 2021. Filed with
Secretary of State September 16, 2021.]
legislative counsel’s digest
SB 9, Atkins. Housing development: approvals.
The Planning and Zoning La w provides for the creation of accessory dwelling units by local ordinance, or, if a local agency has not adopted an ordinance, by ministerial approval, in accordance with specified standards and conditions.
This bill, among other things, w ould require a proposed housing development containing no more than 2 residential units within a single-family residential zone to be considered ministerially , without discretionary review or hearing, if the proposed housing development meets certain requirements, including, but not limited to, that the proposed housing development would not require demolition or alteration of housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and f amilies of moderate, lo w, or very low income, that the proposed housing de velopment does not allo w for the demolition of more than 25% of the existing exterior structural walls, except as provided, and that the de velopment is not located within a historic district, is not included on the State Historic Resources In ventory, or is not within a site that is legally designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district.
The bill would set forth what a local agenc y can and cannot require in approving the construction of 2 residential units, including, but not limited to, authorizing a local agency to impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objecti ve design standards, as defined, unless those standards w ould ha ve the ef fect of ph ysically precluding the construction of up to 2 units or ph ysically precluding either of the 2 units from being at least 800 square feet in floor area, prohibiting the imposition of setback requirements under certain circumstances, and setting maximum setback requirements under all other circumstances.
The Subdivision Map Act vests the authority to regulate and control the design and improvement of subdivisions in the le gislative body of a local agency and sets forth procedures governing the local agency’s processing, approval, conditional approval or disapproval, and filing of tentative, final, and parcel maps, and the modification of those maps. Under the Subdivision Map Act, an approved or conditionally approved tentative map expires 24
94 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
AUTHENTICATED
ELECTRONIC LEGAL MATERIAL
689 of 741
months after its appro val or conditional appro val or after an y additional period of time as prescribed by local ordinance, not to exceed an additional 12 months, except as provided.
This bill, among other things, would require a local agency to ministerially approve a parcel map for an urban lot split that meets certain requirements, including, but not limited to, that the urban lot split w ould not require the demolition or alteration of housing that is subject to a recorded co venant, ordinance, or la w that restricts rents to le vels affordable to persons and families of moderate, lo w, or v ery low income, that the parcel is located within a single-f amily residential zone, and that the parcel is not located within a historic district, is not included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, or is not within a site that is legally designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district.
The bill would set forth what a local agenc y can and cannot require in approving an urban lot split, including, b ut not limited to, authorizing a local agency to impose objecti ve zoning standards, objecti ve subdivision standards, and objective design standards, as defined, unless those standards would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of 2 units, as defined, on either of the resulting parcels or physically precluding either of the 2 units from being at least 800 square feet in floor area, prohibiting the imposition of setback requirements under certain circumstances, and setting maximum setback requirements under all other circumstances. The bill would require an applicant to sign an affida vit stating that they intend to occupy one of the housing units as their principal residence for a minimum of 3 years from the date of the appro val of the urban lot split, unless the applicant is a community land trust or a qualified nonprofit corporation, as specified. The bill w ould prohibit a local agenc y from imposing an y additional owner occupancy standards on applicants. By requiring applicants to sign affida vits, thereby e xpanding the crime of perjury , the bill w ould impose a state-mandated local program.
The bill would also extend the limit on the additional period that may be provided by ordinance, as described abo ve, from 12 months to 24 months and would make other conforming or nonsubstantive changes.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may ha ve a significant ef fect on the en vironment. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects.
This bill, by establishing the ministerial review processes described above, would thereby exempt the approval of projects subject to those processes from CEQA.
The California Coastal Act of 1976 pro vides for the planning and regulation of de velopment, under a coastal de velopment permit process, within the coastal zone, as defined, that shall be based on v arious coastal resources planning and management policies set forth in the act. 94 — 2 — Ch. 162
690 of 741
This bill would exempt a local agency from being required to hold public hearings for coastal de velopment permit applications for housing developments and urban lot splits pursuant to the above provisions.
By increasing the duties of local agencies with respect to land use regulations, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1. Section 65852.21 is added to the Government Code, to read:
65852.21. (a) A proposed housing de velopment containing no more than two residential units within a single-f amily residential zone shall be considered ministerially, without discretionary re view or a hearing, if the proposed housing development meets all of the following requirements:
(1) The parcel subject to the proposed housing de velopment is located within a city , the boundaries of which include some portion of either an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau, or , for unincorporated areas, a le gal parcel wholly within the boundaries of an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau.
(2) The parcel satisfies the requirements specified in subparagraphs (B) to (K), inclusive, of paragraph (6) of subdivision (a) of Section 65913.4. (3) Notwithstanding any provision of this section or an y local law, the proposed housing development would not require demolition or alteration of any of the following types of housing:
(A) Housing that is subject to a recorded co venant, ordinance, or la w that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income.
(B) Housing that is subject to any form of rent or price control through a public entity’s valid exercise of its police power.
(C) Housing that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three years. (4) The parcel subject to the proposed housing de velopment is not a parcel on which an o wner of residential real property has e xercised the owner’s rights under Chapter 12.75 (commencing with Section 7060) of Division 7 of Title 1 to withdraw accommodations from rent or lease within 15 years before the date that the de velopment proponent submits an application.
94 Ch. 162 — 3 —
691 of 741
(5) The proposed housing de velopment does not allo w the demolition of more than 25 percent of the existing exterior structural walls, unless the housing development meets at least one of the following conditions:
(A) If a local ordinance so allows.
(B) The site has not been occupied by a tenant in the last three years. (6) The development is not located within a historic district or property included on the State Historic Resources In ventory, as defined in Section 5020.1 of the Public Resources Code, or within a site that is designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district pursuant to a city or county ordinance.
(b) (1) Notwithstanding an y local la w and e xcept as pro vided in paragraph (2), a local agenc y may impose objecti ve zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standards that do not conflict with this section.
(2) (A) The local agency shall not impose objecti ve zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards that would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of up to two units or that would physically preclude either of the two units from being at least 800 square feet in floor area.
(B) (i) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), no setback shall be required for an existing structure or a structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure.
(ii) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), in all other circumstances not described in clause (i), a local agenc y may require a setback of up to four feet from the side and rear lot lines.
(c) In addition to an y conditions established in accordance with subdivision (b), a local agency may require any of the following conditions when considering an application for two residential units as provided for in this section:
(1) Off-street parking of up to one space per unit, e xcept that a local agency shall not impose parking requirements in either of the follo wing instances:
(A) The parcel is located within one-half mile walking distance of either a high-quality transit corridor, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, or a major transit stop, as defined in Section 21064.3 of the Public Resources Code.
(B) There is a car share vehicle located within one block of the parcel. (2) For residential units connected to an onsite w astewater treatment system, a percolation test completed within the last 5 years, or , if the percolation test has been recertified, within the last 10 years. (d) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a local agency may deny a proposed housing development project if the building official makes a written finding, based upon a preponderance of the e vidence, that the proposed housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined and determined in paragraph (2) of subdi vision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety or the physical environment and for which there is 94 — 4 — Ch. 162
692 of 741
no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact.
(e) A local agency shall require that a rental of any unit created pursuant to this section be for a term longer than 30 days.
(f) Notwithstanding Section 65852.2 or 65852.22, a local agenc y shall not be required to permit an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit on parcels that use both the authority contained within this section and the authority contained in Section 66411.7. (g) Notwithstanding subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2) of subdi vision (b), an application shall not be rejected solely because it proposes adjacent or connected structures pro vided that the structures meet b uilding code safety standards and are sufficient to allow separate conveyance. (h) Local agencies shall include units constructed pursuant to this section in the annual housing element report as required by subparagraph (I) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 65400.
(i) For purposes of this section, all of the following apply:
(1) A housing de velopment contains tw o residential units if the development proposes no more than two new units or if it proposes to add one new unit to one existing unit.
(2) The terms “objecti ve zoning standards, ” “objecti ve subdi vision standards,” and “objecti ve design re view standards” mean standards that involve no personal or subjecti ve judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion a vailable and kno wable by both the de velopment applicant or proponent and the public official prior to submittal. These standards may be embodied in alternati ve objective land use specifications adopted by a local agency, and may include, but are not limited to, housing overlay zones, specific plans, inclusionary zoning ordinances, and density bonus ordinances. (3) “Local agency” means a city , county, or city and county , whether general law or chartered.
(j) A local agency may adopt an ordinance to implement the provisions of this section. An ordinance adopted to implement this section shall not be considered a project under Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code.
(k) Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code), except that the local agenc y shall not be required to hold public hearings for coastal de velopment permit applications for a housing development pursuant to this section.
SEC. 2. Section 66411.7 is added to the Government Code, to read:
66411.7. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this division and any local law, a local agency shall ministerially approve, as set forth in this section, a parcel map for an urban lot split only if the local agency determines that the parcel map for the urban lot split meets all the follo wing requirements:
94 Ch. 162 — 5 —
693 of 741
(1) The parcel map subdivides an existing parcel to create no more than two new parcels of approximately equal lot area pro vided that one parcel shall not be smaller than 40 percent of the lot area of the original parcel proposed for subdivision.
(2) (A) Except as pro vided in subparagraph (B), both ne wly created parcels are no smaller than 1,200 square feet.
(B) A local agency may by ordinance adopt a smaller minimum lot size subject to ministerial approval under this subdivision. (3) The parcel being subdivided meets all the following requirements:
(A) The parcel is located within a single-family residential zone. (B) The parcel subject to the proposed urban lot split is located within a city, the boundaries of which include some portion of either an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau, or, for unincorporated areas, a legal parcel wholly within the boundaries of an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau.
(C) The parcel satisfies the requirements specified in subparagraphs (B) to (K), inclusive, of paragraph (6) of subdivision (a) of Section 65913.4. (D) The proposed urban lot split w ould not require demolition or alteration of any of the following types of housing:
(i) Housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income.
(ii) Housing that is subject to any form of rent or price control through a public entity’s valid exercise of its police power.
(iii) A parcel or parcels on which an o wner of residential real property has exercised the o wner’s rights under Chapter 12.75 (commencing with Section 7060) of Division 7 of Title 1 to withdraw accommodations from rent or lease within 15 years before the date that the development proponent submits an application.
(iv) Housing that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three years. (E) The parcel is not located within a historic district or property included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, as defined in Section 5020.1 of the Public Resources Code, or within a site that is designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district pursuant to a city or county ordinance.
(F) The parcel has not been established through prior exercise of an urban lot split as provided for in this section.
(G) Neither the o wner of the parcel being subdi vided nor an y person acting in concert with the o wner has pre viously subdivided an adjacent parcel using an urban lot split as provided for in this section. (b) An application for a parcel map for an urban lot split shall be approved in accordance with the following requirements:
(1) A local agency shall approve or deny an application for a parcel map for an urban lot split ministerially without discretionary review. (2) A local agency shall approve an urban lot split only if it conforms to all applicable objective requirements of the Subdivision Map Act (Division 94 — 6 — Ch. 162
694 of 741
2 (commencing with Section 66410)), except as otherwise expressly provided in this section.
(3) Notwithstanding Section 66411.1, a local agenc y shall not impose regulations that require dedications of rights-of-way or the construction of offsite improvements for the parcels being created as a condition of issuing a parcel map for an urban lot split pursuant to this section. (c) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), notwithstanding an y local law, a local agenc y may impose objecti ve zoning standards, objecti ve subdivision standards, and objective design review standards applicable to a parcel created by an urban lot split that do not conflict with this section. (2) A local agency shall not impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objecti ve design re view standards that w ould have the ef fect of ph ysically precluding the construction of tw o units on either of the resulting parcels or that would result in a unit size of less than 800 square feet.
(3) (A) Notwithstanding paragraph (2), no setback shall be required for an existing structure or a structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure.
(B) Notwithstanding paragraph (2), in all other circumstances not described in subparagraph (A), a local agency may require a setback of up to four feet from the side and rear lot lines.
(d) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a local agency may deny an urban lot split if the b uilding official mak es a written finding, based upon a preponderance of the e vidence, that the proposed housing de velopment project would have a specific, adv erse impact, as defined and determined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety or the ph ysical environment and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. (e) In addition to an y conditions established in accordance with this section, a local agency may require any of the following conditions when considering an application for a parcel map for an urban lot split:
(1) Easements required for the provision of public services and facilities. (2) A requirement that the parcels ha ve access to, provide access to, or adjoin the public right-of-way.
(3) Off-street parking of up to one space per unit, e xcept that a local agency shall not impose parking requirements in either of the follo wing instances:
(A) The parcel is located within one-half mile walking distance of either a high-quality transit corridor as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, or a major transit stop as defined in Section 21064.3 of the Public Resources Code.
(B) There is a car share vehicle located within one block of the parcel. (f) A local agency shall require that the uses allowed on a lot created by this section be limited to residential uses.
(g) (1) A local agency shall require an applicant for an urban lot split to sign an affida vit stating that the applicant intends to occup y one of the 94 Ch. 162 — 7 —
695 of 741
housing units as their principal residence for a minimum of three years from the date of the approval of the urban lot split.
(2) This subdivision shall not apply to an applicant that is a “community land trust,” as defined in clause (ii) of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (11) of subdivision (a) of Section 402.1 of the Re venue and Taxation Code, or is a “qualified nonprofit corporation” as described in Section 214.15 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
(3) A local agenc y shall not impose additional o wner occupanc y standards, other than provided for in this subdivision, on an urban lot split pursuant to this section.
(h) A local agency shall require that a rental of any unit created pursuant to this section be for a term longer than 30 days.
(i) A local agency shall not require, as a condition for ministerial approval of a parcel map application for the creation of an urban lot split, the correction of nonconforming zoning conditions.
(j) (1) Notwithstanding an y pro vision of Section 65852.2, 65852.21, 65852.22, 65915, or this section, a local agenc y shall not be required to permit more than two units on a parcel created through the e xercise of the authority contained within this section.
(2) For the purposes of this section, “unit” means an y dwelling unit, including, but not limited to, a unit or units created pursuant to Section 65852.21, a primary dwelling, an accessory dwelling unit as defined in Section 65852.2, or a junior accessory dwelling unit as defined in Section 65852.22.
(k) Notwithstanding paragraph (3) of subdivision (c), an application shall not be rejected solely because it proposes adjacent or connected structures provided that the structures meet b uilding code safety standards and are sufficient to allow separate conveyance.
(l) Local agencies shall include the number of applications for parcel maps for urban lot splits pursuant to this section in the annual housing element report as required by subparagraph (I) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 65400.
(m) For purposes of this section, both of the following shall apply:
(1) “Objective zoning standards,” “objective subdivision standards,” and “objective design review standards” mean standards that involve no personal or 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 de velopment applicant or proponent and the public official prior to submittal. These standards may be embodied in alternative objective land use specifications adopted by a local agency, and may include, but are not limited to, housing o verlay zones, specific plans, inclusionary zoning ordinances, and density bonus ordinances.
(2) “Local agency” means a city , county, or city and county , whether general law or chartered.
(n) A local agency may adopt an ordinance to implement the provisions of this section. An ordinance adopted to implement this section shall not be 94 — 8 — Ch. 162
696 of 741
considered a project under Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code.
(o) Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code), except that the local agenc y shall not be required to hold public hearings for coastal de velopment permit applications for urban lot splits pursuant to this section.
SEC. 3. Section 66452.6 of the Government Code is amended to read:
66452.6. (a) (1) An approved or conditionally approved tentative map shall expire 24 months after its appro val or conditional appro val, or after any additional period of time as may be prescribed by local ordinance, not to exceed an additional 24 months. Ho wever, if the subdivider is required to expend two hundred thirty-six thousand se ven hundred ninety dollars ($236,790) or more to construct, impro ve, or finance the construction or improvement of public impro vements outside the property boundaries of the tentative map, excluding improvements of public rights-of-way that abut the boundary of the property to be subdivided and that are reasonably related to the development of that property, each filing of a final map authorized by Section 66456.1 shall e xtend the e xpiration of the appro ved or conditionally approved tentative map by 48 months from the date of its expiration, as pro vided in this section, or the date of the pre viously filed final map, whichever is later. The extensions shall not extend the tentative map more than 10 years from its approval or conditional approval. However, a tentative map on property subject to a development agreement authorized by Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 65864) of Chapter 4 of Division 1 may be extended for the period of time provided for in the agreement, but not beyond the duration of the agreement. The number of phased final maps that may be filed shall be determined by the advisory agency at the time of the approval or conditional approval of the tentative map. (2) Commencing January 1, 2012, and each calendar year thereafter, the amount of tw o hundred thirty-six thousand se ven hundred ninety dollars ($236,790) shall be annually increased by operation of law according to the adjustment for inflation set forth in the state wide cost inde x for class B construction, as determined by the State Allocation Board at its January meeting. The effective date of each annual adjustment shall be March 1.
The adjusted amount shall apply to tentati ve and v esting tentative maps whose applications were received after the effective date of the adjustment. (3) “Public improvements,” as used in this subdi vision, include traffic controls, streets, roads, highways, freeways, bridges, overcrossings, street interchanges, flood control or storm drain facilities, sewer facilities, water facilities, and lighting facilities.
(b) (1) The period of time specified in subdi vision (a), including an y extension thereof granted pursuant to subdivision (e), shall not include any period of time during which a de velopment moratorium, imposed after approval of the tentati ve map, is in e xistence. However, the length of the moratorium shall not exceed five years.
94 Ch. 162 — 9 —
697 of 741
(2) The length of time specified in paragraph (1) shall be e xtended for up to three years, b ut in no e vent be yond January 1, 1992, during the pendency of any lawsuit in which the subdivider asserts, and the local agency that appro ved or conditionally appro ved the tentati ve map denies, the existence or application of a development moratorium to the tentative map. (3) Once a development moratorium is terminated, the map shall be valid for the same period of time as w as left to run on the map at the time that the moratorium was imposed. However, if the remaining time is less than 120 days, the map shall be valid for 120 days following the termination of the moratorium.
(c) The period of time specified in subdi vision (a), including an y extension thereof granted pursuant to subdivision (e), shall not include the period of time during which a lawsuit involving the approval or conditional approval of the tentati ve map is or w as pending in a court of competent jurisdiction, if the stay of the time period is appro ved by the local agenc y pursuant to this section. After service of the initial petition or complaint in the lawsuit upon the local agenc y, the subdi vider may apply to the local agency for a stay pursuant to the local agency’s adopted procedures. Within 40 days after receiving the application, the local agency shall either stay the time period for up to five years or deny the requested stay. The local agency may, by ordinance, establish procedures for re viewing the requests, including, b ut not limited to, notice and hearing requirements, appeal procedures, and other administrative requirements.
(d) The expiration of the appro ved or conditionally appro ved tentative map shall terminate all proceedings and no final map or parcel map of all or any portion of the real property included within the tentati ve map shall be filed with the le gislative body without first processing a ne w tentative map. Once a timely filing is made, subsequent actions of the local agency, including, but not limited to, processing, appro ving, and recording, may lawfully occur after the date of expiration of the tentative map. Delivery to the county surv eyor or city engineer shall be deemed a timely filing for purposes of this section.
(e) Upon application of the subdivider filed before the expiration of the approved or conditionally appro ved tentative map, the time at which the map expires pursuant to subdivision (a) may be extended by the legislative body or by an advisory agenc y authorized to appro ve or conditionally approve tentative maps for a period or periods not e xceeding a total of six years. The period of e xtension specified in this subdi vision shall be in addition to the period of time pro vided by subdi vision (a). Before the expiration of an appro ved or conditionally appro ved tentative map, upon an application by the subdi vider to e xtend that map, the map shall automatically be e xtended for 60 days or until the application for the extension is approved, conditionally approved, or denied, whichever occurs first. If the advisory agenc y denies a subdi vider’s application for an extension, the subdivider may appeal to the legislative body within 15 days after the advisory agency has denied the extension.
94 — 10 — Ch. 162
698 of 741
(f) For purposes of this section, a de velopment moratorium includes a water or sewer moratorium, or a w ater and sewer moratorium, as well as other actions of public agencies that regulate land use, development, or the provision of services to the land, including the public agenc y with the authority to appro ve or conditionally appro ve the tentati ve map, which thereafter prevents, prohibits, or delays the appro val of a final or parcel map. A development moratorium shall also be deemed to exist for purposes of this section for any period of time during which a condition imposed by the city or county could not be satisfied because of either of the following:
(1) The condition was one that, by its nature, necessitated action by the city or county, and the city or county either did not take the necessary action or by its o wn action or inaction w as prevented or delayed in taking the necessary action before expiration of the tentative map. (2) The condition necessitates acquisition of real property or any interest in real property from a public agenc y, other than the city or county that approved or conditionally approved the tentative map, and that other public agency fails or refuses to convey the property interest necessary to satisfy the condition. Ho wever, nothing in this subdi vision shall be construed to require any public agency to convey any interest in real property owned by it. A development moratorium specified in this paragraph shall be deemed to have been imposed either on the date of approval or conditional approval of the tentative map, if evidence was included in the public record that the public agency that owns or controls the real property or any interest therein may refuse to convey that property or interest, or on the date that the public agency that owns or controls the real property or any interest therein receives an offer by the subdivider to purchase that property or interest for fair market value, whiche ver is later . A de velopment moratorium specified in this paragraph shall extend the tentative map up to the maximum period as set forth in subdivision (b), but not later than January 1, 1992, so long as the public agency that owns or controls the real property or any interest therein fails or refuses to convey the necessary property interest, regardless of the reason for the f ailure or refusal, e xcept that the de velopment moratorium shall be deemed to terminate 60 days after the public agency has officially made, and communicated to the subdivider, a written offer or commitment binding on the agenc y to convey the necessary property interest for a f air market value, paid in a reasonable time and manner.
SEC. 4. The Le gislature finds and declares that ensuring access to affordable housing is a matter of state wide concern and not a municipal affair as that term is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the California Constitution. Therefore, Sections 1 and 2 of this act adding Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7 to the Go vernment Code and Section 3 of this act amending Section 66452.6 of the Go vernment Code apply to all cities, including charter cities.
SEC. 5. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because a local agenc y or school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act or 94 Ch. 162 — 11 —
699 of 741
because costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Go vernment Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution.
O
94 — 12 — Ch. 162
700 of 741
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes – 8/23/22 1
COMMISSION MEMBERS
Margaret Williams, Chair
John Ebneter, Vice Chair
Adam Nugent
Seema Patel
Martin Wiggins
City of San Mateo
Regular Meeting Minutes
Planning Commission
Tuesday, August 23, 2022
Hybrid 7:00 PM
Regular Meeting
City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
CALL TO ORDER
This meeting was held pursuant to the Governor’s Executive Orders which suspended certain requirements of the Brown Act. The meeting was open to in person and remote attendance.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
Present: Vice Chair John Ebneter, Commissioners Adam Nugent, Seema Patel, and Martin Wiggins
Absent: Chair Margaret Williams
*Note: Seema Patel joined remotely from: TRYP by Wyndham Pittsburgh / Lawrenceville 177 40th Street, Pittsburgh PA 15201
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. 2191 S. El Camino Real and 2195 S. El Camino Real – Findings of General Plan Conformance – Resolution Adoption
2. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Approval
Approve the minutes of the Regular meetings of 7.12.2022 and 7.26.2022 and the Special meeting of 7.26.2022.
Moved: Nugent, Seconded: Wiggins
Ayes: Ebneter, Nugent, Patel, Wiggins
Noes: None
Absent: Williams
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Public commenter, Tony Lavaysse, suggested an adoption of a requirement that all proposed developers and general contractors pay living wages, provide health coverage, and commit to hiring local carpenters, tradesmen, and apprentices.
PUBLIC HEARING
3. Hayward Park Caltrain Station Parking Lot – New Five-Story, 191-unit, Multi-Family Residential Building (PA-2021- 033)
Associate Planner Wendy Lao presented an overview of the architectural and site design of the proposed project, including modifications to draft conditions of approval published with the agenda report.
Applicant Ken Busch presented the project.
Commissioner Questions:
Commissioners asked clarifying questions on public art, removal of three bedroom units, parking for visitors and Caltrain commuters, eBike charging stations, access to the bicycle room, air quality, required Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) parking spaces, financing, delays and levels of service at the State Route 92 West ramp and DocuSign Envelope ID: 999FD975-9B49-4005-8973-AFD43C633A6F
701 of 741
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes – 8/23/22 2
Concar Drive intersection, public safety issues, Transportation Demand Management (TDM) monitoring, Area Median Income (AMI) rent, deed restricted rent, Density Bonus Law, and Housing Accountability Act (HAA).
Public Comments:
The following public commenters addressed the Commission with concerns for the project: Tina Robinson, Sonya Medwid, and Richard Hedges. Public commenters cited reasons for concerns including privacy, visibility, access, increase of traffic, parking, and lack of ADA parking spaces. The following public commenters addressed the Commission with support for the project: Michael Chang, Brian Fitzpatrick, Max Mautner, Stephanie Reyes, Louis Mirante, Richard Hedges, and Jordan Grimes. Public commenters cited reasons for support including addition of electric vehicle parking spots, inclusion of bicycle trails, access to Caltrain station from Station Park Green, high density housing, location near transit, mixed income neighborhood, and need for moderate income housing. Public commenters Michael Chang, Sonya Medwid, Brian Fitzpatrick (Caltrain), Max Mautner, Richard Hedges, and Jordan Grimes addressed the Commission with suggestions including more electric vehicle parking spots, additional market rate units, eBike charging stations, prioritizing alternative modes of transportation, a BikeLink program, shared parking spaces, and implementation of the Bicycle Master Plan.
Commissioner Comments:
All Commissioners expressed support for the project. Most Commissioners discussed applicant management of moderate-income units. Commissioners suggested adding ADA parking spaces and incorporating a shared parking program, which the applicant and the property owner Caltrain declined to provide at this time.
The Commission moved to adopt a Resolution to approve the Site Plan and Architectural Review (SPAR) and Site Development Planning Application (SDPA) for a new five-story multi-family residential building with 191 units located at 401 Concar Drive (the Hayward Park Caltrain Station parking lot); and adopt an Addendum to the previously certified Rail Corridor Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), based on the Findings for Approval and subject to the Conditions of Approval, with proposed staff modifications.
Moved: Nugent, Seconded: Wiggins
Ayes: Ebneter, Nugent, Patel, Wiggins
Noes: None
Absent: Williams
4. Recommendation – Draft SB 9 Ordinance
Associate Planner Laura Richstone presented an overview of the draft Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) Ordinance.
Commissioner Questions:
Commissioners asked clarifying questions on plane offsets within interim objective design standards, objective design guidelines for single-family homes, R2 development standards, what triggers Historic Resource Evaluations (HRE), who generates a Historic Resources Report, changes in the definition of historic resources, what triggers a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review for historic resources, percentage of lots eligible for historic preservation, the process for properties eligible as a historic resource, qualifications for SB 9 regarding historic resources, locations of historic buildings, height standards for detached units, requirements for individual entries for each unit, subdivision of lots, Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs), if exterior stairwells contribute to the maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR), and exterior building materials.
Public Comments:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 999FD975-9B49-4005-8973-AFD43C633A6F
702 of 741
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes – 8/23/22 3
Public commenter, Eric Holm, expressed concern for proposed objective design standards including restricted height, slab-on-grade construction, and sustainability.
Commissioner Comments:
Commissioners expressed concern for the discretionary review processes for SB 9 projects over 800 sq. ft., reduction in height limit for detached units, sustainability, restrictions on exterior materials, window glazing requirements, definitions of architectural features, access requirements for flag lots, implications of a change in definition of historic resources, and alignment of City guidelines against current state laws. Commissioners suggested allowing up to 100% demolition through a ministerial permit provided the project conforms to the objective design standards, allowing 3-4 units on urban lot split properties based on the size of the resulting lots through a tiered approach, removing discretionary review for unit sizes over 800 sq. ft. provided the project conforms to objective design standards, allowing larger unit sizes as determined by maximum FAR of the underlying zoning district through a ministerial process, and allowing at least one unit to be up to 1,200 sq. ft. even if total cumulative development exceeds the maximum FAR.
The Commission moved to recommend approval of the Ordinance and associated text amendments to the City Council amending the San Mateo Municipal Code to add Chapter 27.21 "Two-Unit Development Overlay District" to implement the provisions of SB 9 with the recommendation to allow up to 100% demolition through a ministerial permit provided the project conforms to the objective design standards, allow 3-4 units on urban lot split properties based on the size of the resulting lots through a tiered approach, remove discretionary review for unit sizes over 800 sq. ft. provided the project conforms to objective design standards, allow larger unit sizes as determined by maximum FAR of the underlying zoning district through a ministerial process, allow at least one unit to be up to 1,200 sq. ft. even if total cumulative development exceeds the maximum FAR, remove the lower height restrictions for detached units, allow all units to achieve the maximum plate and peak height of the underlying zoning district, and require a 10 ft. access easement/corridor only when parking is required or when necessary per the fire code; and adopt a Resolution to establish interim objective design standards for single-family and duplex development with the recommendation to remove the second story window glazing requirement.
Moved: Patel, Seconded: Wiggins
Ayes: Ebneter, Nugent, Patel, Wiggins
Noes: None
Absent: Williams
The Commission moved to not amend Chapter 27.66 "Historic Preservation" to update the definition of “Individually Eligible Buildings.”
Moved: Patel, Seconded: Wiggins
Ayes: Ebneter, Nugent, Patel, Wiggins
Noes: None
Absent: Williams
REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Planning Manager, Manira Sandhir, provided updates on items for future Planning Commission meetings, including the replacement of the Regular meetings on 9.13.2022 and 9.27.2022 with Special meetings that start at 6:00 PM.
Community Development Director, Christina Horrisberger, announced the review and consolidation of the handbook for Planning Commissioners at the City Council Special meeting on 9.06.2022. There were no reports from Chair, Commissioners, or City Attorney.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 11:26 pm.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 999FD975-9B49-4005-8973-AFD43C633A6F
703 of 741
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes – 8/23/22 4
APPROVED BY:
___________________________________
John Ebneter, Vice Chair
SUBMITTED BY:
___________________________________
Ashley Snodgrass, Administrative Assistant
DocuSign Envelope ID: 999FD975-9B49-4005-8973-AFD43C633A6F
704 of 741
Certificate Of Completion
Envelope Id: 999FD9759B4940058973AFD43C633A6F
Status: Completed
Subject: Please DocuSign: Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes 8.23.2022.docx Source Envelope:
Document Pages: 4
Signatures: 2
Envelope Originator:
Certificate Pages: 5
Initials: 0
Mary Way
AutoNav: Enabled
EnvelopeId Stamping: Enabled
Time Zone: (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
330 W. 20th Avenue
City Clerk's Office
San Mateo, CA 94403
[email protected]
IP Address: 76.206.52.126
Record Tracking
Status: Original
9/14/2022 9:43:49 AM
Holder: Mary Way
[email protected]
Location: DocuSign
Signer Events
Signature
Timestamp
Ashley Snodgrass
[email protected]
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)
Signature Adoption: Pre-selected Style
Using IP Address: 76.206.52.126
Sent: 9/14/2022 9:47:06 AM
Viewed: 9/14/2022 9:47:34 AM
Signed: 9/14/2022 9:47:49 AM
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Accepted: 9/14/2022 9:47:34 AM
ID: a672f315-4e5b-4885-b436-be25c8fa612e
John Ebneter
[email protected]
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)
Signature Adoption: Pre-selected Style
Using IP Address: 73.223.53.57
Sent: 9/14/2022 9:47:51 AM
Viewed: 9/14/2022 12:54:24 PM
Signed: 9/14/2022 12:54:38 PM
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Accepted: 9/14/2022 12:54:24 PM
ID: 57fd3322-89cb-4d8d-94bd-fd86d46b675e
In Person Signer Events
Signature
Timestamp
Editor Delivery Events
Status
Timestamp
Agent Delivery Events
Status
Timestamp
Intermediary Delivery Events
Status
Timestamp
Certified Delivery Events
Status
Timestamp
Carbon Copy Events
Status
Timestamp
Witness Events
Signature
Timestamp
Notary Events
Signature
Timestamp
Envelope Summary Events
Status
Timestamps
Envelope Sent
Hashed/Encrypted
9/14/2022 9:47:06 AM
705 of 741
Envelope Summary Events
Status
Timestamps
Certified Delivered
Security Checked
9/14/2022 12:54:24 PM
Signing Complete
Security Checked
9/14/2022 12:54:38 PM
Completed
Security Checked
9/14/2022 12:54:38 PM
Payment Events
Status
Timestamps
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure
706 of 741
CONSUMER DISCLOSURE
From time to time, Carahsoft OBO City of San Mateo (we, us or Company) may be required by law to provide to you certain written notices or disclosures. Described below are the terms and conditions for providing to you such notices and disclosures electronically through the DocuSign, Inc. (DocuSign) electronic signing system. Please read the information below carefully and thoroughly, and if you can access this information electronically to your satisfaction and agree to these terms and conditions, please confirm your agreement by clicking the ‘I agree’ button at the bottom of this document .
Getting paper copies
At any time, you may request from us a paper copy of any record provided or made available electronically to you by us. You will have the ability to download and print documents we send to you through the DocuSign system during and immediately after signing session and, if you elect to create a DocuSign signer account, you may access them for a limited period of time (usually 30 days) after such documents are first sent to you. After such time, if you wish for us to send you paper copies of any such documents from our office to you, you will be charged a $0.00 per-page fee. You may request delivery of such paper copies from us by following the procedure described below.
Withdrawing your consent
If you decide to receive notices and disclosures from us electronically, you may at any time change your mind and tell us that thereafter you want to receive required notices and disclosures only in paper format. How you must inform us of your decision to receive future notices and disclosure in paper format and withdraw your consent to receive notices and disclosures electronically is described below.
Consequences of changing your mind
If you elect to receive required notices and disclosures only in paper format, it will slow the speed at which we can complete certain steps in transactions with you and delivering services to you because we will need first to send the required notices or disclosures to you in paper format, and then wait until we receive back from you your acknowledgment of your receipt of such paper notices or disclosures. To indicate to us that you are changing your mind, you must withdraw your consent using the DocuSign ‘Withdraw Consent’ form on the signing page of a DocuSign envelope instead of signing it. This will indicate to us that you have withdrawn your consent to receive required notices and disclosures electronically from us and you will no longer be able to use the DocuSign system to receive required notices and consents electronically from us or to sign electronically documents from us.
All notices and disclosures will be sent to you electronically Unless you tell us otherwise in accordance with the procedures described herein, we will provide electronically to you through the DocuSign system all required notices, disclosures, authorizations, acknowledgements, and other documents that are required to be provided or made available to you during the course of our relationship with you. To reduce the chance of you inadvertently not receiving any notice or disclosure, we prefer to provide all of the required notices and disclosures to you by the same method and to the same address that you have given us. Thus, you can receive all the disclosures and notices electronically or in paper format through the paper mail delivery system. If you do not agree with this process, please let us know as described below. Please also see the paragraph immediately above that describes the consequences of your electing not to receive delivery of the notices and disclosures Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure created on: 6/13/2017 8:08:23 AM Parties agreed to: Ashley Snodgrass, John Ebneter
707 of 741
electronically from us.
How to contact Carahsoft OBO City of San Mateo:
You may contact us to let us know of your changes as to how we may contact you electronically, to request paper copies of certain information from us, and to withdraw your prior consent to receive notices and disclosures electronically as follows:
To contact us by email send messages to: [email protected] To advise Carahsoft OBO City of San Mateo of your new e-mail address To let us know of a change in your e-mail address where we should send notices and disclosures electronically to you, you must send an email message to us at [email protected] and in the body of such request you must state: your previous e-mail address, your new e-mail address.
We do not require any other information from you to change your email address..
In addition, you must notify DocuSign, Inc. to arrange for your new email address to be reflected in your DocuSign account by following the process for changing e-mail in the DocuSign system.
To request paper copies from Carahsoft OBO City of San Mateo To request delivery from us of paper copies of the notices and disclosures previously provided by us to you electronically, you must send us an e-mail to [email protected] and in the body of such request you must state your e-mail address, full name, US Postal address, and telephone number. We will bill you for any fees at that time, if any.
To withdraw your consent with Carahsoft OBO City of San Mateo To inform us that you no longer want to receive future notices and disclosures in electronic format you may:
i. decline to sign a document from within your DocuSign session, and on the subsequent page, select the check-box indicating you wish to withdraw your consent, or you may; ii. send us an e-mail to [email protected] and in the body of such request you must state your e-mail, full name, US Postal Address, and telephone number. We do not need any other information from you to withdraw consent.. The consequences of your withdrawing consent for online documents will be that transactions may take a longer time to process..
Required hardware and software
Operating Systems: Windows® 2000, Windows® XP, Windows
Vista®; Mac OS® X
Browsers: Final release versions of Internet Explorer® 6.0 or above (Windows only); Mozilla Firefox 2.0
or above (Windows and Mac); Safari™ 3.0 or
above (Mac only)
PDF Reader: Acrobat® or similar software may be required to view and print PDF files
Screen Resolution: 800 x 600 minimum
Enabled Security Settings: Allow per session cookies
** These minimum requirements are subject to change. If these requirements change, you will be asked to re-accept the disclosure. Pre-release (e.g. beta) versions of operating systems and browsers are not supported.
Acknowledging your access and consent to receive materials electronically
708 of 741
To confirm to us that you can access this information electronically, which will be similar to other electronic notices and disclosures that we will provide to you, please verify that you were able to read this electronic disclosure and that you also were able to print on paper or electronically save this page for your future reference and access or that you were able to e-mail this disclosure and consent to an address where you will be able to print on paper or save it for your future reference and access. Further, if you consent to receiving notices and disclosures exclusively in electronic format on the terms and conditions described above, please let us know by clicking the ‘I agree’ button below.
By checking the ‘I agree’ box, I confirm that:
• I can access and read this Electronic CONSENT TO E LECTRONIC RECEIPT OF ELECTRONIC CONSUMER DISCLOSURES document; and
• I can print on paper the disclosure or save or sen d the disclosure to a place where I can print it, for future reference and access; and
• Until or unless I notify Carahsoft OBO City of San Mateo as described above, I consent to receive from exclusively through electronic means all notices, disclosures, authorizations, acknowledgements, and other documents that are required to be provided or made available to me by Carahsoft OBO City of San Mateo during the course of my relationship with you.
709 of 741
Dear Council:
The proposed ordinance on historic resources 27.66.020 recognizes the concept of a structure that contributes to a historic district even when it does not qualify for registration on its own. This is proper recognition. However, the proposed ordinance limits the applicability of contributing houses to the Downtown Historic Zone. This does not support any other zone that may be designated as historical in the future. Given that San Mateo is rich in historic buildings, it would seem appropriate to include any future historic zones with the Downtown Historic zone in this ordinance so contributors in other parts of the city can be treated in an appropriate manner.
Regards,
Michael Nash
710 of 741
From: Keith Weber < >
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2022 2:10 PM
To: Amourence Lee <[email protected]>; Eric Rodriguez <[email protected]>; Rick Bonilla <[email protected]>; Joe Goethals <[email protected]>; Diane Papan <[email protected]>
Cc: Drew Corbett <[email protected]>; Laura Richstone <[email protected]> Subject: Agenda Item 29: Ordinance Introduction SB9
Members of the City Council:
Senate Bill 9 was written with one exemption. It does not apply to legitimately documented residential historic districts. The author of the Bill included this exemption for a reason: the understanding that historic districts not only add to the quality of life in California, but are important to understanding our history and are protected under the California Environmental Quality Act.
The amendments to Chapter 27.66.020 Historic Preservation Applicability ignore the potential for additional districts to be designated as historic. As you are aware, San Mateo is rich in historic resources that have never been studied or registered due to the inaction of the city since the 1989 County Historical Association survey pointed this out and called for additional work. Citizens groups are now taking up the challenge.
I suggest that you modify the language of this amendment to include the possibility that there may be more than one historic district in San Mateo. Limiting the designation of a contributing building to those in the Downtown Historic District does not recognize the city's extensive inventory of historic buildings. Adding words that state “or any other district that is designated as historic” is a simple fix for this problem.
Senate Bill 9 was written with the intent of protecting historic resources in residential historic districts throughout the state. Why would San Mateo not include that protection?
Sincerely,
Keith Weber
711 of 741
From: Lisa Vande Voorde
To: City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: City Council Meeting 9/19/22 Agenda Item #29 -- Ordinanance Introduction SB9 Date: Monday, September 19, 2022 4:00:45 PM
Dear San Mateo City Council Members,
As a 30-year resident of San Mateo, with a keen interest in preservation of our historic architecture, I took a closer look at the proposal to amend Chapter 27.66 "Historic Preservation" to update the definition of "Individually Eligible Buildings". What popped out to me was this section, specifically what I have highlighted in yellow:
Section 3. Subsection (c) of Section 27.66.020 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows: Individually Eligible and Contributor Buildings.
For the purposes of this chapter, the terms "individually eligible building" shall mean those buildings as identified in the City of San Mateo General Plan, buildings which are on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or California Register of Historical Resources (CRHP), or buildings determined to be individually eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHP through documentation contained in a historic resources report. "Contributor
building" shall mean those buildings identified as such and located within the Downtown Historic District as adopted by resolution of the City Council and identified in the City of San Mateo General Plan.
Surely this is an oversight? "Contributor buildings" should mean buildings identified THROUGHOUT San Mateo, not just in the Downtown Historic District. I hope you amend the highlighted sentence so that it reads:
"Contributor building" shall mean those buildings identified as such and located within the Downtown Historic District, or any other district that is deemed to be historic, by resolution of the City Council and identified in the City of San Mateo General Plan.
Thank you for your attention and consideration to this very important matter.
Respectfully yours,
Lisa Vande Voorde
s
712 of 741
From: Laurie Hietter
To: City Council (San Mateo); Diane Papan; Rick Bonilla; Eric Rodriguez; Amourence Lee; Joe Goethals; Patrice Olds Subject: Reach Codes and SB 9
Date: Monday, September 19, 2022 4:00:22 PM
Dear Mayor Bonilla and Council Members,
I urge the City to be cautious in approving Reach Codes. We do not have enough electricity or infrastructure to mandate electrification. Very little new generation is proposed, and the desert is locked up so little to no wind or solar will be constructed there due to the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan. Power plants require 5-10 years for permitting and environmental review. Even fast-track projects can barely be permitted in one year. Rooftop solar is not enough. Very few transmission upgrades are currently proposed, according to the California Public Utilities Commission website. The push for electric cars alone will vastly expand the need for electricity. Each electric car requires 4 MW per year. We should not be relying only on one source of power until we have a plan for additional power supply and transmission.
The City is doing a lot by requiring new homes to be electric. Don't push this on small remodeling projects. Please do not approve any more reach codes.
SB 9 Ordinance
The public routinely has expressed opposition to excessive growth in San Mateo. I agree with the staff's approach to generally not increase allowances under SB 9 beyond state requirements, and disagree with the Planning Commission recommendation to allow 3-4 units on each split lot.
Historic Definitions
I agree with and support Keith Weber's comments on the historic language. The City should not be arbitrarily defining what is and is not historic. We have state and federal laws that have definitions. The City would be in violation of state historic preservation law and CEQA if an applicant is allowed to demolish up to 50% of an eligible property without preparing a Historic Resource Evaluation for structures more than 45 years old. At a minimum, that demolition should not be in front of a building that may be historic or in a historic district, of which we have many in San Mateo.
The new language in the ordinance seems to indicate that only the existing identified historic buildings qualify as historic. The language does not adequately address historic districts. The State Historic Preservation Office indicates historic surveys have a shelf life. The Downtown Historic District was designated over 30 years ago and should be revisited.
The following statement in the ordinance inappropriately limits contributors to only those buildings previously identified, and only in the Downtown District:
"Contributor building" shall mean those buildings identified as such and located within the Downtown Historic District as adopted by resolution of the City Council and identified in the City of San Mateo General Plan.
Case law shows the courts err on the side of the preservation of historic resources. Why is the City inviting litigation by trying to narrow the definition of historic resources and ignore all the historic districts in our City?
713 of 741
Public Notice
I support the public notice requirement and request that the distance for noticing be increased to 1,200 ft or the entire neighborhood.
Access
I support the staff's recommendation to maintain the 10-foot access corridor on newly created lots to minimize safety issues, especially in our most vulnerable neighborhoods where streets are very narrow.
Interim Objective Design Standards
I agree the City needs objective design standards, especially in historic neighborhoods that have not been evaluated. San Mateo is known for its charming neighborhoods. Let's work to maintain that charm through specific design standards. The standards should be defined by architects and historians working together with the City planners.
I support the list of prohibited exterior finishes in the ordinance. The prohibition of some exterior finishes such as plywood and vinyl outlined in the interim objective design standards is to ensure development consists of high-quality and durable materials. A prohibited exterior material SHOULD NOT be allowed through the discretionary review process where staff would review to ensure that the material would still result in a durable and high-quality structure.
Front setbacks of 20 feet are not adequate in some neighborhoods, such as Baywood, Aragon, and San Mateo Park. Structures at 20 feet from the street are out of place when most homes in the neighborhood are 30-35 feet from the street (it varies.
Windows are critically important elements in architecture. Replacement windows should be of the same as the other windows on the house and of the same character as the majority of homes in the area.
Discretionary Review
The staff report seems to indicate that if units are subject to discretionary review then all rules and standards are up for negotiation (e.g., exterior finishes). The purpose of having standards is to ensure the rules are followed.
Public Comments and Outreach
This is a good opportunity to present my concerns about summarizing public comments. Every City meeting I have attended in the last year or so has last-minute commenters who call in to support growth and more housing with no restrictions. The callers often do not live in San Mateo or appear to be paid activists (YIMBY Law and others). The City has had an unprecedented number of high-rise development applications, along with the General Plan update meetings, reach codes, and meetings about SB 9 and 10. It is difficult to devote enough time to review all materials (this packet is 712 pages) and present informed comments. The City should resume the practice of asking for the address or at least the neighborhood where commenters reside.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Laurie
714 of 741
--
Laurie
715 of 741
City Council
Senate Bill 9 (SB 9)
Ordinance Introduction
September 19, 2022
Laura Richstone, Associate Planner
Community Development
716 of 741
Agenda
• SB 9 Introduction
• Previous City Council Guidance
• Overview:
• Draft Ordinance
• Interim Objective Design Standards
• Code Amendments – Historic Preservation
• Planning Commission Recommendations
2 717 of 741
3 • Development Permitted:
• Two-Unit Development
• Urban Lot Splits
• Ministerial Approval Only
• Denial Only When:
• The building official makes a written finding that the development would have a specific adverse impacts on public health safety or the environment and where there is no feasible way to mitigate the impact
Duplex A: Standard Lot Duplex B: Standard Lot Lot Split What is SB 9?
718 of 741
Past City Council
Study Sessions
Session 1: February 2022
Session 2: June 2022
Policy Guidance Areas
4 1. Demolition Limits
• Increase to 50%
2. Public Noticing
• Courtesy Notice
3. Urban Lot Split Maximum Dwelling Units
• Limit to 2 Units
4. Unit Size Limits
• Units larger than 800 sq. ft. subject to discretionary Review
5. Subdivision Map Extension
• Not Recommended
6. Open Space Requirements
• Not Recommended
719 of 741
Public Outreach and Comments
• Community Workshops:
• May 17, 2022
• Development standards feedback
• August 8, 2022
• Draft ordinance feedback
Focused Poll Results:
1. Urban Lot Splits Unit Maximum
• Limit to 2 (40%)
• 3-4 Units outright or tiered approach
(60%)
2. Unit Size / FAR Limitations
• Units larger than 800 sq. ft. should be
allowed.
• Even split on discretionary process for
units larger than 800 sq. ft.
5 720 of 741
Ordinance Overview
6 Additional Development
Standards
• Two Unit
• Height
• Detached vs.
Attached
• Parking covered or
uncovered
• Urban Lot Splits
• Max 2 dwelling units
• 10’ wide access
Review and Processing
• Ministerial Review
• 800 sq. ft. or less
• Discretionary Review
• Greater than 800 sq.
ft.
• Notice Provided
Interim Objective Design
Standards
• Ministerial Projects
• Based on SFDDR and
Duplex Guidelines
• Standards
• Privacy, window
placement, massing,
lighting colors,
materials attached
units
721 of 741
Text Amendments – Historic Preservation
• Update definition of “Individually Eligible Buildings” in Chapter 27.66 “Historic Preservation” to also include buildings determined to be individually eligible for listing through a historic resources report in alignment with General Policy C/OS
8.1. 7
722 of 741
Planning Commission
Recommendations
August 23, 2022
PC Recommendation
CC Guidance
8 1. Demolition Limits
• 100% demolition;
• Ministerial process
2. Urban Lot Splits Unit
Maximum
• 3-4 units
• Tiered approach
3. Unit Size Limits
• No discretionary review
• Max size determined by
FAR
• One 1,200 sq. ft. unit
regardless of FAR
1. Demolition Limits
• Increase to 50%
2. Urban Lot Split Unit
Maximum
• Limit to 2 Units
3. Unit Size Limits
• Discretionary review:
Units larger than 800
sq. ft.
• Max size determined
by FAR
723 of 741
Planning Commission
Recommendations
August 23, 2022
PC Recommendation
Ordinance
9 4. Height
• All units to achieve max.
R1 height
5. Access
• 10 ft. easement only
when parking is required
or when required by Fire
6. Interim Design Standards
• Remove 2nd story window
glazing requirement
4. Height
• Detached: 16 ft. plate;
24 ft. peak
• Attached: 24 ft. plate;
32 ft. peak (R1)
5. Access
• 10 ft. access corridor
for newly created flag
lots
6. Interim Design Standards
• Glaze 2nd story
windows up to 5 ft.
from finished floor
when w/in 5ft. of a
property line
724 of 741
Planning Commission
Recommendations
August 23, 2022
PC Recommendation
Ordinance
10 7. Text Amendment –
Individually Eligible Historic
Resources Definition
• Do not update the
definition
7. Text Amendment –
Individually Eligible Historic
Resources Definition
• Update definition to
align with the General
Plan
• Include buildings
determined to be
eligible through a
historic resources
evaluation.
725 of 741
Staff Recommendation
Recommend to the City Council to:
• Adopt an Ordinance to amend the San Mateo Municipal Code to add Chapter 27.21 "Two-Unit Development Overlay District" to implement the provisions of SB 9; • Amend Chapter 27.66 "Historic Preservation" to update the definition of “Individually Eligible Buildings,”; and,
• Adopt a resolution to establish interim objective design standards for single-family and duplex development.
11 726 of 741
Thank You
SB 9 Website
http://www.cityofsanmateo.org/SB9
Staff Contacts:
Laura Richstone, Associate Planner, 650-522-7205, [email protected]; Linda Ly, Associate Planner, 650-522-7217, [email protected]; Manira Sandhir, 650-522-7203, [email protected] 12 727 of 741
City Council
Senate Bill 9 (SB 9)
Ordinance Introduction
September 19, 2022
Laura Richstone, Associate Planner
Community Development
728 of 741
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
14 • Approx. 16,200 SFD’s lots subject to SB 9
• Majority are over 45 years and were built before 1977 • Listing
• 45 yrs AND eligible for listing per CEQA
• CEQA Listing Requirements
• CEQA resources that are eligible for listing are considered historical resources • Historical Context (Events or Patterns of Events)
• History of Property (Owners and Occupants)
• Architectural Analysis (Type, Style, Architect, Builder) • Information Potential
729 of 741
15 730 of 741
16 731 of 741
17 Lot Split - Maximum Unit Potential (4 units)
732 of 741
State Standards
Qualifying Criteria
Location
Tenant Protections
18 • Zoned Single-Family (R1)
• Not a local, state, or federal
historic property, landmark
or district
• Cannot be located in a
hazard areas (i.e high fire
zone, earthquake fault zone,
floodway etc.) unless
certain state standard are
met
• Demolition limits
• Units restricted to
residential use only
• Short-term rentals
prohibited
• No demolition of
affordable units
• Not occupied by
tenant within last 3
years
733 of 741
What Can Be
Built?
Setbacks and
Height
Parking
Requirements
19 • City must allow
2 primary units
that are at least
800 sq. ft.
• Maximum of 4
units allowed
• Short-term
rentals
prohibited
• Residential uses
only
• 4 ft. side and
rear yard
setbacks
• City must allow
at least 16 ft.
height
• 1 space per
main unit
• Cannot require
parking if
located within
1/2 mile
walking
distance of a
major transit
stop / major
transit corridor,
or carshare
facility
State Standards
Two-Unit Development
734 of 741
What Can Be
Built?
Parcel Size, Setbacks
and Height
Parking
Requirements
20 • Split a parcel
into 2 lots
• City must allow
at least 2
dwelling units
(can allow up to
4)
• Short-term
rentals
prohibited
• Residential uses
only
• 60/40 split
maximum
• 1,200 sq. ft.
minimum parcel
size
• Height and
setbacks same as
Two-Unit
Development (4 ft.
side and rear; 16
ft. height)
• Same as Two-
Unit
Development (1
space per main
unit)
State Standards
Urban Lot Splits
735 of 741
21 736 of 741
CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 6
8 7
CITY OF SAN MATEO
Agenda Report
City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
Agenda Number: 30 Section Name: NEW BUSINESS Account Number: 10-1311 File ID: 22-6645 TO: City Council
FROM: Drew Corbett, City Manager
PREPARED BY: City Manager's Office
MEETING DATE: September 19, 2022
SUBJECT:
Consideration of Contribution to San Mateo-Foster City Education Foundation Gala and Auction RECOMMENDATION:
Consider adopting a resolution to appropriate an amount determined by Council from the General Fund's unassigned fund balance to make a contribution to the San Mateo-Foster City Education Foundation's Gala and Auction.
BACKGROUND:
At its September 6, 2022 regular meeting, Council directed staff to bring forward for consideration a contribution to the San Mateo-Foster City Education Foundation’s Gala and Auction. For the past two years, Council authorized a $7,260 contribution and also provided an item for the auction, which was an evening of bowling at Bel Mateo Bowl with the City Council. This year’s gala and auction, Night at the Museum, will take place on October 21st. Funds raised will go towards supporting the Arts in all 21 schools. Sponsorship levels available include:
• $1,000: Community Challenge Partner
• $3,000: Bright Future Challenge Partner
• $5,000: Positive Change Ambassador Challenge Partner
• $10,000: Virtual Innovation Challenge Partner
• $20,000: For a Better Tomorrow Champion Challenge Partner • $50,000: Night at the Museum Champion Challenge Partner BUDGET IMPACT:
Should Council choose to make a contribution to the San Mateo-Foster City School District Education Foundation’s gala and auction, an appropriation will be made in the determined amount from the General Fund’s unassigned fund balance.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
This administrative action is not a project subject to CEQA, because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5).)
NOTICE PROVIDED
All meeting noticing requirements were met.
ATTACHMENTS
Att 1 - Proposed Resolution
737 of 741
CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 6
8 7
STAFF CONTACT
Drew Corbett, City Manager
[email protected]
(650) 522-7002
738 of 741
7 2
5 5
CITY OF SAN MATEO
RESOLUTION NO. (2022)
APPROPRIATE AN AMOUNT DETERMINED BY COUNCIL FROM GENERAL FUND’S UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE TO MAKE CONTRIBUTION TO SAN MATEO-FOSTER CITY EDUCATION FOUNDATION’S GALA
AND AUCTION
WHEREAS, the City is considering a contribution to the San Mateo-Foster City Education Foundation for its gala and auction, “Night at the Museum”; and
WHEREAS, all proceeds will be contributed towards the Arts in all 21 schools; and WHEREAS, sponsorship levels range from $1,000 to $50,000; and WHEREAS, pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5), this appropriation is not a project subject to CEQA because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MATEO, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY RESOLVES that:
1. The amount of ________ in unassigned fund balance from the General Fund is appropriated for the purpose of contributing to the San Mateo-Foster City Education Foundation’s Gala and Auction.
739 of 741
Education
Foundation
Gala Support
September 19, 2022
740 of 741
Background
• San Mateo-Foster City Education Foundation Gala and
Auction, Night at the Museum, on October 21st
• Last two years Council approved $7,260 contribution + a night of bowling with Council at Bel Mateo Bowl for the auction • Should Council opt to provide a contribution and/or an item for the auction, resolution prepared to appropriate
contribution amount
741 of 741