Section Page
1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................3
1.1 PURPOSE.............................................................................................................................3
1.2 STATUTORY AUTHORITY AND REQUIREMENTS ..................................................................3
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................4
2.1 REGIONAL LOCATION..........................................................................................................4
2.2 PROPOSED PROJECT ...........................................................................................................4
3. FINDINGS CONCERNING CEQA EXEMPTION ..............................................................................6
3.1 GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(B)(3): COMMON SENSE EXEMPTION ....................................6
3.2 ANALYSIS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS ..................................................................................6 Figures
Figure 2-1 Housing Sites Inventory ......................................................................................................5 187 of 2271
January 2023 Page 3
1. Introduction
1.1 PURPOSE
This Technical Memorandum serves as an evaluation of the City of San Mateo 2023-2031 (6th cycle) Housing Element (proposed project) for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance. This Technical Memorandum was prepared to present: 1) the findings resulting from the CEQA compliance review, as described below; and 2) the recommendations concerning the appropriate CEQA compliance documentation.
1.2 STATUTORY AUTHORITY AND REQUIREMENTS
Once it is determined that an activity is a project subject to CEQA, it is then determined whether the project is exempt from CEQA. State CEQA Guidelines (“Guidelines”) Section 15061(b) outlines the ways in which a project may be exempt as follows:
A project is exempt from CEQA if:
1) The project is exempt by statute (see, e.g. Article 18, commencing with Section 15260). 2) The project is exempt pursuant to a categorical exemption (see Article 19, commencing with Guidelines Section 15300) and the application of that categorical exemption is not barred by one of the exceptions set forth in Guidelines Section 15300.2. 3) The activity is covered by the common-sense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA.
4) The project will be rejected or disapproved by a public agency. (See Guidelines Section 15270(b)). 5) The project is exempt pursuant to the provisions of Article 12.5 of Chapter 3.
The proposed project would be exempt as a “common sense” exemption under Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because implementation of the 2023-2031 Housing Element would not have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment, as further discussed below in Section 3, Findings Concerning CEQA Exemption.
188 of 2271
2. Project Description
2.1 REGIONAL LOCATION
San Mateo is in the northern portion of San Mateo County. It is bordered by the San Francisco Bay and City of Foster City to the east, the City of Burlingame and Town of Hillsborough to the north, the City of Belmont to the south, and the Town of Hillsborough and unincorporated San Mateo County to the west. San Mateo is roughly 10 miles south of San Francisco and 25 miles northwest of downtown San Jose. State Route 82 (El Camino Real), State Route 92, Highway 101, and Caltrain provide regional transportation connections.
2.2 PROPOSED PROJECT
2.2.1 Project Background
The City of San Mateo has prepared a comprehensive update to its existing Housing Element. The updated 2023-2031 Housing Element was originally adopted in January 2023, with an updated version scheduled for adoption in April/May of 2024 following the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) review letter that found the City’s updated Housing Element to be in substantial compliance with State Law. This Housing Element will guide the City’s housing development during the 6th Housing Cycle, from January 2023 through January 2031.
The 6th Cycle Housing Element is a State-mandated eight-year policy document that is a component of the San Mateo General Plan. The overall purpose of the Housing Element Update is to identify current and projected housing needs, show locations where housing can be built, and set goals, policies, and programs to meet the community’s housing needs. The foundation of the Housing Element is the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), which begins with a determination of housing need issued by the California Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) and allocated by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). A jurisdiction is required to demonstrate whether it has sufficient capacity to achieve its RHNA. However, identification of a site’s capacity does not guarantee that construction will occur on that site, as the actual construction of units would occur as a result of a development application from a private or non-profit developer. The RHNA for San Mateo for this Housing Element Update is 7,015 units, including 1,777 Very Low income units, 1,023 Low income units, 1,175 Moderate income units, and 3,040 Above Moderate income units.
2.2.2 Proposed Sites and Zoning
State law requires that the 2023-2031 Housing Element identify adequate sites for housing by including an inventory of land suitable for residential development, including vacant sites and non-vacant sites having potential for redevelopment, with an analysis of the development capacity that can realistically be achieved 189 of 2271
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T U P D A T E C E Q A E X E M P T I O N T E C H N I C A L M E M O R A N D U M
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
Project Description
January 2023 Page 5
for each site. The purpose of the Sites Inventory is to evaluate whether there are sufficient sites with appropriate zoning density to meet the RHNA. It is based on the City’s current land use designations and zoning requirements. The City of San Mateo’s Sites Inventory for future housing identifies housing sites spread throughout the city that could be developed with up to 10,274 new housing units, exceeding the RHNA assigned to the City. Figure 2-1, Housing Sites Inventory, shows a map of where each site is located within the city and the housing opportunity areas. The development capacity of each of the identified housing sites is based on existing land use and zoning densities currently in place. No redesignations or rezoning are necessary, and no redesignation or rezoning would occur as part of the adoption of the City’s 2023-2031 Housing Element. Most of the identified sites are currently developed, although not to the maximum extent allowed under current land use and zoning designations. Based on market trends observed in the city, property owner and developer interests, and the characteristics of new development approved since 2019, the City has developed a sites inventory that includes properties most likely to be redeveloped to provide new housing over the next eight years. A significant number of these sites are located in high resource areas to meet Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) requirements and avoid adding to any Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (RECAP).
2.2.3 Proposed Housing Plan
The City has identified five goals to guide the 2023-2031 Housing Element’s policies and programs. Goals H1 through H3 address the region’s housing needs through a combination of production, preservation, and protection. Goal H4 promotes community engagement and public outreach to support social resilience and awareness of housing resources and opportunities, and Goal H5 is to affirmatively further fair housing.
Goal H1 is to facilitate and support the production of new housing at all income levels, but especially affordable housing. The City will employ two approaches to support this goal: being directly involved in housing production and encouraging and streamlining housing developments. Policies proposed under this goal encourage utilization of public funds and properties to build more units, partnerships to support increased production of accessory dwelling units (ADUs), usage of local ordinances to require developers to create affordable units that serve a variety of populations and provision of incentives for affordable unit development, adoption of objective design standards, identifying residential uses as permitted in all commercial (C) and Executive Office (E) districts, updates to site standards in the Zoning Code, consideration of setting minimum densities for mixed-use projects with a housing component and housing projects in proximity to transit, development of programs to support production of “missing middle”1 housing, and streamlined application review and processing timelines for affordable development projects.
Those policies under Goal H1 that have the potential to affect land use regulations related to housing production are discussed in further detail and analyzed below in Section 3.2, Analysis in Support of Findings. 1 “Missing middle” housing refers to multi-family housing in walkable neighborhoods built at a scale compatible with single-family homes.
190 of 2271
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T U P D A T E C E Q A E X E M P T I O N T E C H N I C A L M E M O R A N D U M
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
Project Description
Figure 2-1 Housing Sites Inventory
191 of 2271
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T U P D A T E C E Q A E X E M P T I O N T E C H N I C A L M E M O R A N D U M
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
Project Description
January 2023 Page 7
Goal H2 is to preserve existing housing that is affordable to lower- and middle-income residents. This goal can be achieved most directly through policies encouraging the use of public funds to acquire existing affordable housing units and/or requiring developers to replace any lost units. Alternatively, the City can indirectly achieve this goal by improving the quality of life for the current residents through policies incentivizing upgrades through rehabilitation, accessibility modifications, or energy efficiency changes.
Enhancements to low-income neighborhoods can also be achieved through capital improvements and resiliency projects that protect against threats posed by climate change.
Goal H3 is to protect current residents and prevent displacement. Commercial linkage fees, relocation fees, documentation requirements for landlords, and right to return policies are proposed under this goal to help balance the scales against market forces that lead to displacement, while extending and expanding tenant protections. Policies under this goal also address homelessness and increasing shelter capacity that can protect housing insecure individuals and families from having to leave San Mateo entirely, allowing service providers an opportunity to intervene and lead clients to housing stability. Other policies relate to affirmative marketing, prioritizing special needs tenants in below market rate units, monitoring trends in evictions and rents, and undertaking several actions to affirmatively further fair housing.
Goal H4 is to promote social resilience through public education and outreach. Policies under this goal work include increasing community outreach and availability of resources in multiple languages, supporting the development of a countywide affordable rental waitlist, expanded community education and outreach, and enabling affirmative housing.
Goal H5 is the Fair Housing Action Plan, meant to implement the overarching goals of AFFH. Action areas under this goal include enhancing housing mobility strategies, encouraging new housing choices and affordability in high resource areas, improving place-based strategies to encourage community conservation and revitalization (including preservation of existing affordable housing), and protecting existing residents from displacement. Many of the policies and programs that support AFFH also support the other goals of the Housing Element Update discussed above, which further highlights how fair housing is interwoven with achieving the City’s larger housing production, preservation, protection, and promotion goals.
192 of 2271
January 2023 Page 8
3. Findings Concerning CEQA
Exemption
3.1 GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(B)(3): COMMON SENSE
EXEMPTION
The proposed project is exempt as a “common sense” exemption under Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because the project involves policies, programs, and actions to meet the City’s RHNA and AFFH goals. As described above, the 2023-2031 Housing Element creates a roadmap on how to achieve its RHNA and AFFH goals through identification of suitable sites for development and identifying programs and actions that could remove constraints and promote affordable housing development. Because the City does not have to rezone any sites or make any physical improvements to adopt the Housing Element, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the 2023-2031 Housing Element would have a significant effect on the environment. Thus, the 2023-2031 Housing Element is exempt from CEQA under the common-sense exemption.
3.2 ANALYSIS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is strictly a policy document that does not provide entitlements to any specific development projects and would not result in any direct or indirect physical changes to the environment. As discussed in Section 2.2.2, Proposed Sites and Zoning, the Housing Sites Inventory utilizes existing land use and zoning densities and does not require redesignation or rezoning to meet the City’s RHNA plus a buffer. The 2023-2031 Housing Element does not propose any changes to the City’s General Plan 2040 land use map and would not modify any General Plan land use designations. Future implementation actions would include amendments to zoning and other regulations to facilitate housing development consistent with State housing law. These future amendments are discussed in detail below.
Policies, programs, and actions included in the 2023-2031 Housing Element encourage housing production and outline steps for the future implementation of certain actions. As discussed in Section 2.2.3, Proposed Housing Plan, Goal H1 of the proposed Housing Element Update is to produce new housing at all income levels, with a focus on affordable housing. Policy H1.5 encourages family housing by prioritizing family-sized units in City projects and requiring new housing development to include a minimum percentage of familysized affordable and market rate units. Policy H1.7 includes amending the Zoning Code to remove constraints to housing development, reduce parking requirements, make residential uses permitted in Commercial (C) and Executive Office (E) districts that are not within the Residential Overlay (/R), and allowing for housing as a permitted use on quasi-public sites. Policy H1.8 is to adopt Objective Design Standards for multi-family residential projects and mixed-use projects with a residential component to 193 of 2271
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T U P D A T E C E Q A E X E M P T I O N T E C H N I C A L M E M O R A N D U M
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
Findings Concerning CEQA Exemption
January 2023 Page 9
expedite the production of housing, which was completed in 2023. Policy H1.9 creates minimum residential density requirements to ensure mixed-use development will contain an appropriate amount of housing in commercial/office developments. Policy H1.12 encourages development of missing middle housing by supporting small infill residential construction (4-10 units) through policy updates and code amendments.
These policies encourage and promote housing production under existing land use regulations but do not increase the amount of allowable development allowed in the city when compared to existing land use and zoning regulations.
The policies described above—and their corresponding implementing programs and actions—under Goal H1 would encourage housing projects in the City and could be considered potentially growth inducing.
However, none of these policies involve any land use or zoning changes that could increase the amount of housing allowed in the city or otherwise create physical impacts on the environment. These policies are structured to incentivize housing development within the framework of existing density and buildout provisions envisioned in the City’s General Plan 2030 and recently adopted General Plan 2040, amend the Zoning Code to modify/eliminate site standards and requirements that are identified as a constraint or barrier to new housing development, and through changes to the ministerial or discretionary review process depending on the type of projects proposed by developers.
Furthermore, the 2023-2031 Housing Element would not increase water demand in comparison to growth projections already reflected in relevant urban water supply planning documents. The City of San Mateo receives its water supply from California Water Service (CalWater) and Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID). Urban water management plans (UWMPs) are prepared by urban water suppliers and are updated every five years to support the supplier’s long-term resource planning to ensure that adequate water supplies are available to meet existing and future water needs. Because the 2023-2031 Housing Element would retain existing land use and zoning designations, it would not increase water demand projections for San Mateo. Furthermore, it is reasonable to assume that 2025 UWMPs will be prepared in the future based on the City’s forthcoming 2040 growth projections from the City’s recently adopted General Plan 2040, which is separate from the 2023-2031 Housing Element adoption and was adopted by the City Council on March 18, 2024.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element does not include specific amendments to any land use regulations at this time, but rather provides a timeline for future amendments. Subsequent amendments to the City’s land use or zoning regulations would be subject to separate CEQA review at the time those amendments are prepared, if required. No redesignations or rezoning are necessary to create housing capacity, and no redesignation or rezoning would occur as part of the adoption of the proposed Housing Element Update.
Therefore, it can be seen with certainty that the City of San Mateo 2023-2031 Housing Element would not have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore exempt from CEQA review. 194 of 2271
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
January 19, 2024
Zachary Dahl, Director
Community Development Department
City of San Mateo
330 West 20th Avenue
San Mateo, CA 94403
Dear Zachary Dahl:
RE: City of San Mateo’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Revised Draft Housing Element Thank you for submitting the City of San Mateo’s (City) revised draft housing element received for review November 22, 2023. In addition, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) received edits on January 17, 2024.
Pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (c). HCD considered comments from Housing Action Coalition and David D. Bohannon Organization.
Pursuant to Government Code section 65585, HCD is reporting the results of the review.
The revised draft element meets the statutory requirements that were described in HCD’s March 27, 2023 review. The housing element will substantially comply with State Housing Element Law (Gov. Code, § 65580 et seq) when it is adopted, submitted to and approved by HCD, in accordance with Government Code section 65585.
Public participation in the development, adoption and implementation of the housing element is essential to effective housing planning. Throughout the housing element process, the City must continue to engage the community, including organizations that represent lower-income and special needs households, by making information regularly available while considering and incorporating comments where appropriate. HCD encourages the City to actively consider comments, especially related to the identification of suitable sites to accommodate the regional housing need allocation (RHNA), addressing constraints on housing and programs to affirmatively further fair housing, on this revised draft and make adjustments as appropriate. Please be aware, any revisions to the element must be posted on the local government’s website and to email a link to all individuals and organizations that have previously requested notices relating to the local government’s housing element at least seven days before submitting to HCD.
195 of 2271
Zachary Dahl, Director
For your information, pursuant to Assembly Bill 1398 (Chapter 358, Statutes of 2021), as the City did not adopt a compliant housing element within 120 days of the statutory deadline (January 31, 2023), any programs to make prior identified sites available (Policy H1.10 – Establish By-Right Designation for Prior Housing Sites) or address a shortfall of capacity to accommodate the RHNA must be completed no later than one year from the statutory deadline. Otherwise, the local government’s housing element will no longer comply with State Housing Element Law, and HCD may revoke its finding of substantial compliance pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (i).
Please be aware, if the City does not adopt a compliant housing element within one year from the statutory deadline, the element cannot be found in substantial compliance until all necessary rezones are completed pursuant to Government Code section 65583, subdivision (c)(1)(A) and Government Code section 65583.2, subdivision (c).
For your information, as the housing element relies upon nonvacant sites to accommodate more than 50 percent of the RHNA for lower-income households, the City must find existing uses are not an impediment to additional residential development in the planning period and will likely discontinue in the planning period (Gov. Code, § 65583.2, subd. (g)(2).). Absent findings (e.g., adoption resolution) based on substantial evidence, the existing uses will be presumed to impede additional residential development and will not be utilized toward demonstrating adequate sites to accommodate the RHNA. The City must make these findings as part of its adoption resolution.
As a reminder, pursuant to Government Code section 65583.3, the City must submit an electronic sites inventory with its adopted housing element. The City must utilize standards, forms, and definitions adopted by HCD. Please see HCD’s housing element webpage at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community-development/housingelements for a copy of the form and instructions.
For your information, some general plan element updates are triggered by housing element adoption. HCD reminds the City to consider timing provisions and welcomes the opportunity to provide assistance. For information, please see the Technical Advisories issued by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research at:
https://www.opr.ca.gov/planning/general-plan/guidelines.html.
HCD appreciates the dedication and work that was put into the housing element update and review process and looks forward to receiving the City’s adopted housing element.
Please contact Weston Starbird, of our staff, at [email protected] with any questions or assistance
Sincerely,
Paul McDougall
Senior Program Manager
196 of 2271
Housing Element
of the General Plan
2023-2031
April 2024
197 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024
Housing Element of the General Plan 2023-2031
198 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element 1 April 2024
Acknowledgements
City Council
Lisa Diaz Nash, Mayor
Robert Newsom, Jr, Deputy Mayor
Richard Hedges, Council Member
Amourence Lee, Council Member
Adam Loraine, Council Member
Planning Commission
John Ebneter, Chair
Seema Patel, Vice Chair
Adam Nugent, Commissioner
Martin Wiggins, Commissioner
Margaret Williams, Commissioner
San Mateo City Staff
City Manager’s Office: Alex Khojikian, City Manager
Christina Horrisberger, Assistant City Manager
City Attorney’s Office: Prasanna Rasiah, City Attorney
Mazarin Vakharia, Assistant City Attorney
Community Development Dept: Zachary Dahl, Interim Community Development Director Manira Sandhir, Planning Manager
Nicholas “Nicky” Vu, Housing Specialist
Linda Ly, Associate Planner
Consultants
Diana Elrod, Diana R. Elrod Consulting
Veronica Tam, Veronica Tam and Associates
Nicholas Hamilton, Good City Company
Heidi Aggeler, Root Policy Research
Diane Glauber, Lawyer’s Committee for Civil Rights Under Law Acknowledgement also goes out to all of the past City staff, City Council members and Planning Commissioners who contributed to this Housing Element.
199 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 2
This page is intentionally blank.
200 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 3
Chapter 4 Table of Contents
1. Executive Summary 7
2. Introduction and Background 19
2.1 History of San Mateo 19
2.2 Legislative Context 21
2.3 Consistency with the General Plan 25
2.4 Water/Sewer Capacity 26
3. Housing Needs and Sites Inventory 31
3.1 Housing Needs Summary 31
3.2 Demographics 33
3.3 Units at Risk of Conversion to Market Rate 35
3.4 RHNA Allocation Summary and Methodology 39
3.5 Sites Inventory 56
4. Other Required Housing Element Components 61
4.1 Constraints Analysis Summary 61
4.2 Housing Resources Summary 63
4.3 Climate Change and Energy Conservation 65
5. Public Participation 69
5.1 Overview 69
5.2 Accomplishments and Key Takeaways 72
5.3 Draft Housing Element Public Review Period 77
5.4 How We Incorporated What We Heard into the Plan 78
5.5 Attachments included in Appendices F and G 84
6. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Summary 89
6.1 What is Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing? 89
6.2 History of segregation in the region 90
6.3 San Mateo’s Fair Housing Assessment 92
7. Housing Plan 105
7.1 Goals, Policies, and Programs Summary 106
7.2 Implementation Plan 115
8. Quantified Objectives 129
9. Prior Accomplishments Summary 135
Table of Contents
201 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 4
Table of Contents
Figure 1: 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map 49
Figure 2: Sites Inventory Map 54
Figure 3: AFFH Definition 89
List of Figures
Appendix A: Needs Analysis
Appendix B: Constraints
Appendix C: Housing Resources and Sites Inventory List
Appendix D: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Narrative Appendix E: Review of Prior Element
Appendix F: Public Participation
Appendix G: Public Review Period
List of Appendices
Executive Summary Table: San Mateo Sites Inventory Breakdown 10 Table 1: Income Limits for San Mateo County, 2023 32
Table 2: Final Regional Housing Needs Allocations 33
Table 3: San Mateo RHNA Targets Summary 39
Table 4: January 2019 – December 2023 Planning Development Approvals (ranked by density) 45
Table 5: ADU/JADU Annual Permit Data 50
Table 6: Sites Inventory Affordability Breakdown 56
Table 7: ADUs with Permits Issued by Resource Area (2017 to 2021) 111 Table 8: Goal H-1: Production - Implementation Plan 115 Table 9: Goal H-2: Preservation - Implementation Plan 119 Table 10: Goal H-3: Protection - Implementation Plan 120 Table 11: Goal H-4: Promotion - Implementation Plan 121 Table 12: Goal H-5: AFFH - Implementation Plan 122
Table 13: Quantified Objectives for Cycle 6 (2023 – 2031) 130 Table 14: Quantified Objectives Alignment with San Mateo’s RHNA 131 Table 15: Quantified Objectives, 2015 - 2022 136
Table 16: Quantified Objective Actuals, 2015 – 2022* 136 List of Tables
202 of 2271
SECTION 1
Executive Summary
203 of 2271
204 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 7
Chapter 4 Executive Summary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
San Mateo’s 2023-2031 Housing Element is a plan to help address the region’s housing crisis, a blueprint for supporting all forms of housing, and a demonstration of the City’s commitment to achieving greater housing equity and access for all residents. The Housing Element identifies existing housing conditions and community needs, desc ribes “Home is where one where new housing can be developed, establishes goals, policies and programs, and creates a plan for supporting the production of ho using starts from.” to meet the needs of the City’s current and future residents. It includes nine sections as outlined below.
– T.S. Eliot
1. Executive Summary
This Executive Summary provides a high-level summary of each section, and its findings and conclusions.
The Sites Inventory is in Section 3, the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Assessment is in Section 6 and the Housing Plan, with a complete breakdown of the goals, policies and programs, is included in Section
6. Detailed technical information and documentation to support the Housing Element’s findings and conclusions are included in the seven appendices.
2. Introduction and Background
The City of San Mateo is located in San Mateo County, California, on the San Francisco Bay Peninsula and has a population of 105,661 per the 2020 Census. It is approximately 20 miles south of San Francisco and borders Burlingame to the north, Hillsborough to the west, the San Francisco Bay and Foster City to the east and Belmont to the south.
The Housing Element is an integral part of the General Plan, which guides the City of San Mateo’s development and policy decisions, and it is the only element that requires certification by the State. California has also established a significant number of new housing related laws to address the State’s housing crisis and this section provides an overview of the applicable legislation that the Housing Element is required to comply with and address. The State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is tasked with reviewing housing elements for compliance and adequacy and is responsible for certifying the City’s Housing Element.
All newhousing units need tohaveaccess toadequateinfrastructureand municipal services, and in particular, sewage disposal and water capacity must be demonstrated. The City’s electrical and natural gas provider is Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), and the water service provider is predominantly the California Water Company, except for the portion of San Mateo east of the slough, which is served by the Estero Municipal Improvement District. Recology provides recycling, composting and waste disposal services and sewage disposal services are provided by a Joint Powers Authority led by the City. An assessment of Cal Water’s Urban Water Management Plan combined with increased water efficiency and conservation requirements found that there is sufficient water capacity to serve at least 7,015 new housing units by 2031. For sewage disposal, the City is currently building an updated sewage treatment facility which will have the capacity to serve the City into the future, including the new units for this housing cycle. 205 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 8
Chapter 4 Executive Summary
3. Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
For this upcoming eight-year housing cycle, HCD has identified the nine-county Bay Area region’s housing need to be 441,176 units; with this number broken down into four income categories that cover housing types for all income levels, from extremely low-income households to market rate (above moderate income) housing. This Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND) is based on population projections produced by the California Department of Finance (DOF) as well as adjustments that incorporate the region’s existing housing need. The City of San Mateo’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for this cycle is 7,015 new housing units.
A summary of facts about San Mateo’s demographic data is provided to establish a basis for the City’s housing needs and issues. A full version of the City’s demographic report can be found in Appendix A. A key fact identified in this data is that the number of homes in San Mateo increased 3.6% from 2010 to 2020, which is below the growth rate for San Mateo County and below the growth rate of the region’s housing stock during this time period. And, during this time period, home prices increased by 115.6% and rental prices increased by 74.2%. Overall, this demographic data supports the finding that the City does not have sufficient housing units to meet the needs of its residents and that housing affordability is a significant barrier for many middle- and lower-income residents.
206 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 9
Chapter 4 Executive Summary
An analysis of existing affordable ho using units that are at ri sk of conversion/reversion to market rate, rendering them no longer affordable to the people living in them, identified 65 units in two developments (Bridgepoint Condominiums and Belmont Building) that have expiring affordability covenants. The potential loss of existing affordable housing units is an important issue to the City due to displacement of lower-income tenants and the limited alternative housing available to such persons. Preservation of these units can be achieved in a variety of ways and policies and programs have been included in the Housing Plan to explore options to retain the units as affordable, replace the units elsewhere, or relocate tenants into alternative housing that is affordable to them.
To demonstrate how San Mateo can accommodate its RHNA of 7,015 new housing units, the Housing Element must identify adequate sites for housing (Sites Inventory), including rental housing, factorybuilt housing, and mobile homes, and make adequate provision for the existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community. The Sites Inventory is required to include an inventory of land suitable for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having potential for redevelopment, and analyze the development capacity that can realistically be achieved for each site.
The purpose of the Sites Inventory is to evaluate whether there are sufficient sites with appropriate zoning capacity to meet the City’s RHNA goal. The Sites Inventory analysis does not include the economic feasibility of specific sites, does not necessarily take into consideration the owner’s intended use of the land now or in the future, and does not dictate where residential development will actually occur. Based on previous Housing Elements, it is anticipated that some of the sites on the list will be developed with new housing, some will not, and some housing will be built on sites not listed in the Sites Inventory.
The methodology used to estimate the development potential of each property included on the Sites Inventory was developed based on the criteria established by State law, on the physical characteristics, existing uses, redevelopment potential (including improvement to land value ratio, floor area ratio, age of structures, existing height, lot coverage and known developer/owner interest), location and context, local knowledge, and environmental and infrastructure constraints. To ensure a higher likelihood of new developments exceeding the estimates in the Sites Inventory, conservative assumptions were employed. Overall, the Sites Inventory identified sites spread around the City with capacity to develop up to 10,286 units, or 146% of the City’s RHNA. This development capacity exists within the City’s current zoned densities and does not require any rezoning to achieve.
While many of the sites identified are non-vacant sites, they have a significantly high redevelopment potential as noted through example projects, individual site analysis including developer or owner interest, and other factors such as aging building stock and low utilization rates including underutilized parking lots or strip malls (Appendix C). The following table provides a summary breakdown of the Sites Inventory by income category. In addition to the capacity within the City’s existing zoning identified in the Sites Inventory, the recently adopted General Plan 2040 will add at least 10,000 units of additional housing capacity. 207 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 10
Chapter 4 Executive Summary
4. Other Required Housing Element Components
This section provides a summary and evaluation of housing production constraints, an overview of the funding opportunities and housing resources provided by the City, and the applicable energy conservation and climate change policies and requirements for new housing developments.
The constraints section analyzes potential and actual governmental and non-governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing that hinder a jurisdiction from meeting its housing goals. Governmental constraints to housing include zoning and development standards, infrastructure requirements, development impact and permitting fees, and the development review and permitting processes. Non-governmental constraints include availability of financing, the price of land, Executive Summary Table: San Mateo Sites Inventory Breakdown Housing Opportunity
Areas Total Units Very Low Low Moderate
Above
Moderate
(Market Rate)
San Mateo RHNA 7,015 1,7771,0231,1753,040
ADUs 440 132 132 132 44
Pipeline Projects 3,110 562 14 2,534
Remaining RHNA 3,465 1,974 1,029 462
Fashion Island Area 817 167 121 109 418
Hillsdale Mall 1,200 0 180 180 840
Downtown 1,213 177 305 85 646
Other Sites 3,528 1,290 721 1,520
Total Sites 6,758 2,240 1,095 3,424
Grand Total 10,286 3,129 1,278 5,880
Buffer Over Remaining
RHNA 329 (17%) 103 (10%)
General Plan 2040
Buffer 10,000 2,533 1,458 1,675 4,334
This information is included as Table 6 in Section 3.5 of the Housing Element. 208 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element 11 April 2024
Chapter 4 Executive Summary
the cost of construction, Measure Y (voter approved growth limits) and the length of time to de sign and construct new housing.
The City is in the process of implementing measures to reduce development costs, streamline the development review process and amend/simplify the Zoning Code to reduce these constraints. A comprehensive evaluation of all housing impact and permitting fees, with a focus on reducing costs for smaller multi-family projects, will also be completed. Non-governmental constraints are largely determined by market conditions and other factors over which the City has little control. However, the General Plan Update process is facilitating a community conversation around Measure Y, with a goal of building consensus around an updated ballot measure that would allow for the production of more housing, in particular affordable housing, to meet the City’s current and future needs.
The Housing Resources of the City are grouped into three categories. The first is the various funding sources that the City is able to leverage for affordable housing production, preservation, and protection; the second are the existing programs that the City manages and supports to increase the housing supply or otherwise serve past, current, and prospective residents of affordable housing; and the third is the inventory of sites that are adequate for development to meet projected housing needs.
Home energy efficiency has become an increasingly significant factor in housing construction, particularly in the past few years with the increasing demand to build energy efficient and sustainable buildings in California. The California Energy Code and the California Green Building Code in State Title 24 establish uniform energy efficiency and green building standards that all construction must adhere. The City’s 2020 Climate Action Plan (CAP) sets standards to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for housing and construction by exceeding minimum State requirements, providing education and outreach on benefits and financial incentives associated with energy upgrades, and continuing support for energy efficiency and electrification retrofits.
5. Public Participation
Over the past twelve months, the City has conducted a significant community outreach effort to engage with the community, with over nineteen public and community meetings and workshops, five intercept/pop-up events, four surveys and partnership with 21 Elements. The outreach effort included an emphasis on connecting with community members for whom English was not spoken at home, renters, those under 45 years of age, low-income and very low-income households, people with disabilities, seniors, single female heads of household, people experiencing homelessness, and those from underrepresented neighborhoods.
Key accomplishments of the community outreach efforts included:
• Launch of a Housing Element Update website (www.cityofsanmateo.org/HousingElement2023) that included links to past event video recordings, meeting materials, outreach and survey summaries, and information about upcoming meetings and ways to get involved. • Two mailers – one citywide in October 2021 was sent to 27,000 households and a second in January 2022 targeted to renters – inviting community members to participate in community workshops, public meetings, and online surveys. Both mailers included printed information in English and Spanish. 209 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 12
Chapter 4 Executive Summary
• Three public Housing Element workshops, six presentations/discussions at City Council and Planning Commission public meetings, a focus group discussion with builders, developers and architects, and presentations to many local community-based organizations, including the Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Merchants Association and San Mateo-Foster City School District Parent Teacher Association (SMFCSD PTA).
• Two related Housing Element Surveys conducted by the City between October 11, 2021 and January 16, 2022 received a total of 750 responses. Online responses from community members accounted for 594 responses, with 156 additional responses to a subset of questions collected by staff and the consultant team as intercept surveys during pop-up events in the North Central and Shoreview Neighborhoods, as well as Macedonia food distribution events.
Feedback and insights from tenants, non-English speakers, lower-income residents, property owners and developers helped to highlight new policy opportunities and ways to strengthen and improve existing policies, with the overarching challenge of housing affordability and availability being a reoccurring topic.
Themes that were incorporated into the Housing Plan included production of more missing middle housing, more outreach and education to tenants and landlords, streamlining and simplifying development review and permitting processes, doing more to address fair housing and equity, and ensuring that new housing is sustainable and addresses climate change.
On April 6, 2022, the City published the Draft Housing Element for public review. The 30-day public review period ended on May 6, 2022. During the review period, the City received 20 public comment letters.
Comments reflected a broad range of sentiments including support for housing generally and the Draft Housing Element, a desire for the Draft Housing Element to articulate methods to greatly expand the supply of housing and tenant protections, concern about the future of existing very low density neighborhoods, and worry that future growth would strain the City’s transportation infrastructure and available water supplies. On April 26 and May 3, 2022, the Planning Commission held public hearings and provided input on the Draft. On May 23, 2022, the City Council held a public hearing to consider the public comments and provide staff with input and direction. On November 7, 2022, the City Council held a study session to discuss HCD’s first review letter and receive public comments. Following an update to the Housing Element to address HCD comments, public comments and City Council direction, the Revised Draft Housing Element was published for public review on December 30, 2022 to January 10, 2023 for the mandated 7-day public comment period.
The Revised Draft was reviewed by the Planning Commission at a public hearing on January 12, 2023 and adopted by the City Council on January 24, 2023, to affirmatively further fair housing and accommodate the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) of 7,015 units for the 2023-2031 Housing Element cycle.
The Adopted Housing Element was submitted to HCD on January 27, 2023. HCD completed their review of the City’s Adopted Housing Element and provided written comments to the City on March 27, 2023.
The City Council held study sessions on April 17, 2023 and June 5, 2023 to consider public comments and provide staff with input on direction on how to update the Housing Element in response to HCD’s second comment letter. The third revised Draft Housing Element was published for public review on July 26, 2023 and submitted to HCD on August 4, 2023. On September 20, 2023, following multiple meetings with HCD where additional deficiency comments were provided verbally, the City rescinded the revised Draft Housing Element submittal to allow for technical updates and clarifications. 210 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 13
Chapter 4 Executive Summary
On November 8, 2023, a revised third Draft Housing Element was published for public review, with the comment period ending on November 15, 2023. Following a review of the public comments submitted, the revised third Draft Housing Element was submitted to HCD on November 22, 2023. On January 19, 2024, The City received a letter from HCD noting that the revised third Draft Housing Element, with the technical clarifications submitted on January 17, 2024, met the statutory requirements and will substantially comply with State Housing Element Law once adopted.
6. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Assessment This section provides an overview of AFFH requirements; a history of segregation in the region; and an assessment of the San Mateo’s AFFH issues.
“Affirmatively furthering fair housing” means taking meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics. California law, as established by AB 686, requires all public agencies to “administer programs and activities relating to housing and community development in a manner that affirmatively furthers fair housing, and take no action inconsistent with this obligation.” The law also required that housing elements include an analysis of fair housing outreach and capacity, integration and segregation, access to opportunity, disparate housing needs, and current fair housing practices.
The United States’ oldest cities have a history of mandating segregated living patterns—and Northern California cities are no exception. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), in its recent Fair Housing Equity Assessment, attributes segregation in the Bay Area to historically discriminatory practices— highlighting redlining and discriminatory mortgage approvals—as well as “structural inequities” in society, and “self-segregation” (i.e., preferences to live near similar people).
A Fair Housing Assessment for all San Mateo County jurisdictions was conducted by 21 Elements, a countywide jurisdictional collaborative. For the City of San Mateo, the Assessment describes fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity, integration and segregation, access to opportunity and disparate housing needs as contributing factors that should be addressed in the city’s fair housing action plan. Some primary findings in the Fair Housing Assessment included:
• 16% of fair housing complaints filed in San Mateo County between 2017 to 2021 (57 total) were in the City of San Mateo (9 total), which is approximately aligned with the City share of the county’s population (14%).
• Racial and ethnic minority populations are disproportionately impacted by poverty, low household incomes, overcrowding, and homelessness compared to the non-Hispanic White population in the City of San Mateo. Additionally, racial and ethnic minorities are more likely to live in moderate resources areas and be denied for a home mortgage loan. • The northeast area of San Mateo is disproportionately impacted by high poverty, low education opportunity, low economic opportunity, low environmental scores, high social vulnerability scores, concentrations of cost burdened households, overcrowding, and moderate resource scores. These areas are generally on either side of Highway 101 and stretch to the San Francisco Bay waterfront, encompassing the North Central and Shoreview neighborhoods. 211 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 14
Chapter 4 Executive Summary
• The City of San Mateo has a slight concentration of residents with a disability with 9% of the population compared to 8% in the county. Residents living with a disability in the City are more likely to be unemployed and are largely concentrated in areas around Highway 101. • Racial and ethnic minority students in the City of San Mateo—served by the San Mateo Union High School District and the San Mateo-Foster City Elementary School District—experience lower educational outcomes compared to other students.
• Nearly half of all renter households in the City of San Mateo are cost burdened—spending more than 30% of their gross income on housing costs—and one in four are extremely cost burdened—spending more than 50% of their gross income on housing costs.
Contributing factors to these Primary Findings include:
• Higher rates of mortgage denial rates among Hispanic households stems from decades of discrimination in housing markets and challenges building wealth through economic mobility and homeownership. • The northern portion of the City offers the most affordable homes, and as such, residents living in these areas have lower incomes and higher rates of poverty. • Hispanic residents are more likely than others to work low wage jobs that do not support the City’s or region’s housing prices, resulting in higher rates of cost burden and overcrowding. • Hispanic residents are primarily concentrated in the northeastern area of the City where residents face higher poverty and cost burden as well as poor opportunity outcomes according to TCAC’s opportunity maps.
• Concentration of naturally occurring affordable ownership and rental housing opportunities in the northeast areas of the City further concentrates poverty, cost burden, and overcrowding in areas with low economic and environmental outcomes.
• There is a relative lack of affordable housing opportunities in higher resourced areas of the City. • Highway 101 creates a major barrier between the Shoreview neighborhood and the rest of the City of San Mateo.
• The unemployment rate for the City of San Mateo’s residents with a disability is four times that of persons without a disability.
• The undersupply of accessible housing units, particularly for renters, creates a scarcity of units for residents living with a disability.
• There are concentrations of the population living with a disability west of Highway 101 in the North Central neighborhood.
• Residents with disabilities and Hispanic households face increased housing discrimination.
In response to this analysis, as well as community input, an Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Action Plan, which details how the City proposes to respond to the factors contributing to the fair housing challenges identified in this analysis, was developed. The Action Plan is included in Appendix D and the policies and programs to implement the Action Plan are included in the Housing Plan under Goal 5. 212 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 15
Chapter 4 Executive Summary
7. Housing Plan
The City of San Mateo’s primary objective is to maintain and provide a diversity of housing opportunities for current and future residents. There should be a variety of housing types and sizes, a mixture of rental and ownership housing, and housing that supports special needs populations, including seniors, farmworkers, single female heads of household, people with disabilities, and those who are unhoused. This variety of housing opportunities should accommodate a diverse population, leading to a variety of household sizes and types at all income levels.
In addition, the City needs to increase housing supply to meet the housing demand caused by current and future job growth. The types of new housing created should accommodate all income levels consistent with the city’s RHNA. The goals, polices, and actions contained in this Housing Plan support these overarching objectives while also ensuring that the City will meet its statutory obligations to affirmatively further fair housing and facilitate housing production at all income levels.
The City has identified five goals to guide the Housing Element’s policies and programs. The first three are based upon the “3Ps” framework that seeks to address the region’s housing needs through a combination of Production, Preservation and Protection and is endorsed by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). The fourth goal, or “fourth P,” is Promotion of community engagement and public outreach to support social resilience, and the fifth goal is to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH). • Goal H-1 – Production – Facilitate and support the production of new housing at all income levels, but especially affordable housing. Twenty (20) policies with fifty-one (51) implementing actions have been identified to support this goal.
• Goal H-2 – Preservation – Preserve existing housing that is affordable to lower- and middle-income residents. Six (6) policies with thirteen (13) implementing actions have been identified to support this goal.
• Goal H-3 – Protection – Protect current residents to prevent displacement. Seven (7) policies with seventeen (17) implementing actions have been identified to support this goal. • Goal H-4 – Promotion – Promote social resilience through public education and community outreach to make information more available and accessible. Five (5) policies with twelve (12) implementing actions have been identified to support this goal.
• Goal H-5 – Affirmatively Further Fair Housing – Address the issues of fair housing, equity and access while reinforcing the objective that affirmatively furthering fair housing is both a stand-alone priority and decisively inseparable from achieving the Housing Element’s other goals. Fifteen (15) policies with twenty-three (23) quantified objectives have been identified to support this goal. 213 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 16
Chapter 4 Executive Summary
8. Quantified Objectives
In addition to the Sites Inventory and the Housing Plan, the City is required to provide an estimate of actual housing units that can be preserved and produced given available resources, permits issued and projected pipeline projects expected to be completed within the next housing cycle. State law recognizes that the city’s total housing needs exceed available resources and the community’s ability to satisfy this need within the content of the general plan. The total development cost for the City's RHNA allocation of affordable units (3,975 total units) would exceed $4 billion dollars, of which there is approximately a $2 billion financing gap. Thus, the quantified objectives do not need to completely account for San Mateo’s RHNA but do establish the maximum number of housing units that can realistically be constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved in the City over an eight-year timeframe.
For the upcoming housing cycle, the city’s quantified objectives for conservation are 719 units, with 323 being affordable units, and the quantified objectives for construction are 5,931 units, with 1,481 being affordable units. The total of quantified objectives for the City are 6,650 units, including 1,804 affordable units. For a full breakdown of units by affordability level and by project or category, see Table 14 – Quantified Objectives for Cycle 6 (2023 – 2031), in this Section.
9. Review of Prior Housing Element
This section provides a summary of the key accomplishments, challenges, and opportunities learned from the city’s previous Housing Element. The city’s RHNA for the fifth housing cycle (2015 – 2022) was 3,100 units. The City was able to achieve many of its goals through successful implementation of most of its policies and programs, but fell short of its affordable housing production goals. Key accomplishments included increased accessory dwelling unit (ADU) production, new affordable housing funding sources, protecting existing affordable housing units, and using new technology and streamlined processes to speed up development approvals. During this time, the City also adopted updates to the Below Market Rate (BMR) Program to increase minimum inclusionary housing requirements from 10% to 15% for residential development projects. Significant progress was also made on the design, entitlement and/or construction of two affordable housing projects on City-owned properties in Downtown (Kiku Crossing and Bespoke). From 2015 through the end of 2022, the City was able to achieve a total of 2,501 new housing units and exceed its market rate housing target; however, this only represents 81 percent of the city’s total RHNA for Cycle 5. A variety of factors have contributed to this production shortfall, including high land and construction costs1, outdated policies, and community division regarding intensity of growth and building heights. The lessons learned over this past cycle have been used to help inform the Housing Plan in this Housing Element. 1 It should be noted during Cycle 5, national and global factors contributed to the high cost of construction including: a) The Great Recession which affected the banking industry and residential investments; b) COVID-19 pandemic which contributed to construction worker and material shortages, and c) 2021-2022 Global Supply Chain Crisis which contributed to construction material cost increases and delays that extended construction schedules locally by a year or more. 214 of 2271
SECTION 2
Introduction and Background
215 of 2271
216 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 19
Chapter 4 Introduction and Background
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
The Bay Area continues to see growth in both population and jobs, which means more housing of various types and sizes is needed to ensure that residents across all income levels, ages, and abilities have a place to call home. While the number of people drawn to the region over the past 30 years has steadily increased, housing production has not kept pace, contributing to the housing shortage that communities around the Bay Area are experiencing today. In many cities, this has resulted in residents being priced out, increased traffic congestion caused by longer commutes, and fewer people, particularly those in the middle- and lower-income tiers, being able to purchase homes or meet surging rents.
The Housing Element is part of the City’s General Plan and sets forth the policies and programs to address the housing needs for San Mateo. It is the City’s eight-year housing strategy from the period of 2023-2031 for how it will meet the community’s housing needs. State law (Government Code Sections 65580-65589.8) requires that every city and county in California adopt a Housing Element, subject to State approval, as part of its General Plan. Per SB 375 (Statutes of 2008), the planning period for the Housing Element is eight years.
Since 1969, State law requires that jurisdictions throughout California complete a Housing Element. The City itself is not responsible for building or producing this housing, but it must demonstrate that it has policies and programs in place to support housing construction for all income levels, as well as available land appropriately zoned to accommodate new housing. The Housing Element must include a variety of statistics on housing needs, constraints to development, and policies and programs to implement a variety of housing-related land use actions, and a detailed inventory of “opportunity sites” on which future housing may be built.
The Housing Element is the only element of a locality’s General Plan that must be approved (“certified”) by the State, through its Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to ensure it meets all statutory requirements. Having a certified Housing Element is a prerequisite for many State grants and funding programs. This is the sixth cycle of the Housing Element and covers the eight-year period from 2023 to 2031.
2.1 HISTORY OF SAN MATEO
One of only two charter cities in San Mateo County, the City of San Mateo was incorporated in 1894 and is governed by a five-member City Council. The City encompasses 15.9 square miles in the San Francisco Bay Area in the center of the Peninsula and is currently home to an estimated 105,661 residents.2Its strategic location at the crossroad of the east-west coastal stagecoach and the north-south railroad drew a number of residents after its incorporation. The land around this settlement was controlled by some of the wealthiest families in the State, who created large suburban estates. San Mateo emerged in the postwar periods as a rapidly expanding and progressive city when the population of the City nearly quadrupled between 1940 and 1990.3 Some of the current land use constraints, such as voter approved Measure H, P, and Y in 1991, 2004, and 2020, respectively, which limit heights to 55 feet and density to no more than 50 units per acre in the City were a direct result of this rapid expansion. 2 US Census estimate, April 2020. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/sanmateocitycalifornia 3 Mitchell P. Postel, San Mateo – A Centennial History,”Foreword”, 1994, Page ix. 217 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 20
Chapter 4 Introduction and Background
Despite the Measure Y growth limitations, San Mateo has seen a significant amount of growth over the past two decades. Recent development activity includes a mix of single-family homes, multi-family dwellings, senior housing, office space, retail areas, hotels, and mixed-use (commercial and residential) projects.
San Mateo has very few remaining vacant sites with development potential (approximately 40 parcels).
The areas that are undeveloped are generally protected as open space, parks, and waterways. However, there are many sites that have aging buildings or are under-developed that provide opportunity for new mixed-use and higher-density housing development. Development interest in San Mateo remains high with a variety of projects in the pipeline, including those in the early planning stages.
San Mateo’s economy has grown quickly in recent years, in large part due to the strength of Silicon Valley technology companies and the city’s strategic geographic location. Currentlowvacancy ratesforretail, office, and industrial space confirm that businesses find San Mateo a desirable location, and new development projects will produce more non-residential space to help meet that demand. Between 2010 and 2019, the number of jobs in San Mateo increased by 33 percent, and there are currently approximately 52,800 people4 employed in the City. The “professional and technical services” sector, which includes technology jobs, makes up about 20 percent of local jobs, about the same proportion as in San Francisco and more than in Silicon Valley. Retail, health care, food services, public agencies, are other primary employment sectors in the community.
San Mateo’s vibrant Downtown, desirable neighborhoods, diversity of employment options, high quality public services, and recent developments such as Hillsdale/Bay Meadows and Station Park Green, make it an ever-popular place to live and work. Major new development in San Mateo is concentrated primarily near the three Caltrain stations (in the Downtown, Hayward Park and Hillsdale areas), and along El Camino Real. The city’s three Caltrain stations, extensive bicycle and pedestrian network, SamTrans bus system, and well-maintained local roadways lead efficiently to destinations in the City, on the Peninsula, and beyond.
4 City of San Mateo, General Plan Update - Alternatives Evaluation, 2019. 218 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element 21 April 2024
Chapter 4 Introduction and Background
The City has many distinct and diverse
individual neighborhoods, including two
designated historic districts, the Downtown and
the Glazenwood Historic Districts. The Downtown
area, which maintains a 1930s character, is of
particular importance and interest with respect to
historic structures. The residential neighborhood of
Glazenwood is a unique early 1920’s development
of Spanish Colonial Revival homes. Other areas of
the City contain buildings of exceptional architectural interest and reflect local historical periods.
San Mateo has about 41,250 housing units; roughly
half are rental units and half are occupied by
homeowners, which are also split almost evenly
between single-family and multi-family residences.
Older homes are common in San Mateo, with almost
50 percent being 60 years or older. Local housing
costs are very high, driven by high demand and a
lack of production, which is due to
a variety of factors including lack of available land and regulatory limits. The average cost for a single-family home in San Mateo is about $1.7 million, up more than 80 percent in just five years.5 A typical rental unit
costs $2,900 a month, 31 percent higher than five years ago. With the current median annual income of $175,000, a four-person household in San Mateo could comfortably afford to purchase a home priced at up to $700,000 – less than half of the realistic cost.6 Even with the high housing costs, there is ongoing
demand for new affordable and market rate housing to meet current and future needs and keep pace with job growth in the City and the larger Bay Area region.
2.2 LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT
Since the city’s last Housing Element was adopted and certified in 2014, several substantive changes to State housing law and Housing Element requirements have occurred, as summarized below.
Affordable Housing Streamlined Approval Process. Senate Bill 35 (2017), Assembly Bill 168 (2020) and Assembly Bill 831 (2020). SB 35 created a streamlined, ministerial review process for qualifying multifamily, urban infill projects in jurisdictions that have failed to approve housing projects sufficient to meet their State-mandated RHNA. Among other requirements, to qualify for streamlining under SB 35, a project must incorporate one of two threshold levels of affordable housing: (1) 10 percent of the project’s units in jurisdictions that have not approved housing projects sufficient to meet their RHNA for above moderateincome housing or have failed to submit an annual progress report as required under State law; or (2) 50 percent of the project’s units in jurisdictions that have not approved housing projects sufficient to meet their RHNA for below moderate-income housing. AB 168 added a requirement to provide a formal notice to each California Native American tribe that is affiliated with the area of the proposed project. The Housing Element must describe the City’s processing procedures related to SB 35. This is discussed further in Appendix B.
5 San Mateo County Association of Realtors, 2018
6 CoStar; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., 2018.
219 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 22
Chapter 4 Introduction and Background
Additional Housing Element Sites Analysis Requirements. Assembly Bill 879 (2017) and Assembly Bill 1397 (2017). These bills require additional analysis and justification of the sites included in the sites inventory of the city’s Housing Element. The Housing Element may only count non-vacant sites included in one previous housing element inventory and vacant sites included in two previous housing elements if the sites are subject to a program that allows affordable housing by right. Additionally, the bills require additional analysis of non-vacant sites and additional analysis of infrastructure capacity, and place size restrictions on all sites.
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing. Assembly Bill 686 (2017). AB 686 law ensures that public entities, including local governments, administer their programs relating to housing and urban development in a manner affirmatively to further the purposes of the federal Fair Housing Act and do not take any action that is materially inconsistent with its obligation to affirmatively further fair housing. It also requires that housing elements of each city and county promote and affirmatively further fair housing opportunities throughout the community for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability, and other characteristics protected by the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, Government Code Section 65008, and any other State and federal fair housing and planning law. AB 686 requires jurisdictions to conduct an assessment of fair housing in the housing element, prepare the housing element site inventory through the lens of affirmatively furthering fair housing, and include program(s) to affirmatively further fair housing.
No-Net-Loss Zoning. Senate Bill 166 (2017). SB 166 amended the No-Net-Loss rule to require that the land inventory and site identification programs in the Housing Element include sufficient sites to accommodate the unmet RHNA. When a site identified in the Housing Element as available to accommodate the lowerincome portion of the RHNA is actually developed for a higher income group, the city must either (1) identify, and rezone if necessary, an adequate substitute site or (2) demonstrate that the land inventory already contains an adequate substitute site.
220 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 23
Chapter 4 Introduction and Background
AB 1397, Low (Chapter 375, Statutes of 2017). The law made several revisions to the site inventory analysis requirements of Housing Element Law. In particular, it requires stronger justification when nonvacant sites are used to meet housing needs, particularly for lower income housing, requires by right housing when sites are included in more than one housing element, and adds conditions around size of sites, among others.
Safety Element to Address Adaptation and Resiliency. Senate Bill 1035 (2018). SB 1035 requires the General Plan Safety Element to be reviewed and revised to include any new information on fire hazards, flood hazards, and climate adaptation and resiliency strategies with each revision of the housing element.
By Right Transitional and Permanent Supportive Housing. Assembly Bill 2162 (2018) and Assembly Bill 101 (2019). AB 2162 requires the City to change its zoning to provide a “by right” process and expedited review for supportive housing. The bill prohibits the City from applying a conditional use permit or other discretionary review to the approval of 100 percent affordable developments that include a percentage of supportive housing units, either 25 percent or 12 units, whichever is greater. The change in the law applies to sites in zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including in nonresidential zones permitting multifamily use. Additionally, AB 101 requires that a Low Barrier Navigation Center development be a use by right in mixed-use zones and nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses if it meets specified requirements.
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). Assembly Bill 2299 (2016), Senate Bill 1069 (2016), Assembly Bill 494 (2017), Senate Bill 229 (2017), Assembly Bill 68 (2019), Assembly Bill 881 (2019), Assembly 587 (2019), Senate Bill 13 (2019), Assembly Bill 670 (2019), Assembly Bill 671 (2019), Assembly Bill 3182 (2020). In recent years, multiple bills have added requirements for local governments related to ADU ordinances. The 2016 and 2017 updates to State law included changes pertaining to the allowed size of ADUs, permitting ADUs by right in at least some areas of a jurisdiction, and limits on parking requirements related to ADUs.
More recent bills reduce the time to review and approve ADU applications to 60 days, remove lot size requirements and replacement parking space requirements and require local jurisdictions to permit junior ADUs. AB 68 allows an ADU and a junior ADU to be built on a single-family lot, if certain conditions are met.
The State has also removed owner-occupancy requirements for ADUs, created a tiered fee structure that charges ADUs based on their size and location, prohibits fees on units of less than 750 square feet, and permits ADUs at existing multi-family developments. AB 671 requires the Housing Element to include plans to incentivize and encourage affordable ADU rentals. AB 3182 prohibits homeowner’s associations from imposing rental restrictions on ADUs.
Density Bonus and Development Incentives. Assembly Bill 1763 (2019) and Assembly Bill 2345 (2020). AB 1763 amended California’s density bonus law to authorize significant development incentives to encourage 100 percent affordable housing projects, allowing developments with 100 percent affordable housing units to receive an 80 percent density bonus from the otherwise maximum allowable density on the site. If the project is within half a mile of a major transit stop, the City may not apply any density limit to the project, and it can also receive a height increase of up to three additional stories (or 33 feet). In addition to the density bonus, qualifying projects will receive up to four regulatory concessions. Additionally, the City may not impose minimum parking requirements on projects with 100 percent affordable housing units that are dedicated to special needs or supportive housing. AB 2345 created additional density bonus incentives for affordable housing units provided in a housing development project. It also requires that the annual report include information regarding density bonuses that were granted. 221 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 24
Chapter 4 Introduction and Background
Housing Crisis Act of 2019. Senate Bill 330 (2019). SB 330 enacts changes to local development policies, permitting, and processes that will be in effect through January 1, 2025. SB 330 places new criteria on the application requirements and processing times for housing developments; prevents localities from decreasing the housing capacity of any site, such as through downzoning or increasing open space requirements, if such a decrease would preclude the jurisdiction from meeting its RHNA housing targets; prohibits localities from imposing a moratorium or similar restriction or limitation on housing development; prevents localities from establishing non-objective standards; and requires that any proposed demolition of housing units be accompanied by a project that would replace or exceed the total number of units demolished. Additionally, any demolished units that were occupied by lower-income households must be replaced with new units affordable to households with those same income levels. The City’s processing procedures related to SB 330 are described further in Appendix B.
Surplus Land Act Amendments. Assembly Bill 1486 and AB 1255 (2019). AB 1486 refines the Surplus Land Act to provide clarity and further enforcement to increase the supply of affordable housing.
The law requires the City to include specific information relating to surplus lands in the Housing Element and Housing Element Annual Progress Reports, and to provide a list of sites owned by the City or County that have been sold, leased, or otherwise disposed of in the prior year. AB 1255 requires the City to create a central inventory of surplus and excess public land each year. The City is required to transmit the inventory to HCD and to provide it to the public upon request. As of April 2022, the City of San Mateo has identified three surplus sites, two of which are under negotiations for affordable housing development (4th Avenue and Railroad Avenue known as the Talbot’s Site), and one is a City parking lot available for affordable housing development (located at 308 5th Avenue).
AB 1486, Ting (Chapter 644, Statutes of 2019). The law expanded the definition of surplus land and added additional requirements on the disposal of surplus land. In addition, local agencies must send notices 222 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 25
Chapter 4 Introduction and Background
of availability to interested entities on a list maintained by HCD. This list and notices of availability are maintained on HCD’s website. Local agencies must also send a description of the notice and subsequent negotiations for the sale of the land, which HCD must review, and within 30 days submit written finding of violations of law. Violations of the Surplus Land Act can be referred to the Attorney General. Finally, it adds a requirement in Housing Element Law for the jurisdiction to identify which of the sites included in the inventory are surplus property.
Housing Impact Fee Data. Assembly Bill 1483 (2019). AB 1483 requires the City to publicly share information about zoning ordinances, development standards, fees, exactions, and affordability requirements. The City is also required to update such information within 30 days of changes. This Housing Element describes governmental constraints on the production of housing, including a look at zoning requirements, development standards, fees, exactions, and affordability requirements.
Changes in requirements made during the Housing Element planning period will also be reported as part of the city’s annual Housing Element Progress Report.
SB 6, Beall (Chapter 667, Statutes of 2019). Jurisdictions are required to prepare the housing site inventory on forms developed by HCD and send an electronic version with their adopted housing element to HCD.
HCD will then send those inventories to the Department of General Services by December 31 of each year.
Housing Opportunity and More Efficiency (HOME) Act. Senate Bill 9, Atkins (Chapter 162, Statutes of 2021). SB 9 requires the City to allow up to two residential dwelling units and residential lot splits in single-family zones. SB 9 allows for reduced standards, such as setbacks, minimum parcel dimensions, and parking. The City must apply objective zoning standards that do not preclude construction of up to two 800 square-feet units. To prevent displacement, the State does not allow SB 9 projects to demolish any affordable or rent controlled housing, or housing that has been occupied by a tenant within the last three years. Projects that meet the qualifying criteria and requirements must be ministerially approved and are not subject to CEQA review. The City adopted a local SB 9 Ordinance on October 3, 2022, as described in Policy H 1.11.
Senate Bill 10, Wiener (Chapter 163, Statutes of 2021). SB 10 authorizes cities to adopt an ordinance to zone for up to ten units of residential density on any parcel located within transit rich or urban infill areas.
If adopted, the ordinance allows ministerial approval of up to ten units (not counting ADUs or JADUs) at a height specified by the City. The intent of this bill is to streamline production of housing in urban infill neighborhoods with access to transit. SB 10 includes a sunset date of January 1, 2029; the City has identified Policy H 1.12 to evaluate sites and “Missing Middle” housing policies consistent with SB 10 by 2026.
2.3 CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN
As this Housing Element was being developed, the City was also undertaking a larger effort to comprehensively update the General Plan. Section 3.4.6 provides additional information about the General Plan Update. The Housing Element is the only chapter in a general plan with statutorilyprescribed timelines for completion, so it is being prepared on a shorter schedule than the rest of the General Plan Update. To ensure internal consistency among all General Plan elements, work on both the General Plan Update and the Housing Element Update is being coordinated. Other elements of the General Plan that specifically require updates statutorily triggered by the Housing Element include:
223 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 26
Chapter 4 Introduction and Background
• Flood Hazard and Management (Gov. Code § 65302(d)(3) and (g)(2)(B)) • Fire Hazard (Gov. Code § 65302 and 65302.5) (Safety Element updates) • Environmental Justice (Gov. Code § 65302(h))
• Climate Adaptation (sustainability throughout the General Plan Update) All four of these topics are addressed as part of the General Plan Update. To ensure ongoing consistency among all elements of the General Plan, the City tracks all General Plan amendments as they occur and prepares revisions as needed. This will ensure ongoing consistency throughout the planning period.
2.4 WATER/SEWER CAPACITY
As part of the Housing Element, jurisdictions must provide information regarding water and sewer capacity to accommodate future development. In addition, jurisdictions must include narratives about how they will comply with two specific pieces of legislation, SB 1087 and SB 244. • SB 1087 – Housing Elements – Requires a city to immediately forward its adopted Housing Element to its water providers so they can grant priority for service allocations to proposed housing developments that include units affordable to lower-income households. • SB 244 – Land Use and General Plans – Requires cities and counties, prior to adoption of a housing element, to address the infrastructure needs of disadvantaged unincorporated communities outside the city’s limits but within the city’s planning area. Because the city’s planning area does not contain any unincorporated areas, no such conditions exist.
224 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 27
Chapter 4 Introduction and Background
The cities, water districts and private utilities represented by the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) rely upon the Hetch Hetchy system for water to protect the health, safety and economic well-being of 1.8 million citizens, businesses and community organizations. Together, the BAWSCA agencies account for two-thirds of water consumption from the system and pay for two-thirds of its upkeep.
The regional water system provides water to 2.7 million people in San Francisco, Santa Clara, Alameda and San Mateo counties. Eighty-five percent of the water comes from Sierra Nevada snowmelt stored in the Hetch Hetchy reservoir situated on the Tuolumne River in Yosemite National Park. Hetch Hetchy water travels 160 miles via gravity from Yosemite to the San Francisco Bay Area. The remaining 15 percent of water comes from runoff in the Alameda and Peninsula watersheds and is captured in reservoirs located in San Mateo and Alameda counties. Overall, this regional system, which consists of over 280 miles of pipelines, over 60 miles of tunnels, 11 reservoirs, five pump stations and two water treatment plants, delivers approximately 260 million gallons of water per day.
The City’s water providers are California Water Company (Cal Water) and Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID). Cal Water’s Mid-Peninsula District, which includes the City of San Carlos, serves the majority of San Mateo, and EMID serves the bayside portions of San Mateo east of Seal Slough and the City of Foster City.
The City’s wastewater treatment plant, which is currently undergoing upgrades that are expected to be completed in 2024, is jointly owned by the City of San Mateo and the City of Foster City/Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID). The treatment facility serves more than 130,000 people and businesses in its service area at an average flow of 12 million gallons each day. By effectively treating wastewater at an 225 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 28
Chapter 4 Introduction and Background
advanced biological treatment facility, the plant helps keep San Francisco Bay environmentally clean and safe. These upgrades will also result in significant increased capacity to serve San Mateo and Foster City well into the future.
Both Cal Water and EMID have adopted Urban Water Management Plans that were developed based on the City’s existing zoning densities. Since the City will not need to increase density or rezone any sites to meet its RHNA, combined with increased water efficiency and conservation requirements for new development, there appears to be sufficient water capacity to serve at least 7,015 new housing units by 2031. However, the entire State has experienced significant fluctuation in water supply availability over the past decade, including many unprecedented drought years, which impacts the City’s ability to use current water supply to ensure future water availability. Thus, the City is fully committed to working with its two water supply agencies, neighboring jurisdictions and regional partners to take the necessary actions to ensure that our water supply meets demand to build the necessary new housing through 2031.
Policy H 1.19 outlines how the City will support the water and sewer providers to ensure adequate capacity for new housing development and includes the following programs:
1. Upon adoption of the Housing Element, provide a copy of the Element to California Water Company, Estero Municipal Improvement District, and San Mateo Public Works Dept, for greater awareness of affordable housing priorities and collaboration, in compliance with AB 1087.
2. Pursuant to AB 1087, work with Cal Water and EMID to establish a procedure to prioritize water allocation for developments that include units set aside as affordable housing for lower income households, including affordable housing within larger, mixed-use developments and larger residential subdivisions.
3. Establish a written procedure for the City to grant priority sewer service to developments with units that are affordable to lower-income households.
4. Support efforts by Cal Water and EMID to expand their water supplies with new water sources and develop water efficiency and conservation methods to offset demand from new development projects.
In addition, the Public Services and Facilities Element in the City’s General Plan Update (GPU), with a horizon year of 2040, includes a section that focuses on water supply, and includes a goal to “Support access to a safe, sustainable, and resilient supply of water for San Mateo.” This goal is supported by over 20 policies and actions that support both water agencies when updating their UWMPs, increases water efficiency and conservation in new development, and supports the development of new water sources, including recycled water, with a target of no net increase in water usage. This target is further analyzed in the GPU’s Environmental Impact Report.
Based on this information, it is anticipated that the City has sufficient water service capacity and sewage processing capacity to meet new housing development needs for this housing cycle. The current facilities and/or infrastructure are reported to be in good operating condition. Therefore, with Policy H 1.19, it is determined that the City has sufficient capacity to serve the 7,015 housing units stipulated in the 2023-2031 Regional Housing Needs Allocation.
226 of 2271
SECTION 3
Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
227 of 2271
228 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element 31 April 2024
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
HOUSING NEEDS AND SITES
INVENTORY
3.1 HOUSING NEEDS SUMMARY
The Plan Bay Area 2050 Final Blueprint forecasts that the nine-county Bay Area will add 1.4 million new households between 2015 and 2050. For the eight-year timeframe covered by this Housing Element, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has identified the region’s housing need as 441,176 units. The total number of housing units assigned by HCD is separated into four income categories that cover housing types for all income levels, from extremely low-income households to market rate housing.
Every year, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), in conjunction with the State of California, establish income categories based on the median income in each county. Based on new requirements for the completion of the Housing Element, jurisdictions must now report on the following categories of income:
• Extremely Low Income: 0-30% of Area Median Income, or AMI • Very Low Income: 30-50% AMI
• Low Income: 50-80% AMI
• Moderate Income: 80-120% AMI
• Above Moderate Income: 120%+ AMI
Table 1 illustrates the income categories for San Mateo County in 2023. The median income for a family of four is $175,000.
229 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 32
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
Table 1: Income Limits for San Mateo County, 2023
Number of Persons
in Household: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
San
Mateo
County
Area
Median
Income:
$175,000
Acutely
Low $18,400 $21,000 $23,650 $26,250 $28,350 $30,450 $32,550 $34,650 Extremely
Low $39,150 $44,750 $50,350 $55,900 $60,400 $64,850 $69,350 $73,800 Very Low
Income $65,250 $74,600 $83,900 $93,200 $100,700 $108,150 $115,600 $123,050 Low
Income $104,400 $119,300 $134,200 $149,100 $161,050 $173,000 $184,900 $196,850 Median
Income $122,500 $140,000 $157,500 $175,000 $189,000 $203,000 $217,000 $231,000 Moderate
Income $147,000 $168,000 $189,000 $210,000 $226,800 $243,600 $260,400 $277,200 Source: State of California Department of Housing and Community Development, June 6, 2023. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/grantsfunding/income-limits/state-and-federal-income-limits.shtml The Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND) is based on population projections produced by the California Department of Finance (DOF) as well as adjustments that incorporate the region’s existing housing need. The adjustments result from recent legislation requiring HCD to apply additional adjustment factors to the baseline growth projection from the DOF, in order for the regions to get closer to healthy housing markets. To this end, adjustments focus on the region’s vacancy rate, level of overcrowding and the share of cost burdened households and seek to bring the region more in line with comparable ones.5 These new laws governing the methodology for how HCD calculates the RHND resulted in a significantly higher number of housing units for which the Bay Area must plan compared to previous RHNA cycles.
Almost all jurisdictions in the Bay Area received a larger RHNA this cycle compared to the last cycle, primarily due to changes in State law that led to a considerably higher RHND compared to previous cycles. The allocation that San Mateo received from the Draft RHNA Methodology is broken down by income category as shown in Table 2.
230 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 33
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
3.2 DEMOGRAPHICS
The following are key facts regarding the City’s demographic data and housing needs and issues from the demographic report, which can be found in Appendix A.
• Population – Generally, the population of the Bay Area continues to grow because of natural growth and because the strong economy draws new residents to the region. The population of San Mateo increased by 11.5% from 2000 to 2020, which is below the growth rate of the Bay Area. • Age – In 2019, San Mateo’s youth population under the age of 18 was 21,827 and senior population 65 and older was 16,093. These age groups represent 20.9% and 15.4%, respectively, of San Mateo’s population.
• Race/Ethnicity – In 2020, 40.9% of San Mateo’s population was White while 1.9% was African American, 26.2% was Asian, and 25.1% was Latinx. People of color in San Mateo comprise a proportion below the overall proportion in the Bay Area as a whole.
Table 2: Final Regional Housing Needs Allocations
Income Group San Mateo
Units
San Mateo
County Units
Bay Area
Units
San Mateo
Percent
San Mateo
County
Percent
Bay Area
Percent
Very Low Income
(<50% of AMI) 1,777 12,196 114,442 25.3% 25.6% 25.9%
Low Income
(50%-80% of AMI) 1,023 7,023 65,892 14.6% 14.7% 14.9%
Moderate Income
(80%-120% of
AMI)
1,175 7,937 72,712 16.7% 16.6% 16.5%
Above Moderate
Income
(>120% of AMI)
3,040 20,531 188,130 43.3% 43.1% 42.6%
Total 7,015 47,687 441,176 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments Final Regional Housing Needs Allocations Plan, adopted on December 16, 2021 and approved by California Housing and Community Development on January 12, 2022. 231 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 34
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
• Employment – San Mateo residents most commonly work in the Financial & Professional Services industry. From January 2010 to January 2021, the unemployment rate in San Mateo decreased by
3.6 percentage points. Since 2010, the number of jobs located in the jurisdiction increased by 16,810 (42.7%). Additionally, the jobs-household ratio in San Mateo has increased from 1.17 in 2002 to 1.45 jobs per household in 2018.
• Number of Homes – The number of new homes built in the Bay Area has not kept pace with the demand, resulting in longer commutes, increasing prices, and exacerbating issues of displacement and homelessness. The number of homes in San Mateo increased 3.6% from 2010 to 2020, which is below the growth rate for San Mateo County and below the growth rate of the region’s housing stock during this time period.
• Home Prices – A diversity of homes at all income levels creates opportunities for all San Mateo residents to live and thrive in the community.
» Ownership – The largest proportion of homes had a value in the range of $1M-$1.5M in 2019.
Home prices increased by 115.6% from 2010 to 2020.
» Rental Prices – The typical monthly rent for an apartment in San Mateo was $2,380 in 2019.
Rental prices increased by 74.2% from 2009 to 2019. To rent a typical apartment without cost burden, a household would need to make $95,240 per year. • Housing Type – It is important to have a variety of housing types to meet the needs of a community today and in the future. In 2020, 44.3% of homes in San Mateo were single family detached, 9.9% were single family attached, 6.3% were small multifamily (2-4 units), and 39.4% were medium or large 232 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 35
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
multifamily (5+ units). Between 2010 and 2020, the number of multi-family units increased more than single-family units. Generally, in San Mateo, the share of the housing stock that is detached single family homes is below that of other jurisdictions in the region. • Cost Burden – HUD considers housing to be affordable for a household if the household spends less than 30% of its income on housing costs. A household is considered “cost-burdened” if it spends more than 30% of its monthly income on housing costs, while those who spend more than 50% of their income on housing costs are considered “severely cost-burdened.” In San Mateo, 20.8% of households spend 30%-50% of their income on housing, while 16.8% of households are severely cost burdened and use the majority of their income for housing. • Displacement/Gentri ication – According to research from The University of California, Berkeley,
0.0% of households in San Mateo live in neighborhoods that are susceptible to or experiencing displacement, and 0.0% live in areas at risk of or undergoing gentrification. 63.4% of households in San Mateo live in neighborhoods where low-income households are likely excluded due to prohibitive housing costs. There are various ways to address displacement including ensuring new housing at all income levels is built.
• Neighborhood – 56.4% of residents in San Mateo live in neighborhoods identified as “Highest Resource” or “High Resource” areas by State-commissioned research, while 0.0% of residents live in areas identified by this research as “Low Resource” or “High Segregation and Poverty” areas. These neighborhood designations are based on a range of indicators covering areas such as education, poverty, proximity to jobs and economic opportunities, low pollution levels, and other factors. • Special Housing Needs – Some population groups may have special housing needs that require specific program responses, and these groups may experience barriers to accessing stable housing due to their specific housing circumstances. In San Mateo, 9.1% of residents have a disability of some kind and may require accessible housing. Additionally, 9.0% of San Mateo households are larger households with five or more people, who likely need larger housing units with three bedrooms or more. 9.1% of households are female-headed families, which are often at greater risk of housing insecurity.
3.3 UNITS AT RISK OF CONVERSION TO MARKET
RATE
State law requires that each city provide analysis and programs for preserving existing affordable multi-family rental housing units that were developed with public subsidies. Units at risk of conversion are those units in which the restrictions, agreements or contracts to maintain the affordability of the units expire or are otherwise terminated. At expiration, units may revert to market rate, rendering them no longer affordable to the people living in them. Loss of affordability can occur at the termination of bond funding, the expiration of density bonuses, and other similar local programs.
The potential loss of existing affordable housing units is an important issue to the City due to displacement of lower-income tenants and the limited alternative housing for such persons. It is typically less expensive to preserve the affordability of these units than to subsidize construction of new affordable units due to the inflation of land and construction costs which has occurred since the original development of the affordable housing projects.
233 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 36
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
3.3.1 Preservation and Replacement Options
Based on City records and information from the California Housing Partnership Corporation, a total of 65 units in San Mateo have affordability covenants that will expire during the next ten years (2023-2033):
Bridgepointe Condominiums. This development from 1999 contains the City’s first Below Market Rate (BMR) units, 59 in all, of which 24 are very low income (50% AMI) and the remainder (35) are at 120% of AMI, at the top of the moderate-income level. The expiration date for the 59 units is 2027, and the City has included a program (H 2.2) to assist in the preservation of these units. However, the 24 very lowincome units are most at risk since rents at 120% of median are closer to market rate.
Belmont Building. Originally financed in 1993, this project involved the conversion of six units to family rentals, serving very low-income households (50% AMI). The affordability of the project was created through loans in two programs. Federal HUD loans were used for the rehabilitation of the building. These loans are set to expire in 2032. The developer of this project was a private entity, but a longtime participant in the Section 8 voucher program.
Preservation of at‐risk projects can be achieved in a variety of ways, with adequate funding availability.
Alternatively, units that are converted to market rate may be replaced with new assisted multi‐family units with specified affordability timeframes.
Rehabilitation Projects. The City funds rehabilitation projects for low-income residents of San Mateo to promote access to suitable living environments within each home. The Minor Home Repair program is funded through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program and serves an annual goal of 10 units through general repairs, 14 units through accessibility modifications, and 7 units through weatherization upgrades. Furthermore, the City provides low-interest loans for rehabilitation projects of up to $60,000 per 234 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 37
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
home for low-income homeowners through the CALHOME program. During this cycle, 10 rehabilitation loan projects are anticipated to be completed. Policy H 2.1 includes programs and implementation actions to support funding these rehabilitation projects. Overall, these programs will result in the rehabilitation of a total of 258 affordable housing units.
3.3.2 Rental Assistance
State, local, or other funding sources can be used to provide rental subsidies to maintain the affordability of at‐risk projects. These subsidies can be structured to mirror the Housing Choice Voucher/Section 8 program, whereby the subsidy covers the cost of the unit above what is determined to be affordable for the tenant’s household income (including a utility allowance) up to the fair market value of the apartment. Unit sizes for the at‐risk properties range from studios to two‐bedroom units and are generally reserved for very low‐income households. The total annual subsidy to maintain the 30 at‐risk units (the 24 from Bridgepointe and the six from Belmont Building) is estimated at least $600,000.
3.3.3 Transfer of Ownership
If the current organizations managing the units at risk are no longer able to maintain the project, transferring ownership of the affordable units to a nonprofit housing organization is a viable way to preserve affordable housing for the long term. The estimated market value for the 30 affordable units that are potentially at high risk of converting to market rate is nearly $350,000 per unit, or $10.5 million total.
3.3.4 Construction of Replacement Units
The construction of new low‐income housing can be a means to replace at‐risk units, though extremely costly. The cost of developing new housing depends on a variety of factors including density, size of units, construction quality and type, location, land and development costs. Using the Terner Center’s research on the cost to develop affordable housing around the Bay Area, the cost to replace the units would be at least $700,00 per unit, if not more based on increasing materials and labor costs, so the total would be at least $21 million.
3.3.5 Entities Interested in Participating in California’s First Right of Refusal Program
An owner of a multi‐family rental housing development with rental restrictions (i.e., is under agreement with federal, State, and local entities to receive subsidies for low‐income tenants), may plan to sell their “at risk” property. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) have listed qualified entities that may be interested in participating in California’s First Right of Refusal Program. If an owner decides to terminate a subsidy contract or prepay the mortgage or sell or otherwise dispose of the assisted housing development, or if the owner has an assisted housing development in which there will be the expiration of rental restrictions, the owner must first give notice of the opportunity to offer to purchase to a list of qualified entities provided to the owner.
HCD has identified six entities that may be interested in participating in California’s First Right of Refusal Program in San Mateo County:
• ROEM Development Corporation
235 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 38
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
• Northern California Land Trust, Inc.
• Housing Corporation of America
• Mid‐Peninsula Housing Coalition
• Affordable Housing Foundation
• Alta Housing (previously Palo Alto Housing Corp)
Of these entities, some have worked specifically in San Mateo, and others have completed projects in surrounding areas. If a development becomes at risk of conversion to market-rate housing, the City will maintain contact with local organizations and housing providers who may have an interest in acquiring at-risk units and will assist other organizations in applying for funding to acquire at-risk units.
3.3.6 Funding Sources
A critical component to implement any of these preservation options is the availability of adequate funding, which can be difficult to secure. In general, Low-Income Housing Tax Credit funding is not readily available for rehabilitation and preservation, as the grant application process is highly competitive and prioritizes new construction. The City’s previous ongoing funding source, Low/Mod Housing Funds available through the Redevelopment Agency, no longer exists due to the dissolution of Redevelopment more than a decade ago. However, affordable housing impact fees are a new, local funding source, and the City may consider developing inclusionary zoning in lieu fees as well. Additional available funding sources that can support affordable housing preservation include sources from the federal and state governments, as well as local and regional funding.
Federal Funding
• HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program
• Project‐Based Vouchers (Section 8)
• Section 811 Project Rental Assistance
• Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) Vouchers
State Funding
• Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) Program • Golden State Acquisition Fund (GSAF)
• Project Homekey
• Housing for a Healthy California (HHC)
• Multifamily Housing Program (MHP)
• National Housing Trust Fund
• Predevelopment Loan Program (PDLP)
• Permanent Location Housing Allocation (PLHA)
Regional, Local, and Nonprofit Funding
• San Mateo County Affordable Housing Fund
• Housing Successor Agency for the Redevelopment Agency • City Housing Fund
• Commercial Linkage Fee (CLF)
• City General Fund
236 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 39
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
As outlined in Policy H 2.2, the City will work with the owners of both the Bridgepointe and Belmont Building projects prior to the expiration of their affordability restrictions to develop a plan to retain the units as affordable, replace the units elsewhere, or relocate tenants into alternative housing that is affordable to them.
3.4 RHNA ALLOCATION SUMMARY AND
METHODOLOGY
3.4.1 Legislative Context for the Housing Element’s Inventory of Sites
Per State law, the State of California, in conjunction with Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), has projected future population figures for the nine Bay Areas counties which translates into the need for additional housing units. Each jurisdiction is then assigned a portion of the regional need based on factors such as growth of population and adjusted by factors including proximity to jobs, and high resource areas that have excellent access to amenities such as good school and employment centers. This assignment is known as the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Each jurisdiction must ensure that there is enough land at appropriate zoning densities to accommodate its RHNA in its Housing Element in four income categories (very low-, low-, moderate- and above moderate-income). The RHNA for City of San Mateo for the Housing Element 2023-2031 is 7,015 units, which are broken down by income category in Table 3.
A key component of the Housing Element is a projection of a jurisdiction’s housing supply. State law requires that the element identify adequate sites for housing, including rental housing, factory-built housing, and mobile homes, and make adequate provision for the existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community. This sites list is required to include an inventory of land suitable for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having potential for redevelopment, including analysis of the development capacity that can realistically be achieved for each site.
Table 3: San Mateo RHNA Targets Summary
Income Group Very Low
50% AMI
Low
80% AMI
Moderate
120% AMI
Above
Market Rate
Total
2023-31
Allocation 1,777 1,023 1,175 3,040 7,015
Source: Housing Element Cycle 6 RHNA Allocation.
237 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 40
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
The purpose of the Sites Inventory is to evaluate whether there are sufficient sites with appropriate zoning to meet the RHNA goal. It is based on the City’s current land use designations and zoning requirements. The analysis does not include the economic feasibility of specific sites, nor does it take into consideration the owner’s intended use of the land now or in the future. It does not dictate where residential development will actually occur, and the decision whether or not to develop any particular site always remains with the owner of the property, not the City. Based on previous Housing Elements, the City anticipates that some of the sites on the list will be developed with new housing, some will not, and some housing will be built on sites not listed in the inventory. The Sites Inventory is further outlined below, with a breakdown of the units in Table 8. The complete Sites Inventory is included as Appendix C.
A number of new housing laws have significantly changed how a sites inventory is developed, introducing changes to the following components of the site inventory:
• Design and development of the site inventory (SB 6 (2019)) • Requirements in the site inventory table (AB 1397 (2017)), (AB 1486 (2019))
• Capacity calculation (AB 1397 (2017))
• Infrastructure requirements (AB 1397 (2017))
• Suitability of nonvacant sites (AB 1397 (2017))
• Size of site requirements (AB 1397 (2017))
• Locational requirements of identified sites (AB 686 (2018)) • Sites identified in previous housing elements (AB 1397 (2017)) • Non-vacant site replacement unit requirements (AB 1397 (2017)) • Rezone program requirements (AB 1397 (2017))
These laws are further described in Section 2.2 (Legislative Context) of the Housing Element and were adhered to for development of the Sites Inventory.
3.4.2 Site Inventory Methodology
City staff inventoried vacant and underutilized parcels in San Mateo to determine what land is available for development at various levels of density. Types of sites included:
• Vacant sites zoned for residential use.
• Vacant sites zoned for nonresidential use that allow residential development. • Residentially zoned sites, including non-residentially zoned sites with a residential overlay, that are capable of being developed at a higher density (non-vacant sites, including underutilized sites). • Sites owned or leased by a city, county, or city and county.
The number of units that might be able to be developed at various affordability levels was then estimated, e.g., available land zoned at higher densities can be counted toward the very low- and low-income level needs, and land zoned at lower densities are counted toward the moderate and above moderate-income housing need. The analysis was then completed using the actual average residential densities for comparable developments built on land with various zoning designations over the past five years. 238 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element 41 April 2024
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
The City of San Mateo’s Sites Inventory for future housing includes property zoned for multi-family use that is currently vacant as well as land that is underutilized. Sites that are zoned commercial or office but allow residential uses were included. As seen in Table 8 below, the adequate sites analysis demonstrates that there is enough land with sufficient zoning capacity to meet the City’s RHNA. The analysis for affordable housing units for extremely low, very low, and low-income households is based on the assumption that land zoned at densities higher than 30 units to the acre can facilitate affordable housing development, given the City’s inclusionary requirements of 15%. More than 50% of the City’s below market rate housing would be developed on lands that are underutilized. However, the City is experiencing a high volume of residential and mixed-use development projects looking to revitalize these sites and seeking density bonus and other incentives to achieve higher density residential development. Example projects that demonstrate this trend are included in Attachment C.
3.4.3 Site Inventory Approach
Staff conducted a site-by-site review of all potential development sites, citywide. As is demonstrated below, there are enough sites with sufficient acreage that can meet the RHNA, plus a buffer, within the existing zoning densities and the growth limits of the voter-approved heights and density limits under Measure Y.7 However, it should be noted that because of the density limit set by Measure Y, additional sites and overall acreage are included in the Sites Inventory to meet the RHNA. The land use map in the City’s 2040 General Plan Update (GPU) proposes significant increases in the upper range of densities from 35 and 50 dwelling 7 Measure Y imposes growth limits on the height, density and intensity of new development that can be built in San Mateo through 2030. 239 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 42
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
units per acre (dua) under Measure Y, up to 99 and 130 dua. Once effective, half as many sites currently listed would be needed to achieve the RHNA for this housing cycle. The updated land use map in the 2040 GPU will create capacity for at least 10,000 new housing units and add significantly to the buffer for affordable units (Policy H 1.20).
Factors Used in Selecting Sites. Site selection criteria are detailed in Appendix C of this Housing Element.
Based on the trends of recent development, as well as characteristics of sites with expressed interest from property owners and developers for redevelopment, each site is evaluated based on the following factors:
1. Site with property owner or developer interest
2. Site that is developer owned
3. Site with previous proposal for redevelopment
4. Vacant site
5. Site containing limited improvements (such as parking and outdoor storage)
6. Existing uses are consistent with recent redevelopment trends
7. Age of structure
8. Single story versus multi-story structure
9. Improvement to land value ratio
10. Lot coverage
240 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 43
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
Zoned versus Realistic Capacity. When establishing realistic unit capacity calculations, the jurisdiction must consider current development trends of existing or approved residential developments at a similar affordability level in that jurisdiction, as well as the cumulative impact of standards such as maximum lot coverage, height, open space, parking, and floor area ratios. The capacity methodology must be adjusted to account for any limitation as a result of availability and accessibility of sufficient water, sewer, and dry utilities. For non-residential zoned sites (mixed-use areas or commercial sites that allow residential development), the capacity methodology must account for the likelihood of residential development on these sites. While a site may be zoned to accommodate, say, 100 units, site constraints or other development standards may preclude development to the full 100 units.
San Mateo has several office and commercial zones that also allow residential development. As a result, 90% of projects in the last five years located in commercial or mixed-use zones have included a residential component. The timeframe of five years (2019 to end of 2023) is used because it is most representative of the type of projects that are anticipated moving forward and best aligns with the current local and State regulatory environments (i.e., inclusionary requirements, density bonus). The only commercial zone that prohibits residential uses is the C-4 Service Commercial district, which includes uses such as auto repair and light industrial uses and encompasses less than 1% of the total commercial-zoned land within the City. The table below shows the number of approved projects on sites in commercial and mixed-use zones over the last five years.
The 2019-2023 residential project data was also used to determine the realistic capacity of each site within the site inventory. Based on this data, it was determined that sites in the inventory that had either a commercial, downtown, executive office, or transit-oriented development zone could be developed to 90% of capacity. Meanwhile, sites that were zoned for multi-family or other residential zoning could be developed to 75% of capacity. These factors were multiplied by site acreage and maximum units per acre allowed by zoning (50 units/acre for commercial, executive office, downtown, or transit-oriented development and 35 units/acre for residential) to create the realistic capacity assumptions in the Sites Inventory Table.
241 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 44
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
Identification of Sites for Affordable Housing. Sites on the Inventory must also be classified as suitable for various income levels including very low, low, moderate and above moderate. Several housing laws impact how sites are selected for inclusion by income category. In general, sites less than 0.5 acres cannot be considered as available for lower income development unless the jurisdiction demonstrates that it has a track record of affordable developments at this size of lot. For this inventory, no individual site less than
0.5 acres is allocated toward lower income units; however, as per State guidance, such small sites can be considered either for moderate income, above moderate income, or both.
Sites larger than 10 acres are generally considered unavailable for affordable housing, unless the Housing Element can demonstrate a track record for developing such sites of this size, or the City can demonstrate it is otherwise feasible to develop affordable housing. The City has a demonstrated track record of large site development, typically completed in phases, that includes affordable residential development. Station Park Green (12 acres), Concar Passage (14.5 acres), and Bay Meadows (175 acres) are examples of built or approved large development projects that include substantial numbers of affordable units.
In this inventory, there are only two sites larger than 10 acres. This includes Concar Passage and Hillsdale Mall. Concar Passage (14.53 acre) is an approved mixed-use development with commercial, retail and residential uses. The project provides 961 residential units, including 73 units that are affordable for lower income families (80% AMI). Additional information on Concar Passage can be found in Appendix C. The following discussion will focus on the Hillsdale Mall and Bridgepointe Shopping Center as feasible sites for affordable housing, however it should be noted that the Bridgepointe Shopping Center site has been reduced in the sites inventory to 8.5 acres to account for underutilized parts of the site. • Hillsdale Mall. Originally built in the 1940’s, the Hillsdale Shopping Center is approximately 47 acres in total, of which about 33 acres are included in the inventory. The property owner, the Bohannon Organization, has expressed interest in redeveloping a significant portion of the site to address what it calls “a changing retail landscape.” In a recent article in the Daily Journal, David Bohannon (President) stated that his organization is interested in bringing more vibrancy to the place, with additional office and housing on site. In 2019, more than 4,000 people provided input on what should happen with the Hillsdale Mall on the www.reimaginehillsdale.com website, and 54.2% stated that providing new housing, including affordable workforce housing, was very important to respondents. Based on the express interest in providing a mixed-use development with housing for the site, the inventory shows a distribution of affordable units based on the RHNA calculations at 42 units per acre. It should also be noted that the land use map in General Plan 2040 has identified this site for Mixed-Use Medium II (51 to 99 units/acres) and Mixed-Use High (100 to 130 units/acre) land use designations. To support this effort and ensure sufficient development capacity on this site, Policy H 1.20 supports adoption of General Plan 2040.
Within the Housing Element planning period, it is anticipated that the property owner will submit a planning application for a Master Plan to redevelop a large portion of the property. This is based upon the property owner’s letter of interest8
, as well as the owner’s ongoing commitment (since 2019) to gather input from the community through a robust outreach and engagement strategy which includes an interactive learning, ideation, and sharing space called the “Idea Store” within the center, 8 “Hillsdale Shopping Center—Preferred Land Use Scenario,” David Bohannan, updated April 15, 2022, https://strivesanmateo.org/ wp-content/uploads/2022/04/2022_04_15_Bohannon-Organization_Redacted.pdf 242 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 45
Table 4: January 2019 – December 2023 Planning Development Approvals (ranked by density) Address Development Type Description
No. of
Dwelling
Units
% of Project
Residential
(approx.)
Base Zoning Lot Size
(Acre)
Dwelling
Units per
Acre
% of Base
Density Existing Use
Age of
Existing
Building
Existing
Building #
of Story
FAR Improvement
to Land Ratio
480 E 4th Ave. (Kiku Crossing)
Multi-Family
Demo surface parking lot (City-owned parcel). Construct new 7-story100% affordable multi-family building with a separate 5-level parking structure. 225 53% CBD-S: Commercial and DT residential 2.41 93 186% Two Public Parking Lots No Building 0 0.0 0.0 Block 21
Mixed-Use
Demo existing retail and residential structures (8 units). New mixed-use building with office and residential uses. 111 33% CBD-S: Commercial and DT Residential 1.51 74 148% Retail and residential structures (8 units) 1900 - 2002 2 0.5 0.4 477 9th Ave
Mixed-Use Demo existing commercial buildings. New 5-story office and residential building. 120 80% E2-2: Office 1.6 75 150% Office 1980s 1 0.3 0.7 616 S. B St. Nazareth Vista
Mixed-Use
Demo existing commercial buildings. New 5-story mixed-use building with commercial and residential uses. 48 86% C1-3/R5: Commercial and Residential 0.64 75 150% Retail 1956 - 1974 1 0.4 0.0 1919 O’Farrell St.
Multi-Family Demo existing office building. New 5-story residential apartment building. 49 100% E1-1/R4: Office with residential overlay 0.71 69 138% Office N/A 1 0.1 0.0 401 Concar Dr.
Hayward Park | Mixed-Use
Demo surface parking lot at Hayward Park Caltrain Station. New 5-story residential apartment building. 191 100% TOD: Mixed use 2.82 68 136% CalTrain Parking Lot No Building 0 0.0 0.0 303 Baldwin Ave.
Mixed-Use
Demo existing grocery store. New 5-story mixed-use building with commercial, office and residential uses. 64 40% C1-2/R5: Commercial with residential overlay 0.93 68 136% Grocery Store 1956 1 0.4 0.3 1650 S. Delaware St.
Multi-Family
Demo the existing office building. New 5-story 73-unit residential apartment building. 73 100% TOD: Mixed-Use 1.07 68 136% Office Before the 1980s 2 0.4 0.3 666 Concar Dr.
Mixed-Use
Demo existing shopping center. New mixed-use buildings with commercial, office and residential uses. 961 97% TOD: Mixed use 14.51 66 132% Regional Retail 1969 - 1991 1 0.3 2.6 1 Hayward Ave
Mixed-Use
Demo existing commercial and residential uses (5 units). New mixed-use building with office and residential uses. 18 77% E2-1/R4: Office with residential overlay 0.29 61 122% Residential and office 1938 1 0.4 0.1 S Delaware St. at Landing Ave
(PA20-053).
Bay Meadows | Mixed-Use
New 4-story mixed-use building on MU2 Block with ground floor retail uses and office above; and new 4-story mixed-use building on MU3 Block with ground floor retail uses and residential above.
67 15% BMSP: Mixed-Use per Bay
Meadows Specific Plan 1.51 44 88% Vacant No Building 0 0.0 0.0 4 W Santa Inez Ave.
Multi-Family Demo two single-family dwellings. Construct new 4-story condominium building. 10 100% R4: Multi-Family Dwelling 0.25 40 80% 2 single-family dwellings 1950s 1 0.3 0.1 406 E 3rd Ave.
Mixed-Use Demo existing commercial buildings. New 4-story office and residential building. 25 14% CBD-S: Commercial and DT Residential 0.88 28 56% Fast food restaurant,
industrial/auto uses 1990s 1 0.9 0.8
435 E. 3rd Ave.
Mixed-Use Demo existing commercial buildings. New 5-story office and residential building. 18 16% CBD-S: Commercial and DT Residential 0.25 20 40% Gas station 1980s 1 0.1 0.1
2988 Campus Dr.
Multi-Family
Demo 4 office buildings on 2 sites. New multi-family residential buildings (townhouses) on two hillside parcels. 290 100% E1-1: Office 15.45 19 38% Offices 1970s 3 0.3 0.3 1, 2 and 3 Waters Park Dr.
Multi-Family
Demo office campus. New multi-family buildings with single-family, townhouses and condominium units. 190 100% Rezoned from E1: Office to
R3 multi-family 11.13 17 49% Executive business
park 1979 2 0.3 0.4
222 E 4th Ave. (Draeger’s)
Mixed-Use
Demo existing grocery store. New mixed-use building with retail (grocery), office and 100% affordable residential uses. 10 7% CBD/R: Commercial with residential overlay 1.13 9 18% Grocery Store 1997 2 1.3 0.8 2089 Pacific Blvd.
Multi-Family
Conversion of eight two-bedroom units into 16 studio units for a net increase of 8 units within an existing apartment complex 16 100% TOD: Mixed-Use 2.37 7 14% Apartment 2015 3 2.0 3.9 Based on the history described in Tables 4 and 5, the Sites Inventory calculates the realistic capacity of housing opportunity sites listed as follows:
• 75% of base zoned density for infill sites zoned as multi-family residential (R3, R4, R5); or • 90% of base zoned density for infill sites zoned as commercial, executive office, downtown or transit-oriented development (C, E, CBD, TOD); and
• Calculated at either 50 du/ac or 35 du/ac in accordance with base zoning 243 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 46
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
This page is intentionally blank.
244 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 47
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
a 25-question in-store and online survey, public presentations, dialogue sessions, website and social media. Given the changing retail climate, it is anticipated that some of the existing commercial uses in the center may choose to relocate elsewhere while others may choose to find a new space within the new development. While the site has a zoned capacity of 50 units per acre (capacity for up to 2,350 units), to account for a mixed-use redevelopment of the site, a portion being maintained as a retail shopping center and per the owner’s assessment of what could be developed on the site, a realistic capacity of 1,200 units (approx. 36 units per acre) has been estimated for this site, with 15% of the units identified as affordable in accordance with the City’s Inclusionary Housing policy. A detailed narrative of the Hillsdale sites is provided in Appendix C. • Bridgepointe Shopping Center. The inventory includes a portion of the approximately 22 acres Bridgepointe Shopping Center, an underutilized commercial shopping center with significant amounts of surface parking. The portion of the site included in the Sites Inventory is approximately 8.5 acres and consists of the surface parking lot at the east end of the shopping center. This site is estimated to produce 340 units. There have been a variety of discussions with the shopping center’s ownership representatives who have expressed interest in mixed-use redevelopment that includes both housing and commercial. By assuming mixed-use development on a portion of the site that is a surface parking, the City is calculating the realistic capacity at 30 units per acre. General Plan 2040 includes policies to update the Bridgepointe Area Plan that would guide redevelopment of the shopping center into a mixed-use neighborhood that supports a variety of housing types, including affordable housing. 245 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 48
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
General Plan 2040’s land use plan designates Bridgepointe as Mixed-Use High, which would allow up to 130 units per acre. A detailed narrative of the Bridgepointe site is provided in Appendix C.
Locational Requirements of Sites. The new requirements for Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH), pursuant to AB 686, dictate that the City avoid, to the extent possible, the location of potential affordable housing in the inventory in a manner that would exacerbate existing concentrations of poverty, as well as contribute to increasing the number of lower-income households in lower-income neighborhoods. The City must also consider locating housing away from environmental constraints such as sea level rise or high fire hazard severity zones, and near areas of higher or highest opportunities or are in affluent areas, including quality schools, parks, and educational opportunities. The State indicates that jurisdictions consider the following factors when determining the best locations for affordable housing. » Proximity to transit.
» Access to high performing schools and jobs.
» Access to amenities, such as parks and services.
» Access to health care facilities and grocery stores.
» Locational scoring criteria for Low-income Housing Tax Credit (TCAC) Program funding. » Proximity to available infrastructure and utilities.
» Sites that do not require environmental mitigation.
» Presence of development streamlining processes, environmental exemptions, and other development incentives.
One measurement tool to evaluate neighborhood amenities and resources is the Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) Opportunity Area Map. Each site in the inventory list is rated as either Low, Moderate, High or Highest Resource area utilizing the mapping tool (there are no “Low” resource areas in San Mateo).
The Sites Inventory, which includes properties citywide, many of which are in high resource areas, appears to comply with these requirements as currently understood. Overall, the sites identified as suitable for lower income housing in San Mateo are located in moderate or high resource areas. The inventory currently does not project any new affordable housing to be developed in the Shoreview, North Central, and similar areas, which include higher concentration of lower-income households than other areas of the City.
Information about all of the AFFH requirements and how they have been addressed in the Sites Inventory is included in Appendix D. A map that shows the HCD/TCAC Opportunity Map overlaid with the Sites Inventory housing sites is provided as Figure 1.
Distribution of Units by Affordability. Consistent with State guidance, individual sites less than 0.5 acres were assumed to be developed with moderate- and above-moderate income, split 50% to each. For sites larger than 0.5 acres, the distribution of units by income category fell into two types:
1. For sites in the pipeline, the actual proposed distribution of units by affordability was included. For example, Concar Passage (Planning Application PA-2018-052) includes a total of 961 units, of which 73 will be very low-income. These are the figures used in the spreadsheet.
2. For all other sites, the distribution of units by affordability varies by site size. Most sites in the inventory have unit affordability distributed in proportion to the RHNA allocation. For large sites over 10 acres, the City applies only the inclusionary housing requirement (15%) for the lower income category. For the moderate category, 15% was also applied to the smaller sized units that are naturally affordable to moderate income households.
246 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 49
Source: ESRI, 2024; CAHCD, 2023; City of San Mateo, 2024; PlaceWorks, 2024.
Figure 1: 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map
247 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 50
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
Table 5: ADU/JADU Annual Permit Data
2019 2020 2021 2022 4-Year Ave.
Applications
Submitted 56 94 94 115 90
Permits Issued 44 47 66 84 60
The State recommends using the proportion of units in the RHNA allocation as a guide for allocating units among sites. This mathematical process is intended to demonstrate that there are enough sites zoned at appropriate densities to accommodate all of the RHNA allocation, rather than an assumption about the specific location and number of affordable units that will actually be built. In part, this is because the City does not determine specific sites for affordable housing, but rather reviews and evaluates projects as they are proposed by property owners, developers and other outside entities.
3.4.4 Pipeline Projects
In addition to the sites potentially available for development or redevelopment, projects that have been approved, permitted, or received a certificate of occupancy since the beginning of the RHNA period may be credited toward meeting the RHNA allocation based on the affordability and unit count of the development. For these projects, affordability is based on the actual or projected sale prices, rent levels, or other mechanisms establishing affordability in the planning period of the units within the project. These sites are included in the Sites Inventory (Appendix C), as each project is anticipated to receive its Certificate of Occupancy during this housing cycle (after June 30, 2022). New development currently in the pipeline includes 655 new housing units under construction, 1,588 new housing units approved and 856 new housing units under review. The total number of pipeline project units is 3,099, which accounts for 44% of the City’s total RHNA.
3.4.5 Accessory Dwelling Units
Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are a housing type that can meet the needs of middle- and lower-income individuals and households and are often located in the City’s High and Highest Resource areas.
Based on increased documentation and State guidance, jurisdictions are allowed to count projected development of ADUs based on prior year production averages. As outlined in Table 5, the City has issued an annual average of 60 building permits for ADUs, including JADUs, over the last four years (2019-2022).
Consistent with the accepted approach of using a four-year average of permitting data, the Sites Inventory is using an estimate of 55 new ADUs annually, below the annual average of 60, which results in 440 new ADUs projected over the eight-year cycle. It should be noted that ADU permitting in both 2021 and 2022 exceed the annual estimate of 55. The City has over 17,000 parcels that are zoned R1 and has issued permits for 271 ADUs over the last eight years, so there are a significant number of eligible parcels that have the capacity to add an ADU and/or a JADU.
248 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element 51 April 2024
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
A study conducted by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) in September 2021 found that ADUs are rented at a variety of rates and often meet lower income affordability requirements based on the incomes of the occupants and/or their rental rates. Based on these findings, local jurisdictions are justified in using certain percentages to meet their affordable housing allocations. The study’s recommended affordability breakdown that a Bay Area jurisdiction can use for ADUs, which is noted as being conservative, is 30% very low, 30% low, 30% moderate and 10% above moderate. The City is using the 30/30/30/10 approach to estimate the ADU affordability mix in the Sites Inventory.
Based on this information, a total of 440 new ADUs are estimated during this Housing Cycle. To support this production target, Policy H 1.4 includes programs to support and incentivize ADU production, as well as to monitor occupancy and rental rate to ensure affordability targets are being achieved. If annual targets are not being achieved, the City will take additional actions to increase ADU production.
3.4.6 San Mateo General Plan Update
The City’s 2040 General Plan Update (GPU) kicked off in Fall 2018 with a series of visioning workshops and community meetings.
From April 2019 through November 2022, the City identified study areas where growth and change would occur, to create a range of growth alternatives, and receive feedback and direction on the preferred land use and circulation scenarios from the community and, ultimately, the City Council. In April 2022, the preferred land use and circulation scenarios were selected by the City Council, and in July 2022, the draft land use map that would go into the GPU was confirmed by the City Council.
The land use map in the GPU’s Land Use Element includes significant changes to the allowable heights and densities within the ten Study Areas, with densities increasing from 35-50 units per acre to 99-130 units per acre. The increased density in the land use map will add capacity for over 19,000 new housing units over the next 20 years. Adoption of the GPU will also significantly increase the housing capacity of the housing sites identified on the Sites Inventory since over 90 percent of these sites are within a Study Area and will have an updated land use designation with increased base density. Figure 2 illustrates how the Sites Inventory sites overlay with the GPU’s 10 Study Areas.
As part of the GPU process, a community conversation about Measure Y, the voter approved initiative that sets growth and density limits until 2030, is being facilitated in order to build consensus around a path forward that allows for the housing growth that is needed over the next 20 years while balancing community concerns about growth and change. The land use map in the GPU includes building heights and densities that exceed the limits set by Measure Y, so over the next year, the community discussion around Measure Y and the GPU will continue. Ultimately, all elements of the GPU that exceed the growth limits set by Measure Y will require voter approval before they can take effect. Community input, and ultimately City Council direction, will guide how to best address the elements of the GPU that go beyond the Measure Y height and density limits. Next steps in this discussion include community outreach and meetings in Summer and Fall 2023. Following adoption of General Plan 2040, an initiative that updates Measure Y will need to be placed on the ballot in November 2024.
249 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 52
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
The Draft General Plan was published in July 2023 and the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was published in August 2023. The target for adoption of General Plan 2040 is March 2024, with a ballot initiative to update Measure Y targeted for November 2024. More information about the General Plan Update can be found at www.StriveSanMateo.org.
To support adoption of General Plan 2040 and a successful ballot initiative, Policy H 1.20 includes a commitment to increase heights and densities and to add capacity for at least 10,000 new housing units, support for a community conversation around Measure Y and to bring a ballot initiative before the voters in November 2024. It also includes a provision for a backup plan to add housing capacity of at least 1,700 units for an affordable housing buffer of at 25%, if the ballot initiative is not successful. However, even within the confines of Measure Y, this Housing Element clearly demonstrates that the City’s existing Zoning has capacity for over 10,000 housing units, which achieves its RHNA targets in each category with buffers.
3.4.7 City Properties and Funding
In prioritizing public land for affordable housing, the City will comply with all requirements of the Surplus Lands Act, which contains requirements and procedures for designating public properties as surplus and selling or leasing those properties. The Surplus Lands Act requires that, before selling or leasing a property, local agencies must send a Notice of Availability to housing sponsors, local public entities, and local, regional and states agencies. Entities have 60 days to respond to the notice and 90 days to negotiate with respondents in good faith. The Surplus Lands Act requires that, during the negotiation process, local agencies cannot prohibit a residential use or limit residential density below what is provided by zoning.
When selecting a development partner, cities are generally required to prioritize affordable housing uses.
Under the Surplus Land Act, State HCD would review disposition agreements for compliance with State law prior to the execution of a final sale or lease agreement. 250 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 53
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
The City of San Mateo is committed to supporting the development of affordable housing by utilizing City owned properties and funding to help achieve this goal. Two significant 100% affordable housing projects are currently underway on City owned parcels (formerly public parking lots). In compliance with the Surplus Lands Act, the City issued Notices of Availability to interested parties and selected development partners for the two City properties described below.
480 E. 4th Avenue (Kiku Crossing) This
project will provide 225 affordable
homes for families and individuals in San
Mateo, including 22 units for formerly
homeless households and eight units
for individuals with intellectual and
developmental disabilities, and 57 units
for public employees. The affordability
of the units will be a mix of ELI, VLI and
LI. Construction started in January 2022
and is expected to finish in spring 2024.
It is being built on City owned property
and funded by a combination of City,
State, and Federal dollars.
445 S. B Street (Bespoke) This project is a public-private partnership that will redevelop a full City block that includes a City owned property and a City monetary contribution. The project will provide 71 affordable apartment units (at ELI, VLI and LI levels), community facilities, and commercial and office space. The project is currently under review, with a target for approval in 2024 and construction starting in 2025/2026.
To support the ongoing development of new affordable housing in San Mateo, the City established a dedicated funding source in 2016 with the adoption of an Affordable Housing Commercial Linkage Fee (SMMC Chapter 23.61). In addition, the City has a policy to set aside 20% of the general fund property tax revenues from former Redevelopment Area (RDA) sites for its Housing Fund. Based on these two funding sources, as well as the Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA), Below Market Rate (BMR) fractional and in-lieu fees, and other miscellaneous housing funds, the City’s Affordable Housing Fund currently has approximately $5.8M, and is estimated to generate approximately $26M over the next eight years.
Using the estimate of $100k per affordable unit, the City estimates that it may be able to create 260 new affordable units throughout the 6th Housing Element Cycle. The Housing Fund was used to support both the Kiku Crossing and Bespoke affordable projects and the City continues to actively look for other partnership opportunities to construct additional affordable housing in San Mateo in the coming years. Policy H 1.2 includes programs and implementing actions to support these affordable housing projects and utilize City funds and other identified City-owned sites to support the development of additional affordable housing.
In total, the City has contributed property and funding to support the development of 283 affordable housing units and maintains a Housing Fund with dedicated revenue that has a target of constructing an additional 260 affordable housing units, for a total of 543 new affordable housing units during this cycle. 251 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 54
Source: ESRI, 2024; City of San Mateo, 2024; PlaceWorks, 2024.
Figure 2: Sites Inventory Map
Downtown
Fashion Fashion
Island Area
101/92
Interchange
92/ El Camino 92/ El Camino
Real
Hillsdale Hillsdale
Station Area
Universe: Sites Inventory, February 2024.
Notes: The individual sites identified as suitable for
housing redevelopment are marked in pink while blue
circles indicate groupings of sites. Site affordability breakdown by grouping is seen in Table 8.
252 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 55
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
3.4.8 Missing Middle Housing
Missing middle housing and constraints
to the development of such housing has
been identified as a key programmatic
priority for the City. Missing Middle
housing describes small to medium-scale
development such as duplexes, triplexes,
and 4-10 unit projects that are compatible
in scale with single‐family homes within
walkable neighborhoods. To address this
need and existing zoning constraints in
the City that limit production of this type
of housing, multiple policies and programs
are included in the Housing Element that
would directly or indirectly support the
production of such housing. Specifically,
programs and implementation measures
under the following policies are focused
on reducing development standard constraints, reducing costs, expanding opportunities and streamlining the development review process for missing middle housing projects. The City is committed to expanding opportunities for Missing Middle housing and has included six policies that support this objective. • Policy H 1.4 Support Increased Accessory Dwelling Unit Development • Policy H 1.6 Streamline Housing Application Review
• Policy H 1.7 Update Zoning Code Development Standards to Support Housing Production • Policy H 1.8 Adopt Objective Design Standards
• Policy H 1.12 Encourage Development of Missing Middle Housing • Policy H 1.17 Permitting and Development Fee Review
3.4.9 Single Room Occupancies (SRO) Housing
Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units are a type of housing alternative that is typically available to residents with low or minimal incomes. SROs are single-room (zero bedroom) units that are typically intended for occupancy by a single resident who shares a kitchen and bathrooms with other residents in a multi-tenant building. Government Code 65583(c)(1) requires local jurisdictions to specify the areas where SROs are permitted. Currently SROs are not identified as a separate allowed use in the City’s Municipal Code. However, given the nature of the use, they would be considered similar to multiple-family dwellings and would be allowed as a special use in several zoning districts that allow multi-family developments including R3, R4 and R5.The Housing Element includes a new program in Policy H 1.7 to amend the Zoning Code to reduce or eliminate constraints to housing construction including the identification of the R3, R4 and R5 districts where SROs will be permitted consistent with State law. 253 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 56
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
3.5 SITES INVENTORY
Based on the methodology and approach described in detail in Appendix C, the Sites Inventory includes a range of sites located citywide that could be developed with up to 10,286 new housing units.
The 2040 General Plan Update will also add at least 10,000 units of additional housing capacity. Table 6 provides a high-level summary of the sites listed on the Sites Inventory broken down by income. Figure 1 shows a map of where each site is located within the City and the housing opportunity areas.
Table 6: Sites Inventory Affordability Breakdown
Housing Opportunity
Areas Total Units Very Low Low Moderate
Above
Moderate
(Market Rate)
San Mateo RHNA 7,015 1,7771,0231,1753,040
ADUs 440 132 132 132 44
Pipeline Projects 3,110 562 14 2,534
Remaining RHNA 3,465 1,974 1,029 462
Fashion Island Area 817 167 121 109 418
Hillsdale Mall 1,200 0 180 180 840
Downtown 1,213 177 305 85 646
Other Sites 3,528 1,290 721 1,520
Total Sites 6,758 2,240 1,095 3,424
Grand Total 10,286 3,129 1,278 5,880
Buffer Over Remaining
RHNA 329 (17%) 103 (10%)
General Plan 2040
Buffer 10,000 2,533 1,458 1,675 4,334
Table Source: Housing Resources Sites Inventory.
254 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 57
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
The Sites Inventory was developed to meet all applicable statutory requirements and provide a realistic and achievable roadmap for the City to meet and potentially exceed its RHNA. The Sites Inventory is summarized as follows:
• The housing sites are spread throughout the City, with a significant number located in high resource areas, to meet AFFH requirements.
• The housing projections utilize existing land use and zoning densities, and no rezoning is necessary. • The housing sites capacity estimates utilize conservative production and density assumptions. • A significant number of housing units are already in the pipeline and anticipated to be completed during this housing cycle.
» 655 housing units are currently under construction;
» 1,588 housing units are approved or entitled; and
» 867 housing units are under review as active projects. • The housing projections do not have any reliance on new units developed under SB 9 and a low reliance on new ADU production.
• In accordance with AB 725, the inventory identifies more than 25 percent of the moderate and above moderate RHNA units on sites that allow at least four units of housing; and all sites are zoned at least R-3 (multi-family) or equivalent, which allow five or more units by right. 255 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 58
Chapter 4 Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
• For sites with existing residential units that are anticipated to be demolished for new housing development, the City will require replacement housing units subject to the requirements of Government Code Section 65915(c)(3), for units that are restricted or have been occupied by a lower income household in the past five years. The City will also conduct a study to create a permanent replacement housing program (Policy H 2.6).
The City can clearly meet its 2031 RHNA under existing zoning and land use designations. In addition, the City’s 2040 General Plan Update will add capacity for at least 10,000 new housing units with increased density and height limits. Over 90% of the housing opportunity sites listed in the Sites Inventory are located within one of the ten General Plan Land Use Study Areas and will see an increase in base density. Since the City is committed to increasing densities in the General Plan Update and updating the voter approved height and density limit (Measure Y) through a ballot measure by the end of 2024, significant additional housing capacity will be added around the City and will result in a significantly expanded buffer beyond the City’s RHNA. Should the Measure Y ballot initiative not be successful, the City has committed to exploring alternative options, such as rezonings, that will add at least 1,700 more units to achieve a buffer of at least 25% (Policy H 1.20).
The analytical process that went into creating the Sites Inventory and the justification for commercial site redevelopment are fully detailed in the Sites Inventory Approach and Methodology sections above as well as in the Sites Inventory section of Appendix C, Housing Resources and Sites Inventory List. The full list of sites adequate for housing development identified by the City is included in Appendix C. 256 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 59
Chapter 4 Other Required Housing Element Components
SECTION 4
Housing Needs and Sites Inventory
257 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 60
Chapter 4 Other Required Housing Element Components
258 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element 61 April 2024
Chapter 4 Other Required Housing Element Components
OTHER REQUIRED HOUSING
ELEMENT COMPONENTS
4.1 CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS SUMMARY
The purpose of the constraints analysis section, per Government Code Section 65583(a)(5-6), is to identify and analyze potential and actual governmental and non-governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing that hinder a jurisdiction from meeting its share of the regional housing needs. A summary of governmental and non-governmental constraints is provided below, and a more detailed analysis is contained in Appendix B.
4.1.1 Governmental Constraints
State law (Government Code, Section 65583(a)(5)) requires Housing Elements to contain an analysis of governmental policies and regulations that can result in both positive and negative effects on the availability and affordability of housing. Potential constraints to housing include zoning regulations, development standards, infrastructure requirements, permit and development impact fees, and the development approval processes. While government policies and regulations are intended to serve public objectives and further the public good, the City recognizes that its actions can potentially constrain the availability and affordability of housing to meet the community’s future needs. The City has implemented several measures to reduce development costs and streamline the approval process and has identified additional opportunities for streamlining the City’s review process, including eliminating the pre-application process for housing projects and allowing residential project with up to 25 units to be approved administratively (Policy H 1.6).
259 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 62
Chapter 4 Other Required Housing Element Components
Land Use Controls: The City has also identified outdated zoning code regulations and development standards in several areas, including open space in R3 zones, citywide parking requirements including for 1,400 square feet units, as well as density, floor area, and height controls related to Measure Y, that may pose a barrier, individually or cumulatively, to housing development and to Missing Middle housing.
To remove these constraints, the Housing Element includes several implementation programs to update zoning code standards necessary to remove these barriers (Policies H 1.6, H 1.7, H 1.12, and H 1.20).
This includes reducing residential parking requirements to align with density bonus laws (thus eliminating floor area size to parking requirements), and completing the General Plan Update to increase height, floor area, and density limits (Policy H 1.20). It’s important to note that the City does not have lot coverage standards for residential districts (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5). However, Policy H 1.12 specifically addresses reducing developmental constraints such as open space requirements in R3 and other zones to maximize developable area for missing middle housing. Additionally, the building height limit of 35 feet in the R3 district is measured to the top of plate; but the top of roof (or the roof peak) is allowed to extend beyond 35 feet. The City does not limit the number of stories in a building; thus a three-story building is allowed, and has been achieved at several projects, most recently at 21-27 Lodato Avenue, under the existing 35-foot to top of plate height limit.
The City also adopted Objective Design Standards (ODS) for multi-family projects (Policy H 1.8) at the end of 2023. To address permitting and development impact fees, an implementation program has been included to evaluate the City’s cumulative permit fee costs for new housing developments, with the goal of reducing overall costs and a particular focus on reducing per unit costs for small multi-family or “Missing Middle” projects (Policy H 1.17). Further information and analysis are provided in Appendix B.
4.1.2 Non-Governmental Constraints
State law (California Government Code, Section 65583(a)(6)) requires Housing Elements to contain an analysis of non-governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including the availability of financing, the price of land, the cost of construction, and the length of time between receiving entitlement approval for a housing development and submittal of an application for building permits for that development. Potential non-governmental constraints are largely determined by market conditions or other factors, over which local jurisdictions have little control. However, local governments can influence market conditions and their associated costs indirectly. 260 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 63
Chapter 4 Other Required Housing Element Components
Aside from the high costs of land and construction in the Bay Area, the most significant Non-Governmental Constraint that affects housing production in San Mateo is the voter-approved ballot initiative Measure Y, which restricts density, heights, and intensity of new development. Under Measure Y, building height is limited to 55 feet (up to 75 feet in specific areas) and residential density is limited to 50 dwelling units per acre. Measure Y was approved in November 2020 and sunsets in 2030. The City’s original growth control ballot initiative (Measure H) was approved by the voters in 1990, followed by the adoption of Measure P in 2004, and then Measure Y in 2020. Although identified as a constraint, the presence of Measure Y causes the RHNA housing units to be spread across a greater number of sites to achieve the same amount of housing units, and results in a smaller buffer. Even with the Measure Y constraint, the City has identified adequate housing sites to meet its RHNA targets for 2031 given the strong history of developed and pipeline residential and mixed-use projects.
To allow for a stronger buffer of at least 25% and to remove the constraint on realizing even higher density projects (99-130 dwelling units per acre), additional discussion to address the constraints created by Measure Y is provided in Section 3.4.6 (General Plan Update). Policy H 1.20 outlines how the City is committed to facilitating a community conversation around Measure Y and placing an initiative on the ballot in November 2024 to update Measure Y. Should the 2024 ballot measure not succeed, the City identifies other alternative options in Policy H 1.20, including rezoning, to create additional capacity for 1,700 new units for a buffer of at least 25%. Further information and analysis about Measure Y and other non-governmental constraints are provided in Appendix B.
4.2 HOUSING RESOURCES SUMMARY
The Housing Resources of the City of San Mateo can be summarized into three sections. The first is the various funding sources the City is able to pool together for affordable housing production, preservation, and protection. The second is a list of the existing programs the City manages and supports to increase the housing supply or otherwise serve past, current, and prospective residents of affordable housing. The third is an inventory of sites that are adequate for projected housing needs. A full description of each funding source and housing program are included in Appendix C - Housing Resources and Sites Inventory List, including detailed inventory.
4.2.1 Funding Opportunities
Activities that housing funding may be used
for includes but is not limited to the following:
predevelopment, acquisition, construction,
rehabilitation, conversion and preservation. Also
included is funding that is used for housing related
activities, which provide service to the residents
of low-income housing. A list of the most relevant
funding sources is as follows:
261 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 64
Chapter 4 Other Required Housing Element Components
Federal Programs
• Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
• HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME)
• Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC)
• Section 8 Rental Assistance Program
• Other Federal Sources (Section 811 Project Rental Assistance, Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) Vouchers)
State Programs
• Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA)
• Other State Sources (CALHome, CalHFA, Infill Infrastructure Grant (IIG), Local Housing Trust Fund (LHTF), Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) Program, Golden State Acquisition Fund (GSAF), Project Homekey, Housing for a Healthy California (HHC), Multifamily Housing Program (MHP), Predevelopment Loan Program (PDLP))
Other Public Funds
• Housing Successor Agency for the Redevelopment Agency • Below Market Rate Program (BMR)
• City Housing Fund
• San Mateo County Affordable Housing Fund
Private For-Profit and Nonprofit Sources
• Community Reinvestment Act (CRA)
• Private Developers
• Non-Profit Agencies
• Housing Endowment and Regional Trust (HEART)
4.2.2 Existing Housing Programs
The City manages and supports several programs that aim to either increase the housing supply, improve existing housing, or serve residents of San Mateo within the scope of housing or homelessness.
While many of these programs are a direct effort of the City, some are part of a regional collaboration across San Mateo County, of which the City is an active participant. A list of these programs are as follows:
• Minor Home Repair
• Home Rehabilitation
• Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction
• First Time Home Buyers Program
• Acquisition of Land
• Acquisition and Rehabilitation of Existing
Housing
• Community Housing Development
Organizations (CHDO)
• New Construction
• Accessory Dwelling Units
• Special Needs Housing Operation Subsidies
• Homeless Programs
• Regional Collaborations
• Chronic Homelessness
• Homeless Prevention
• Discharge Policy
262 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 65
Chapter 4 Other Required Housing Element Components
4.3 CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY
CONSERVATION
Home energy efficiency has become an increasingly significant factor in housing construction, particularly in the past few years with the increasing demand to build energy efficient and sustainable buildings in California. Energy costs related to housing include not only the energy required for home heating, cooling and the operation of appliances, but the energy required for transportation to and from home.
State Title 24 Part 6 is the California Energy Code, first enacted in the 1980s, permits builders of new residential units to achieve compliance either by calculating energy performance in a prescribed manner or by performance based on computer modeling. The energy code is updated every three years by the Energy Commission to advance the energy efficiency standards for building construction. In addition to the energy code, the State Green Building code establishes sustainable building construction standards.
The Green Building code addresses the use of sustainable materials, methods of construction, recycling of construction waste, and electric vehicle infrastructure. These measures contribute to overall building energy efficiency and sustainability and have an added ongoing benefit throughout the useful life of a building.
263 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 66
Chapter 4 Other Required Housing Element Components
In order to save natural resources and to make utilities more affordable, the City’s Home Repair programs, implemented under Policy H 2.3, provide both funding and information referral for participants to include weatherization improvements and utilize energy and water efficient appliances and fixtures. Program participants are encouraged to use the energy conservation programs provided by Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E).
All new development, including housing projects, are also subject to compliance with applicable greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction strategies contained in the City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP). The CAP, which was last updated in 2020, demonstrates the City’s leadership to reduce GHG emissions and provides a comprehensive list of community-wide actions that will help reduce the community’s GHG emissions.
Specifically, for housing and new construction, the CAP includes Measures EE 1, EE 2, EE 3, ME 1 and ME 2 for exceeding minimum State energy efficiency requirements, providing education and outreach on benefits and financial incentives associated with energy upgrades, and continuing support for energy efficiency upgrades through utility programs and programs with local and regional agencies.
The CAP also identifies building electrification strategies (Measures BE 1, BE 2 and ME 3) to encourage the transition from gas to electric equipment, in line with the City’s goal to phase out natural gas in existing buildings by 2030. Strategies include outreach and education to residents, businesses and contractors on the benefits of building electrification and rebates for electric technologies (e.g., induction cooktops, heat pump water heaters, electric clothes dryers) and adopting policies to encourage or require eliminating the use of natural gas in new or existing buildings.
Policies and programs that explicitly address the City’s CAP, as well as energy efficiency and sustainability, will be contained in other elements of the City’s updated General Plan, but are not contained the Housing Element. However, as outlined above, addressing climate change, continuing to improve energy efficiency and building homes sustainably are key City priorities and will be applied to housing projects and housing program implementation for the upcoming housing cycle. In addition, Policy H 2.3 supports In creased energy and water efficiency in existing lower income housing units. 264 of 2271
Chapter 4 Public Participation
SECTION 5
Public Participation
265 of 2271
266 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 69
Chapter 4 Public Participation
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
5.1 OVERVIEW
The City of San Mateo recognizes an engaged community is essential to drafting and implementing a strongHousing Element.
A key strength of this draft Housing Element is the incorporation of key findings collected at over nineteen public and community meetings and workshops, five intercept/pop-up events, and four surveys. A summary of public participation and community outreach activities and key takeaways are included here. The collected public input received is included as an appendix to this draft Element (Appendix F). To reach as many community members who live in or are a part of the San Mateo as
possible, the City developed and implemented a proactive outreach plan at the outset of the draft Housing Element development process. Its goals were to:
• Raise awareness among San Mateo residents of the importance of the Housing Element update on shaping the future of the community
• Have robust and diverse community participation throughout the process that is representative of the full range of demographics, perspectives, and experiences in the San Mateo community • Build a level of public trust in the update process and support for the Housing Element that will lead to its successful implementation after adoption.
The City proactively engaged community members for whom English was not spoken at home, renters, those under 45 years of age, low-income and very low-income households, people with disabilities, seniors, single female heads of household, people experiencing homelessness, and those from under-represented neighborhoods.
In recent years, the community has participated in many conversations about affordable housing, tenant rights, displacement, and fair housing. In addition to conversations focused on the Housing Element, the City’s effortsto establish district elections, the ongoing General Plan Update effort, and the 2019 Community Conversations: Housing in San Mateo event series have provided opportunities for many additional collaborative outreach activities. For other outreach work, we partnered with other San Mateo County jurisdictions for a first-of-its-kind countywide outreach effort, through an award-winning collaboration called 21 Elements. Specific activities included:
Website, Social Media, and Printed Mailing. The City of San Mateo launched a Housing Element Update website, and conducted extensive email and social media outreach beginning in March 2021.
Physical mailers were sent City-wide in October 2021 (to 27,000 households), and a second targeted mailer was sent out in January 2022. Physical mailers included printed information in English and Spanish. City staff and consultants also participated in and helped shape the Let’s Talk Housing initiative. Through this award-winning collaborative, the jurisdictions of San Mateo County worked together to increase awareness
267 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 70
Chapter 4 Public Participation
of and participation in the Housing Element Update process and make sure everyone is involved in shaping our shared future.
Community Meetings. The City organized three public Housing Element workshops and presented at five public commission/council meetings. These included:
• Community and Housing Needs Workshop /Community Relations Commission 9/29/21 • Housing Element Update/Planning Commission 10/12/21
• Housing Policy Workshop 11/2/21
• Housing Element Update/Senior Commission 11/8/21
• Housing Element Update/City Council 11/15/21
• Fair Housing Workshop 1/13/22
• Joint PC/CC Study Session - Housing Programs /Policies Study Session 2/7/22 • Planning Commission Recommendation 4/26/22
• Planning Commission Recommendation 5/3/22
• City Council Review and Direction 5/23/22
• City Council Study Session 11/7/22
• Planning Commission Recommendation 1/12/23
• City Council Local Adoption 1/24/23
• City Council Study Session 4/17/23
• City Council Study Session 6/5/23
• Final Planning Commission and City Council Adoption Spring 2024 Focus groups and presentations at the meetings of local community-based organizations included:
• Housing Element and General Plan Update/ Bay Area Community Health Advisory Council (BACHAC) 9/9/21
• Builders Focus Group 11/15/21
• Housing Element Update/Chamber of Commerce 12/14/21
• Housing Element Update/Downtown Merchants Association 12/14/21 • Housing Element Update/ SMFCSD PTA Association 1/10/22 The City also participated in several meetings and webinars in partnership with 21 Elements, including:
• Let’s Talk Housing - Introduction to the Housing Element » 3/25/21 (Joint with Millbrae, Burlingame, Hillsborough, East Palo Alto) » 7/26/21 (Virtual countywide meeting about the Housing Element update in Spanish) • All About RHNA - 4/23/21 (countywide)
• Listening Sessions (countywide)
268 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element 71 April 2024
Chapter 4 Public Participation
» Fair Housing 9/27/21
» Housing Advocates 10/18/21
» Builders 11/01/21
» Service Providers 11/15/21
Outreach Activities. City staff and consultants conducted an online survey, in-person intercept surveys at pop-up events and other community events, and a statistically reliable community survey that included some Housing Element-related questions.
These efforts included:
• Harvest Festival at King Park in North Central 10/16/21 • Central Park Storytime in the Park 10/27/21
• Mi Rancho Market in North Central 10/29/21
• Chavez Market in Shoreview 11/18/21
• Macedonia Food Distribution, Various Tuesdays October to December • Online Survey 10/11/21 to 1/16/22
• Intercept Surveys 10/16/21 to 12/21/21
• True North Community Survey 1/21/22 to 2/2/22
The City also supported an Equity Advisory Group with 21 Elements to ensure outreach was set up to meet people where they were at as much as possible. Specifically, all intercept surveys were conducted in printed and conducted in both English-language and Spanish-language, with English and Spanish speakers available to engage and facilitate completion of the surveys and record first person accounts of housing needs and challenges. Examples of the Spanish and English intercept surveys are included in Appendix F. 269 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 72
Chapter 4 Public Participation
5.2 ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND KEY TAKEAWAYS
5.2.1 Website, Social Media, and Printed Mailing
As a starting point for accomplishing extensive research, San Mateo launched a Housing Element Update website that included links to past event video recordings, meeting materials, outreach and survey summaries, and information about upcoming meetings and ways to get involved. It also contained draft Housing Element documents and collected community feedback. Email Blasts and social media efforts from March 2021 through January 2022 included invitations to participate in community workshops, public meetings, and online survey to several City-maintained email lists. The City was also successful in similar messages being circulated in the newsletters of at least five community groups including: San Mateo High School District Employees Newsletter, San Mateo-Foster City School District Parent Teacher Association (SMFCSD PTA) Newsletter, Chamber of Commerce Newsletter, Downtown San Mateo Association Newsletter, and to the affordable housing residents of Human Investment Project (HIP) Housing and MidPen Housing properties within San Mateo.
A Citywide mailer was sent to every household (27,000) on October 18, 2021 and a second mailer targeted to renters was sent on January 2, 2022 also inviting community members to participate in community workshops, public meetings, and online surveys. Mailers included printed information in English and Spanish. An example of the mailer is included in Appendix F (Additional Community Outreach Collateral and Activities). Community intermediaries also distributed stacks of printed fliers with similar content to businesses with significant Spanish-speaking clientele in the North Central and Shoreview neighborhoods. an example is also included in Appendix F.
270 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 73
Chapter 4 Public Participation
FromSeptembertoNovember 2021, fourjointHousing Element and General Plan Update-focused Facebook live events were conducted in Spanish by Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center (PCRC), a trusted community partner in Spanish-speaking communities to introduce the Housing Element and General Plan Update and keep community members informed about events and updates. Participants expressed an interest in a variety of housing and community safety topics and supported the City’s emphasis on getting input from the Latinx community.
The City also participated in, and helped shape, the Let’s Talk Housing initiative with 21 Elements, which included a countywide website available in five languages, detailing our timeline, engagement activities, and resources, videos about the process in several languages, and a social media presence. As of February 2022, the website had been visited more than 17,000 times, with more than 20% from mobile devices.
5.2.2 Community Meetings
The City held three public Housing Element workshops, presented at five public commission/ council meetings, hosted a focus group discussion with housing architects and developers, and provided presentations to local community-based organizations including the Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Merchants Association, San Mateo-Foster City School District Parent Teacher Association (SMFCSD PTA) and neighborhood associations. The workshops were advertised and offered in Spanish and English-language formats.
In partnership with 21 Elements/Let’s Talk Housing: An Introduction to the Housing Element event, provided a housing element overview with breakout discussion rooms that was part of a series of introductory meetings attended by more than 32 people in San Mateo and over 1,000 community members countywide.
Additionally, Let’s Talk Housing held an All About RHNA webinar and a countywide four-part webinar series to help educate and inform San Mateo County residents and stakeholders on regional and local housing issues. The four-part series took place on Zoom in fall of 2021, focusing on the following topics and how they intersect with the Bay Area’s housing challenges and opportunities: Why Affordability Matters, Housing and Racial Equity, Housing in a Climate of Change, Putting it All Together for a Better Future. The series included speaker presentations, audience Q&A, breakout sessions for connection and debrief discussions.
The sessions were advertised and offered in Spanish, Mandarin and Cantonese, though participation in nonEnglish channels was limited. The All About RHNA webinar provided an in-depth dive into sites methodology.
On July 26th, San Mateo joined a virtual countywide meeting about the Housing Element update in Spanish, hosted by El Comité, a trusted community organization. English interpretation was provided so non-Spanish speaking staff could participate in the conversation, and a total of 57 people participated.
5.2.3 Outreach Activities
San Mateo conducted a Housing Element online survey from October 11, 2021 to January 16, 2022. The online survey received 594 responses. In the fall, to ensure survey results were as representative as possible, City staff and their consultant team also organized pop-up events and conducted an intercept survey and received 156 responses in the North Central and Shoreview Neighborhoods, as well as Macedonia food distribution events. True North Research, Inc. was retained to conduct statistically reliable community survey in January and February of 2022 across a variety of topics, including some housing-related questions. 271 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 74
Chapter 4 Public Participation
Community-wide survey. In order to provide decision makers with a statistically reliable understanding of its residents’ satisfaction, priorities, opinions, and concerns as they relate to City services, facilities, and policies, True North Research, Inc. was retained to conduct a community-wide survey. The survey was specifically designed to avoid the self-selection bias common in informal feedback mechanisms, public comment fora, and other mechanisms for public engagement. A statistically reliable community survey was conducted in January and February of 2022 across a variety of topics, including some housing-related questions and was completed by 775 community members.
Key Housing Element-related themes include:
• When residents were asked to indicate the one thing City government could change to make San Mateo a better place to live, now and in the future, providing more affordable housing was the most common (19%)
• Respondents were less satisfied with the City’s efforts to facilitate the creation of affordable housing (33%), and address homelessness (42%)
• Approximately two-thirds of residents indicated that there is currently too little housing that is affordable
• Factors that were viewed as most important in planning for future housing were ensuring adequate water supplies, minimizing greenhouse gases, creating homes that are affordable for low- and middle-income residents, preserving open space and parklands, and creating pedestrian friendly areas that encourage people to walk rather than drive.
• 63% were willing to support higher density buildings up to 12 stories near downtown/transit Housing Element Online Survey. Results of the “Housing Needs in San Mateo – Housing Element 2023-31” online survey conducted by the City between October 11, 2021 and January 16, 2022 are presented below.
A total of 594 surveys were completed online by community members. The information in this report should be considered with a similar weight as other qualitative forms of feedback and should not be treated as statistically reliable. When compared to City averages overall, survey respondents tended to be older, more white, more likely to own their own home, more likely to live in a single-family home, and less likely to be low income. Some areas resulted in conflicting input from the community with many commenters emphasizing their belief that increasing housing supply was a top priority for the City, while many others emphasizing the view that “new housing is not needed or desired”. Key themes are summarized below:
• Most important housing related challenges: “Service workers’ salaries cannot support existing rents in San Mateo” and “Service workers, teachers, first responders, and small business owners are moving out of San Mateo.”
• Best location to place additional housing: “New housing should be walkable/bikeable to shops and services,” and “New housing should be concentrated near public transit.” Key themes from open ended responses: “new housing should be located in high opportunity areas,” and “new housing is not needed or not desired.”
• Best strategies to manage production of new housing: “Encourage mixed-use projects that have both commercial and residential uses,” “Create housing by redeveloping existing properties that have additional potential,” and “Increase allowable density in areas that are close to transit.” Key themes from open ended responses: “increase density throughout the City,” “new housing is not needed or not desired’” and “prioritize single family housing.” 272 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 75
Chapter 4 Public Participation
• What types of housing should be prioritized: “Smaller units that are less expensive to live in.” Key themes from open ended responses: “support for building housing in general,” “prioritize affordable housing, require affordable housing, or establish mandatory inclusionary zoning,” and “prioritize senior housing.”
• Best ways to address housing affordability: “Incentives for private developers to build more affordable housing,” “Locate affordable housing near transit and jobs,” and “Financial assistance for people who cannot afford housing, such as subsidized rent and down payment loans.” Key themes from open ended responses: “strengthen rent regulations or establish rent control” and “streamline regulations:
reduce height, density, parking, or other regulations.” • Most important ways to ensure housing opportunities are available to all members of San Mateo, especially those who have not had fair access to housing in the past: “Ensure affordable housing opportunities are created throughout the entire city” and “Improve infrastructure, transit and services in underserved neighborhoods.” Key theme from open ended responses: “more housing equals more opportunity, focus on expanding supply.”
• Common themes: Additional comments (296 open-ended responses) were analyzed for common themes, these included:
» Housing is a priority issue: use whatever means are available to substantially increase supply » Improve public transportation and make walking and biking safer, this is also better for the environment
» Infrastructure improvements should happen before housing is built, with particular emphasis on traffic congestion, roads, parking, and water
» Locate new housing in Transit Oriented Developments (TOD)/increase density most in transit-rich areas
» New housing is not needed or not desired
Intercept surveys. In the fall, to ensure survey results were as representative as possible, City staff and their consultant team also organized pop-up events and conducted an intercept survey and received 156 responses in the North Central and Shoreview Neighborhoods, as well as Macedonia food distribution events. The locations, dates, and times of these events were selected with the advice of Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center (PCRC), who also helped to staff these events. Events at Mi Rancho Market in North Central (10/29/21), Chavez Market in Shoreview (11/18/21), and Macedonia food distribution events were staffed by English-Spanish bilingual community outreach staff. The information in this report should be considered with a similar weight as other qualitative forms of feedback and should not be treated as statistically reliable. When compared to City averages overall, intercept survey respondents were more likely to be Hispanic or Latinx, 35-50 years old, and reside in the 94401 zip code, which includes the North Central and North Shoreview neighborhoods. Key themes are summarized below:
• To manage the production of housing overall, there was notable interest in redeveloping existing properties that have potential for more housing (45%), creating accessory units on existing singlefamily properties (22%), and encouraging mixed-use projects that have both commercial and residential uses (21%).
273 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 76
Chapter 4 Public Participation
• To address housing affordability, there was substantial interest in financial assistance programs for people who cannot afford housing, such as subsidized rent and down payment loans (47%), and public funding to construct new housing (26%).
• The current housing situation in San Mateo is affecting them or people they know due to the high cost of housing in general; the cost of housing’s impact on types of individuals (childcare workers, adult children, older adults); inability to purchase a home due to cost; self or others moving away due to price, traffic, and difficulty commuting.
• Some direct quotes: “Include up-scale neighborhoods in zoning changes,” “Always include preferences for people w/ developmental disabilities + others,” “I have to move b/c its getting too expensive, I will move away from County to an in-law unit with relatives in Marin,” and “I’m homeless, I sleep on street behind the gas station. I can’t afford rent, I can hardly get food.” Equity Advisory Group. In partnership with 21 Elements / Let’s Talk Housing, and in alignment with community outreach best practices, it was important to include the guidance of and foster partnerships with community organizations to help ensure everyone’s voices were heard during the Housing Element update. In response, an Equity Advisory Group (EAG) was formed consisting of 15 organizations or leaders across the county that are advancing equity and affordable housing. To date, EAG members have facilitated and hosted community meetings in partnership with 21 Elements, collected community housing stories to put a face to housing needs, advised on messaging, and amplified events and activities to their communities.
All participating organizations are featured on the Let’s Talk Housing website.
San Mateo County Fair Housing Survey. In partnership with 21 Elements / Let’s Talk Housing, and conducted by Root Policy, the San Mateo County Fair Housing Survey has gathered 108 responses from residents in the City of San Mateo as of January 20, 2022. Key challenges include:
• Income is too low to find housing
• Housing unit is too small
• Displacement
• Denied housing when looking due to “income too low”
• Difficulty for voucher holders to find an affordable unit • Homes not meeting needs of a household member with a disability • When asked what type of help they needed to improve their housing security, top answers included:
Help me with a down payment/purchase (39%); Help me get a loan to buy a house (27%); and Help me with the housing search (23%). Other resources to improve quality of life were also identified in the survey results.
274 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 77
Chapter 4 Public Participation
5.3 DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT PUBLIC REVIEW
PERIOD
During the formal 30-day public review period of the Draft Housing Element, which ran from April 6, 2022 to May 6, 2022, a total of 20 comment letters were received, and are included in Appendix G. The comments received by the City offered a wide variety of opinions and input on the Draft Housing Element. Those that expressed opposition to the planned growth noted concerns about whether the City’s resources, specifically water supply, would be able to support the population increase and that single-family neighborhoods would be negatively impacted or even eliminated. Other comments pushed for the Housing Element to go further beyond the goals currently outlined in the plan, noting concern that the City is too optimistic in redevelopment potential of the sites contained in the Sites Inventory. They encouraged the City to include re-zoning of the single-family neighborhoods as a program while going further to remove existing constraints to development (namely Measure Y) to increase housing production potential. Both those for and against the draft plan agreed that if housing density were to increase, commensurate upgrades to transit options must be made to mitigate traffic impacts and not reduce quality of life for residents. Finally, some commenters emphasized the importance of working towards housing affordability as vital for protecting individuals with disabilities, for sheltering low-income families in danger of experiencing homelessness, and to affirmatively further fair housing through racial equity.
On April 26 and May 3, 2022, the Planning Commission also received public comments and provided input on the Draft Housing Element. On May 23, 2022, the City Council held a special meeting to consider the Draft Housing Element, receive public comments and provide staff with direction. Overall, the Council expressed support for the Draft, with several modifications and updates, and directed staff to submit the draft to HCD for first review. The minutes from these meetings are included in Appendix G. Additionally, during this period, City staff
conducted intercept outreach
activities to inform the public
of the draft plan and invite
their attendance and
participation in the public
meetings. A key activity
included engaging and
distributing information to
approximately 150 households
in English and Spanish during
the very popular annual Citywide community event
known as “Eggstravaganza” on
April 16, 2022. Intercept
materials, designed to
engage families with young
children were developed and
distributed in English and
Spanish-language formats.
Examples are included in
Appendix F.
275 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 78
Chapter 4 Public Participation
5.4 HOW WE INCORPORATED WHAT WE HEARD
INTO THE PLAN
The extensive outreach and community engagement conducted over the past year played a significant role in the development of the goals, policies, and programs within the 2023-2031 Housing Element. Feedback and insights from tenants, non-English speakers, lower-income residents, property owners and developers helped to highlight new policy opportunities and ways to strengthen and improve existing policies. And the overarching challenge of housing affordability and availability was heard during most every meeting and conversation. In addition, themes such as investing in disadvantaged communities, improving walkability in neighborhoods and access to transit, and addressing climate change helped inform policies in the Housing Element as well as the General Plan Update which is being prepared concurrently. The following is a summary list of topics and the associated policy(s) that were added or improved as a result of that community and stakeholder feedback.
• Support the production of more missing middle housing. (Policies H 1.4, H 1.11 and H 1.12) • Improve awareness and availability of resources for landlords and tenants. (Policies H 4.1, H 4.2, H
4.3 and H 4.4)
• Streamline the permitting process and simplify the rules and regulations for new housing development. (Policies H 1.6, H 1.7 and H 1.8)
• Fair housing – setup a rental registry, adopt first right of refusal for existing tenants’ rules. (Policies H 3.4 and H 3.6)
• New housing should be sustainable and support the City’s climate action plan. (Policies H 2.3 and H
2.5)
• Provide more materials and information in languages other than English. (Policies H 4.1 and H 4.4) • Improve walkability and access to transit in disadvantaged communities. (Policy H 2.4) • Provide training/education about fair housing laws to landlord. (Policy H 3.2) • Support the construction of more accessory dwelling units (ADUs). (Policy H 1.4) • Establish a BMR unit set-aside for tenants with physical or developmental needs. (Policy H 3.5) • Support the development of larger units with more bedrooms for families. (Policy H 1.5) 276 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 79
Chapter 4 Public Participation
In response to the public comments made during and after the Public Review Period, and City Council discussion and direction, multiple additional revisions, clarifying edits, and corrections were made to the Draft prior to submittal to HCD. Those revisions and updates include:
All policies and programs were reviewed and, where appropriate, updated, to be more specific and action oriented.
» Sites inventory methodology was updated to remove outliers and distinguish average densities by project types; and additional information was provided for justification of the ADU projections. » Constraints summary was modified based on updates to Appendix B. » Policies and programs were updated to reflect public comments and decision-maker direction to increased housing support for people with disabilities including those with developmental disability; greater support for missing middle housing options; and increased attention to identifying new funding sources for housing programs.
» The Sites Inventory was reviewed and updated to add information related to site selection, anticipated GPU land use designation, and explanations for density projections were bolstered. » The Constraints analysis was updated to include corrections and further information related to the City’s fees.
» Staff followed-up with water providers (Cal Water and Estero Municipal Improvement District) to provide additional information on existing water infrastructure and future supply to support the projected growth in the Housing Element.
» Policies and programs related to transportation and circulation upgrades will be addressed as part of the updated Circulation Element in the GPU.
After the City submitted its draft to HCD on August 4, 2023 (seven days after publication), the City received six public comments with feedback related to the Housing Element submittal. These comments are available in full in Appendix G. Below is a summary of the comments received and if and how they were addressed in the Supplemental Housing Element information provided to HCD on August 30, 2023:
• The first comment received was from the Loma Prieta Chapter of the Sierra Club. The letter spoke out mostly in favor of the changes included in the newest submittal of the Housing Element, but it urged City staff to work closely with HCD reviewers to ensure timely certification to avoid environmental challenges that could be faced from builder’s remedy developments. The City continues to meet regularly with HCD reviewers to ensure that strong communication is maintained between staff of both agencies.
• The second and third comments received was from the Housing Leadership Council of San Mateo County (HLC) and the San Mateo Chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. Both letters recognized that the latest version of the Housing Element included some substantial changes in favor of housing, but maintained an overall stance that the element does not go far enough to meet its goals. They argued that the sites inventory overestimates its capacity and that its affirmatively furthering fair housing actions are not ambitious enough to make quantitative results against housing inequality. Within the element, staff included a breakdown of how capacity calculations in the inventory were reached, which was based upon averages of real 277 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 80
Chapter 4 Public Participation
housing development that have been completed from 2019 to present day in the City. Staff also continue to collaborate with non-profit housing developers and community organizations to create housing set-asides within affordable developments and housing related services for special needs populations, which are actions that create measurable impacts based upon the analysis included in the element. Additionally, Policies 1.2 (d), 1.4, 1.7 (d), 1.20 (d) and 3.6 (b) were updated in response to HLC’s comments.
• The fourth comment received was from the Housing Action Coalition. Their letter was mostly focused on the Housing Element sites inventory, stating that there were numerous mathematical errors and unrealistic assumptions for redevelopment. In response, City staff completed a thorough review of the entire sites inventory list and updated all entries to ensure mathematical errors are remedied.
Overall, these changes did not affect the City’s ability to meet its RHNA targets and the City’s affordable housing goals remain feasible.
• The fifth comment received was from a community member that urged the City to consider road improvements when considering new housing development.
• The sixth comment received was from a community member that stated that the City underestimates its housing development capacity, particularly in heavy commercial corridors such as Hillsdale Mall, Bridgepointe, or along El Camino Real. Both traffic circulation and land use are being revisited through the City’s 2040 General Plan Update within the Circulation and Land Use Elements respectively.
During the month of September, staff engaged with HCD and received preliminary comments that identified additional technical items to be addressed and clarified in the Housing Element. On September 20, 2023, the Housing Element submittal was rescinded to address the technical issues raised by HCD. On November 9, 2023, the Revised Third Draft of the Housing Element was published for public review. The public comment period ran from November 9, 2023 to November 15, 2023. During this period, seven public comments were received.
• The first and second comments were from community members which spoke out against new development (citing noise and traffic concerns) and in favor of preserving the Measure Y height limits. Both of these issues will be considered in the 2040 General Plan Update and at the ballot in November 2024.
• The third comment was from Mid-Pen Housing, a non-profit organization which develops affordable housing. The comment mostly spoke out in favor of the Housing Element and cited the City as a reliable partner for affordable housing development.
• The fourth and fifth comments were from property owners related to the Bohannon organization. The letters requested that the affordability allocation on their properties on the Sites Inventory be reduced to the City’s inclusionary ordinance minimums of 15% of units in the lower-income bracket, and with none in the moderate-income category. However, RHNA adequate sites analysis is a separate concept from RHNA accomplishments. For the purpose of estimating capacity for RHNA, the City’s obligation is to identify potential sites that are considered feasible for facilitating housing for the various income levels. Specifically, State law allows local jurisdictions to use a default density (30 du/ac) as a proxy for feasibility for facilitating lower income housing. Sites (between 0.5 acre and 10 acres) that are zoned 30 du/ac are presumed to be feasible for lower income housing. For sites larger than 10 acres, to avoid the concentration of lower income units, HCD generally advises local jurisdictions to use an 278 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element 81 April 2024
Chapter 4 Public Participation
income distribution that is more conservative, either based on the RHNA income distribution or the local jurisdiction’s inclusionary housing policy.
» For the Hillsdale Shopping Center site, the City uses a 15% lower income (based on the City’s inclusionary housing requirement), a 15% moderate income, and 70% above moderate income.
The 15% moderate income allocation is based on a general expectation that a development of this scale could include a range of housing types (apartments, condos, and townhomes), unit sizes, and price points. The City of San Mateo promotes a diverse housing stock that offers choices to its residents and strives to provide a range of housing options through quality design and sound planning principles.
» The developer is obligated to deed restrict the 15% lower income pursuant to the inclusionary housing requirement. However, the developer is not obligated to provide or deed restrict the moderate income units. If smaller rental units are included in the development, a desirable goal of the community, these units could be naturally affordable to moderate income households.
The City will diligently monitor its ability to meet the RHNA for all income levels. If no moderate income units are achieved at the Hillsdale site, the City will identify replacement sites or alternative strategies to fulfill the RHNA.
• The sixth comment was from the Housing Action Coalition, which challenged the Housing Element’s analysis of housing development trends. The letter asserted that the City changed the timeframe of recent housing development from 2017 – 2022 to 2019 – present in order to hide less than favorable results. However, this change was made to better reflect projects being proposed and built under the City’s updated Inclusionary Policy, updated State Density Bonus provisions, various other new State housing laws as well as the economic changes brought on in the post-pandemic era, which has seen a large downturn in commercial and office development, and increased housing development. It can be reasonably assumed that these conditions will continue throughout this Housing Cycle and is more appropriate to use to predict housing development trends in San Mateo. The letter also cites six examples of non-residential projects to argue that the City has overstated the likelihood of housing redevelopment on sites zoned for commercial and office uses. However, two of the examples given cite projects that are better classified as auxiliary to an existing use (allowing food trucks to use a parking lot of an existing office building and conversion of commercial space to office space). Both of these examples do not reflect new development. Three other examples are on smaller lots that are zoned for Service Commercial uses (C-4, which is a small subset of the City’s commercial zoning that does not allow for housing due to the uses in this zone). In addition, these parcels are too small to be considered for the Sites Inventory and are not comparable to the mix of sites included on the Sites Inventory. The sixth project is a recently submitted pre-development application for a new office building on a former gas station site. This project is in very early stages of development, so the final size and mix of uses may change. It is not located on a site listed on the Sites Inventory.
279 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 82
Chapter 4 Public Participation
Lastly, this letter also raised concerns that the City’s ADU projections are too ambitious and should include 2018 permitting data in the average estimate, which would lower the annual target to around 50 ADU permits. However, with the first year of the housing cycle almost completed, the City has already issued permits for 90 ADUs in 2023, which significantly exceeds the annual target of 55 ADU permits issued. Thus, the City appears to be on pace to meet or exceed its target of 440 ADU permits during this housing cycle.
• The seventh comment was from the Sierra Club which spoke out in favor of reincluding the Land Use Designation High 2 in the General Plan Update. The letter argued that the GPU’s land use map should include heights of up to 10 stories and densities up to 200 dwelling units per acre to allow for projects to feasibly include more open space on the site and create a more pedestrian friendly environment. This decision to not include High 2 on the GPU’s land use map does not significantly reduce the GPU’s increase housing capacity and will still allow for well over 10,000 units of new housing capacity as committed to in Policy H 1.20. • However, there have been multiple changes made to the Housing Element to strengthen it and ensure that housing can be realized in San Mateo to meet its RHNA obligations in response these comments, as well as earlier comments received. These updates include:
» Updated Policy H 1.1 (Implementation Action b.) to clearly commit to a mid-cycle review to ensure that realistic capacity and pipeline project assumptions are being achieved. » Updated Policy H 1.7 to include a new implementation action to “rezone sites with quasi-public uses such as schools, churches, and other facilities of an educational, religious, charitable, or philanthropic nature, to 'Quasi-Public,' following completion of the General Plan Update and allow for housing as a permitted use in this zone district.” » Updated Policy H 1.20 to further strengthen the GPU commitments, including a new implementation action to initiate rezonings to implement the GPU land use map in 2025, and more specific targets, including a commitment to rezoning, for the backup plan if a Measure Y ballot initiative is not successful.
» Updated Policy H 3.6 to more comprehensively monitor rental rates, evictions and displacement and use the information to guide housing policy decisions. » Updated “Section 6.3.2 Contributing factors and Fair Housing Action Plan” to include metrics that show how actions included under Goal H-5: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Plan directly address fair housing issues within the City.
5.4.1 Key Takeaways
• Housing is personal: People often have differing views on housing because it is a very personal issue tied to feelings of safety, belonging and identity. Often the comments reflected people’s current housing situation. Many people shared meaningful stories of being priced out of their communities or of their children not being able to live in the community where they grew up. • The price of housing is a major concern: Many voiced concerns about the high cost to rent or buy a home today, either for themselves, friends, or family. It is an issue that touches a lot of lives. There was significant concern raised that service workers, teachers, first responders, and small business owners were being priced out of San Mateo.
280 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 83
Chapter 4 Public Participation
• More housing is needed: Generally, people believe we need more housing, particularly affordable housing. However, there are diverging views on how to accomplish this, where housing should go, and what it should look like. There was strong interest in locating higher density developments close to transit, in walkable, mixed-use areas.
• Single-family neighborhoods are polarizing: While some people voiced their interest in up-zoning single-family neighborhoods or eliminating them altogether, other homeowners want to protect them and are concerned with the future of investments they have made. • Affordable housing is a top concern: Many felt that more needs to be done to promote affordable housing. They also felt that developers should be eligible for incentives and opportunities that make them more competitive, and that affordable housing should be spread throughout the entire City. • Specific concern for individuals with all types of disabilities: There was interest in prioritizing the creation of new units and prioritizing accessible units for people with disabilities. • Other common themes: equity, regional considerations, the difficulty of the development process, the interconnected nature of land-use and transportation decisions, and diversity.
Also, in partnership with 21 Elements/Let’s Talk Housing, a series of four stakeholder listening sessions allowed jurisdictions to listen to and interact with stakeholder groups arranged by topic: Fair Housing, Housing Advocates, Builders, Service Providers. More than 30 groups participated. Key takeaways include:
Fair Housing: Concern for the end of the eviction moratorium, the importance of transit-oriented affordable housing and anti-displacement policies, and the need for education around accessibility regulations and tenant protections. Eight (8) stakeholder groups provided this feedback. • Housing Advocates: Concern for rent increases and the need for ongoing outreach to underserved and diverse communities, workforce housing, deeply affordable and dense infill, and tenant protections for the most vulnerable. 6 stakeholder groups provided this feedback. • Builders and Developers: Local funding, tax credit availability, and concern that appropriate sites limit their ability to develop affordable housing while limited sites, construction costs, and city development review requirements and processes limit the development of market-rate housing. 12 stakeholder groups provided this feedback.
• Service Providers: More affordable housing and vouchers or subsidies for market-rate housing are needed, along with on-site services and housing near transit, and jurisdictions should work with providers and people experiencing issues before creating programs. Ten (10) stakeholder groups provided this feedback.
The following key themes were collected as part of a builder’s focus group discussion with housing developers, builders, and architects on policies and programs for San Mateo’s Housing Element on November 15, 2021. The Constraints Analysis Section also includes key themes from the builders focus group and related feedback. Seven external participants, including non-profit housing developers, for-profit housing developers, and architects familiar with multi-family construction provided feedback. Key themes include:
• Relaxing height restrictions, particularly as they can conflict with minimum height requirements for ground floor uses.
281 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 84
Chapter 4 Public Participation
• Streamlining the development review and entitlement process and establishing clearer objective development standards.
• Expanding incentive programs for affordable housing, including local density bonus incentives. • Relaxing parking requirements, particularly in walkable areas close to transit. • A walkable downtown is an amenity and could be a rationale for exceptions to other required amenities, including required open space.
5.5 ATTACHMENTS INCLUDED IN APPENDICES F
AND G
Appendix F includes community feedback, communications and documentation that support the findings and conclusions in this Section.
• True North Survey Results (Excerpts)– February 21, 2022 • Community Engagement, Pop-Ups and Intercepts – Public Feedback Received • Online Housing Element Survey Results
• Builders Focus Group – November 15, 2021 – Feedback Received • Fair Housing Workshop – January 13, 2022 – Discussion and Poll Summary • Housing Policy Workshop – November 2, 2021 – Discussion and Poll Summary • Community Relations Commission – September 29, 2021 – Community Needs and Housing Needs Workshop – Speaker Notes
• San Mateo Countywide Housing Elements Listening Sessions – Summary Notes » Fair Housing – September 27, 2021
» Housing Advocates – October 18, 2021
» Builders – November 1, 2021
» Service Providers – November 15, 2021
• Root Policy Fair Housing Survey Summary – Summary of Public Feedback • Community Correspondence received by the City prior to April 6, 2022, and between May 7, 2022 and December 30, 2022.
• Planning Commission and City Council Minutes – April 26, 2022 to November 7, 2022 • Additional Community Outreach collateral and activities » Citywide mailer sent October 2021
» Mailer targeted to renters sent January 2022
» Housing Element Flyer
» Intercept Surveys (English and Spanish), October-December, 2021 282 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 85
Chapter 4 Public Participation
» Where do you live/Donde Vives interactive activity results, October 16, 2021 » “Eggstravaganza” outreach activity, April 16, 2022
Appendix G includes public review period comments received by the City during the 30-day public review period as well as subsequent public review periods when updated documents were published. • 30-Day Public Review Period Comments Received – April 6, 2022 to May 6, 2022 • Second Public Review Period Comments Received – December 30, 2022 to January 9, 2023 • Third Public Review Period Comments Received – July 26, 2023 to August 9, 2023 • Fourth Public Review Period Comments Received – November 9, 2023 to November 15, 2023 • All other public Comments Received – January 10, 2023 to Present 283 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 86
Chapter 4 Public Participation
This page is intentionally blank.
284 of 2271
SECTION 6
Affirmatively Furthering Fair
Housing (AFFH) Summary
285 of 2271
286 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 89
Chapter 4 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Summary
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR
HOUSING (AFFH) SUMMARY
6.1 WHAT IS AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR
HOUSING?
California Assembly Bill 686, which was signed into law in 2018 requires that all public agencies in the State affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH) beginning January 1, 2019. Public agencies receiving funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) are also required to demonstrate their commitment to AFFH. The federal obligation stems from the fair housing component of the federal Civil Rights Act mandating federal fund recipients to take “meaningful actions” to address segregation and related barriers to fair housing choice.
AB 686 requires all public agenciesto “administer programs and activities relating to housing and community development in a manner that affirmatively furthers fair housing, and take no action inconsistent with this obligation”
AB 686 also makes changes to Housing Element Law to incorporate requirements to AFFH as part of the housing element and general plan to include an analysis of fair housing outreach and capacity, integration and segregation, access to opportunity, disparate housing needs, and current fair housing practices.
Figure 3: AFFH Definition
“Affirmatively furthering fair housing” means taking meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics. Specifically, affirmatively furthering fair housing means taking meaningful actions that, taken together, address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity, replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns, transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity, and fostering and maintaining compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws. The duty to affirmatively further fair housing extends to all of a public agency’s activities and programs relating to housing and community development. (Gov.
Code, § 8899.50, subd. (a)(1).)”
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development Guidance, 2021, page 14. 287 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 90
Chapter 4 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Summary
6.2 HISTORY OF SEGREGATION IN THE REGION
The United States’ oldest cities have a history of mandating segregated living patterns—and Northern California cities are no exception. ABAG, in its recent Fair Housing Equity Assessment, attributes segregation in the Bay Area to historically discriminatory practices—highlighting redlining and discriminatory mortgage approvals—as well as “structural inequities” in society, and “self-segregation” (i.e., preferences to live near similar people).
Researcher Richard Rothstein’s 2017 book The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America chronicles how the public sector contributed to the segregation that exists today.
Rothstein highlights several significant developments in the Bay Area region that played a large role in where the region’s non-White residents settled.
Pre-civil rights San Mateo County faced resistance to racial integration, yet it was reportedly less direct than in some Northern California communities, taking the form of “blockbusting” and “steering” or intervention by public officials. These local discriminatory practices were exacerbated by actions of the Federal Housing Administration which excluded low-income neighborhoods, where the majority of people of color lived, from its mortgage loan program.
According to the San Mateo County Historical Association, San Mateo County’s early African Americans worked in a variety of industries, from logging, to agriculture, to restaurants and entertainment. Expansion of jobs, particularly related to shipbuilding during and after World War II attracted many new residents into the Peninsula, including the first sizable migration of African Americans. Enforcement of racial covenants after the war forced the migration of the county’s African Americans into neighborhoods where they were allowed to occupy housing—housing segregated into less desirable areas, next to highways, and concentrated in public housing and urban renewal developments.
The private sector contributed to segregation through activities that discouraged (blockbusting) or prohibited (restrictive covenants) integrated neighborhoods. In the City of San Mateo, David Bohannon, developer of the Hillsdale neighborhood in the mid-1900s recorded deeds that specified that only “members of the Caucasian or White race shall be permitted” to occupy sold homes—the exception being “domestics in the employ[ment] on the premises.” This practice was the norm at the time, since the federal government refused to insure large-scale single-family developments throughout the country, unless they specifically prohibited non-Whites from purchasing the new single-family homes. Henry Doelger in Daly City, as well as Bohannon in San Mateo, both developed large tracts of single-family homes with racially-based restrictive covenants.
City staff has uncovered restrictive covenants still extant on properties being provided rehabilitation assistance, even though such covenants have long been unenforceable. From Hillsdale Boulevard to about 20th Avenue, between Alameda de las Pulgas and El Camino Real, single-family homes in the area almost exclusively had restrictive covenants. Bohannon went on to develop many race-restricted neighborhoods in the Bay Area, became president of the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), became national president of the Urban Land Institute (ULI), and was inducted into California’s Homebuilding Foundation Hall of Fame.
288 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element 91 April 2024
Chapter 4 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Summary The timeline of major federal Acts and court decisions related to fair housing choice and zoning and land use appears on the following page. As shown in the timeline, exclusive zoning practices were common in the early 1900s. Courts struck down only the most discriminatory practices and allowed those that would be considered today to have a “disparate impact” on classes protected by the Fair Housing Act. For example, the 1926 case Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. (272 U.S. 365) supported the segregation of residential, business, and industrial uses, justifying separation by characterizing apartment buildings as “mere parasite(s)” with the potential to “utterly destroy” the character and desirability of neighborhoods. At that time, multifamily apartments were the only housing options for people of color, including immigrants.
The Federal Fair Housing Act was not enacted until nearly 60 years after the first racial zoning ordinances appeared in U.S. cities. This coincided with a shift away from federal control over low-income housing toward locally-tailored approaches (block grants) and market-oriented choice (Section 8 subsidies)—the latter of which is only effective when adequate affordable rental units are available. 289 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 92
Chapter 4 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Summary
6.3 SAN MATEO’S FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
The Fair Housing Assessment (Appendix D) follows the April 2021 State of California State Guidance for AFFH. The study was conducted as part of the 21 Elements process, which facilitates the completion of Housing Elements for all San Mateo County jurisdictions. It includes the following sections:
6.3.1 Primary Findings
Primary findings from the Fair Housing Assessment for the City of San Mateo describes fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity, integration and segregation, access to opportunity, disparate housing needs, and contributing factors and the city’s fair housing action plan. • 16% of fair housing complaints filed in San Mateo County from 2017 to 2021 (57 total) were in the City of San Mateo (9 total), which is approximately aligned with the City share of the county’s population (14%). The most common issues cited in the City were refusal to rent and discrimination in terms, conditions, privileges relating to rental. Most complaints were on the basis of disability status (6 complaints) and race (3 complaints) in the City.
Racial and ethnic minority populations are disproportionately impacted by poverty, low household incomes, overcrowding, and homelessness compared to the non-Hispanic White population in the City of San Mateo. Additionally, racial and ethnic minorities are more likely to live in moderate resources areas and be denied for a home mortgage loan.
290 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 93
Chapter 4 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Summary • Racial and ethnic minority populations generally have higher rates of poverty (Figure II-5) and lower household incomes (Figure II-4) compared to the non-Hispanic White population in the City of San Mateo.
• Racial and ethnic minorities are more likely than non-Hispanic White households to experience overcrowding (Figure IV-17). Low- and moderate-income households are also more likely to be overcrowded (Figure IV-18).
• People who identify as American Indian or Alaskan Native, Black, White, and Hispanic are overrepresented in the homeless population compared to their share of the general population (Figure IV-22).
• Hispanic, Asian, and Black residents are more likely to live in moderate resource areas compared to high resource areas (Figure III-12). It is important to note there are no designated low resource areas in the City of San Mateo.
• Hispanic and American Indian or Alaska Native households have the highest denial rates for mortgage loan applications in 2018 and 2019 (Figure IV-33).
Geospatially, the northeast area of the City is disproportionately impacted by high poverty, low education opportunity, low economic opportunity, low environmental scores, high social vulnerability scores, concentrations of cost burdened households, overcrowding, and moderate resource scores. These areas are generally on either side of Highway 101 and stretch to the San Francisco Bay waterfront, encompassing the North Central and Shoreview neighborhoods. These areas have:
• Higher poverty rates between 10% and 20% (Figure II-28). • Education opportunity scores between 0.25 and 0.5—meaning they have lower education scores compared to the rest of the City (Figure III-1).
• Low economic opportunity scores between zero and 0.5 (Figure III-7). • Low environmental scores—which account for PM2.5, diesel PM, drinking water, pesticides, toxic release, traffic, cleanup sites, groundwater threats, hazardous waste, impaired water bodies, and solid waste sites (Figure III-9). The northeast area of the City of San Mateo has particularly poor environmental outcomes for traffic, impaired water, groundwater threats, hazardous waste, and asthma.
• The composite opportunity score for the City of San Mateo shows Census Tracts in the northeast area of the City fall within moderate resource areas while the rest of the City is within high or highest resource areas (Figure III-14).
• The Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (D) ranks census tracts based on their ability to respond to a disaster and includes four themes of socioeconomic status, household composition, race or ethnicity, and housing and transportation. The northeast area of the City is most vulnerable according to the SVI (Figure III-15). • Concentration (60% to 80% of households) of cost burdened households (Figure IV-13). • Overcrowded households are concentrated in the same areas as cost burdened households (Figure IV-19).
• These areas are also within Special Flood Hazard Areas (Figure IV-31) and are vulnerable to displacement (Figure IV-28).
291 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 94
Chapter 4 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Summary The City of San Mateo has a slight concentration of residents with a disability with 9% of the population compared to 8% in the county (Figure III-17). Residents living with a disability in the City are more likely to be unemployed and are largely concentrated in areas around Highway 101.
Finally, the aging population is putting a strain on paratransit access countywide. • Unemployment is disproportionately high among residents living with a disability at 12% compared to 3% for residents without a disability in the City of San Mateo—particularly when compared to the county (Figure III-20).
Racial and ethnic minority students in the City of San Mateo—served by the San Mateo Union High School District and the San Mateo-Foster Elementary School District—experience lower educational outcomes compared to other students. Many high schoolers in the county met admission standards for a University of California (UC) or California State University (CSU) school. However, Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and Black students in the San Mateo Union district were less likely to meet the admission standards. Although San Mateo Union High School has relatively low dropout rates—4% of students—compared to other districts in the county, dropout rates among Hispanic (7%), Black (6%), and Pacific Islander students are higher (Figures will be included in the access to education supplement). • Nearly half of all renter households in the City of San Mateo are cost burdened—spending more than 30% of their gross income on housing costs—and one in four are extremely cost burdened— spending more than 50% of their gross income on housing costs (Figure IV-9). There are disparities in housing cost burden in the City of San Mateo by race and ethnicity and family size (Figure IV-11 and Figure IV-12).
• 15% of respondents to the resident survey conducted for this AFFH said that schools in their neighborhood were of poor quality.
Resident needs collected through local survey. A survey administered to capture residents’ needs and support the AFFH found the following housing challenges. Nearly 150 residents completed the survey:
• About 26% of residents said their house or apartment is too small for their family; » 36% for racial and/or ethnic minority households;
» 42% for single parent households
• 14% of renters said they worry that if they request a repair they will experience rent increase or get evicted;
» 16% for racial and/or ethnic minority households
» 21% for single parent households
• 27% of respondents indicated they had been discriminated against when looking for housing in San Mateo County;
» 31% for racial and/or ethnic minority respondents;
» 43% for residents with a disability;
• 10% (14% for single parent households) of renters are often late on rent and 14% (20% for residents with a disability) can’t afford utilities.
292 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 95
Chapter 4 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Summary
6.3.2 Contributing factors and Fair Housing Action Plan The disparities in housing choice and access to opportunity discussed above stem from historical actions, socioeconomic factors that limit employment and income growth, the inability of the broader region to respond to housing demand, regional barriers to open housing choice, and, until recently, very limited resources to respond to needs.
Fair housing issue: Hispanic households have disproportionate housing needs. These needs are evident in mortgage denial gaps, geographic distribution of affordable housing, cost burden, and overcrowding.
Contributing factors:
• Higher rates of mortgage denial rates among Hispanic households stems from decades of discrimination in housing markets and challenges building wealth through economic mobility and homeownership. • Although voucher holders and affordable housing (as captured in the HCD Location Affordability Index) are not as highly concentrated in the City of San Mateo as in many surrounding jurisdictions, the northern portion of the City offers the most affordable homes. As such, residents living in these areas have lower incomes and higher rates of poverty. Preference may be at play as well: A recent article in Cityscape found that Hispanic homebuyers—when controlled for demographics, loan characteristics, and finances—are more likely to purchase homes in neighborhoods with fewer non-Hispanic White homeowners and lower economic opportunity.[1] • Hispanic residents are more likely than others to work at jobs with low wages that are not commensurate with the City’s or region’s housing prices, resulting in higher rates of cost burden and overcrowding. Although, it is customary for Hispanic households to live in multigenerational settings, which may account for higher rates of perceived overcrowding, overcrowding is also an indicator of lack of access to affordable and right-sized housing. • Hispanic residents are primarily concentrated in the northeastern area of the City where residents face higher poverty and cost burden as well as poor opportunity outcomes according to TCAC’s opportunity maps.
Fair housing issue: Hispanic residents and single female parent households are concentrated in census tracts with higher poverty, low economic and environmental opportunity, high-cost burden, overcrowding, and flood hazards compared to the rest of the City of San Mateo.
Contributing factors:
• Concentration of naturally occurring affordable ownership and rental housing opportunities in the northeast areas of the City further concentrates poverty, cost burden, and overcrowding in areas with low economic and environmental outcomes.
• There is a relative lack of affordable housing opportunities in higher resourced areas of the City. • Highway 101 creates a major barrier between the Shoreview neighborhood—where the geographic concentrations of these groups exist—and the rest of the City of San Mateo.
Fair housing issue: Persons with disabilities have higher housing needs due to challenges accessing employment and housing discrimination and are concentrated in areas with lower environmental and economic opportunity scores.
293 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 96
Chapter 4 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Summary Contributing factors:
• The unemployment rate for the City of San Mateo’s residents with a disability is four times that of persons without a disability. The exact reasons for this disparity are unclear and are likely related to limited job opportunities, access to employment, and market discrimination. • The undersupply of accessible housing units, particularly for renters, creates a scarcity of units for residents living with a disability.
• There were six complaints—out of the nine total complaints in the City—filed with HUD in the City of San Mateo from 2017 to 2020 where the issues cited included a failure to make reasonable accommodations. Landlords and property owners are required to provide reasonable accommodations to residents living with a disability upon request. • There are concentrations of the population living with a disability west of Highway 101 in the North Central neighborhood. This area of the City has a concentration of low- and moderate-income households (more than 50% per census tract) and scores low on TCAC’s environmental and economic opportunity scores.
Fair housing issue: Persons with disabilities and persons of color are most likely to file complaints of housing discrimination due to discriminatory terms, conditions, privileges, or services and facilities and failure to make reasonable accommodations.
Contributing factors:
• Housing discrimination residents with disabilities and Hispanic households. • Lack of understanding of reasonable accommodation requirements by landlords and property owners.
The prioritization of contributing factors is based on the ability of the City to make significant impacts on the concerns. They are as follows:
Fair housing issue: Hispanic households have disproportionate housing needs. These needs are evident in mortgage denial gaps, geographic distribution of affordable housing, cost burden, and overcrowding.
Contributing factors:
• LOW: Higher rates of mortgage denial rates among Hispanic households stems from decades of discrimination in housing markets and challenges building wealth through economic mobility and homeownership.
Actions to address:
Policy H 3.2 – Investigate Fair Housing Cases: continue to fund fair housing service providers to address potential households facing displacement and/or fair housing challenges, who often have disparate needs in lower-income, poorly resourced areas.
Policy H 4.3 – Expand Community Education and Outreach: The City plans a robust and adaptive community engagement program with targeting to underrepresented groups, including those with special needs, disparate housing needs, and others.
294 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 97
Chapter 4 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Summary • LOW: Although voucher holders and affordable housing (as captured in the HCD Location Affordability Index) are not as highly concentrated in the City of San Mateo as in many surrounding jurisdictions, the northern portion of the City offers the most affordable homes. As such, residents living in these areas have lower incomes and higher rates of poverty.
Actions to address:
Policy H 2.4 – Implement Capital Improvements in Lower-Resourced Neighborhoods: The City will continue to invest CDBG and other funding into lower resource neighborhoods, which include households shown to have disparate housing needs. This will include proactive outreach to the affect communities to ensure the most critical needs are addressed. See also excerpts from the Environmental Justice efforts, located after the AFFH programs, below.
Policy H 5.1.3 - Explore the potential to implement a loan program for ADU construction If a City-funded ADU loan program is determined to be infeasible. The City will support the design of a regional forgivable loan program for homeowners to construct an ADU that is held affordable for extremely low-income households for 15 years.
• MEDIUM: Hispanic residents are more likely than others to work low wage jobs that do not support the City’s or region’s housing prices, resulting in higher rates of cost burden and overcrowding.
Although, it is customary for Hispanic households to live in multigenerational settings, which may account for higher rates of perceived overcrowding, overcrowding is also an indicator of lack of access to affordable and right-sized housing.
Actions to address:
Policy H 1.5 - Encourage Family Housing: prioritizes creation of housing that addresses the needs of large families, providing greater housing choice.
Policy H 4.4 – Enable Affirmative Marketing: This would require developers of affordable housing to create a Marketing Plan during the final phase of construction on a project-by-project basis, focusing on outreach to special needs individuals and those least likely to apply based on racial make-up of neighborhood, including those with disparate housing needs.
• HIGH: Hispanic residents are primarily concentrated in the northeastern area of the City where residents face higher poverty and cost burden as well as poor opportunity outcomes according to TCAC’s opportunity maps.
Actions to address:
Policy H 1.2 – Utilize Public Funding and Properties for New Affordable Housing: provides funding for a variety of housing types, addressing the needs of lower-income households, including on sites owned by the City.
Policy H 1.3 – Increase Affordable Housing Production: adopting an updated Density Bonus/Community Benefits program that provides additional incentives and/or streamlining options for housing projects that provide additional affordable units or the most needed unit types (including those with special needs) beyond minimum State requirements.
295 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 98
Chapter 4 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Summary Policy H 2.4 – Implement Capital Improvements in Lower-Resourced Neighborhoods: The City will continue to invest CDBG and other funding into lower resource neighborhoods, which include households shown to have disparate housing needs. This will include proactive outreach to the affect communities to ensure the most critical needs are addressed. See also excerpts from the Environmental Justice efforts, located after the AFFH programs, below.
Policy H 2.5 – Promote Housing Resilience: this specifically address climate change-related environmental issues in disadvantaged neighborhoods impacted by flooding in the North Shoreview neighborhood.
Fair housing issue: Hispanic residents and single female parent households are concentrated in census tracts with higher poverty, low economic and environmental opportunity, high cost burden, overcrowding, and flood hazards compared to the rest of the City of San Mateo.
Contributing factors:
• HIGH: Concentration of naturally occurring affordable ownership and rental housing opportunities in the northeast areas of the City further concentrates poverty, cost burden, and overcrowding in areas with low economic and environmental outcomes.
Actions to address:
Policy H 3.3 – Expand Tenant Protections: this action would extend the measures found in AB1482 by requiring relocation payments to tenancy of less than one year, requiring right to return policies for tenants displaced by substantial renovations, and strengthening the enforcement penalty structure to further protect tenants.
Policy H 5.2.1 - Add more City supported housing with affordability restrictions in moderate and high resource areas and areas of affluence. Affirmatively market the housing to households with disproportionate housing needs including persons with disabilities, farmworkers, single parents, and Hispanic households (e.g., Spanish and English, targeted to northeast neighborhoods).
Policy H 5.4.1 - Establish tenant protections in local ordinance to extend measures of AB1482 related to relocation, documentation, and right to return policy in eviction cases Policy H 5.4.5 - Ensure that future improvements in disadvantaged communities will not produce a net loss of affordable housing or the displacement of residents and seek to increase the amount of affordable housing in disadvantaged communities
• HIGH: There is a relative lack of affordable housing opportunities in higher resourced areas of the City.
Policy H 1.4 – Incentivize Accessory Dwelling Unit Development: expands the resources available for homeowners to add ADUs, which provide an important source of affordable housing. Recent analysis of ADUs permitted indicates these are being developed in highest or high resource areas, or areas of affluence, providing additional mobility options within in San Mateo:
Policy H 1.7 – Update Zoning Code Development Standards: includes an action to create an affordable housing overlay to support the development of affordable housing on religious or educational institutions’ sites, thereby increasing mobility into lower-density areas. 296 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 99
Chapter 4 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Summary Policy H 3.5 – Study the Creation of Below Market Rate Set Asides: conduct a best practices review to determine the feasibility of prioritizing groups with special needs, including large families, single female heads of households, and others with disparate housing needs and implement as directed by City Council.
Policy H 5.1.1 – Adjust the city’s Below Market Rate (inclusionary) program to provide larger density bonuses, and/or increased City support in exchange for affordable units in high resource areas or in areas of affluence that address the needs of residents with disproportionate housing needs (e.g., accessible/visit able units for persons with disabilities, child-friendly developments with day care on site for single parents, and 3-4 bedroom units for larger families).
Policy H 5.2.1 – Add more City supported housing with affordability restrictions in moderate and high resource areas and areas of affluence. Affirmatively market the housing to households with disproportionate housing needs including persons with disabilities, farmworkers, single parents, and Hispanic households (e.g., Spanish and English, targeted to northeast neighborhoods).
Policy H 5.2.4 – In conjunction with San Mateo County, develop a housing mobility program that provides support to tenants seeking to move to high opportunity areas in the region. • LOW: Highway 101 creates a major barrier between the Shoreview neighborhood—where the geographic concentrations of these groups exist—and the rest of the City of San Mateo.
Policy H 2.4 – Implement Capital Improvements in Lower-Resourced Neighborhoods: The City will continue to invest CDBG and other funding into lower resource neighborhoods, which include households shown to have disparate housing needs. This will include proactive outreach to the affect communities to ensure the most critical needs are addressed. See also excerpts from the Environmental Justice efforts, located after the AFFH programs, below.
Policy H 2.5 – Promote Housing Resilience: this specifically address climate change-related environmental issues in disadvantaged neighborhoods impacted by flooding in the North Shoreview neighborhood.
Policy H 5.4.5 – Ensure that future improvements in disadvantaged communities will not produce a net loss of affordable housing or the displacement of residents and seek to increase the amount of affordable housing in disadvantaged communities
Fair housing issue: Persons with disabilities have higher housing needs due to challenges accessing employment and housing discrimination and are concentrated in areas with lower environmental and economic opportunity scores.
Contributing factors:
• LOW: The unemployment rate for the City of San Mateo’s residents with a disability is four times that of persons without a disability. The exact reasons for this disparity are unclear and are likely related to limited job opportunities, access to employment, and market discrimination. • HIGH: The undersupply of accessible housing units, particularly for renters, creates a scarcity of units for residents living with a disability.
Actions to address:
Policy H 1.2 – Utilize Public Funding and Properties for New Affordable Housing: provides funding for a variety of housing types, addressing the needs of lower-income households, including on sites owned by the City.
297 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 100
Chapter 4 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Summary Policy H 1.3 – Increase Affordable Housing Production: adopting an updated Density Bonus/Community Benefits program that provides additional incentives and/or streamlining options for housing projects that provide additional affordable units or the most needed unit types (including those with special needs) beyond minimum State requirements.
Policy H 1.4 – Incentivize Accessory Dwelling Unit Development: expands the resources available for homeowners to add ADUs, which provide an important source of affordable housing. Recent analysis of ADUs permitted indicates these are being developed in highest or high resource areas, or areas of affluence, providing additional mobility options within in San Mateo:
Policy H 5.1.1 – Adjust the city’s Below Market Rate (inclusionary) program to provide larger density bonuses, and/or increased City support in exchange for affordable units in high resource areas or in areas of affluence that address the needs of residents with disproportionate housing needs (e.g., accessible/visit able units for persons with disabilities, child-friendly developments with day care on site for single parents, and 3-4 bedroom units for larger families).
• MEDIUM: There were six complaints—out of the nine total complaints in the City—filed with HUD in the City of San Mateo from 2017 to 2020 where the issues cited included a failure to make reasonable accommodations. Landlords and property owners are required to provide reasonable accommodations to residents living with a disability upon request.
Actions to address:
Policy H 3.2 – Investigate Fair Housing Cases: continue to fund fair housing service providers to address potential households facing displacement and/or fair housing challenges, who often have disparate needs in lower-income, poorly resourced areas.
Policy H 5.4.1 - Establish tenant protections in local ordinance to extend measures of AB1482 related to relocation, documentation, and right to return policy in eviction cases Policy H 5.4.2 - Partner with Project Sentinel to perform fair housing training for landlords and tenants. Focus enforcement efforts on race-based discrimination, reasonable accommodations and source of income discrimination.
• HIGH: There are concentrations of the population living with a disability west of Highway 101 in the North Central neighborhood. This area of the City has a concentration of low- and moderate-income households (more than 50% per census tract) and scores low on TCAC’s environmental and economic opportunity scores.
Actions to address:
Policy H 5.2.2 - Incentivize developers through direct subsidies, fee waivers, and/or density bonuses, to increase accessibility requirements beyond the federal requirement of 5% for subsidized developments.
Policy H 5.2.3 - Prioritize City funding proposals for City funded affordable housing that are committed to serving hard to serve residents (e.g., extremely low income, special needs, on site services) 298 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element 101 April 2024
Chapter 4 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Summary Fair housing issue: Persons with disabilities and persons of color are most likely to file complaints of housing discrimination due to discriminatory terms, conditions, privileges, or services and facilities and failure to make reasonable accommodations.
Contributing factors:
• HIGH: Housing discrimination against residents with disabilities and Hispanic households.
Actions to address:
Policy H 3.2 – Investigate Fair Housing Cases: continue to fund fair housing service providers to address potential households facing displacement and/or fair housing challenges, who often have disparate needs in lower-income, poorly resourced areas.
Policy H 5.4.1: Establish tenant protections in local ordinance to extend measures of AB1482 related to relocation, documentation, and right to return policy in eviction cases Policy H 5.4.2 - Partner with Project Sentinel to perform fair housing training for landlords and tenants. Focus enforcement efforts on race-based discrimination, reasonable accommodations and source of income discrimination.
• HIGH: Lack of understanding of reasonable accommodation requirements by landlords and property owners.
Actions to address:
Policy H 5.4.2 - Partner with Project Sentinel to perform fair housing training for landlords and tenants. Focus enforcement efforts on race-based discrimination, reasonable accommodations and source of income discrimination.
Policy H 5.4.3 - Create a webpage specific to fair housing including resources for residents who feel they have experienced discrimination, information about filing fair housing complaints with HCD or HUD, and information about protected classes under the Fair Housing Act. The webpage will have accessibility features and a Spanish language version.
Policy H 5.4.4 - Ensure that all multi-family residential developments contain signage in both English and Spanish to explain the right to request reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities.
Make this information available and clearly transparent on the City’s website and fund landlord training and outreach on reasonable accommodations.
The Fair Housing Action Plan (FHAP) at the end of this report details how the City of San Mateo proposes to respond to the factors contributing to the fair housing challenges identified in this analysis. • The Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Action Plan, developed in response to this analysis as well as community input, is included in Appendix D and as Goal 5 in the Housing Element. The AFFH Action Plan details how the city proposes to respond to the factors contributing to the fair housing challenges identified in this analysis. The updated Appendix D includes extensive new narrative on a variety of topics in response to State HCD comments, including more information on the history of the City’s development; the prioritization of contributing factors; detail on fair housing legal cases and inquiries; data on changes in racial composition in the City; enhanced discussion of special needs groups; and greater analysis of R/ECAPs and RCAAs.
299 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 102
Chapter 4 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Summary This page is intentionally blank.
300 of 2271
SECTION 7
Housing Plan
301 of 2271
302 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 105
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
HOUSING PLAN
The City of San Mateo has many positive attributes, especially being a desirable residential community to live in, work, and play in. Thus, one of the City’s primary objectives is to expand housing opportunities and increase the diversity of housing supply. There should be a variety of housing types and sizes, a mixture of rental and ownership housing, and housing that supports special needs populations, including singlefemale heads of household, people with disabilities, those who are unhoused and farmworkers. This variety of housing opportunities will need to accommodate a diverse population, leading to a variety of household sizes, all age groups and a wide range of income levels in order for the City to continue to thrive into the future.
In addition, San Mateo will need to increase its housing supply to meet the housing demand caused by current and future job growth. The types of new housing created should accommodate all income levels consistent with the Regional Housing Needs Allocation. The goals, polices, and actions contained in this Housing Plan support these overarching objectives while also ensuring that the City will meet its statutory obligations, affirmatively further fair housing and facilitate housing production at all income levels. 303 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 106
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
7.1 GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS SUMMARY
The City has identified five goals to guide the Housing Element’s policies and programs. The first three are based upon the “3Ps” framework that seeks to address the region’s housing needs through a combination of Production, Preservation and Protection and is endorsed by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). The fourth goal, or “fourth P,” is Promotion of community engagement and public outreach to support social resilience, and the fifth goal is to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH). This goal provides a framework for how the City will comprehensively address fair housing issues and meet State law requirements. Many of the policies and programs that support AFFH also support the Housing Element’s other goals, which just further highlights how the issue of fair housing is interwoven with achieving the City’s larger housing production, preservation, protection and promotion goals.
Goal H-1: Production of New Housing at all Income Levels, with a Focus on Affordable Housing
The need for additional affordable housing was the most prominent and pervasive sentiment noted throughout the Housing Element outreach process. Households of various sizes and socioeconomic backgrounds have reported feeling the pressure of the high costs of housing. To meet the targets set by RHNA, the City must facilitate the production of abundant and affordable new housing in a wide diversity of forms.
To support this goal, the City will be employing two approaches, with the first being directly involved in housing production. This can be done by utilizing public funds to build more units, partnering with nonprofits and other groups to support the production of all types of housing, including ADUs, and using local ordinances to require that developers create more affordable units that can serve a diverse variety of populations and providing incentives for additional affordable unit development. In addition, the policies outlined below would encourage and streamline housing development through the adoption of objective design standards, updates to the Zoning Code, creating minimum densities for housing projects, developing policies for missing middle housing, and streamlining the application review and processing timelines for affordable development projects. And, to address the housing constraint associated with the growth limits imposed by Measure Y, there is a policy to support adoption of General Plan 2040 and facilitation of a community conversation about Measure Y to build consensus around a path forward for updating the growth limits. The 21 policies to support this goal are:
• Policy H 1.1 – Monitor Regional Housing Needs Allocation • Policy H 1.2 – Utilize Public Funding and Properties for New Affordable Housing • Policy H 1.3 – Increase Affordable Housing Production • Policy H 1.4 – Support Increased Accessory Dwelling Unit Development • Policy H 1.5 – Encourage Family Housing
• Policy H 1.6 – Streamline Housing Application Review
• Policy H 1.7 – Update Zoning Code Development Standards to Support Housing Production 304 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 107
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
• Policy H 1.8 – Adopt Objective Design Standards
• Policy H 1.9 – Establish Minimum Densities for Mixed-Use Projects • Policy H 1.10 – Establish By-Right Housing Designation for Prior Housing Sites • Policy H 1.11 – Implement the SB 9 Ordinance
• Policy H 1.12 – Encourage Development of Missing Middle Housing • Policy H 1.13 – Update Special Needs Group Housing Requirements • Policy H 1.14 – Update Supportive Housing Requirements • Policy H 1.15 – Update Mobile Home Parks Requirements • Policy H 1.16 – Update Farmworker Housing Requirements • Policy H 1.17 – Permitting and Development Fee Review • Policy H 1.18 – Increase Senior Housing Production
• Policy H 1.19 – Ensure Adequate Water Supply for the Development of New Housing • Policy H 1.20 – Adopt San Mateo General Plan 2040
Goal H-2: Preservation of Existing Housing that is Affordable to Lower- and Middle-Income Residents
As the City continues to grow, it remains important to maintain and preserve existing affordable housing as well as non-deed restricted housing that is naturally affordable for middle and lower-income households.
The most direct method of achieving this goal would be to prevent the conversion of existing affordable units from becoming market rate by renegotiating agreements, using public funds to acquire the units, or requiring developers to replace any lost units. Alternatively, the City can indirectly preserve affordable housing by improving the quality of life for individuals and families who currently reside in them. Residents that are able to thrive in low-income housing are less likely to be displaced. Therefore, the City proposes to incentivize upgrades to low-income homes through rehabilitation, accessibility modifications, or energy efficiency changes. In addition, enhancements to low-income neighborhoods can also be achieved through capital improvements and resiliency projects that protect against threats posed by climate change. The six policies to support this goal are:
• Policy H 2.1 – Fund Housing Rehabilitation Efforts
• Policy H 2.2 – Support Retention of Existing Lower Income Units • Policy H 2.3 – Increase Energy and Water Efficiency in Existing Units • Policy H 2.4 – Implement Capital Improvements in Lower-Resourced Neighborhoods • Policy H 2.5 – Promote Housing Resilience
• Policy H 2.6 – Require Replacement Units
305 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 108
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
Goal H-3: Protection of Current Residents to Prevent Displacement San Mateo’s demographics will fluctuate as the City continues to grow and evolve. But while change is inevitable, the loss of the existing community is not. Therefore, it remains a priority for the City to prevent gentrification and displacement through protection of lower-income residents. Policy tools included within this goal, such as commercial linkage fees, relocation fees, documentation requirements for landlords, and right to return policies, help balance the scales against the market forces that lead to displacement while extending vital tenant protections. Programs are included to address homelessness and increase shelter capacity that can protect housing insecure individuals and families from having to leave the City entirely.
These programs allow service providers an opportunity to intervene and lead clients to housing stability.
The City also proactively affirms its commitment to combat inequities in housing that exist across people of protected classes through affirmative marketing, prioritizing special needs tenants in below market rate units, monitoring rental rates, displacement, and trends in evictions, and undertaking several actions to affirmatively further fair housing. The seven policies to support this goal are:
• Policy H 3.1 – Prevent Homelessness
• Policy H 3.2 – Investigate Fair Housing Cases
• Policy H 3.3 – Evaluate Housing Revenue Sources
• Policy H 3.4 – Expand Tenant Protections
• Policy H 3.5 – Study the Creation of Below Market Rate Set Asides • Policy H 3.6 – Monitor Rental Rates and Displacement
• Policy H 3.7 – Evaluate Opportunities for Expanding Homeless Shelters GOAL H-4: Promotion of Community Engagement and Public Outreach To increase effectiveness and successfully achieve the Housing Element’s goals and policies, the City should increase access and awareness of housing programs through use of new technology as part of a robust and proactive public outreach strategy. By expanding availability of digital resources, the barriers of proximity, transportation, and time opportunity cost can be reduced for many. In addition, by providing education and information on regulatory requirements and specific programs and protections offered locally, regionally, and by the State, the City can improve access to housing for all income groups, special needs communities, and households found in AFFH analysis to have disproportionate needs. Public outreach in a diversity of methods, forms and languages can be used to reach the widest breadth of residents and program beneficiaries to ensure those in need can find supportive programs and service providers. Targeted digital, print, and in-person outreach and engagement methods can also be effective at reaching the communities most affected by housing policies and programs.
Partnering with community intermediaries to conduct outreach in Spanish and English language formats has been effective and will be a key component of affirmative marketing efforts moving forward. Such activities in the neighborhoods where priority communities live, and at events where there is a high rate of attendance by members of households with disproportionate needs, including pop-ups at priority neighborhood grocery stores, and key public events. The five policies to support this goal are:
306 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 109
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
• Policy H 4.1 – Update the Housing Webpage
• Policy H 4.2 – Support a Countywide Below Market Rate Unit Waitlist • Policy H 4.3 – Expand Community Education and Outreach • Policy H 4.4 – Enable Affirmative Marketing
• Policy H 4.5 – Conduct Outreach to Sites Inventory Property Owners Goal H-5: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
To reinforce the objective that AFFH is a top priority for the City, an AFFH Fair Housing Action Plan with programs and actions has been included as the fifth goal of the Housing Element. This Action Plan cross references items that are interwoven with the Housing Plan’s other four goals, policies, and programs.
The actions to achieve the Fair Housing goal are meant to address the fair housing issues found in the AFFH analysis, specifically for groups that have disparate housing impacts when compared to the whole of San Mateo. This includes, for example, Hispanic and single-female heads of households who have disproportionate housing needs while being concentrated in census tracts that have high rates of poverty.
Persons with disabilities are also more likely to experience housing discrimination due to low economic opportunity and failure of landlords to provide reasonable accommodations. Each of the actions identified have specific quantified objectives to reach the target households. The 14 policies to support this goal are:
• Policy H 5.1.1 – Adjust the City’s Below Market Rate (inclusionary) program to provide larger density bonuses, and/or increased City support in exchange for affordable units that address the needs of residents with disproportionate housing needs.
• Policy H 5.1.2 – Participate in a regional down payment assistance program with affirmative marketing to households with disproportionate housing needs including persons with disabilities, single parents, and Hispanic households.
• PolicyH5.1.3 – Support the design of a regional forgivable loan program for homeowners to construct an ADU that is held affordable for extremely low-income households for 15 years. • Policy H 5.2.1 – Add more City supported housing with affordability restrictions in moderate and high resource areas; and affirmatively market the units to households with disproportionate housing needs including persons with disabilities, farmworkers, single-parents, and Hispanic households.
• Policy H 5.2.2 – Incentivize developers through direct subsidies, fee waivers, and/or density bonuses, to increase accessibility requirements beyond the federal requirement of 5% for subsidized developments.
• Policy H 5.2.3 – Prioritize City funding proposals for City-funded affordable housing that are committed to serving hard to serve residents.
• Policy H 5.3.1 – As part of the General Plan Update, conduct an area plan for the North Shoreview and North Central neighborhoods and prioritize land use and design around Highway 101 to improve access and reduce the division of the urban form produced by the highway. • Policy H 5.3.2 – Continue to fund minor home repairs and public services in low opportunity census tracts identified in the analysis and implement a preference for projects in these areas. 307 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 110
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
• Policy H 5.3.3 – Monitor affordable housing projects that are at risk of conversion to market rate; support regional and local efforts to examine displacement of affordable housing and lower income households; and assist with the retention of special needs housing that is at risk of expiring affordability requirements.
• Policy H 5.4.1 – Establish tenant protections in local ordinance to extend measures of AB 1482 related to relocation, documentation, and right to return policy in eviction cases. • Policy H 5.4.2 – Partner with Project Sentinel to perform fair housing training for landlords and tenants; and focus enforcement efforts on race-based discrimination and reasonable accommodations. • Policy H 5.4.3 – Create a webpage specific to fair housing including resources for residents who feel they have experienced discrimination, information about filing fair housing complaints with HCD or HUD, and information about protected classes under the Fair Housing Act. • Policy H 5.4.4 – Ensure that all multifamily residential developments contain signage to explain the right to request reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities. Make this information available and clearly transparent on the city’s website and fund landlord training and outreach on reasonable accommodations.
• Policy H 5.4.5 – Ensure that future improvements in disadvantaged communities will not produce a net loss of affordable housing or the displacement of residents and seek to increase the amount of affordable housing in disadvantaged communities.
Other Policies in Support of Goal H-5
It should be noted that, in addition to the programs and policies specifically in response to the AFFH analysis contained under Goal H-5, many of the general goals and policies of the Housing Element will also have positive impacts in addressing disparate housing needs, mobility concerns, housing choice, place-based strategies, and safeguards against displacement. The following includes, but is not limited to, those general policies with a beneficial impact on AFFH concerns:
• Policy H 1.2 – Utilize Public Funding and Properties for New Affordable Housing: provides funding for a variety of housing types, addressing the needs of lower-income households, including on sites owned by the City.
• Policy H 1.3 – Increase Affordable Housing Production: adopting an updated Density Bonus/ Community Benefits program that provides additional incentives and/or streamlining options for housing projects that provide additional affordable units or the most needed unit types (including those with special needs) beyond minimum State requirements. • Policy H 1.4 – Incentivize Accessory Dwelling Unit Development: expands the resources available for homeowners to add ADUs, which provide an important source of affordable housing. Recent analysis of ADUs permitted indicates these are being developed in highest or high resource areas, or areas of affluence, providing additional mobility options within in San Mateo:
308 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element 111 April 2024
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
Table 7: ADUs with Permits Issued by Resource Area (2017 to 2021) TCAC Area (2021) # of Units Percent
Highest Resource 30 15.7%
High Resource 83 43.5%
Moderate Resource* 78 40.8%
TOTAL 191 100.0%
*Includes Rapidly Changing
• Policy H 1.5 – Encourage Family Housing: prioritizes creation of housing that addresses the needs of large families, providing greater housing choice.
• Policy H 1.7 – Update Zoning Code Development Standards: includes an action to create an affordable housing overlay to support the development of affordable housing on religious or educational institutions’ sites, thereby increasing mobility into lower-density areas. • Policy H 1.20 – Complete the General Plan 2040 Update (GPU) process: upon adoption, the plan would increase housing capacity by at least 10,000 units, increase the base densities in the 10 Study Areas by at least 25 dwelling units per acre and height limits by at least two stories, create substantial new opportunities for housing, including that which is affordable, throughout the City in locations that are near transit, jobs, and services; and will place an updated Measure Y ballot initiative to allow for the increased heights and densities in the adopted General Plan on the November 2024 election. If the Measure Y ballot initiative does not pass, within six months, alternative plans will be presented to the City Council, including a plan for rezoning, to address the housing production constraint of Measure Y and to add at least 1,700 units of new capacity around the City to increase the City’s RHNA buffer by at least 25%.
• Policy H 2.1 – Fund Housing Rehabilitation Efforts: providing funding to lower income households for rehabilitation and accessibility improvements helps prevent displacement because of poor housing conditions.
• Policy H 2.4 – Implement Capital Improvements in Lower-Resourced Neighborhoods: The City will continue to invest CDBG and other funding into lower resource neighborhoods, which include households shown to have disparate housing needs. This will include proactive outreach to the affected communities to ensure the most critical needs are addressed. See also excerpts from the Environmental Justice efforts, located after the AFFH programs, below. • Policy H 2.5 – Promote Housing Resilience: this specifically address climate change-related environmental issues in disadvantaged neighborhoods impacted by flooding in the North Shoreview neighborhood.
309 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 112
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
• Policy H 2.6 – Require Replacement Units: this would extend replacement requirements beyond the Housing Crisis Act sunset date of 2034, thereby helping to prevent potential displacement in the future.
• Policy H 3.2 – Investigate Fair Housing Cases: continue to fund fair housing service providers to address potential households facing displacement and/or fair housing challenges, who often have disparate needs in lower-income, poorly resourced areas. • Policy H 3.3 – Expand Tenant Protections: this action would extend the measures found in AB1482 by requiring relocation payments to tenancy of less than one year, requiring right to return policies for tenants displaced by substantial renovations, and strengthening the enforcement penalty structure to further protect tenants.
• Policy H 3.5 – Study the Creation of Below Market Rate Set Asides: conduct a best practices review to determine the feasibility of prioritizing groups with special needs, including large families, single female heads of households, and others with disparate housing needs and implement as directed by City Council.
• Policy H 4.1 – Update the Housing Webpage: this would improve the City’s webpage with comprehensive housing-related materials in multiple languages, with a specific effort to ensure that households with disproportionate housing needs are targeted with this information. • Policy H 4.3 – Expand Community Education and Outreach: The City plans a robust and adaptive community engagement program with targeting to underrepresented groups, including those with special needs, disparate housing needs, and others.
• Policy H 4.4 – Enable Affirmative Marketing: This would require developers of affordable housing to create a Marketing Plan during the final phase of construction on a project-by-project basis, focusing on outreach to special needs individuals and those least likely to apply based on racial make-up of neighborhood, including those with disparate housing needs.
Programs in Support of ELI Households and Those with Special Needs Although some programs, such as those under Policies H 1.13, H 1.14, H 1.16, H 1.18, and programs addressing AFFH concerns, explicitly target special needs and ELI households, all programs in this Housing Element will ensure an ongoing review of how these programs do, or do not, reach ELI and special needs households. This information will be tracked wherever possible and reported on an annual basis through the Annual Progress Report requirements.
Related Environmental Justice Activities
The 2040 General Plan Update has identified two Equity Priority Communities within the City of San Mateo - North Central and North Shoreview. Within the Housing Element, Policy H 2.4 (Implement Capital Improvements in Lower-Resourced Neighborhoods) focuses resources toward these two neighborhoods in support of AFFH and Environmental Justice objectives. The 2040 General Plan Update further articulates the City’s commitment to Environmental Justice in these Equity Priority Communities, and proposes a number of actions to improve conditions that address additional AFFH concerns in the Land Use Element, including, but not limited to:
310 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 113
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
Action LU 8.8 – Streetscape and Safety Improvements. Work with residents in equity priority communities to identify sidewalk, lighting, landscaping, and roadway improvements needed to improve routes to parks, schools, recreation facilities, and other destinations within the community. Prioritize investments to address health disparities in equity priority communities in the annual Capital Improvement Program.
Action LU 8.9 – Equity Priority Community Mapping. Regularly update the map identifying equity priority communities with data from CalEnviroScreen or other sources, including information from community members.
Action LU 8.10 – Equity Priority Communities Plan. Prepare a plan for the equity priority communities that addresses the needs of each community, including health, safety, and improved circulation with community input. The plan shall seek to ensure the streets in each community are measurably safe, include ADA accessibility, and have adequate on-street parking. Changes included in the plan shall be developed and enacted with the express purposes of improving health, safety, and welfare for the members of each community.
Action LU 8.11 – City Services. Work with residents in equity priority communities to identify services that the City or other partners could provide to improve safety, sanitation, and security in these neighborhoods.
Action LU 8.12 – Neighborhood Beautification. Support and promote neighborhood clean-up and beautification initiatives in equity priority communities, including in partnership with neighborhood organizations.
311 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 114
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
This page is intentionally blank.
312 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 115
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
Table 8: Goal H-1: Production - Implementation Plan
GOAL H-1: Production of New Housing at all Income Levels, with a Focus on Affordable Housing Number Policy Lead Dept./
Division
Funding
Source(s) Program Measure(s) Implementation Action(s) Target Timeline New/Existing Program H 1.1 Monitor
Regional
Housing
Needs
Allocation
and Pipeline
projects
Housing
Division
N/A Monitor housing production against
ABAG Fair Share Allocation in compliance
with no net loss requirements during
planning period. In addition, monitor
pipeline projects and new development
applications to ensure production
outcomes are meeting projections.
a) Provide an annual report on housing production to the City Council each March, prior to submittal of the Annual Progress Report to HCD by April 1st.
The report will include an assessment on the City’s RHNA progress and, as needed, identify additional sites to ensure ongoing compliance with “no net loss” provisions of State law.
b) Conduct a mid-cycle review of realistic capacity projections and pipeline project housing production to ensure outcomes are aligned with projections. Update sites inventory to include additional sites to ensure ongoing compliance with “no net loss” provisions of State law. a) 2023 – 2031
(Annually)
b) 2027 (Mid-cycle
review)
a) Existing
b) New
H 1.2 Utilize Public
Funding and
Properties
for New
Affordable
Housing
City of San
Mateo
City funds
and State, and
federal funds,
as available
Produce City supported housing projects
with affordability restrictions utilizing
local public funds; and use this funding to
leverage other regional, State, and
federal funding sources to increase the
number of affordable housing units
developed in each project. Encourage
developers to include ELI units in their
projects.
a) Continue to set aside 20% of general fund property tax revenues from former RDA areas (aka “Boomerang Funds”), as well as the Affordable Housing Commercial Linkage Fee Fund to use for affordable housing development, prioritizing funding allocation to projects that include units for extremely low income (ELI) households.
b) Identify ways to create a stand-alone Housing Trust Fund using available funding sources and utilizing that fund to leverage new funding sources, including the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (BAHC) and the Bay Area Preservation Pilot (BAPP). c) Prioritize available local housing funds to assist in the production of at least 543 below market rate units by 2031, including within the study areas of the General Plan that allow high-density housing by holding developer roundtable meetings at least once per year. Encourage developers to include ELI units in their projects.
d) Support development of 71 units of affordable housing on the City owned parking lot at 4th and Railroad as part of the public-private partnership (Bespoke project).
i. Development team has been selected as part of an RFP process, an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) has been executed with the developer, and the project’s pre-application review has been completed. ii. Complete the Planning Application Process for the project within 18 months of Housing Element adoption. iii. Facilitate permitting and project construction during the planning period. e) Support affordable housing development, including ELI units, on the City owned property at 4142 S. El Camino Real. i. Complete site analysis within 24 months of Housing Element adoption. ii. Issue RFP within 48 months of Housing Element adoption. iii. Select a development partner and negotiate a lease within 60 months of Housing Element adoption. iv. Facilitate development of the site throughout the planning period.
Geographic Targeting: high and highest resource and RCAA areas.
This item is connected to Policy H 5.1.2 and H 5.2.3.
a) 2023 – 2031
(Ongoing)
b) 2025
c) 2023 – 2031
(Ongoing)
d) 2024
e) 2023 – 2031
a) Existing
b) New
c) New
d) Existing
e) New
H 1.3 Increase
Affordable
Housing
Production
Community
Development
Department
N/A Update the City’s Inclusionary Housing
requirements for ownership and rental
residential developments to allow for
alternative compliance options other
than on-site construction and to establish
an updated Density Bonus/Community
Benefits program that incentivizes
production of additional affordable units.
a) Amend the Affordable Housing Ordinance (SMMC Chapter 27.16.050) and Inclusionary Housing Policy to allow for alternative compliance options to onsite inclusionary unit development within one year of Housing Element adoption. b) Adopt an updated Density Bonus/Community Benefits program that provides additional incentives and/or streamlining options for housing projects that provide additional affordable units or the most needed unit types beyond minimum State requirements. Both of these actions would include an assessment of applicable State law to ensure that the City meets or exceeds all requirements. c) Target ELI populations to the extent feasible.
Geographic Targeting: high resource and RCAA areas.
Outcome: 15% of new units will be developed in high/highest resource areas and/or RCAA areas.
This item is connected to Policy H 5.1.1 and H 5.2.2.
a) 2024
b) 2025
a) New
b) New
7.2 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
313 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 116
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
Table 8: Goal H-1: Production - Implementation Plan (Continued) Number Policy Lead Dept./
Division
Funding
Source(s) Program Measure(s) Implementation Action(s) Target Timeline New/Existing Program H 1.4 Support
Increased
Accessory
Dwelling Unit
Development
Planning
Division
N/A Implement and maintain programs to
encourage and support ADU production
to increase missing middle and lower
income housing opportunities.
a) Amend the City’s ADU Ordinance (SMMC Chapter 27.19) to align with current State law and to resolve any inconsistencies identified by HCD. b) Maintain and expand the ADU information and resources available to homeowners and applicants provided on the City’s website. c) Collaborate with 21 Elements and other jurisdictions in San Mateo County to find ways to enhance available ADU resources, establish uniform standards and requirements, and effective ways to monitor ADU affordability. d) Monitor ADU occupancy and rent levels to verify that affordability allocations. Tools to monitor will include, but are not limited to, collaboration with 21 Elements or ABAG to develop a uniform approach to tracking ADU affordability countywide, and surveying ADU applicants during the building permit review process to understand intended use, occupancy and rent charged. e) Continue to offer flat fees for ADU building permits, and review ADU permit fees every 2-3 years. If fees are found to be a barrier to ADU production, the City will make reductions as necessary to reduce cost barriers. f) Provide an annual report on ADU permitting data to verify that Housing Element production targets are being achieved. If ADU production targets are not achieved for two consecutive years, then, within six months, pursue additional actions, including fee reductions, increased homeowner resources and assistance, funding assistance, identifying additional sites and/or code amendments, to incentivize ADU production.
Geographic Targeting: high resource and RCAA areas.
Outcome: 30% of new ADUs units will be developed in high/highest resource areas and/or RCAA areas.
This item is connected to Policy H 5.1.3.
a) 2024
b) 2023 – 2031
(Ongoing)
c) 2023 – 2031
(Ongoing)
d) 2023 - 2031
(Ongoing)
e) 2023 – 2031
(Ongoing)
f) 2023 – 2031
(Annually)
a) New
b) Existing
c) New
d) New
e) Existing
f) New
H 1.5 Encourage
Family
Housing
Planning
Division
N/A Increase the number of new construction
housing units that can accommodate
families (larger units) when possible and
require subsidized projects to include
family-sized units.
a) Present options to City Council for requiring a minimum percentage of three-bedroom units in City subsidized projects; b) Present options to City Council for requiring a minimum percentage of family-sized units in private development projects as part of the Inclusionary Policy update.
c) Should such policy recommendations not materialize into code amendments, explore alternative methods to promote family sized units through the community benefits program.
This item is connected to Policy H 5.1.1 and H 5.2.3.
a) 2025
b) 2025
c) 2025
a) New
b) New
c) New
H 1.6 Streamline
Housing
Application
Review
Community
Development
Department
N/A Reduce the development review timeline
for housing projects by streamlining
the development review process and
simplifying design review and submittal
requirements.
a) Update the City Council resolutions that establish the pre-application and development review processes to eliminate the pre-application requirement for housing projects and eliminate the third-party design review requirement for housing projects that meet objective standards. b) Amend the Zoning Code to allow residential projects with up to 25 units to be approved administratively. c) Update permit application submittal requirements.
d) Develop Zoning Code amendments to align City requirements with SB 330 and make a recommendation to the City Council. a) 2024
b) 2023
c) 2023-2031
(Ongoing)
d) 2025
a) New
b) New
c) New
d) New
H 1.7 Update
Zoning Code
Standards
to Support
Housing
Production
Planning
Division
N/A Update Zoning Code development
standards that apply to multi-family
residential projects to reduce or eliminate
constraints, incentivize production of
additional housing units and support
development of a variety of housing
types.
a) Evaluate the standards and requirements in all zone districts that allow for multi-family residential and amend the Zoning Code as needed to reduce or eliminate constraints to housing construction. Specifically: 1) exclude covered parking and other elements as needed from Floor Area Ratio (FAR) calculation for housing projects with affordable units, 2) specify where Single-Room Occupancy (SRO) units are permitted consistent with government Code 65583(c)(1), and 3) specify that Manufactured Homes that are built on a permanent foundation are subject to the same zoning requirements and development standards as single-family homes. b) Amend the Zoning Code to reduce off-street parking requirements for residential units (SMMC Chapter 27.64) as follows: Studio and 1 Bedroom units to 1 space, 2 Bedrooms and above to 1.5 spaces; and for projects within ½ mile of transit, consistent with AB2097, no off-street parking shall be required. As part of this amendment, staff will review all other parking related requirements and make recommendations to reduce or eliminate any other parking related requirements identified as a constraint. c) Amend the Zoning Code to make residential uses, which currently require a special use permit, a permitted use in the C1, C2, C3, E1 and E2 districts for non-R Overlay areas.
d) Rezone sites with quasi-public uses such as schools, churches, and other facilities of an educational, religious, charitable, or philanthropic nature, to “Quasi-Public,” following completion of the General Plan Update and allow for a variety of housing types, such as duplexes and multi-family, as permitted uses in this zone district.
e) Evaluate the feasibility of an affordable housing quasi-public overlay or code amendment to support the production of affordable housing on quasi-public sites, such as religious or educational institutions. a) 2025
b) 2025
c) 2024
d) 2025
e) 2026
a) New
b) New
c) New
d) New
314 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 117
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
Table 8: Goal H-1: Production - Implementation Plan (Continued) Number Policy Lead Dept./
Division
Funding
Source(s) Program Measure(s) Implementation Action(s) Target Timeline New/Existing Program H 1.8 Adopt
Objective
Design
Standards
Planning
Division
N/A Adopt Objective Design Standards to
expedite production of housing.
Adopt Objective Design Standards for multi-family residential projects and mixed-use projects with a residential component. 2023 New H 1.9 Establish
Minimum
Densities for
Mixed-Use
Projects
Planning
Division
N/A Create minimum residential density
requirements to ensure mixed-use
development will contain an appropriate
amount of housing in commercial/office
developments.
a) Amend the Zoning Code to require that properties designated for mixed-uses, in the Sites Inventory List, allow 100 percent residential use and require that residential use occupy 50 percent or more of the total floor area of a mixed-use project consistent with Government Code Section 65583(h), and establish a minimum residential density for mixed-use projects elsewhere in the City that include a residential component. b) Study and present to City Council options for requiring a residential component in all mixed-use projects in certain zones or areas. a) 2024
b) 2024
a) New
b) New
H 1.10 Establish
By-Right
Housing
Designation
for Prior
Housing Sites
Planning
Division
N/A Designate housing sites that have carried
over from the prior Housing Element to
allow housing development by-right.
Amend the Zoning Code to establish a By-Right designation for housing sites reused from prior Housing Elements for housing projects that propose a minimum of 20% affordable units. Zoning for these sites must be at least 30 units/acre to meet default density requirements for lower-income households per Gov. Code Section 65583.2(c).
2024
(must be completed
within one year of
statutory deadline of
the Housing Element
update)
New
H 1.11 Implement
the SB 9
Ordinance
Planning
Division
N/A Implement the Zoning Code to allow
duplexes and lot splits on appropriate
single-family sites.
Continue to implement Zoning Code Chapter 27.21 (Two-Unit Development Residential Overlay District), adopted in September 2022, which facilitates the provisions of SB 9 in single-family districts (R1).
Geographic Target: high or highest resource and RCAA areas and areas of lower density.
Outcome: Facilitate at least 5-10 SB 9 applications, resulting in 10-30 units developed over the planning period 2023 – 2031
(ongoing)
New
H 1.12 Encourage
Development
of Missing
Middle
Housing
Planning
Division
N/A Support small infill residential
construction (Missing Middle, 4-10 units)
through policy updates and Zoning Code
amendments.
a) Evaluate residential zoning districts that have sites with potential for Missing Middle Housing (R2, R3 and R4 zones) and identify development standards that create barriers for small-scale development, including minimum lot size, setbacks, floor area ratio, parking, and open space requirements, and amend the Zoning Code to remove any constraints, maximize developable area and increase capacity. b) Research and evaluate policies and code amendments to allow for Missing Middle housing under SB 10 and schedule for City Council consideration and adoption.
Geographic Target: high and highest resource areas, RCAA areas, and lower density neighborhoods.
Outcome: approximately 50 units of “missing middle”, workforce housing is developed in multi-family housing zones. a) 2026
b) 2026
a) New
b) New
H 1.13 Update
Special
Needs Group
Housing
Requirements
Planning
Division
N/A Research current code requirement
regarding special needs group homes for
people with disabilities for consistency
with Fair Housing Requirements. The
City commits to revising procedural
requirements to permit group homes
for seven or more persons in all zones
allowing residential uses based on
objective criteria to facilitate approval
certainty similar to other residential uses
of the same form.
a) Review and amend the Zoning Code to allow group homes and residential care facilities for persons with special needs, including those who are ELI, in all residential zones, only subject to those objective standards that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone in conformance with State law.
b) Review and amend the Zoning Code definition for family, and other related regulations, to ensure consistency with State and Federal fair housing laws related to persons with disabilities. This effort may also include consideration of new definitions such as single-unit and multi-unit dwellings to accommodate various housing situations.
c) Study best practices and develop a universal design ordinance that may better address housing needs for persons with disabilities.
This item is connected to Policy H 5.1.1 and H 5.2.3
a) 2025
b) 2025
c) 2027
a) New
b) New
c) New
H 1.14 Update
Supportive
Housing
Requirements
Planning
Division
N/A Review and amend zoning code regarding
multi-family housing development.
Amend the Zoning Code to be consistent with AB 2162 to allow by-right 100% affordable housing that has 25% or 12 units of permanent supportive housing, where multi-family or mixed-use housing is permitted.
This item is connected to Policy H 5.1.1 and H 5.2.3.
To be completed by
December 31, 2024.
New
315 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 118
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
Table 8: Goal H-1: Production - Implementation Plan (Continued) Number Policy Lead Dept./
Division
Funding
Source(s) Program Measure(s) Implementation Action(s) Target Timeline New/Existing Program H 1.15 Update
Mobile
Home Parks
Requirements
Planning
Division
N/A Amend zoning code requirements
regarding mobile home parks.
Amend the Zoning Code to allow mobile home parks as a special use in all residential zones to be consistent with Government Code Section 65852.7 2025 New H 1.16 Update
Farmworker
Housing
Requirements
Planning
Division
N/A Amend zoning code requirements
regarding farmworker housing.
Amend the Zoning Code to define and allow farmworker housing within the Agricultural District consistent with Government Code Section 17021.6. The City will comply with Health and Safety Code section 17021.5. 2025 New
H 1.17 Permitting
and
Development
Fee Review
Community
Development
Department
N/A Regularly review development
application, building permit and impact
fees to identify opportunities to reduce
per unit costs for housing developments,
with a focus on reducing per unit costs
for small multi-family projects (Missing
Middle).
a) Study cumulative permit fee costs for new housing development of various sizes and use information to identify opportunities to reduce per unit permitting costs; with fee reductions for small multi-family projects being prioritized. Present findings to the City Council with recommendations for adoption.
b) Conduct a comprehensive review and update of the fee schedule every 5-6 years, with a focus on evaluating and adjusting fees with potential barriers to housing production. Next review will be conducted in 2027 (last fee study completed in 2021). a) 2025
b) 2027 (Ongoing)
a) New
b) New
H 1.18 Increase
Senior
Housing
Production
Community
Development
Department
N/A Evaluate potential policies and code
amendments to support the production
of housing for seniors.
Evaluate code amendments and/or policies to encourage and support the development of senior housing, especially senior housing that serves the ELI and lower income senior households, including through shared‐ housing arrangements, community care facilities, supportive housing, and assisted living for seniors, and make a recommendation to the City Council. 2028 New
H 1.19 Ensure
Adequate
Water Supply
for the
Development
of New
Housing
Community
Development
Department
N/A Support the City’s water and sewer
providers to ensure adequate capacity for
new housing development.
a) Upon adoption of the Housing Element, provide a copy of the Element to California Water Company, Estero Municipal Improvement District, and San Mateo Public Works Dept, for greater awareness of affordable housing priorities and collaboration, in compliance with AB 1087. b) Support efforts by Cal Water and EMID to expand their water supplies with new water sources and develop water efficiency and conservation methods to offset demand from new development projects. c) Pursuant to AB 1087, work with Cal Water and EMID to establish a procedure to prioritize water allocation for developments that include units set aside as affordable housing for lower income households, including affordable housing within larger, mixed-use developments and larger residential subdivisions
d) Establish a written procedure for the City to grant priority sewer service to developments with units that are affordable to lower-income households. a) 2023
b) 2023 – 2031
(Ongoing)
c) 2023
d) 2023
a) New
b) New
c) New
d) New
H 1.20 Adopt San
Mateo
General Plan
2040
Community
Development
Department
N/A Adopt a General Plan Update that
provides sufficient development capacity
to meet the City’s housing needs through
2040.
a) Complete the General Plan 2040 Update (GPU) process and present to the City Council for adoption. The City is committed to adopting a General Plan that will create capacity for at least 10,000 new housing units and will increase the base densities in the 10 Study Areas by at least 25 du/ac and height limits by at least two stories.
b) Commence with rezoning Citywide, in phases, to implement the land use map following GPU adoption. c) The GPU public outreach and engagement process will include information on Measure Y and how it creates a constraint on housing production. d) The City will place an updated Measure Y ballot initiative to allow for the increased heights and densities in the adopted General Plan on the November 2024 election.
e) If the Measure Y ballot initiative does not pass in November 2024, present alternative plans within six months to the City Council, including a plan for rezoning, to address the housing production constraint of Measure Y with an emphasis on higher densities in high and highest resource areas, and to add at least 1,700 units of new capacity around the City, thereby increasing the City’s RHNA buffer by at least 25%. a) 2024
b) 2025-2026
c) 2023 - 2024
d) November 2024
e) May 2025, if
needed
a) Existing
b) New
c) New
d) New
e) New
316 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 119
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
Table 9: Goal H-2: Preservation - Implementation Plan
GOAL H-2: Preservation of Existing Housing that is Affordable to Lower- and Middle-Income Residents Number Policy Lead Dept./
Division
Funding
Source(s) Program Measure(s) Implementation Action(s) Target Timeline New/ Existing Program H 2.1 Fund Housing
Rehabilitation
Efforts
Housing Division CDBG/CALHome a) Fund minor home repairs and accessibility improvements
b) Provide opportunity for home rehabilitation
loans for low- income residents.
c) Allow accessibility improvements on rental
properties with owner permission.
a) Complete annual goals of 10 minor home repairs and 14 accessibility modifications through grants for lower-income residents, targeting ELI households where appropriate.
b) Provide home rehabilitation loans for lower-income residents up to a total of approximately $500,000 available. c) Affirmatively market the availability of these funds to both homeowners and renters to increase awareness. Marketing efforts include translating flyers into Spanish and distributing flyers to various locations throughout the City, including libraries, senior and community centers and non-profit agencies. Outreach will be conducted biannually.
Geographic Target: low resource areas (40% of loans and improvements), and areas with significant infrastructure needs This item is connected to Policy H 5.3.2.
2023 - 2031
(Annually by June
30)
a) Existing
b) Existing
c) New
H 2.2 Support
Retention of
Existing Lower
Income Units
Housing Division TBD (potential
sources include:
PLHA)
a) Identify funding source for preservation
b) Monitor affordable housing projects that are at
risk of conversion to market rate.
c) Support regional and local efforts to examine
displacement of affordable housing and lower
income households.
d) Assist with the retention of special needs
housing that is at risk of expiring affordability
requirements.
Bridgepointe Condominiums affordability requirements for 59 affordable units expire in 2027, out of which 24 are very low-income units (35 are at 120% AMI). Belmont Building affordability requirements for 6 units expire in 2032. The rental property is owned by a for-profit entity, potential for loss of units is high.
Proactively coordinate with owners to preserve the 24 very low-income units as affordable, including identifying potential funding sources, advertise conversion units to non-profits, conduct tenant outreach and education, add a displacement preference for new affordable housing for people displaced, including those displaced as a result of conversion. Outreach and negotiate with owners for affordability extensions. Provide noticing to tenants and affected public entities in accordance with Gov. Code, § 65863.10, 65863.11, and 65863.13 This item is connected to Policy H 5.3.3.
a) 2026
(Bridgepointe
Condominiums)
b) 2031 (Belmont
Building)
a) New
b) New
H 2.3 Increase Energy
and Water
Efficiency in
Existing Units
Community
Development
Department,
City Manager’s
Office
CDBG/City
Funds
Increase energy and water efficiency in all existing
residential units. Fund weatherization upgrades
for low- and moderate-income homeowners.
a) Complete seven weatherization upgrades through grants for lower-income residents annually, targeting ELI households when appropriate. b) Implement energy-efficiency and electrification strategies identified in the City’s Climate Action Plan through updates to the City’s Reach Codes as part of the building permit review process. Outreach will be conducted biannually.
Geographic Target: low resource areas, and areas with significant infrastructure needs This item is connected to Policy H 5.3.2. a) 2023 - 2031
(Annually, June
30)
b) Reach codes are
updated every
three years.
a) Existing
b) New
H 2.4 Implement
Capital
Improvements in
Lower-Resourced
Neighborhoods
Housing Division CDBG Invest more resources in lower resource neighborhoods (utilize federal CDBG to provide
capital improvements).
a) Use available CDBG funds to make CIP improvements in identified Equity Priority Neighborhoods (including North Central and North Shoreview neighborhoods). Potential improvements may include: street work, crosswalk implementation, ADA ramp installation, striping, sidewalk improvements, traffic signal replacement, and other pedestrian/bicycle enhancements. Allocate available CDBG funds on an annual basis. b) Implement Bike Master Plan and Pedestrian Master Plan through capital improvements in Equity Priority Neighborhoods. c) Conduct proactive public outreach to identify and prioritize capital improvements that best align with a neighborhood’s most critical needs. d) Apply for funding biannually, consistent with CIP efforts and CDBG to pursue at least eight improvement projects over eight years in Equity Priority Areas.
Geographic Target: low resource areas, and areas with significant infrastructure needs; Equity Priority Areas.
Outcome: Pursue eight improvement projects over eight years in Equity Priority Areas 2023 - 2031
(Annually)
Existing
H 2.5 Promote Housing
Resilience
Public Works
Department
City Funds Use resources to protect housing at risk of
damage due to changing environmental
conditions.
Provide Flood Improvements for the North Shoreview neighborhood through the levee project with Public Works. Started in Fall 2020, with completion
anticipated in Spring
2023
Existing
H 2.6 Require
Replacement
Units
Planning
Division
N/A Require equivalent replacement units for all
housing units lost during any construction or
demolition projects (Housing Crisis Act).
a) Conduct a study to determine whether the City should update the zoning ordinance and other policies to permanently require replacement of units (beyond Housing Crisis Act sunset date of 2034). This action must be completed within three years from the start of the planning period. b) The City will require replacement housing units subject to the requirements of Government Code Section 65915(c)(3), when a development project or demolition occurs on sites with existing residential units that are restricted or have been occupied by a lower income household in the past five years. Consistent with H 2.6.
a) 2026
b) Effective Immediately
a) New
b) New
317 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 120
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
Table 10: Goal H-3: Protection - Implementation Plan
GOAL H-3: Protection of Current Residents to Prevent Displacement Number Policy Lead Dept./
Division
Funding
Source(s) Program Measure(s) Implementation Action(s) Target Timeline New/ Existing
Program
H 3.1 Prevent
Homelessness
Housing Division CDBG/ PLHA/
City
Support where feasible programs and facilities to prevent homelessness through City actions, while coordinating with County and Continuum of Care.
a) Allocate PLHA, CDBG, and other local funds to support homeless prevention these may include the following programs: LifeMoves Rapid Rehousing Program, Safe Harbor Shelter, Vendome Hotel supportive units, LifeMoves First Step for Housing program, HIP Housing home sharing and Montara assisted units for the formerly homeless.
b) Support the County in its efforts to convert the Stone Villa Hotel into a 44-room temporary shelter space as part of the Project Homekey programs. a) 2023 – 2031
(Annually by
June 30)
b) 2023 – 2031
(Annually)
a) Existing
b) New
H 3.2 Investigate Fair
Housing Cases
Housing Division CDBG Continue funding and support for outreach services for homeowners and renters at risk of being displaced and/or facing fair housing challenges.
As CDBG funding permits, achieve the Annual Fair Housing Activity Goals:
• Investigate all complaint cases;
• Provide consultation to at least 30 individuals;
• Increase public Education/Outreach to tenants, landlords, and housing professionals by 50% over eight years (from 26 to at least 40 persons); and • Provide legal assistance to at least 185 renters.
These numbers are subject to change based on funding availability.
See Goal H-5/AFFH Action Plan for full list of items.
2023 - 2031
(Annually by June
30)
Existing
H 3.3 Evaluate
Housing
Revenue
Sources
Community
Development
Department
N/A a) Conduct a feasibility study to determine a potential increase of the Commercial Linkage Fee to ensure commensurate housing funding with commercial development.
b) Explore other funding opportunities to support affordable housing development. Efforts include actively tracking available Federal, State, Regional and Local funding opportunities for affordable housing and determining how to leverage these funds to build or rehabilitate more affordable housing.
a) Conduct a feasibility study on increasing the fee to generate additional housing funds gathered from commercial development, analyze the study, conduct community outreach and make a recommendation to the City Council. Proceed as directed by Council. b) Examine other possible revenue sources and bring the proposals before City Council for consideration. Actively track available funding opportunities and coordinate with City partners, including non-profit housing developers on how best to leverage these resources. a) 2026
b) 2023 - 2031
(Annually, as
opportunities
become
available)
a) New
b) New
H 3.4 Expand Tenant
Protections
Community
Development
Department
N/A Expand tenant protections in local ordinance to extend measures of AB1482 related to relocation, documentation, and right to return policy in eviction cases.
a) Extend AB1482 provisions to require tenant relocation payments for No Fault evictions for those with tenure less than one year. b) Make recommendations to the City Council for establishing tenant protection policies that include the requirement of documentation from landlords who use the substantial remodel exemption to evict tenants and a Right to Return policy for tenants displaced from homes due to demolition or substantial remodels. c) Amend the Code to strengthen enforcement penalty structure to aid in protecting tenants from unsafe or substandard units. d) Conduct outreach to the community on a biannual basis. e) This item is connected to Policy H 5.4.1.
a) 2024
b) 2026
c) 2024
d) 2023 – 2031
(biannually)
a) New
b) New
c) New
d) New
H 3.5 Study the
Creation of
Below Market
Rate Set Asides
Community
Development
Department
N/A Examine the feasibility of establishing priority allocation for households with special needs, extremely low-income households and large families in City-assisted and private development projects with BMR units.
Conduct a best practices research on prioritization of households with special needs, extremely low-income households and large families. Analyze the data, conduct community outreach and make recommendations to the City Council. Proceed as directed by Council. 2026 New
H 3.6 Monitor Rental
Rates and
Displacement.
Community
Development
Department
N/A Monitor rents, evictions, and tenant displacement citywide. a) Research options and best practices for a rental registry list, including determining necessary financial and human resources needed to establish such a program. Make recommendations to City Council.
b) Collaborate with regional partners, such as 21 Elements or ABAG, to develop ways to monitor rental rates, evictions and displacement citywide and countywide to track trends and use the information to guide policy priorities. a) 2024
b) 2024-2031
(ongoing)
a) New
b) New
H 3.7 Evaluate
Opportunities
for Expanding
Homeless
Shelters
Community
Development
Department
N/A Examine best practices and policies to expand shelter capacity for individuals experiencing homelessness. Study feasibility of new shelter programs and collaborate with the County to end homelessness. a) Study best practices for expansion of homeless shelter sites. Analyze the data, conduct community outreach and recommendations to City Council. Proceed as directed by Council.
b) Regularly evaluate zoning to ensure enough sites are available to accommodate the capacity for emergency shelters, based on the countywide Point in Time Homeless Count.
c) Review and amend the zoning code to allow emergency shelters in C2, C3, and other zones as needed to ensure there is sufficient capacity on available sites to accommodate the need for emergency shelter as identified in the most recent point-in-time count conducted before the start of the planning period, and to amend the definition of emergency shelters in compliance with Government Code 65583. d) Review and amend the zoning code as needed to comply with Government Code 65583 including to remove the 300 feet buffer from a single-family dwelling, clarify that emergency shelters are not required to be more than 300 feet apart and adopt objective development standards, such as parking for shelters in compliance with Government Code Section 65583(a)(4)(A)(ii).
e) Review and amend the zoning code as needed to comply with requirements of AB 101 (2019) to allow Low Barrier Navigation Centers (LBNC) as a permitted use by right in areas zoned for mixed use and nonresidential zones permitting (by right or through a Special Use Permit) multifamily uses if it meets specific requirements in Government Code sections 65660 – 65668.
a) 2023 – 2031
(Ongoing)
b) 2023 – 2031
(Ongoing)
c) 2023-2031
(Ongoing)
d) 2025
e) 2025
a) New
b) New
c) New
d) New
e) New
318 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element 121 April 2024
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
Table 11: Goal H-4: Promotion - Implementation Plan
GOAL H-4: Promotion of Community Engagement and Public Outreach Number Policy
Lead Agency/
Department/
Division
Funding
Source(s) Program Measure(s) Implementation Action(s) Target Timeline New/Existing Program H 4.1 Update the
Housing Webpage
Housing Division N/A Increase community outreach and availability of resources in multiple languages through the Housing Webpage.
a) Maintain and improve webpage with comprehensive housing related information and materials, and coordinate with providers to market programs electronically. b) Provide information in multiple languages using common terms. c) Ensure that households with disproportionate housing needs are targeted for information through, for example, liaisons with service providers. Ensure targeting reaches ELI households.
See H.4.4 regarding partnering with community intermediaries to conduct outreach activities using these informational resources.
This item is connected to Policy H 5.4.3.
2023 - 2031
(Ongoing)
a) Existing
b) New
c) New
H 4.2 Support a
Countywide Below
Market Rate Unit
Waitlist
County of San
Mateo
N/A Support development of the countywide affordable rental waitlist to streamline and centralize occupancy of BMR units by joining the County’s waiting list process
Support the county’s online portal for a BMR waitlist by transitioning the City’s BMR waiting list to the Countywide system. In addition, work with BMR property managers/owners to advertise available BMR units on the County’s portal to streamline the rental process.
2023 (Transition
to Countywide
portal)
(and ongoing)
Existing
H 4.3 Expand Community
Education and
Outreach
Community
Development
Department
N/A Support and engage in efforts to educate community stakeholders and residents, including those with special needs or with disproportionate needs (such as farmworkers, people with disabilities including those with developmental disability, and single-female head of household), about housing gaps and the effects of programs and policies on addressing those gaps. Proactively create opportunities for all communities to have a voice and be involved in shaping policies and programs.
a) Housing initiatives and policy implementation shall be supported with robust and adaptive community engagement including surveys, workshops, pop-up events, mailings, and targeted outreach to underrepresented groups. Outreach will be conducted biannually. b) Continue to participate in Countywide (and other) efforts to share best practices on equitable engagement and inclusive outreach. (e.g. Home For All “Learning Network”) c) Actively provide information on County and State resources for tenant protections, discriminatory practices (CC&R’s), special needs groups, and households with disproportionate housing needs. 2023 - 2031
(Ongoing)
a) Existing
b) New
c) New
H 4.4 Enable Affirmative
Marketing
Housing Division N/A Develop Marketing Plan with developers of affordable housing projects during final phase of construction on a project-by-project basis. Focus outreach to special needs individuals and those least likely to apply based on racial make-up of neighborhood.
a) Research other best practices to create an affirmative marketing strategy and implement strategies in San Mateo where appropriate.
b) Include farm workers, ELI households. people with disabilities, and households with disproportionate housing needs, as new target group where appropriate.
c) Include Spanish marketing materials and ensure bilingual interpretation services are available. The City will conduct outreach and education on a project-by-project basis and will ensure that programs target/affirmatively market to households in impacted neighborhoods, including North Central and North Shoreview, among others.
d) Partner with community intermediaries to conduct outreach activities on social media and in the community in Spanish and English language, including events with a significant representation of hard to reach communities such as the annual Dia de los Muertos and Eggstravaganza events (minimum of two per year) as well as pop-ups in the North Central and North Shoreview neighborhoods, (minimum of two per year) This item is connected to Policy H 5.1.2 and H 5.2.1.
a) 2026
b) 2023 – 2031
(ongoing)
c) 2023 – 2031
(ongoing)
d) 2023 – 2031
(ongoing)
a) New
b) New
c) Existing
d) New
H 4.5 Conduct Outreach
to Sites Inventory
Property Owners
Community
Development
Department
N/A Conduct focused outreach to the owners of properties on the Sites Inventory to determine interest in redevelopment or construction of additional housing.
Conduct focused outreach to the owners of properties on the Sites Inventory to determine interest in redevelopment or construction of additional housing on their site(s). The outreach shall include provision of information on the City’s development process, fees, and timelines associated with such applications. Initial outreach shall be conducted within two years of adoption and shall be ongoing throughout the housing cycle. 2023 – 2031
(ongoing)
New
319 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 122
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
Table 12: Goal H-5: AFFH - Implementation Plan
Goal H-5: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Actions Fair Housing
Issues Contributing Factors Fair Housing Category
Action Type of
Action
Responsible
Party Objectives Quantified Objectives Timeline
Action Area 1. Enhancing housing mobility strategies: consist of removing barriers to housing in areas of opportunity and strategically enhancing access.
Policy H 5.1.1: Adjust the city’s Below Market Rate
(inclusionary) program to provide larger density
bonuses, and/or increased City support in exchange
for affordable units in high or highest resource areas
or in areas of affluence that address the needs of
residents with disproportionate housing needs (e.g.,
accessible/visit able units for persons with disabilities child-friendly developments with day care on site
for single parents, and 3-4 bedroom units for larger
families).
Hispanic and single
female parent
households are
concentrated in
low opportunity
census tracts.
Persons with
disabilities face
a shortage of
accessible,
affordable housing.
Lack of affordable housing in
high opportunity areas; Lack of
accessible affordable units
Disparities in access
to opportunities
Provide
incentives to
developers
of affordable
housing for
low-income
households and
households with
special needs
Land use
resources
City of San
Mateo
Expand the variety of
housing units produced
under the inclusionary
housing program. Currently
developments of 11 or more
units require 15% affordable
to moderate income
families for ownership and
15% for low -income families
for renters.
a) Perform a feasibility analysis to redesign the program to allow a menu of options, including targeting of units for ELI households.b) Ensure analysis includes review of housing for households with disproportionate housing needs, along with income levels.
This item is connected to Policy H 1.3, Policy H 1.5., Policy H 1.14, and Policy H 1.15.
Geographic Targeting: Citywide
Metrics: Increase affordable housing in high-resource areas or areas of affluence by 15. a) Complete feasibility
analysis by Fall 2023;
b) Implement redesigned
program by Spring 2024.
Policy H 5.1.2: Participate in a regional down
payment assistance program with affirmative
marketing to households with disproportionate
housing needs including persons with disabilities,
single parents, and Hispanic households (e.g.,
Spanish and English, targeted to northeast
neighborhoods).
Hispanic
households, single
female parent
households and
persons with
disabilities have
disproportionate
housing needs.
Historic discrimination
and continued mortgage
denials; Concentration in low
opportunity census tracts; High
housing costs and low wages
Disparities in access
to opportunities
Promote
equal housing
opportunity
Financial
resources
Regional
Partnership with
HEART (San
Mateo County
has program
with them)
Improve accessibility to
home mortgage loans
for Hispanic households
who have the highest
loan denial rates, as well
as single female parent
households, ELI households,
and people with disabilities.
Provide wealth building
through homeownership
for moderate income
households.
a) Affirmatively market down payment assistance to 1,000 households with disproportionate housing needs, including persons with disabilities, single parents and Hispanic households;
b) Provide down payment assistance to 30 total households; c) Provide homebuyer education to 200 households.
d) Assist households in proportion to the demographic profile of the City In addition, the City will work with other jurisdictions to conduct outreach and education. Ensure that programs target/affirmatively market to households in impacted neighborhoods, including North Central and North Shoreview, among others.
This item is connected to Policy H 4.4.
Geographic Targeting: North Central and North Shoreview Neighborhoods a) Meet quantified
objectives by the end
of the Housing Element
period from 2023-2031;
b) Conduct homebuyer/
outreach and education
quarterly in partnership
with HEART
Policy H 5.1.3: Explore the potential to implement
a loan program for ADU construction If a
City-funded ADU loan program is determined to
be infeasible. The City will support the design of a
regional forgivable loan program for homeowners
to construct an ADU that is held affordable for
extremely low-income households for 15 years.
Hispanic and single
female parent
households are
concentrated in
low opportunity
census tracts.
Persons with
disabilities face
a shortage of
accessible,
affordable housing.
Lack of affordable housing in
high opportunity areas/areas
of affluence; Lack of accessible
affordable units
Disparities in access
to opportunities
Incentivize
accessory
dwelling units
(ADUs)
Land use
and financial
resources
21 Elements/
HEART
Increase opportunities for
lower-income households
to find housing that is
affordable.
Explore the potential for a City ADU loan program. Work with 21 Elements collaborative to design a regional loan forgiveness program. Ensure that programs target/affirmatively market to households in impacted neighborhoods, including North Central and North Shoreview, among others. To enhance mobility in high resource/ areas of affluence, additionally target to areas outside lower resource areas. Target those with disproportionate housing needs, with a goal to reach 5 households annually.
Provide support to 21 Elements in the development of a countywide ADU forgivable loan program.
Promote the use of Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs) for ADUs to allow lower income households the opportunity to live in lower density neighborhoods. The goal is to reach 20% of households with HCVs annually. Provide targeted outreach to ELI households.
This item is connected to Policy H 1.4.
Geographic Targeting: Impacted neighborhoods, including North Central and North Shoreview.
Explore City loan program
Summer 2024. If joining
regional collaborative,
begin design in Summer
2025 and complete by
winter 2026.
Additional Mobility Actions From The General Goals, Policies And Programs Policy H 1.4 – Support Increased Accessory Dwelling Unit Development: expands the resources available for homeowners to add ADUs, which provide an important source of affordable housing.
Policy H 1.7 – Update Zoning Code Development Standards: includes an action to create an affordable housing overlay to support the development of affordable housing on religious or educational institutions’ sites, thereby increasing mobility into lower-density areas. 320 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 123
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
Table 12: Goal H-5: AFFH - Implementation Plan (Continued) Actions Fair Housing
Issues Contributing Factors Fair Housing Category
Action Type of
Action
Responsible
Party Objectives Quantified Objectives Timeline
Action Area 2. Encouraging new housing choices and affordability in high or highest resource areas and areas of affluence: promoting housing supply, choices, and affordability in areas of high opportunity and outside of areas of concentrated poverty.
Policy H 5.2.1: Add more City supported housing
with affordability restrictions in moderate and high/
highest resource areas and areas of affluence.
Affirmatively market the housing to households with
disproportionate housing needs including persons
with disabilities, farmworkers, single parents, and
Hispanic households (e.g., Spanish and English,
targeted to northeast neighborhoods).
Hispanic and single
female parent
households are
concentrated in
low opportunity
census tracts.
Persons with
disabilities face
a shortage of
accessible,
affordable housing.
Lack of affordable housing in
high opportunity areas; Lack
of accessible affordable units;
Concentration of Naturally
Occurring Affordable Housing
(NOAH) in low opportunity
census tracts.
Disproportionate
housing need
for low-income
households and
protected classes
Provide
additional
resources to
facilitate the
development
of housing for
low- income
households and
households
with special
needs in higher
opportunity/
areas of
affluence.
Financial
resources
City of San
Mateo
Affirmatively market the
housing to households with
disproportionate housing
needs including persons
with disabilities, single
parents, farmworkers,
and Hispanic households
(e.g., Spanish and English,
targeted identified
neighborhoods).
Require developers to affirmatively market approximately 1,000 units to those with disproportionate housing needs over the eight-year period (approximately 125 annually) by preparing and submitting and affirmative marketing plan to the City for review. The affirmative marketing plan shall include items, such as advertising (print, social media) and targeting community organizations that serve households with disproportionate housing needs Ensure that programs target/affirmatively market to households with disproportionate housing needs. Of the 1,000 affordable units, approximately 15% will benefit special needs and/or ELI households.
Continue to update the housing inventory and provide on the City’s website so that developers can target housing in moderate and high opportunity areas, as well as areas of affluence.
This item is connected to Policy H 1.2. and Policy H 4.4.
Geographic Targeting: Areas of higher opportunities and affluence. 2023 - 2031 (Annually); as
development projects come
in for approvals/financing
Policy H 5.2.2: Incentivize developers through direct
subsidies, fee waivers, and/or density bonuses,
to increase accessibility requirements beyond
the federal requirement of 5% for subsidized
developments.
Persons with
disabilities
and persons
of color have
disproportionate
housing needs.
Lack of accessible affordable
units; Lack of access to
economic opportunity;
Concentration in low income
and low opportunity census
tracts.
Disproportionate
housing need
for low-income
households and
protected classes
Promote
equal housing
opportunity
Financial
resources
City of San
Mateo
Increase development of
accessible units beyond
minimum requirements
a) Update development agreements for projects with City subsidies to include additional accessible units.
b) bUpdate the City’s Inclusionary Housing Policy to require projects that receive City subsidies to increase the percentage of units that meet accessibility requirements.
This item is connected to Policy H 1.3
c) The City will proactively outreach to developers throughout the planning period every two years, beginning in 2024.
Geographic Targeting: Citywide
Metrics: Approximately 10% of units within projects with City subsidies will be accessible.
a) 2023 - 2031 (ongoing) as
development opportunities come available.
b) 2026 Update Inclusionary
Housing Policy
c) Every two years,
beginning in 2024
Policy H 5.2.3: Prioritize City funding proposals for
City funded affordable housing that are committed
to serving hard to serve residents (e.g., extremely
low income, special needs, on site services)
Persons with
disabilities
and persons
of color have
disproportionate
housing needs.
Lack of accessible affordable
units; Lack of access to
economic opportunity;
Concentration in low income
and low opportunity census
tracts.
Disparities in access
to opportunity
Promote
equal housing
opportunity
Financial
resources
City of San
Mateo
Create more housing for
hard to serve households.
Conduct a best practices review and develop a program to prioritize City funding for housing projects. This item is connected to Policy H 1.5, Policy H 1.14, and Policy H
1.15. Geographic Targeting: Citywide, but target high resource and RCAA areas.
Metrics: A minimum of 15% of City-funded affordable housing units will be committed to serving hard to serve residents, including ELI households 2028 Conduct a review of
best practices and develop
a program for City Council
adoption
Policy H 5.2.4: In conjunction with San Mateo
County, develop a housing mobility program that
provides support to tenants seeking to move to high
opportunity areas in the region.
Hispanic and single
female parent
households are
concentrated in
low opportunity
census tracts.
Lack of accessible affordable units;
Lack of access to economic
opportunity; Concentration in
low income and low opportunity
census tracts.
Disparities in access
to opportunity
Promote
equal housing
opportunity
Financial
resources
City of San
Mateo and San
Mateo County
Increase the number of
households with housing
vouchers living in areas
of high opportunity
throughout the region.
There will be a 20% increase in the number of voucher holders, including ELI households, moving to areas of high opportunity.
Identify resources and
develop a housing mobility
program to provide housing
counseling to voucher
holders.
321 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 124
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
Table 12: Goal H-5: AFFH - Implementation Plan (Continued) Actions Fair Housing
Issues Contributing Factors Fair Housing Category
Action Type of
Action
Responsible
Party Objectives Quantified Objectives Timeline
Action Area 3. Improving place-based strategies to encourage community conservation and revitalization including preservation of existing affordable housing: involves approaches that are focused on conserving and improving assets in areas of lower opportunity and concentrated poverty. In addition to those described below, see Policy H Policy H2.4 – Implement Capital Improvements in Lower-Resourced Areas above, as well as excerpts from the General Plan Update’s actions towards environmental justice, following this section.
Policy H 5.3.1: As part of the General Plan, conduct
an area plan for the North Shoreview and North
Central neighborhoods and prioritize land use and
design around Highway 101 to improve access and
reduce the division of the urban form produced by
the highway.
Hispanic and single
female parent
households are
concentrated in
low opportunity
census tracts.
Lack of affordable housing in
high opportunity areas; Lack
of accessible affordable units;
Concentration of NOAH in low
opportunity census tracts.
Segregation/
integration
patterns; disparities
in access to
opportunities
Conserve
and improve
the existing
affordable
housing stock
Land use
resources
City of San
Mateo
Reduce overcrowding,
improve health and safety,
and improve mobility
and access to services in
impacted neighborhoods.
Prepare an area plan for North Shoreview and North Central neighborhoods.
Geographic Targeting: North Shoreview and North Central neighborhoods.
Metrics: Increase housing capacity in North Shoreview and North Central by a minimum of 15%.
2029 Create plan through
the General Plan Update
implementation process
Policy H 5.3.2: Continue to fund minor home repairs,
infrastructure improvements and public services,
implementing a preference for projects in low
opportunity census tracts identified in the analysis.
Hispanic and single
female parent
households are
concentrated in
low opportunity
census tracts.
Persons with
disabilities lack
accessible,
affordable housing.
Lack of affordable housing in
high opportunity areas; Lack of
accessible affordable units.
Disparities in access
to opportunity
Conserve
and improve
the existing
affordable
housing stock
Financial
resources
City of San
Mateo
Fund minor home
repairs and accessibility
improvements in order
to help people with
disabilities and elderly
residents remain in their
homes. Provide opportunity
for home rehabilitation
loans for low-income
residents. Continue funding
for service providers
reaching households
with disproportionate
housing needs, Make
additional infrastructure
improvements in low
resource areas.
Complete annual goals of 10 minor home repairs and 14 accessibility modifications through grants for low-income residents. Provide home rehabilitation loans for lowincome homeowners and landlords making accessibility modifications. Fund service providers that target households with disproportionate housing needs, including services for seniors, ELI households, youth, and fair housing.
Affirmatively market to Hispanic and single female heads of household biannually; ensure that programs target/affirmatively market to households in impacted neighborhoods, including North Central and North Shoreview, among others.
Bi-annually apply for funding through the CIP or other actions to address infrastructure needs.
This item is connected to Policy H 2.1 and Policy H 2.3.
Geographic Targeting: Citywide, but will target impacted neighborhoods, including North Central and North Shoreview.
2023-2031 (Fund annually;
consistent with Policy H
2.1; outreach biannually in
target neighborhoods)
Policy H 5.3.3: Monitor affordable housing projects
that are at risk of conversion to market rate. Support
regional and local efforts to examine displacement
of affordable housing and lower income households.
Assist with the retention of special needs housing
that is at risk of expiring affordability requirements.
Facilitate ownership transfer to nonprofit
organizations.
Hispanic
households, single
parent households
and persons with
disabilities have
disproportionate
housing needs.
Historic discrimination
and continued mortgage
denials; Concentration in low
opportunity census tracts; High
housing costs and low wages
Outreach capacity
and enforcement
Conserve
and improve
the existing
affordable
housing stock
Human
resources
City of San
Mateo
Monitor affordable units
whose subsidies are set to
expire within the planning
period develop a plan for
preservation of the units to
keep them affordable long
term.
Bridgepointe Condominiums affordability requirements for 59 affordable units expire in 2027, out of which 24 are very low- income units (35 are at 120% AMI). Belmont Building affordability requirements for 6 units expire in 2032. The rental property is owned by a for-profit entity, potential for loss of units is high.
Proactively coordinate with owners to preserve the 24 very low- income units as affordable, including identifying potential funding sources, advertise conversion units to non-profits, provide conduct tenant outreach and education, add a displacement preference for new affordable housing for people displaced, including those displaced as a result of conversion. Provide noticing to tenants and affected public entities in accordance with Gov. Code, § 65863.10, 65863.11, and 65863.13 Outreach and negotiate with owners for affordability extensions beginning at least two years prior to the affordability expiration date. This item is connected to Policy H 2.2 Geographic Targeting: N/A, Bridgepoint Condominiums and Belmont Building. a) 2027 (Bridgepointe
Condominiums)
b) 2032 (Belmont Building);
Consistent with Policy
H 2.2
322 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 125
Table 12: Goal H-5: AFFH - Implementation Plan (Continued) Actions Fair Housing
Issues Contributing Factors Fair Housing Category
Action Type of
Action
Responsible
Party Objectives Quantified Objectives Timeline
Action Area 4. Protecting existing residents from displacement: strategies that protects residents in areas of lower or moderate opportunity and concentrated poverty and preserves housing choices and affordability.
Policy H 5.4.1: Establish tenant protections in local
ordinance to extend measures of AB1482 related to
relocation, documentation, and right to return policy
in eviction cases.
Persons with
disabilities
and persons
of color have
disproportionate
housing needs.
Lack of accessible affordable
units; Lack of access to
economic opportunity;
Concentration in low income
and low opportunity census
tracts; Historic discrimination
and continued mortgage
denials; High housing costs and
low wages
Disparities in access
to opportunity
Address
governmental
and nongovernmental
constraints
Human
resources
City of San
Mateo
Increase tenant protections
to prevent displacement of
those with disproportionate
housing needs.
a) Extend AB1482 provisions to require tenant relocation payments for No Fault evictions for those with tenure less than one year.
b) Make recommendations to the City Council for establishing tenant protection policies that include the requirement of documentation from landlords who use the substantial remodel exemption to evict tenants and a Right to Return policy for tenants displaced from homes due to demolition or substantial remodels. c) Amend the Code to strengthen enforcement penalty structure to aid in protecting tenants from unsafe or substandard units. This item is connected to Policy H 3.4.
Geographic Targeting: Citywide.
a) 2024
b) 2026
c) 2024; consistent with
Policy H 3.4
Policy H 5.4.2: Partner with Project Sentinel to
perform fair housing training for landlords and
tenants. Focus enforcement efforts on race-based
discrimination, reasonable accommodations and
source of income discrimination.
Persons with
disabilities
and persons
of color have
disproportionate
housing needs.
Lack of accessible affordable
units; Lack of access to
economic opportunity;
Concentration in low income
and low opportunity census
tracts; Lack of understanding
of reasonable accommodation
requirements by landlords and
property owners.
Outreach capacity
and enforcement
Promote
equal housing
opportunity
Human
resources
City of San
Mateo/Project
Sentinel
Increase awareness of
fair housing laws and
tenants’ rights to reduce
unlawful discrimination and
displacement.
Provide annual funding to Project Sentinel to provide training every two years in the Spring, targeting 200 landlords each training. Awareness will be increased through outreach to landlords.
Geographic Targeting: Citywide.
Annually as part of CDBG
allocation in the spring
(Annually by July 1)
Policy H 5.4.3: Create a webpage specific to fair
housing including resources for residents who feel
they have experienced discrimination, information
about filing fair housing complaints with HCD or
HUD, and information about protected classes
under the Fair Housing Act. The webpage will have
accessibility features and a Spanish language version.
Persons with
disabilities
and persons
of color have
disproportionate
housing needs.
Lack of accessible affordable
units; Lack of access to
economic opportunity;
Concentration in low income
and low opportunity census
tracts; Lack of understanding
of reasonable accommodation
requirements by landlords and
property owners.
Outreach capacity
and enforcement
Promote
equal housing
opportunity
Human
resources
City of San
Mateo
Increase awareness of
fair housing laws and
tenants’ rights to reduce
unlawful discrimination and
displacement.
Provide information on the City’s website about housing discrimination, laws, and protections. Fair Housing resources will also be advertised on the City’s eNewsletter, social media channels and various email listservs. Update the webpage every two years, along with other transparency updates.
Geographic Targeting: Citywide
Metrics will be used to focus outreach: Advertise Fair Housing resources to the community every six months.
See H 4.4 regarding partnering with community intermediaries to conduct outreach activities fair housing resources in priority communities.
This item is connected to Policy H 4.1. and H 4.4
2024 and bi-annually
thereafter; consistent with
Policy H 3.4
Policy H 5.4.4: Ensure that all multi-family residential developments contain signage in both English and
Spanish to explain the right to request reasonable
accommodations for persons with disabilities. Make
this information available and clearly transparent
on the city’s website and fund landlord training and
outreach on reasonable accommodations.
Persons with
disabilities
and persons
of color have
disproportionate
housing needs.
Lack of accessible affordable
units; Lack of access to
economic opportunity;
Concentration in low income
and low opportunity census
tracts; Lack of understanding
of reasonable accommodation
requirements by landlords and
property owners.
Outreach capacity
and enforcement
Promote
equal housing
opportunity
Human
resources
City of San
Mateo
Increase awareness of
fair housing laws and
tenants’ rights to reduce
unlawful discrimination and
displacement.
Initially, create ongoing condition of approval to ensure both BMR and all-affordable developments contain this information. Explore options for recording against the property and/or including in the affordable housing agreement.
Geographic Targeting: Citywide.
Create ongoing conditions
of approval by fall 2024;
conduct best practices
review on options to record
reasonable accommodation
language by January 2025,
and implement a program
by January 2026
Policy H 5.4.5: Ensure that future improvements
in disadvantaged communities will not produce a
net loss of affordable housing or the displacement
of residents and seek to increase the amount of
affordable housing in disadvantaged communities.
Persons with
disabilities
and persons
of color have
disproportionate
housing needs.
Lack of accessible affordable
units; Lack of access to
economic opportunity;
Concentration in low income
and low opportunity census
tracts; Lack of investment in
older housing stock.
Disparities in access
to opportunity
Promote
equal housing
opportunity
Human
resources
City of San
Mateo
Ensure that lower-income
and protected class
households are not
displaced because of
community improvements.
In conjunction with Policies 5.3.1, and 5.3.2, when improvements are planned to be made to disadvantaged communities, conduct a review of existing housing units that may be impacted by such improvements. Consistent with H2.6, ensure units that may be lost are replaced.
Geographic Targeting: Citywide., with a focus on disadvantaged community such as North Central and North Shoreview.
To be completed as part
of the larger General Plan
Update, with the expected
date of completion by
2027. The development of
a no-net loss of affordable
housing policy will be
completed by 2027.
323 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 126
Chapter 4 Housing Plan
This page is intentionally blank.
324 of 2271
Chapter 4 Quantified Objectives
SECTION 8
Quantified Objectives
325 of 2271
326 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 129
Chapter 4 Quantified Objectives
QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES
The quantified objectives section estimates the number of units likely to be constructed, rehabilitated, or conserved/preserved by income level during the 2023-2031 planning period. The quantified objectives do not represent a ceiling on development, but rather set a target goal for the jurisdiction to achieve, based on needs, resources, and constraints.
According to HCD, the sum of the quantified objectives for the programs should ideally be equal to or surpass the community’s identified housing needs. However, State law recognizes that the total housing needs identified may exceed available resources and the community’s ability to satisfy this need within the content of the general plan. Under these circumstances, the quantified objectives need not match the identified existing housing needs but should establish the maximum number of housing units that can be constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved over an eight-year time frame. The quantified objectives do not necessarily meet the goals of RHNA because they are not a full projection of anticipated housing development within the Housing Element Cycle. It is an estimate of actual production, given available resources and projected pipelines projects.
With respect to affordable units, the City has estimated the potential subsidies available during the planning period and has calculated the potential number of units that could be assisted and/or constructed with these funds. In addition, staff has compiled a list of known or expected development projects in the next few years, including preservation projects, anticipated to be completed within the next eight years.
Based on these estimates, along with the known pipeline projects that have been initially reviewed, approved or are under construction, the total quantified objective for affordable units is 1,804. This includes 323 conserved/preserved affordable units, 553 City funded new construction affordable units and 928 non-subsidized affordable units in new private development.
The total development cost for the City’s RHNA allocation of affordable units (3,975 total units) would exceed $4 billion dollars, of which there is approximately a $2 billion financing gap. Thus, the quantified objectives do not completely account for San Mateo’s RHNA but do establish the maximum number of housing units that can realistically be constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved in the City over an eightyear timeframe with current resources. A breakdown of the total quantified objectives for housing production over the next eight years and how they align with the City’s overall RHNA are outlined in the two tables below.
327 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 130
Chapter 4 Quantified Objectives
Table 13: Quantified Objectives for Cycle 6 (2023 – 2031) Conservation/Preservation Affordable
Total ELI VLI LI MOD Market
Bridgepointe Condominiums 59 24 35 396
Belmont Building 6 6
Rehabilitation Projects 258 258
Sub Total 323 0 30 258 35 396
Total Conservation 719
New Construction Affordable
Total ELI VLI LI MOD Market
Kiku Crossing (City Funded) 223 43 45 135 2
445 S. B St. (City Funded) 70 14 36 20 0 1
Future Affordable TBD (City Funded)* 260 70 120 70
Concar Passage 73 73 888
303 Baldwin Ave. (Trags) 6 6 58
Bay Meadows Res 6 5 5 49
Bay Meadows MU 3 7 7 60
Waters Park 19 19 180
406 E. 3rd Ave. (Windy Hill) 3 3 22
500 E. 3rd Ave (Block 21) 12 12 92
500 E. 4th Ave. (Block 20) 9 9 76
1885 S. Norfolk St. (Fish Market) 26 26 234
Hillsdale Terrace 6 6 62
200/210 S. Fremont St. 2 2 12
Peninsula Heights 29 29 261
222 S Fremont St. 4 4 36
477 E. Hillsdale Blvd. (Hillsdale Inn) 23 23 207
222 E. 4th Ave. (Draeger’s Market) 10 10 0
401 Concar Dr. (Hayward Park Station Parking Lot) 28 16 12 163 616 S. B. St. (Nazareth Vista) 5 5 43
477 9th Ave. 12 12 108
1919 O’Farrell St. 4 4 45
668 E. 3rd Ave. 7 7 52
1218 Monte Diablo 12 4 8 63
Accessory Dwelling Units 374 22 132 220 66
Future Private Development TBD** 252 152 60 40 1,670
328 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element 131 April 2024
Chapter 4 Quantified Objectives
Table 14: Quantified Objectives Alignment with San Mateo’s RHNA Income Quantified Objective Eight-Year RHNA Figure % of RHNA to be Produced ELI/VLI 750 1,777 42%
LI 745 1,023 73%
MOD 309 1,175 26%
Market 4,846 3,040 159%
TOTAL 6,650 7,015 95%
*Future Affordable TBD is a estimate of potential publicly funded housing production based on 8-year projections of the City’s various housing funds and an assumption that costs will average to $100k per unit. **Future Private Development TBD is a estimate of potential inclusionary below market rate units to be built in upcoming private developments using projections from the previous Housing Element.
Sub Total 1,481 127 593 487 274 4,450
Total Construction 5,931
Total Quantified Objectives Affordable
Total ELI VLI LI MOD Market
Total (Preserved Units plus New Construction) 1,804 127 623 745 309 4,846 Grand Total 6,650
Table 13: Quantified Objectives for Cycle 6 (2023 – 2031) (Continued) 329 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 132
Chapter 4 Quantified Objectives
This page is intentionally blank.
330 of 2271
SECTION 9
Prior Accomplishments Summary
331 of 2271
332 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 135
Chapter 4 Prior Accomplishments Summary
PRIOR ACCOMPLISHMENTS
SUMMARY
The update of the Housing Element provides an opportunity to reflect on past achievements and challenges.
The following summary highlights key accomplishments and challenges from the previous Housing Element’s 5th Cycle planning period (2015 to 2022), as well as identifies opportunities for where the City took lessons learned and applied them as future tasks for current Housing Element. A detailed evaluation of the prior housing element can be found in Appendix E - Review of Prior Housing Element.
The following achievements were made:
• Progress towards meeting affordable housing goals
• New policies to generate affordable housing funds
• Market rate housing goals were met
• The rate of ADU production have increased greatly
• Accessing new funding sources from non-local sources
• Increasing efficiency in the housing development process • Interventions to preserve affordable housing
• Addressing housing needs for special needs populations The following challenges were experienced:
• A divided vision for the future of the City
• High land and construction costs, including external factors • Outdated housing programs and policies
• Falling short of the quantified objectives
The following opportunities were identified:
• Rewrite the zoning code (refer to Policy H 1.7, H 1.12, H 1.13, H 1.14, H 1.15. H 1.16, H 1.18) • The General Plan update (refer to Policy H 1.20)
• New opportunities for Transit Oriented Development (refer to Policies H 1.7, H 1.8, H 1.9) • Creative solutions to site limitations (refer to Policy H 1.7, H 1.9, H 1.11, H 1.12, H 4.5) • More uses for technology to increase efficiency of housing programs (refer to Policy H 4.1, H 4.2) • New affordable housing opportunities identified (refer to Policy H 1.2, H 1.3, H 3.3) The Housing Element’s 5th Cycle (2015-2022) quantified objectives goal for total housing units, including market rate housing, was 3,164 units. Following the final year of this 5th Housing Cycle, a total of 2,579 units were completed from the projects identified in the quantified objectives. The following two tables summarize the quantified objectives from the last Housing Element Update and detail the City’s progress in achieving those objectives.
333 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 136
Chapter 4 Prior Accomplishments Summary
Table 15: Quantified Objectives, 2015 - 2022
Conservation/Preservation Total ELI VLI LI MOD
Lesley Park Towers 200 200
Humboldt House 9 9
Sub Total 209 0 209 0 0
New Construction Total ELI VLI LI MOD
2000 S. Delaware 60 60
Bay Meadows Affordable Site 60 20 40
Bay Meadows BMR 65 25 40
Station Park Green BMR 60 60
Other BMR 150 45 25 80
Other Affordable TBD 85 30 45 10
Sub Total 480 50 190 60 180
AFFORDABLE TOTAL 689 50 399 60 180
Private Sector/Market Rate 2,475
GRAND TOTAL 3,164
*Information represents final housing numbers for the 5th Housing Cycle (2015-2022), based on the City’s Annual Progress Report (APR) submitted April 1, 2023.
Table 16: Quantified Objective Actuals, 2015 – 2022*
Conservation/Preservation Total ELI VLI LI MOD
Lesley Park Towers 200 200
Humboldt House 9 9
1110 Cypress 7 7
Sub Total 216 0 209 7 0
New Construction Total ELI VLI LI MOD
2000 S. Delaware 60 60
Bay Meadows Affordable Site 67 14 36 17
Bay Meadows BMR 54 31 23
Station Park Green BMR 60 60
Other BMR 123 82 29 12
Other Affordable (Kiku Crossing) 223 43 45 135
Sub Total 581 57 223 212 95
AFFORDABLE TOTAL 803 57 432 219 95
Private Sector/Market Rate 1,776
GRAND TOTAL 2,579
334 of 2271
San Mateo Housing Element April 2024 137
Housing Element of the General Plan 2023-2031
335 of 2271
StriveSanMateo.org
336 of 2271
APPENDIX A
NEEDS ANALYSIS
337 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-2
APPENDIX A | NEEDS ANALYSIS
0.1 Table of Content
0.1 Table of Content .................................................................................................................................................... 2
0.2 List of Figures......................................................................................................................................................... 2
0.3 List of Tables.......................................................................................................................................................... 4
0.4 List of Attachments................................................................................................................................................ 4 1 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................................5 2 Summary of Key Facts.............................................................................................................................................6 3 Looking to the Future: Regional Housing Needs......................................................................................................9
3.1 Regional Housing Needs Determination................................................................................................................ 9
3.2 Regional Housing Needs Allocation ..................................................................................................................... 10 4 Population, Employment and Household Characteristics......................................................................................12
4.1 Population ........................................................................................................................................................... 12
4.2 Age....................................................................................................................................................................... 13
4.3 Race and Ethnicity ............................................................................................................................................... 15
4.4 Employment Trends............................................................................................................................................. 16
4.4.1 Balance of Jobs and Workers ...................................................................................................................... 16
4.4.2 Sector Composition..................................................................................................................................... 20
4.4.3 Unemployment ........................................................................................................................................... 21
4.5 2018-2028 Occupation Projections...................................................................................................................... 22
4.6 Extremely Low-Income Households..................................................................................................................... 23
4.7 Tenure.................................................................................................................................................................. 30
4.8 Displacement....................................................................................................................................................... 33 5 Housing Stock Characteristics...............................................................................................................................35
5.1 Housing Types, Year Built, Vacancy, and Permits................................................................................................ 35
5.2 Assisted Housing Developments At-Risk of Conversion ....................................................................................... 38
5.3 Substandard Housing........................................................................................................................................... 39
5.4 Home and Rent Values......................................................................................................................................... 41
5.5 Housing Affordability........................................................................................................................................... 44
5.5 Overpayment and Overcrowding......................................................................................................................... 46 6 Special Housing Needs..........................................................................................................................................56
6.1 Large Households ................................................................................................................................................ 56
6.2 Female-Headed Households................................................................................................................................ 58
6.3 Seniors ................................................................................................................................................................. 60
6.4 People with Disabilities........................................................................................................................................ 63
6.5 Homelessness ...................................................................................................................................................... 70
6.6 Farmworkers........................................................................................................................................................ 78
6.7 Non-English Speakers .......................................................................................................................................... 81
0.2 List of Figures
Figure 1: Population Growth Trends...........................................................................................................13 Figure 2: Population by Age, 2000-2019.....................................................................................................14 338 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-3
Figure 3: Senior and Youth Population by Race..........................................................................................14 Figure 4: Population by Race, 2000-2019 ...................................................................................................15 Figure 5: Jobs in a Jurisdiction ....................................................................................................................16 Figure 6: Workers by Earnings, by Jurisdiction as Place of Work and Place of Residence .........................17 Figure 7: Jobs-Worker Ratios, By Wage Group...........................................................................................18 Figure 8: Jobs-Household Ratio ..................................................................................................................19 Figure 9: Resident Employment by Industry...............................................................................................20 Figure 10: Resident Employment by Occupation .......................................................................................21 Figure 11: Unemployment Rate..................................................................................................................22 Figure 12: Households by Household Income Level ...................................................................................24 Figure 13: Household Income Level by Tenure...........................................................................................28 Figure 14: Poverty Status by Race...............................................................................................................29 Figure 15: Housing Tenure..........................................................................................................................30 Figure 16: Housing Tenure by Race of Householder...................................................................................31 Figure 17: Housing Tenure by Age ..............................................................................................................32 Figure 18: Housing Tenure by Year Moved to Current Residence..............................................................32 Figure 19: Housing Tenure by Housing Type ..............................................................................................33 Figure 20: Households by Displacement Risk and Tenure..........................................................................34 Figure 21: Housing Type Trends..................................................................................................................35 Figure 22: Housing Units by Year Structure Built........................................................................................36 Figure 23: Vacant Units by Type .................................................................................................................37 Figure 24: Substandard Housing Issues ......................................................................................................39 Figure 25: Home Values of Owner-Occupied Units....................................................................................41 Figure 26: Zillow Home Value Index (ZHVI) ................................................................................................42 Figure 27: Contract Rents for Renter-Occupied Units................................................................................43 Figure 28: Median Contract Rent................................................................................................................44 Figure 29: Cost Burden by Tenure ..............................................................................................................47 Figure 30: Cost Burden by Income Level.....................................................................................................48 Figure 31: Cost Burden by Race ..................................................................................................................50 Figure 32: Cost Burden by Household Size .................................................................................................51 Figure 33: Cost-Burdened Senior Households by Income Level .................................................................52 Figure 34: Overcrowding by Tenure and Severity ......................................................................................53 Figure 35: Overcrowding by Income Level and Severity.............................................................................54 Figure 36: Overcrowding by Race ...............................................................................................................55 Figure 37: Household Size by Tenure..........................................................................................................57 Figure 38: Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms....................................................................................58 Figure 39: Household Type .........................................................................................................................59 Figure 40: Female-Headed Households by Poverty Status.........................................................................60 Figure 41: Senior Households by Income and Tenure ................................................................................61 Figure 42: Disability by Type .......................................................................................................................64 Figure 43: Homelessness by Household Type and Shelter Status, San Mateo County ..............................71 339 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-4
Figure 44: Racial Group Share of General and Homeless Populations, San Mateo County .......................72 Figure 45: Latinx Share of General and Homeless Populations, San Mateo County ..................................73 Figure 46: Characteristics for the Population Experiencing Homelessness, San Mateo County................74 Figure 47: Farm Operations and Farm Labor by County, San Mateo County.............................................79 Figure 48: Population with Limited English Proficiency..............................................................................81
0.3 List of Tables
Table 1: State Income Limits for San Mateo County, 2023 ..........................................................................9 Table 2: Final Regional Housing Needs Allocations ....................................................................................10 Table 3: Population Growth Trends............................................................................................................12 Table 4: Occupations with the Most Job Openings, 2018-2028 .................................................................22 Table 5: Household Distribution by Race/Ethnicity and Income ................................................................25 Table 6: Housing Permitting........................................................................................................................37 Table 7: Assisted Units at Risk of Conversion .............................................................................................38 Table 8: Age of Housing Stock and Estimated Rehabilitation Needs..........................................................40 Table 9: Housing Opportunity Index, First Quarter 2021 ...........................................................................45 Table 10: Housing Affordability by Zip Code...............................................................................................45 Table 11: Affordable Rents for Two- and Three-Person Households.........................................................46 Table 12: Quantified Cost Burden of Low-Income Households by Tenure.................................................49 Table 13: Population with Developmental Disabilities by Age ...................................................................66 Table 14: Population with Developmental Disabilities by Residence.........................................................67 Table 15: Students in Local Public Schools Experiencing Homelessness....................................................75 Table 16: Migrant Worker Student Population ..........................................................................................78
0.4 List of Attachments
▪ Countywide Housing Needs
▪ Inventory of Assisted Units
340 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-5
1 INTRODUCTION
The Bay Area continues to see growth in both population and jobs, which means more housing of various types and sizes is needed to ensure that residents across all income levels, ages, and abilities have a place to call home. While the number of people drawn to the region over the past 30 years has steadily increased, housing production has stalled, contributing to the housing shortage that communities are experiencing today. In many cities, this has resulted in residents being priced out, increased traffic congestion caused by longer commutes, and fewer people across income categories being able to purchase homes or meet surging rents.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element Update provides a roadmap for how to meet our growth and housing challenges. Required by the State, the Housing Element identifies what the existing housing conditions and community needs are, reiterates goals, and creates a plan for more housing. The Housing Element is an integral part of the General Plan, which guides the policies of San Mateo. 341 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-6
2 SUMMARY OF KEY FACTS
• Population – Generally, the population of the Bay Area continues to grow because of natural growth and because the strong economy draws new residents to the region. The population of San Mateo increased by 11.5% from 2000 to 2020, which is below the growth rate of the Bay Area. • Age – In 2019, San Mateo’s youth population under the age of 18 was 21,827 and senior population 65 and older was 16,093. These age groups represent 20.9% and 15.4%, respectively, of San Mateo’s population.
• Race/Ethnicity – In 2020, 40.9% of San Mateo’s population was White while 1.9% was African American, 26.2% was Asian, and 25.1% was Latinx. People of color in San Mateo comprise a proportion below the overall proportion in the Bay Area as a whole.0F0F 1 • Employment – San Mateo residents most commonly work in the Financial & Professional Services industry. From January 2010 to January 2021, the unemployment rate in San Mateo decreased by
3.6 percentage points. Since 2010, the number of jobs located in the jurisdiction increased by 16,810 (42.7%). Additionally, the jobs-household ratio in San Mateo has increased from 1.17 in 2002 to 1.45 jobs per household in 2018.
• Number of Homes – The number of new homes built in the Bay Area has not kept pace with the demand, resulting in longer commutes, increasing prices, and exacerbating issues of displacement and homelessness. The number of homes in San Mateo increased, 3.6% from 2010 to 2020, which is below the growth rate for San Mateo County and below the growth rate of the region’s housing stock during this time period.
• Home Prices – A diversity of homes at all income levels creates opportunities for all San Mateo residents to live and thrive in the community.
– Ownership The largest proportion of homes had a value in the range of $1M-$1.5M in 2019. Home prices increased by 115.6% from 2010 to 2020. – Rental Prices – The typical contract rent for an apartment in San Mateo was $2,380 in 2019. Rental prices increased by 74.2% from 2009 to 2019. To rent a typical apartment without cost burden, a household would need to make $95,240 per year.1F1F 2 1 The Census Bureau’s American Community Survey accounts for ethnic origin separate from racial identity. The numbers reported here use an accounting of both such that the racial categories are shown exclusive of Latinx status, to allow for an accounting of the Latinx population regardless of racial identity. The term Hispanic has historically been used to describe people from numerous Central American, South American, and Caribbean countries. In recent years, the term Latino or Latinx has become preferred. This report generally uses Latinx, but occasionally when discussing US Census data, we use Hispanic or NonHispanic, to clearly link to the data source. 2 Note that contract rents may differ significantly from, and often being lower than, current listing prices. 342 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-7
• Housing Type – It is important to have a variety of housing types to meet the needs of a community today and in the future. In 2020, 44.3% of homes in San Mateo were single family detached, 9.9% were single family attached, 6.3% were small multifamily (2-4 units), and 39.4% were medium or large multifamily (5+ units). Between 2010 and 2020, the number of multi-family units increased more than single-family units. Generally, in San Mateo, the share of the housing stock that is detached single family homes is below that of other jurisdictions in the region. • Cost Burden – The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development considers housing to be affordable for a household if the household spends less than 30% of its income on housing costs.
A household is considered “cost-burdened” if it spends more than 30% of its monthly income on housing costs, while those who spend more than 50% of their income on housing costs are considered “severely cost-burdened.” In San Mateo, 20.8% of households spend 30%-50% of their income on housing, while 16.8% of households are severely cost burden and use the majority of their income for housing.
• Displacement/Gentrification – According to research from The University of California, Berkeley, no households in San Mateo live in neighborhoods that are susceptible to or experiencing displacement, and none currently live in areas at risk of or undergoing gentrification. 63.4% of households in San Mateo live in neighborhoods where low-income households are likely excluded due to prohibitive housing costs. There are various ways to address displacement including ensuring new housing at all income levels is built.
• Neighborhood – 56.4% of residents in San Mateo live in neighborhoods identified as “Highest Resource” or “High Resource” areas by State-commissioned research, while 0.0% of residents live in areas identified by this research as “Low Resource” or “High Segregation and Poverty” areas.
These neighborhood designations are based on a range of indicators covering areas such as education, poverty, proximity to jobs and economic opportunities, low pollution levels, and other factors.2F2F
3 • Special Housing Needs – Some population groups may have special housing needs that require specific program responses, and these groups may experience barriers to accessing stable housing due to their specific housing circumstances. In San Mateo, 9.1% of residents have a disability of any kind and may require accessible housing. Additionally, 9.0% of San Mateo households are larger households with five or more people, who likely need larger housing units with three bedrooms or more. 9.1% of households are female-headed families, which are often at greater risk of housing insecurity.
3 For more information on the “opportunity area” categories developed by Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, see this website: www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity.asp. The degree to which different jurisdictions and neighborhoods have access to opportunity will likely need to be analyzed as part of new Housing Element requirements related to affirmatively furthering fair housing. ABAG/MTC will be providing jurisdictions with technical assistance on this topic this summer, following the release of additional guidance from HCD. 343 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-8
Note on Data
Many of the tables in this report are sourced from data from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey or U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, both of which are samples and as such, are subject to sampling variability. This means that data is an estimate, and that other estimates could be possible if another set of respondents had been reached. We use the five-year release to get a larger data pool to minimize this “margin of error” but particularly for the smaller cities, the data will be based on fewer responses, and the information should be interpreted accordingly.
Additionally, there may be instances where there is no data available for a jurisdiction for particular data point, or where a value is 0 and the automatically generated text cannot perform a calculation. In these cases, the automatically generated text is “NODATA.” Staff should reword these sentences before using them in the context of the Housing Element or other documents.
Note on Figures
Any figure that does not specify geography in the figure name represents data for San Mateo.
344 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-9
3 LOOKING TO THE FUTURE: REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS
3.1 Regional Housing Needs Determination
The Plan Bay Area 20503F3F
4 Final Blueprint forecasts that the nine-county Bay Area will add 1.4 million new households between 2015 and 2050. For the eight-year time frame covered by this Housing Element Update, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has identified the region’s housing need as 441,176 units. The total number of housing units assigned by HCD is separated into four income categories that cover housing types for all income levels, from very low-income households to market rate housing.
Every year, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, in conjunction with the State of California, establishes income categories based on the median income in each county. Based on new requirements for the completion of the Housing Element, jurisdictions must now report on the following categories of income:
• Extremely Low Income: 0-30% of Area Median Income, or AMI • Very Low Income: 30-50% AMI
• Low Income: 50-80% AMI
• Moderate Income: 80-120% AMI
• Above Moderate Income: 120%+ AMI
Table 1 below illustrates the income categories for San Mateo County in 2023. The median income for a family of four is $175,000.
Table 1: State Income Limits for San Mateo County, 2023 Income Group
Number of Persons in Household:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
San
Mateo
County
Area
Median
Income:
$175,000
Acutely
Low $18,400 $21,000 $23,650 $26,250 $28,350 $30,450 $32,550 $34,650 Extremely
Low $39,150 $44,750 $50,350 $5,900 $60,400 $64,850 $69,350 $73,800 Very Low $65,250 $74,600 $83,900 $93,200 $100,700 $108,150 $115,60 $123,050 Low $104,400 $119,300 $134,200 $149,100 $161,0500 $173,000 $184,900 $196,850 Median $122,500 $140,000 $157,500 175,000 $189,000 $203,000 $217,000 $231,000 Moderate $147,000 $168,000 $189,000 $210,000 $226,800 $243,600 $260,400 $277,200 Source: State of California Department of Housing and Community Development, June 6, 2023: www.hcd.ca.gov/grantsfunding/income-limits/state-and-federal-income-limits.shtml 4 Plan Bay Area 2050 is a long-range plan charting the course for the future of the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area. It covers four key issues: the economy, the environment, housing, and transportation. 345 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-10
The Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND) is based on population projections produced by the California Department of Finance as well as adjustments that incorporate the region’s existing housing need. The adjustments result from recent legislation requiring HCD to apply additional adjustment factors to the baseline growth projection from California Department of Finance, in order for the regions to get closer to healthy housing markets. To this end, adjustments focus on the region’s vacancy rate, level of overcrowding and the share of cost burdened households, and seek to bring the region more in line with comparable ones.4F4F
5 These new laws governing the methodology for how HCD calculates the RHND resulted in a significantly higher number of housing units for which the Bay Area must plan compared to previous RHNA cycles.
3.2 Regional Housing Needs Allocation
A starting point for the Housing Element Update process for every California jurisdiction is the Regional Housing Needs Allocation or RHNA – the share of the RHND assigned to each jurisdiction by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). State Housing Element Law requires ABAG to develop a methodology that calculates the number of housing units assigned to each city and county and distributes each jurisdiction’s housing unit allocation among four affordability levels. For this RHNA cycle, the RHND increased by 135%, from 187,990 to 441,776. Almost all jurisdictions in the Bay Area are likely to receive a larger RHNA this cycle compared to the last cycle, primarily due to changes in State law that led to a considerably higher RHND compared to previous cycles. For more information on the RHNA process this cycle, see ABAG’s website: www.abag.ca.gov/our-work/housing/rhna-regional-housing-needs-allocation On January 12, 2022, HCD approved the Sixth Cycle RHNA plans. For San Mateo, the final RHNA to be planned for this cycle is 7,015 units, a slated increase from the last cycle. The allocation that San Mateo would receive from the Final RHNA Methodology is broken down by income category as follows:
Table 2: Final Regional Housing Needs Allocations
Income Group San Mateo
City Units
San Mateo
County Units
Bay Area
Units
San Mateo
City Percent
San Mateo
County Percent
Bay Area
Percent
Very Low
Income 1,777 12,196 114,442 25.3% 25.6% 25.9%
Low Income 1,023 7,023 65,892 14.6% 14.7% 14.9%
Moderate
Income 1,175 7,937 72,712 16.7% 16.6% 16.5%
Above
Moderate
Income
3,040 20,531 188,130 43.3% 43.1% 42.6%
Total 7,015 47,687 441,176 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments Final Regional Housing Needs Allocations Plan, adopted on December 16, 2021 and approved by California Housing and Community Development on January 12, 2022. 5 For more information on HCD’s RHND calculation for the Bay Area, see this letter sent to ABAG from HCD on June 9, 2020:
www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing-element/docs/abagrhna-final060920(r).pdf 346 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-11
347 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-12
4 POPULATION, EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS
4.1 Population
The Bay Area is the fifth-largest metropolitan area in the nation and has seen a steady increase in population since 1990, except for a dip during the Great Recession. Many cities in the region have experienced significant growth in jobs and population. While these trends have led to a corresponding increase in demand for housing across the region, the regional production of housing has largely not kept pace with job and population growth. Since 2000, San Mateo’s population has increased by 11.5%; this rate is below that of the region as a whole, at 14.8%. In San Mateo, roughly 14.4% of its population moved during the past year, which is 1.0 percentage point greater than the regional rate of 13.4%.
In 2020, the population of San Mateo was estimated to be 103,087 (see Table 3). From 1990 to 2000, the population increased by 8.0%, while it increased by 5.1% during the first decade of the 2000s. In the most recent decade, the population increased by 6.0%. The population of San Mateo makes up 13.3% of San Mateo County.5F5F
6 Table 3: Population Growth Trends
Geography 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
San Mateo City 85,619 90,733 92,482 93,883 97,207 101,830 103,087 San Mateo County 649,623 685,354 707,163 719,844 718,451 761,748 773,244 Bay Area 6,020,147 6,381,961 6,784,348 7,073,912 7,150,739 7,595,694 7,790,537 Universe: Total population
Source: California Department of Finance, E-5 series
For more years of data, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-01. 6 To compare the rate of growth across various geographic scales, Figure 1 shows population for the jurisdiction, county, and region indexed to the population in the year 1990. This means that the data points represent the population growth (i.e. percent change) in each of these geographies relative to their populations in 1990. 348 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-13
Figure 1: Population Growth Trends
Source: California Department of Finance, E-5 series Note: The data shown on the graph represents population for the jurisdiction, county, and region indexed to the population in the first year shown. The data points represent the relative population growth in each of these geographies relative to their populations in that year.
For some jurisdictions, a break may appear at the end of each decade (1999, 2009) as estimates are compared to census counts.
DOF uses the decennial census to benchmark subsequent population estimates.
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-01.
4.2 Age
The distribution of age groups in a city shapes what types of housing the community may need in the near future. An increase in the older population may mean there is a developing need for more senior housing options, while higher numbers of children and young families can point to the need for more family housing options and related services. There has also been a move by many to age-in-place or downsize to stay within their communities, which can mean more multifamily and accessible units are also needed.
In San Mateo, the median age in 2000 was 37.4; by 2019, this figure had increased, landing at around 38 years. More specifically, the population of those under 14 has increased since 2010, while the 65-andover population has increased (see Figure 2).
Looking at the senior and youth population by race can add an additional layer of understanding, as families and seniors of color are even more likely to experience challenges finding affordable housing.
People of color6F6F
7 make up 33.5% of seniors and 53.6% of youth under 18 (see Figure 3). 7 Here, we count all non-white racial groups
349 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-14
Figure 2: Population by Age, 2000-2019
Universe: Total population
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 SF1, Table P12; U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 SF1, Table P12; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-04.
Figure 3: Senior and Youth Population by Race
Universe: Total population
Notes: In the sources for this table, the Census Bureau does not disaggregate racial groups by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity, and an overlapping category of Hispanic / non-Hispanic groups has not been shown to avoid double counting in the stacked bar chart.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001(A-G) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table SEN-02. 350 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-15
4.3 Race and Ethnicity
Understanding the racial makeup of a city and region is important for designing and implementing effective housing policies and programs. These patterns are shaped by both market factors and government actions, such as exclusionary zoning, discriminatory lending practices and displacement that has occurred over time and continues to impact communities of color today7F7F 8 . Since 2000, the percentage
of residents in San Mateo identifying as White has decreased – and by the same token the percentage of residents of all other races and ethnicities has increased – by 17.6 percentage points, with the 2019 population standing at 42,623 (see Figure 4). In absolute terms, the Asian / API, Non-Hispanic population increased the most while the White, Non-Hispanic population decreased the most.
Figure 4: Population by Race, 2000-2019
Universe: Total population
Notes: Data for 2019 represents 2015-2019 ACS estimates. The Census Bureau defines Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity separate from racial categories. For the purposes of this graph, the “Hispanic or Latinx” racial/ethnic group represents those who identify as having Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity and may also be members of any racial group. All other racial categories on this graph represent those who identify with that racial category and do not identify with Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B03002
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-02. 8 See, for example, Rothstein, R. (2017). The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America.
New York, NY & London, UK: Liveright Publishing.
351 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-16
4.4 Employment Trends
4.4.1 Balance of Jobs and Workers
A city houses employed residents who either work in the community where they live or work elsewhere in the region. Conversely, a city may have job sites that employ residents from the same city, but more often employ workers commuting from outside of it. Smaller cities typically will have more employed residents than jobs there and export workers, while larger cities tend to have a surplus of jobs and import workers. To some extent the regional transportation system is set up for this flow of workers to the region’s core job centers. At the same time, as the housing affordability crisis has illustrated, local imbalances may be severe, where local jobs and worker populations are out of sync at a sub-regional scale.
One measure of this is the relationship between workers and jobs. A city with a surplus of workers “exports” workers to other parts of the region, while a city with a surplus of jobs must conversely “import” them. Between 2002 and 2018, the number of jobs in San Mateo increased by 27.1% (see Figure 5).
Figure 5: Jobs in a Jurisdiction
Universe: Jobs from unemployment insurance-covered employment (private, state and local government) plus United States Office of Personnel Management-sourced Federal employment Notes: The data is tabulated by place of work, regardless of where a worker lives. The source data is provided at the census block level. These are crosswalked to jurisdictions and summarized.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, Workplace Area Characteristics (WAC) files, 2002-2018 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-11.
The largest-growing sectors during this period included Professional and Managerial Services (93%), Construction (62%) and Health and Educational Services (49%). In contrast, Agriculture and Natural Resources (-96%), Information (-36%) and Retail (15%) all saw substantial losses in the same time period. 352 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-17
There are 56,657 employed residents, and 57,196 jobs8F8F 9 in San Mateo -the ratio of jobs to resident workers
is 1.01; San Mateo is a net importer of workers.
Figure 6 shows the balance when comparing jobs to workers, broken down by different wage groups, offering additional insight into local dynamics. A community may offer employment for relatively lowincome workers but have relatively few housing options for those workers - or conversely, it may house residents who are low wage workers but offer few employment opportunities for them. Such relationships may cast extra light on potentially pent-up demand for housing in particular price categories. A relative surplus of jobs relative to residents in a given wage category suggests the need to import those workers, while conversely, surpluses of workers in a wage group relative to jobs means the community will export those workers to other jurisdictions. Such flows are not inherently bad, though over time, sub-regional imbalances may appear. San Mateo has more low-wage jobs than low-wage residents (where low-wage refers to jobs paying less than $25,000). At the other end of the wage spectrum, the City has more highwage residents than high-wage jobs (where high-wage refers to jobs paying more than $75,000)9F9F 10 (see
Figure 6).
Figure 6: Workers by Earnings, by Jurisdiction as Place of Work and Place of Residence Universe: Workers 16 years and over with earnings
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data 2015-2019, B08119, B08519 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-10. 9 Employed residents in a jurisdiction is counted by place of residence (they may work elsewhere) while jobs in a jurisdiction are counted by place of work (they may live elsewhere). The jobs may differ from those reported in Figure 5 as the source for the time series is from administrative data, while the cross-sectional data is from a survey. 10 The source table is top-coded at $75,000, precluding more fine grained analysis at the higher end of the wage spectrum. 353 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-18
Figure 7 shows the balance of a jurisdiction’s resident workers to the jobs located there for different wage groups as a ratio instead - a value of 1 means that a city has the same number of jobs in a wage group as it has resident workers - in principle, a balance. Values above 1 indicate a jurisdiction will need to import workers for jobs in a given wage group. At the regional scale, this ratio is 1.04 jobs for each worker, implying a modest import of workers from outside the region (see Figure 7).
Figure 7: Jobs-Worker Ratios, By Wage Group
Universe: Jobs in a jurisdiction from unemployment insurance-covered employment (private, state and local government) plus United States Office of Personnel Management-sourced Federal employment Notes: The ratio compares job counts by wage group from two tabulations of LEHD data: Counts by place of work relative to counts by place of residence. See text for details.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, Workplace Area Characteristics (WAC) files (Jobs); Residence Area Characteristics (RAC) files (Employed Residents), 2010-2018 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-14.
Such balances between jobs and workers may directly influence the housing demand in a community.
New jobs may draw new residents, and when there is high demand for housing relative to supply, many workers may be unable to afford to live where they work, particularly where job growth has been in relatively lower wage jobs. This dynamic not only means many workers will need to prepare for long commutes and time spent on the road, but in the aggregate it contributes to traffic congestion and time lost for all road users.
If there are more jobs than employed residents, it means a city is relatively jobs-rich, typically also with a high jobs to household ratio. Thus bringing housing into the measure, the jobs-household ratio in San Mateo has increased from 1.17 in 2002, to 1.45 jobs per household in 2018 (see Figure 8). 354 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-19
Figure 8: Jobs-Household Ratio
Universe: Jobs in a jurisdiction from unemployment insurance-covered employment (private, state and local government) plus United States Office of Personnel Management-sourced Federal employment; households in a jurisdiction Notes: The data is tabulated by place of work, regardless of where a worker lives. The source data is provided at the census block level. These are crosswalked to jurisdictions and summarized. The ratio compares place of work wage and salary jobs with households, or occupied housing units. A similar measure is the ratio of jobs to housing units. However, this jobs-household ratio serves to compare the number of jobs in a jurisdiction to the number of housing units that are actually occupied. The difference between a jurisdiction’s jobs-housing ratio and jobs-household ratio will be most pronounced in jurisdictions with high vacancy rates, a high rate of units used for seasonal use, or a high rate of units used as short-term rentals.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, Workplace Area Characteristics (WAC) files (Jobs), 2002-2018; California Department of Finance, E-5 (Households) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-13. 355 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-20
4.4.2 Sector Composition
In terms of sectoral composition, the largest industry in which San Mateo residents work is Financial & Professional Services, and the largest sector in which San Mateo residents work is Health & Educational Services (see Figure 9). For the Bay Area as a whole, the Health & Educational Services industry employs the most workers.
Figure 9: Resident Employment by Industry
Universe: Civilian employed population age 16 years and over Notes: The data displayed shows the industries in which jurisdiction residents work, regardless of the location where those residents are employed (whether within the jurisdiction or not). Categories are derived from the following source tables:
Agriculture & Natural Resources: C24030_003E, C24030_030E; Construction: C24030_006E, C24030_033E; Manufacturing, Wholesale & Transportation: C24030_007E, C24030_034E, C24030_008E, C24030_035E, C24030_010E, C24030_037E; Retail:
C24030_009E, C24030_036E; Information: C24030_013E, C24030_040E; Financial & Professional Services: C24030_014E, C24030_041E, C24030_017E, C24030_044E; Health & Educational Services: C24030_021E, C24030_024E, C24030_048E, C24030_051E; Other: C24030_027E, C24030_054E, C24030_028E, C24030_055E Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table C24030 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-06. 356 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-21
Looked at a different way, Management, Business, Science and Arts occupations comprise about 53% of all residents’ employment, which is roughly similar to San Mateo County and the Bay Area as a whole (see Figure 10).
Figure 10: Resident Employment by Occupation
Universe: Civilian employed population age 16 years and over Notes: The data displayed shows the occupations of jurisdiction residents, regardless of the location where those residents are employed (whether within the jurisdiction or not).
-Categories are derived from the following source tables: management, business, science, and arts occupations: C24010_003E, C24010_039E; service occupations: C24010_019E, C24010_055E; sales and office occupations: C24010_027E, C24010_063E; natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations: C24010_030E, C24010_066E; production, transportation, and material moving occupations: C24010_034E, C24010_070E
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table C24010
4.4.3 Unemployment
In San Mateo, there was a 3.6 percentage point decrease in the unemployment rate between January 2010 and January 2021. Jurisdictions through the region experienced a sharp rise in unemployment in 2020 due to impacts related to the COVID-19 pandemic, though with a general improvement and recovery in the later months of 2020. As of May, 2021, the State Employment Development Department estimates the City of San Mateo’s unemployment rate at 3.9%. In contrast, the rate for San Mateo County as a whole is estimated at 4.6%.
53% 50% 50%
6% 6% 7%
7% 8% 9%
18% 20% 19%
15% 17% 16%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
San Mateo San Mateo County Bay Area
Share of Employed Residents
Service Occupations
Sales And Office Occupations
Production, Transportation, And
Material Moving Occupations
Natural Resources, Construction, And
Maintenance Occupations
Management, Business, Science, And
Arts Occupations
357 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-22
Figure 11: Unemployment Rate
Universe: Civilian noninstitutional population ages 16 and older Notes: Unemployment rates for the jurisdiction level is derived from larger-geography estimates. This method assumes that the rates of change in employment and unemployment are exactly the same in each sub-county area as at the county level. If this assumption is not true for a specific sub-county area, then the estimates for that area may not be representative of the current economic conditions. Since this assumption is untested, caution should be employed when using these data. Only not seasonallyadjusted labor force (unemployment rates) data are developed for cities and CDPs.
Source: California Employment Development Department, Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS), Sub-county areas monthly updates, 2010-2021.
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-15.
4.5 2018-2028 Occupation Projections
The State Employment Development Department has published job projections for the period between 2018 and 2028. Although the data include both San Mateo and San Francisco counties, some assumptions can be made about the impact of the number of jobs and the corresponding wages in the region. Many of the occupations with the most job openings will pay the employee less than $35,000 annually. Based on 2021 State income limits, such individuals are considered extremely low-income.
Table 4: Occupations with the Most Job Openings, 2018-2028 Occupational Title
Total Job
Openings
Median
Hourly Wage
Median
Annual Wage
Personal Care Aides 62,650 $12.16 $25,283
Combined Food Prep and Servers, incl. Fast Food 52,090 $13.71 $28,524 Wait Staff 48,580 $14.73 $30,632
Software Developers, Applications 38,710 $67.39 $140,175 Cashiers 37,140 $13.54 $28,161
Janitors and Cleaners, Except Maids and Housekeeping Cleaners 28,060 $14.81 $30,807 Cooks, Restaurant 26,840 $16.35 $34,016
Retail Salespersons 25,280 $14.28 $29,700
358 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-23
Occupational Title
Total Job
Openings
Median
Hourly Wage
Median
Annual Wage
Market Research Analysis/Marketing Specialists 24,060 $42.60 $88,609 Taxi Drivers and Chauffeurs 21,540 $18.57 $38,644
Notes: Total job openings are the sum of numeric change, exits, and transfers projected between 2018 and 2028. Wages are from the 2020 first quarter and do not include self-employed or unpaid family workers. If an estimate could not be provided for wages, they are excluded from this table.
Excludes "All Other" categories. These are residual codes that do not represent a detailed occupation. Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics' Current Employment Statistics (CES) March 2019 benchmark and Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) industry employment. https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/data/employment-projections.html
4.6 Extremely Low-Income Households
Despite the economic and job growth experienced throughout the region since 1990, the income gap has continued to widen. California is one of the most economically unequal states in the nation, and the Bay Area has the highest income inequality between high- and low-income households in the State10F10F 11 .
In San Mateo, 49.3% of households make more than 100% of the Area Median Income (AMI)1F1F 12, compared
to 12.7% making less than 30% of AMI, which is considered extremely low-income (see Figure 12).
Regionally, more than half of all households make more than 100% AMI, while 15% make less than 30% AMI. In San Mateo County, 30% AMI is the equivalent to the annual income of $44,000 for a family of four.
Many households with multiple wage earners – including food service workers, full-time students, teachers, farmworkers, and healthcare professionals – can fall into lower AMI categories due to relatively stagnant wages in many industries.
State law requires jurisdictions to estimate the number of extremely low-income households – those earning less than 30% of median income. According to the data shown below (Figure 12), 9,468 of San Mateo’s households are 0-50% AMI while 4,895 are extremely low-income. Therefore, extremely lowincome households represent 51.7% of households who are 0-50% AMI, as 4,895 divided by 9,468 is
51.7%. This option aligns with HCD’s guidance to use U.S. Census data to calculate the percentage of very low-income RHNA that qualifies for extremely low-income households, as the information in Figure 12 represents a tabulation of Census Bureau Data.
11 Bohn, S.et al. 2020. Income Inequality and Economic Opportunity in California. Public Policy Institute of California. 12 Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located. Households making between 80 and 120 percent of the AMI are moderate-income, those making 50 to 80 percent are low-income, those making 30 to 50 percent are very low-income, and those making less than 30 percent are extremely lowincome. This is then adjusted for household size. 359 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-24
Figure 12: Households by Household Income Level
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located. The data that is reported for the Bay Area is not based on a regional AMI but instead refers to the regional total of households in an income group relative to the AMI for the county where that household is located. Local jurisdictions are required to provide an estimate for their projected extremely low-income households (0-30% AMI) in their Housing Elements. HCD’s official Housing Element guidance notes that jurisdictions can use their RHNA for very low-income households (those making 0-50% AMI) to calculate their projected extremely low-income households. As Bay Area jurisdictions have not yet received their final RHNA numbers, this document does not contain the required data point of projected extremely low-income households. The report portion of the housing data needs packet contains more specific guidance for how local staff can calculate an estimate for projected extremely low-income households once jurisdictions receive their 6th cycle RHNA numbers.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table ELI-01. 360 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-25
Understanding households by income and race/ethnicity can shed light on the challenges faced by people of color in terms of access to housing that is affordable. Table 5 below illustrates the disparities between households that are White versus households in other racial/ethnic categories. Although 13% of households are extremely low-income Citywide, 22% of Hispanic/Latinx households are in this income category.12F12F
13 Further, Hispanic/Latinx and Black/African-American households are significantly underrepresented in the greater than 100% AMI category.
Table 5: Household Distribution by Race/Ethnicity and Income Racial / Ethnic Group 0%-30% of
AMI
31%-50% of
AMI
51%-80% of
AMI
81%-100%
of AMI
Greater than
100% of AMI
American Indian or Alaska
Native, Non-Hispanic 0% 23% 12% 0% 65%
Asian / API, Non-Hispanic 10% 10% 13% 11% 56%
Black or African American, NonHispanic 18% 29% 16% 13% 23% White, Non-Hispanic 11% 9% 14% 11% 55%
Other Race or Multiple Races,
Non-Hispanic 8% 12% 20% 10% 50%
Hispanic or Latinx 22% 21% 23% 9% 24%
Totals 13% 12% 16% 11% 49%
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.
-For the purposes of this graph, the “Hispanic or Latinx” racial/ethnic group represents those who identify as having Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity and may also be members of any racial group. All other racial categories on this graph represent those who identify with that racial category and do not identify with Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release. For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table ELI-02.
Extremely low-income households are considered households earning 30% or less than the area median income (AMI). Extremely low-income households are more likely to experience housing problems and cost burden. There are approximately 2,065 ELI owner-households, representing 9.8% of owners throughout the City, and 3,840 ELI renter-households, representing 21.9% of renters. A larger proportion of ELI renter households experience cost burden greater than 30% compared to ELI owner-households, 87.5% and
73.4%, respectively. However, as a group, renters in the extremely low income category are disproportionately represented in cost burden – ELI renters represent 41.7% of all renter households with a cost burden, while ELI owners represent 25.2% of all owners with a cost burden. Similarly, 69.1% of 13These figures are somewhat skewed because White households make up the vast majority of households in the City but are illustrative of differences.
361 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-26
renter households with a severe cost burden earn extremely low incomes, while that figure is just 47.0% for owner households.
Overall, 12.7% of households in San Mateo are ELI households. In comparison, 13.3% of households countywide are in the extremely low-income category. While White households make up the bulk of the households earning extremely low incomes, many households of color also earn extremely low incomes.
For example, Asian/Pacific Islander households make up 18.5% of extremely low-income households in San Mateo, while Hispanic/Latinx make up 30.5% (while only representing 17.4% of the total population).
Racial/ethnic, income, and housing problem demographics are further described in Appendix D, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, of this Housing Element.
Households in the southwest and northwest areas of the City of San Mateo appear to have the highest proportion of extremely low-income (ELI) renters with four or more severe housing problems (severe overcrowding, severe cost burden, incomplete kitchen or incomplete plumbing). In the census tract on the border of Belle Monte (southwest portion of the city), 80% of extremely low- to low-income renters report experiencing at least one of the four severe housing problems. The other two census tracts with concentrations of extremely low- to low-income renters experiencing severe housing problems are located in the northern part of the city, just south of Burlingame and Hillsborough. The ELI renters in these census tracts report experiencing any of the four severe housing problems at a rate of 73% and 51%, respectively.
Resources for ELI Households
The City continues to be committed to developing and preserving existing affordable housing and will continue to focus lifting residents out of poverty by providing a safe, attractive, and affordable place to live. While housing alone does not eliminate poverty, access to decent shelter must be provided before people can strive for self-sufficiency.
The City’s Housing Division takes the lead in improving quality of life in San Mateo, particularly neighborhoods with the highest needs and fewest resources. The Division offers a first-time buyer program, a below market rental program, and other affordable housing programs. By coordinating programs that help address code issues, preserve existing affordable housing, and improve the condition and accessibility of public infrastructure, the City aims to improve the quality of life in target neighborhoods.
Utilizing funds from the CDBG public services cap, the City’s Community Funding Program offers grants to local non-profit agencies that provide services to address the core needs of the community. These services also assist clients in developing greater self-sufficiency with the goal of breaking the cycle of poverty. This program allows the City the opportunity to coordinate with service agencies to address community needs in a more holistic manner.
In addition, the City undertakes activities funded by CDBG that mainly serve the North Central/North Shoreview neighborhoods, such as:
362 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-27
• Street and sidewalk reconstruction (about $500,000 a year for every year except FY 20-22) • Bike lane installation (for about $500,000 a year FY 20-22) • St James AME Zion Church (Youth Services for about $13,000 a year for FY 22-24) • Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center (Housing Conflict Mediation for about $115,000 a year for FY 14-20)
The Housing Choice Voucher Program, managed by the County, also serves very low and extremely lowincome families, senior households, and persons with disabilities. The City aims to provide additional resources for ELI households through programs outlined in this Housing Element Implementation Plan, Appendix G. This includes additional fair housing actions from the AFFH. While there are resources available for ELI households in San Mateo County, they remain a vulnerable group throughout the region, including in the City.
363 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-28
Throughout the region, there are disparities between the incomes of homeowners and renters. Typically, the number of low-income renters greatly outpaces the amount of housing available that is affordable for these households.
In San Mateo, the largest proportion of renters falls in the Greater than 100% of AMI income group, while the largest proportion of homeowners are found in the Greater than 100% of AMI group (see Figure 13). 3 Figure 13: Household Income Level by Tenure
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-21. 364 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-29
Currently, people of color are more likely to experience poverty and financial instability as a result of federal and local housing policies that have historically excluded them from the same opportunities extended to white residents.13F13F
14 These economic disparities also leave communities of color at higher risk for housing insecurity, displacement or homelessness. In San Mateo, Other Race or Multiple Races (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) residents experience the highest rates of poverty, followed by Black or African American (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) residents (see Figure 14).
Figure 14: Poverty Status by Race
Universe: Population for whom poverty status is determined Notes: The Census Bureau uses a federally defined poverty threshold that remains constant throughout the country and does not correspond to Area Median Income. For this table, the Census Bureau does not disaggregate racial groups by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity. However, data for the white racial group is also reported for white householders who are not Hispanic/Latinx. Since residents who identify as white and Hispanic/Latinx may have very different experiences within the housing market and the economy from those who identify as white and non-Hispanic/Latinx, data for multiple white sub-groups are reported here. The racial/ethnic groups reported in this table are not all mutually exclusive. Therefore, the data should not be summed as the sum exceeds the population for whom poverty status is determined for this jurisdiction. However, all groups labelled “Hispanic and Non-Hispanic” are mutually exclusive, and the sum of the data for these groups is equivalent to the population for whom poverty status is determined.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B17001(A-I) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table ELI-03. 14 Moore, E., Montojo, N. and Mauri, N., 2019. Roots, Race & Place: A History of Racially Exclusionary Housing the San Francisco Bay Area. Hass Institute.
365 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-30
4.7 Tenure
The number of residents who own their homes compared to those who rent their homes can help identify the level of housing insecurity – ability for individuals to stay in their homes – in a city and region.
Generally, renters may be displaced more quickly if prices increase. In San Mateo there are a total of 38,549 housing units, and fewer residents rent than own their homes: 45.6% versus 54.4% (see Figure 15).
By comparison, 39.8% of households in San Mateo County are renters, and 44% of Bay Area households rent their homes.
Figure 15: Housing Tenure
Universe: Occupied housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25003 Homeownership rates often vary considerably across race/ethnicity in the Bay Area and throughout the country. These disparities not only reflect differences in income and wealth but also stem from federal, state, and local policies that limited access to homeownership for communities of color while facilitating homebuying for white residents. While many of these policies, such as redlining, have been formally disbanded, the impacts of race-based policies are still evident across Bay Area communities.14F14F 15 In San
Mateo, 26.1% of Black households owned their homes; homeownership rates were 58.9% for Asian households, 31.0% for Latinx households, and 58.7% for White households. Notably, recent changes to State law require local jurisdictions to examine these dynamics and other fair housing issues when updating their Housing Elements.
15 See, for example, Rothstein, R. (2017). The color of law: a forgotten history of how our government segregated America.
New York, NY & London, UK: Liveright Publishing.
366 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-31
Figure 16: Housing Tenure by Race of Householder
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: For this table, the Census Bureau does not disaggregate racial groups by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity. However, data for the white racial group is also reported for white householders who are not Hispanic/Latinx. Since residents who identify as white and Hispanic/Latinx may have very different experiences within the housing market and the economy from those who identify as white and non-Hispanic/Latinx, data for multiple white sub-groups are reported here. The racial/ethnic groups reported in this table are not all mutually exclusive. Therefore, the data should not be summed as the sum exceeds the total number of occupied housing units for this jurisdiction. However, all groups labelled “Hispanic and Non-Hispanic” are mutually exclusive, and the sum of the data for these groups is equivalent to the total number of occupied housing units.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25003(A-I) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-20.
The age of residents who rent or own their home can also signal the housing challenges a community is experiencing. Younger households tend to rent and may struggle to buy a first home in the Bay Area due to high housing costs. At the same time, senior homeowners seeking to downsize may have limited options in an expensive housing market.
In San Mateo, 64.6% of households between the ages of 25 and 44 are renters, while 25.8% of households over the age of 65 are renters. (see Figure 17).
367 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-32
Figure 17: Housing Tenure by Age
Universe: Occupied housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25007 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-18.
Tenure information based on the year in which a household moved to further illustrates the differences between long-term residents, who tend to trend older, with newer residents. The following chart shows that 94% of households that moved in in 1989 or earlier are owner occupied, whereas only 22% of households that moved in in 2017 or later are owner occupied.
Figure 18: Housing Tenure by Year Moved to Current Residence Universe: Occupied housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25038 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-19. 94% 87%
62%
42%
28% 22%
6% 13%
38%
58%
72% 78%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Moved In
1989 Or
Earlier
Moved In
1990 To 1999
Moved In
2000 To 2009
Moved In
2010 To 2014
Moved In
2015 To 2016
Moved In
2017 Or Later
Percent of Households
Renter Occupied
Owner Occupied
368 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-33
In many cities, homeownership rates for households in single-family homes are substantially higher than the rates for households in multi-family housing. In San Mateo, 83.1% of households in detached singlefamily homes are homeowners, and 25.0% of households in multi-family housing are homeowners (see Figure 19).
Figure 19: Housing Tenure by Housing Type
Universe: Occupied housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25032 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-22.
4.8 Displacement
Because of increasing housing prices, displacement is a major concern in the Bay Area. Displacement has the most severe impacts on low- and moderate-income residents. When individuals or families are forced to leave their homes and communities, they also lose their support network.
The University of California, Berkeley has mapped all neighborhoods in the Bay Area, identifying their risk for gentrification. They find that in San Mateo, 0.0% of households live in neighborhoods that are susceptible to or experiencing displacement and 0.0% live in neighborhoods at risk of or undergoing gentrification.
369 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-34
Equally important, some neighborhoods in the Bay Area do not have housing appropriate for a broad section of the workforce. UC Berkeley estimates that 63.4% of households in San Mateo live in neighborhoods where low-income households are likely to be excluded due to prohibitive housing costs.15F15F 16 Figure 20: Households by Displacement Risk and Tenure Universe: Households
Notes: Displacement data is available at the census tract level. Staff aggregated tracts up to jurisdiction level using census 2010 population weights, assigning a tract to jurisdiction in proportion to block level population weights. Total household count may differ slightly from counts in other tables sourced from jurisdiction level sources. Categories are combined as follows for simplicity: At risk of or Experiencing Exclusion: At Risk of Becoming Exclusive; Becoming Exclusive; Stable/Advanced Exclusive At risk of or Experiencing Gentrification: At Risk of Gentrification; Early/Ongoing Gentrification; Advanced Gentrification Stable Moderate/Mixed Income: Stable Moderate/Mixed Income Susceptible to or Experiencing Displacement: Low-Income/Susceptible to Displacement; Ongoing Displacement Other: High Student Population; Unavailable or Unreliable Data Source: Urban Displacement Project for classification, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25003 for tenure. For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-25. 16 More information about this gentrification and displacement data is available at the Urban Displacement Project’s webpage: https://www.urbandisplacement.org/. Specifically, one can learn more about the different gentrification/displacement typologies shown in Figure 18 at this link: https://www.urbandisplacement.org/sites/default/files/typology_sheet_2018_0.png.
Additionally, one can view maps that show which typologies correspond to which parts of a jurisdiction here:
https://www.urbandisplacement.org/san-francisco/sf-bay-area-gentrification-and-displacement 370 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-35
5 HOUSING STOCK CHARACTERISTICS
5.1 Housing Types, Year Built, Vacancy, and Permits
In recent years, most housing produced in the region and across the State consisted of single-family homes and larger multi-unit buildings. However, some households are increasingly interested in “missing middle housing” – including duplexes, triplexes, townhomes, cottage clusters and accessory dwelling units (ADUs). These housing types may open up more options across incomes and tenure, from young households seeking homeownership options to seniors looking to downsize and age-in-place.
The housing stock of San Mateo in 2020 was made up of 44.3% single family detached homes, 9.9% single family attached homes, 6.3% multifamily homes with 2 to 4 units, 39.4% multifamily homes with 5 or more units, and 0.1% mobile homes (see Figure 21). In San Mateo, the housing type that experienced the most growth between 2010 and 2020 was Multifamily Housing: Five-plus Units.
Figure 21: Housing Type Trends
Universe: Housing units
Source: California Department of Finance, E-5 series
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-01.
Production has not kept up with housing demand for several decades in the Bay Area, as the total number of units built and available has not yet come close to meeting the population and job growth experienced throughout the region. In San Mateo, the largest proportion of the housing stock was built 1940 to 1959, with 14,721 units constructed during this period (see Figure 22). Since 2010, 4.6% of the current housing stock was built, which is 1,887 units.
371 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-36
Figure 22: Housing Units by Year Structure Built
Universe: Housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25034 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-04.
Vacant units make up 6.2% of the overall housing stock in San Mateo. The rental vacancy stands at 6.4%, while the ownership vacancy rate is 1.7%. Of the vacant units, the most common type of vacancy is For Rent (see Figure 23).16F16F
17 Throughout the Bay Area, vacancies make up 2.6% of the total housing units, with homes listed for rent; units used for recreational or occasional use, and units not otherwise classified (other vacant) making up the majority of vacancies. The Census Bureau classifies a unit as vacant if no one is occupying it when census interviewers are conducting the American Community Survey or Decennial Census. Vacant units classified as “for recreational or occasional use” are those that are held for short-term periods of use throughout the year. Accordingly, vacation rentals and short-term rentals like AirBnB are likely to fall in this category. The Census Bureau classifies units as “other vacant” if they are vacant due to foreclosure, personal/family reasons, legal proceedings, repairs/renovations, abandonment, preparation for being rented or sold, or vacant for an extended absence for reasons such as a work assignment, military duty, or incarceration.17F17F
18 In a region with a thriving economy and housing market like the Bay Area, units being renovated/repaired and prepared for rental or sale are likely to represent a large portion of the “other vacant” category. Additionally, the need for seismic retrofitting in older housing stock could also influence 17 The vacancy rates by tenure is for a smaller universe than the total vacancy rate first reported, which in principle includes the full stock (6.2%). The vacancy by tenure counts are rates relative to the rental stock (occupied and vacant) and ownership stock (occupied and vacant) - but exclude a significant number of vacancy categories, including the numerically significant other vacant.
18 For more information, see pages 3 through 6 of this list of definitions prepared by the Census Bureau:
https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/definitions.pdf.
372 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-37
the proportion of “other vacant” units in some jurisdictions.18F18F 19 In San Mateo, the State Department of
Finance currently estimates the vacancy rate is approximately 6.4%. Countywide, it is estimated at 5.5%.
Figure 23: Vacant Units by Type
Universe: Vacant housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25004 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-03.
Between 2015 and 2021, 2,133 housing units were issued permits in San Mateo. 83.6% of permits issued in San Mateo were for above moderate-income housing, 6.2% were for moderate-income housing, and
10.1% were for low- or very low-income housing as shown below (Table 6).
Table 6: Housing Permitting
Income Category Number of Permits
Very Low Income Permits 126
Low Income Permits 90
Moderate Income Permits 133
Above Moderate Income 1,784
Universe: Housing permits issued between 2015 and 2021
Notes: HCD uses the following definitions for the four income categories: Very Low Income: units affordable to households making less than 50% of the Area Median Income for the county in which the jurisdiction is located. Low Income: units affordable to households making between 50% and 80% of the Area Median Income for the county in which the jurisdiction is located.
Moderate Income: units affordable to households making between 80% and 120% of the Area Median Income for the county in 19 See Dow, P. (2018). Unpacking the Growth in San Francisco’s Vacant Housing Stock: Client Report for the San Francisco Planning Department. University of California, Berkeley. 373 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-38
which the jurisdiction is located. Above Moderate Income: units affordable to households making above 120% of the Area Median Income for the county in which the jurisdiction is located.
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), 5th Cycle Annual Progress Report Permit Summary (2021)
This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table HSG-11.
5.2 Assisted Housing Developments At-Risk of Conversion While there is an immense need to produce new affordable housing units, ensuring that the existing affordable housing stock remains affordable is equally important. Additionally, it is typically faster and less expensive to preserve currently affordable units that are at risk of converting to market-rate than it is to build new affordable housing.
The data below in Table 7 comes from the California Housing Partnership’s Preservation Database, the State’s most comprehensive source of information on subsidized affordable housing at risk of losing its affordable status and converting to market-rate housing. However, this database does not include all deed-restricted affordable units in the State, so there may be at-risk assisted units in a jurisdiction that are not captured in this data table. There are 702 assisted units in San Mateo in the Preservation Database.
Of these units, 10.3% are at High Risk or Very High Risk of conversion.19F19F 20 Table 7: Assisted Units at Risk of Conversion
Risk San Mateo San Mateo County Bay Area
Low 630 4,656 110,177
Moderate 0 191 3,375
High 72 359 1,854
Very High 0 58 1,053
Total Assisted Units in Database 702 5,264 116,459
Universe: HUD, Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC), USDA, and CalHFA projects. Subsidized or assisted developments that do not have one of the aforementioned financing sources may not be included.
Notes: California Housing Partnership uses the following categories for assisted housing developments in its database: Very-High Risk: affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate within the next year that do not have a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability and are not owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer. High Risk:
affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate in the next 1-5 years that do not have a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability and are not owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer. Moderate Risk:
affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate in the next 5-10 years that do not have a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability and are not owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer. Low Risk:
20 California Housing Partnership uses the following categories for assisted housing developments in its database:
Very-High Risk: affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate within the next year that do not have a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability and are not owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer.
High Risk: affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate in the next 1-5 years that do not have a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability and are not owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer.
Moderate Risk: affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate in the next 5-10 years that do not have a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability and are not owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer.
Low Risk: affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate in 10+ years and/or are owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer.
374 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-39
affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate in 10+ years and/or are owned by a large/stable non-profit, missiondriven developer.
Source: California Housing Partnership, Preservation Database (2020) This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table RISK-01.
5.3 Substandard Housing
Housing costs in the region are among the highest in the country, which could result in households, particularly renters, needing to live in substandard conditions in order to afford housing. Generally, there is limited data on the extent of substandard housing issues in a community. However, the Census Bureau data included in the graph below gives a sense of some of the substandard conditions that may be present in San Mateo. For example, 1.3% of renters in San Mateo reported lacking a kitchen and 0.4% of renters lack plumbing, compared to 0.4% of owners who lack a kitchen and 0.3% of owners who lack plumbing.
Note on Substandard Housing
HCD requires Housing Elements to estimate the number of units in need of rehabilitation and replacement. As a data source for housing units in need of rehabilitation and replacement is not available for all jurisdictions in the region, ABAG was not able to provide this required data point in this document. To produce an estimate of housing needs in need of rehabilitation and replacement, staff can supplement the data below on substandard housing issues with additional local information from code enforcement, recent windshield surveys of properties, building department data, knowledgeable builders/developers in the community, or nonprofit housing developers or organizations. For more information, visit HCD’s Building Blocks page on Housing Stock Characteristics.
Figure 24: Substandard Housing Issues
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Per HCD guidance, this data should be supplemented by local estimates of units needing to be rehabilitated or replaced based on recent windshield surveys, local building department data, knowledgeable builders/developers in the community, or nonprofit housing developers or organizations.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25053, Table B25043, Table B25049 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-06. 375 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-40
One measure of housing condition is the age of housing. In general, the older the unit, the greater it can be assumed to be in need of some level of rehabilitation. A general rule in the housing industry is that structures older than 20 years begin to show signs of deterioration and require renovation to maintain their quality. Unless properly maintained, homes older than 50 years can pose health, safety and welfare problems for occupants. Property maintenance is often deferred, especially for lower-income residents who may be unable to afford the rising costs to maintain their homes.
Consistent with State guidance, the table below estimates the number of units in need of rehabilitation and the number of units needing replacement. Although the exact number of San Mateo units in need of rehab is not currently known, the State accepts estimates based on a formula that assumes the older the unit, the more likely the rehab need. By applying an increasing percentage to the housing stock in each age category, it is estimated that there are approximately 839 units in need of some level of rehabilitation in San Mateo, representing 9.1% of the housing stock. The range of rehabilitation needs can include anything from minor repairs to major structural replacements. It is estimated that nearly all of the units in need of rehabilitation can be repaired without replacement.
Table 8: Age of Housing Stock and Estimated Rehabilitation Needs Year Built
Net
Number
of Units
Percent
of Total
Units
Needing
Rehab,
Percent
Units
Needing
Rehab, Total
2014 or
later 1,380 3%
2010 to
2013 420 1%
2000 to
2009 1,515 4% 0.5% 8
1990 to
1999 3,439 8% 1.0% 34
1980 to
1989 3,988 10% 3.0% 120
1970 to
1979 5,147 12% 5.0% 257
1960 to
1969 5,839 14% 10.0% 584
1950 to
1959 10,582 25% 20.0% 2,116
1940 to
1949 5,275 13% 30.0% 1,583
1939 or
earlier 4,388 10% 30.0% 1,316
41,973 100% 6,018 Total Units Needing Rehab
14% Percentage of Total Units
99.5% 5,988 Units that Can Be Repaired
0.5% 30 Units that Must Be Replaced
Source: 2010 Census, American Community Survey, 5-year estimates (2019), City of San Mateo 2021 376 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-41
5.4 Home and Rent Values
Home prices reflect a complex mix of supply and demand factors, including an area’s demographic profile, labor market, prevailing wages and job outlook, coupled with land and construction costs. In the Bay Area, the costs of housing have long been among the highest in the nation. The typical home value in San Mateo was estimated at $1,444,840 by December of 2020, per data from Zillow. The largest proportion of homes were valued between $1M-$1.5M (see Figure 25). By comparison, the typical home value is $1,418,330 in San Mateo County and $1,077,230 the Bay Area, with the largest share of units valued $1m-$1.5m (county) and $500k-$750k (region).
The region’s home values have increased steadily since 2000, besides a decrease during the Great Recession. The rise in home prices has been especially steep since 2012, with the median home value in the Bay Area nearly doubling during this time. Since 2001, the typical home value has increased 149.2% in San Mateo from $579,810 to $1,444,840. This change is above the change in San Mateo County, and above the change for the region (see Figure 26).
Figure 25: Home Values of Owner-Occupied Units
Universe: Owner-occupied units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25075 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-07. 377 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-42
Figure 26: Zillow Home Value Index (ZHVI)
Universe: Owner-occupied housing units
Notes: Zillow describes the ZHVI as a smoothed, seasonally adjusted measure of the typical home value and market changes across a given region and housing type. The ZHVI reflects the typical value for homes in the 35th to 65th percentile range. The ZHVI includes all owner-occupied housing units, including both single-family homes and condominiums. More information on the ZHVI is available from Zillow. The regional estimate is a household-weighted average of county-level ZHVI files, where household counts are yearly estimates from DOF’s E-5 series For unincorporated areas, the value is a population weighted average of unincorporated communities in the county matched to census-designated population counts.
Source: Zillow, Zillow Home Value Index (ZHVI)
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-08.
Similar to home values, rents have also increased dramatically across the Bay Area in recent years. Many renters have been priced out, evicted or displaced, particularly communities of color. Residents finding themselves in one of these situations may have had to choose between commuting long distances to their jobs and schools or moving out of the region, and sometimes, out of the State.
In San Mateo, the largest proportion of rental units rented in the Rent $3000 or more category, totaling
26.7%, followed by 21.1% of units renting in the Rent $1500-$2000 category (see Figure 27). Looking beyond the City, the largest share of units is in the $3000 or more category (county) compared to the $1500-$2000 category for the region as a whole.
378 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-43
Figure 27: Contract Rents for Renter-Occupied Units
Universe: Renter-occupied housing units paying cash rent Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25056 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-09.
Since 2009, the median rent has increased by 74.2% in San Mateo, from $1,630 to $2,380 per month (see Figure 28). In San Mateo County, the median rent has increased 41.1%, from $1,560 to $2,200. The median rent in the region has increased significantly during this time from $1,200 to $1,850, a 54% increase.20F20F 21 21 While the data on home values shown in Figure 24 comes from Zillow, Zillow does not have data on rent prices available for most Bay Area jurisdictions. To have a more comprehensive dataset on rental data for the region, the rent data in this document comes from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, which may not fully reflect current rents. Local jurisdiction staff may want to supplement the data on rents with local realtor data or other sources for rent data that are more current than Census Bureau data.
379 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-44
Figure 28: Median Contract Rent
Universe: Renter-occupied housing units paying cash rent Notes: For unincorporated areas, median is calculated using distribution in B25056.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data releases, starting with 2005-2009 through 2015-2019, B25058, B25056 (for unincorporated areas). County and regional counts are weighted averages of jurisdiction median using B25003 rental unit counts from the relevant year.
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-10.
According to Zumper, an online rent statistics aggregator, the average rent for a studio in San Mateo was $2,729 in June of 2022, whereas the average rent for a one-bedroom was $3,200. The average rent for a two-bedroom apartment was $3,439.22
5.5 Housing Affordability
The National Association of Homebuilders reports that California cities have some of the lowest homeowner affordability rates in the country, defined as the percentage of homes affordable to the median income family. Despite the high median incomes, especially in the Bay Area, many cannot afford the cost to purchase a home. The San Francisco-Redwood City Division, of which San Mateo is a part, ranked 230th out of 233 metropolitan areas studied in the first quarter of 2021. 22 https://www.zumper.com/rent-research/san-mateo-ca
380 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-45
Table 9: Housing Opportunity Index, First Quarter 2021
Homes
Affordable to
Median
Income
Households
Median
Family
Income
(1,000s)
Median
Sales
Price
(1,000s)
National
Affordability
Rank
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Glendale, CA ^^^ 11.6% 78.7 729 233 Salinas, CA 15.1% 80.9 725 232
San Francisco-Redwood City-South San
Francisco, CA ^^^
17.4% 143.4 1,305 230
Anaheim-Santa Ana-Irvine, CA ^^^ 18.2% 104.8 825 229
Napa, CA 22.1% 101.5 691 228
San Diego-Carlsbad, CA 22.4% 95.1 665 227
San Luis Obispo-Paso Robles-Arroyo Grande, CA 26.0% 97.8 675 226 Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA 27.4% 98.8 650 225
Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA 28.5% 111.9 850 224
Santa Maria-Santa Barbara, CA 28.8% 90.1 678 223
Stockton-Lodi, CA 29.6% 74.0 462 222
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA 29.9% 151.3 1,120 220 Oakland-Hayward-Berkeley, CA ^^^ 31.2% 121.3 795 219
Notes: ^^^ Indicate Metropolitan Divisions. All others are Metropolitan Statistical Areas.
Source: National Association of Homebuilders, 2021,
https://www.nahb.org/news-and-economics/housing-economics/indices/housing-opportunity-index Trulia -- an online residential real estate site for homebuyers, sellers, renters and real estate professionals -- provides statistics based on actual sales of housing by location. According to a study conducted by zip code in 2019, only a small percentage of homes in San Mateo were affordable to the metropolitan median income of $101,000. The following table contains data for the three primary zip codes.
Table 10: Housing Affordability by Zip Code
Zip Code % of Homes Affordable to Metro Median Income Median Home Value 94401 9.4% $903,631
94402 0.0% $1,758,419
94403 1.9% $1,344,813
Source: National Association of Homebuilders, 2021, see website for more information:
https://www.trulia.com/research/affordable-neighborhoods/ The high cost of housing means that people wanting to own a home in San Mateo must have significant incomes, even for the relatively less expensive condos.
The decreasing supply of affordable rental units is a countywide phenomenon; it can include Ellis Act evictions (where an owner of a rental property decides to leave the rental business) to owner move-in evictions. Until additional construction of rental units occurs, the combination of strong demand and low vacancies will contribute to an increasingly severe shortage of rental units and a decrease in their affordability.
381 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-46
The following table illustrates the affordable rents associated with each income category. In the case of an extremely low-income household of two people (for example, a single parent with a child), the annual income of $43,850 translates to a full-time job paying $21.08 per hour. In this scenario, the maximum rent they could afford would be about $1,096 per month – far below average rents in the area, even for studios.
According to statistics on RentCafe.com, an online data aggregator, the average rent for an apartment is $2,908 as of June, 2021, a decrease of 10% from the previous year but still much higher than what a lower income household can afford. A household has to earn at least $116,320 in order to afford the average rent.
Table 11: Affordable Rents for Two- and Three-Person Households Income
Category
Percent of
Median
Income Limit (TwoPerson Household)
Two-Person
Affordable
Rent
Income Limit
(Three--Person
Household)
Three--Person
Affordable Rent
Extremely
Low-Income 30% $43,850 $1,096 $49,350 $1,234
Very LowIncome 50% $73,100 $1,828 $82,250 $2,056
Low-Income 80% $117,100 $2,928 $131,750 $3,294
MedianIncome 100% $119,700 $2,993 $134,650 $3,366
ModerateIncome 120% $143,600 $3,590 $161,550 $4,039
Notes: Affordable rents are calculated based on 30% of annual income divided by 12 months.
Source: State Department of Housing and Community Development and San Mateo Housing, 2021 Through its Section 8 and other housing programs, HUD provides rental housing assistance to lowerincome households. According to the State Department of Housing and Community Development, more than 500 households in San Mateo currently receive Section 8 rental assistance, in the form of Housing Choice Vouchers.
5.5 Overpayment and Overcrowding
A household is considered “cost-burdened” if it spends more than 30% of its monthly income on housing costs, while those who spend more than 50% of their income on housing costs are considered “severely cost-burdened.” Low-income residents are the most impacted by high housing costs and experience the highest rates of cost burden. Spending such large portions of their income on housing puts low-income households at higher risk of displacement, eviction, or homelessness. 382 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-47
Figure 29: Cost Burden by Tenure
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50% of monthly income.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25070, B25091 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-06.
Renters are often more cost-burdened than owners. While the housing market has resulted in home prices increasing dramatically, homeowners often have mortgages with fixed rates, whereas renters are more likely to be impacted by market increases. When looking at the cost burden across tenure in San Mateo, 22.8% of renters spend 30% to 50% of their income on housing compared to 18.6% of those that own (see Figure 29). Additionally, 24.6% of renters spend 50% or more of their income on housing, while
11.8% of owners are severely cost-burdened.
In San Mateo, 16.8% of households spend 50% or more of their income on housing, while 20.8% spend 30% to 50%. However, these rates vary greatly across income categories (see Figure 30). For example,
73.0% of San Mateo households making less than 30% of AMI spend the majority of their income on housing. For San Mateo residents making more than 100% of AMI, just 0.9% are severely cost-burdened, and 88.7% of those making more than 100% of AMI spend less than 30% of their income on housing. 383 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-48
Figure 30: Cost Burden by Income Level
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50% of monthly income. Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-05.
Currently, people of color are more likely to experience poverty and financial instability as a result of federal and local housing policies that have historically excluded them from the same opportunities extended to white residents. As a result, they often pay a greater percentage of their income on housing, and in turn, are at a greater risk of housing insecurity.
Black or African American, Non-Hispanic residents are the most cost burdened with 37.9% spending 30% to 50% of their income on housing, and Hispanic or Latinx residents are the most severely cost burdened with 28.6% spending more than 50% of their income on housing (see Figure 31). 384 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-49
Table 12: Quantified Cost Burden of Low-Income Households by Tenure Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes.
Cost burdened renters in the City of San Mateo far outnumber the cost burdened homeowners in most low-income categories. For households at the 30% AMI level, 3,360 renter families are paying over 30% of their household income towards housing while 2,825 renter families are paying over 50% of their income towards housing costs. Meanwhile, at the same 30% AMI level, there are only 1,515 homeowners paying over 30% of their income towards housing and only 1,130 homeowners paying over 50% of their income towards housing. It can be deduced that renters at the extremely low-income category are disproportionately cost burdened by housing costs in the City of San Mateo at a ratio of 3:2 in total population compared to homeowners. At the 50% AMI level, renters are continuing to be slightly more cost burdened in comparison to homeowners with totals of 2,190 and 1,875 respectively. At the 80% AMI level, cost burdened homeowners begin to slightly outnumber cost burdened renter households. At higher income levels, the number of cost burdened homeowner families begin to greatly outnumber the total number cost burdened renters. It is likely that as household income increases compared to AMI, families are more likely to seek ownership housing. Therefore, when quantifying cost burdened households in the City of San Mateo, there is an imbalance of disproportionately high amount of renters at extremely low and very low-income levels while there is a corresponding imbalance of cost burdened homeowners at moderate and above average income levels. 385 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-50
Figure 31: Cost Burden by Race
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50% of monthly income. For the purposes of this graph, the “Hispanic or Latinx” racial/ethnic group represents those who identify as having Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity and may also be members of any racial group. All other racial categories on this graph represent those who identify with that racial category and do not identify with Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-08.
Large family households often have special housing needs due to a lack of adequately sized affordable housing available. The higher costs required for homes with multiple bedrooms can result in larger families experiencing a disproportionate cost burden than the rest of the population and can increase the risk of housing insecurity.
In San Mateo, 23.7% of large family households experience a cost burden of 30%-50%, while 22.5% of households spend more than half of their income on housing. Some 20.6% of all other households have a cost burden of 30%-50%, with 16.4% of households spending more than 50% of their income on housing (see Figure 32).
386 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-51
Figure 32: Cost Burden by Household Size
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50% of monthly income.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-09.
When cost-burdened seniors are no longer able to make house payments or pay rents, displacement from their homes can occur, putting further stress on the local rental market or forcing residents out of the community they call home. Understanding how seniors might be cost-burdened is of particular importance due to their special housing needs, particularly for low-income seniors. 64.7% of seniors making less than 30% of AMI are spending the majority of their income on housing. For seniors making more than 100% of AMI, 92.7% are not cost-burdened and spend less than 30% of their income on housing (see Figure 33).
387 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-52
Figure 33: Cost-Burdened Senior Households by Income Level Universe: Senior households
Notes: For the purposes of this graph, senior households are those with a householder who is aged 62 or older. Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50% of monthly income. Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San JoseSunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table SEN-03.
Overcrowding occurs when the number of people living in a household is greater than the home was designed to hold. There are several different standards for defining overcrowding, but this report uses the Census Bureau definition, which is more than one occupant per room (not including bathrooms or kitchens). Additionally, the Census Bureau considers units with more than 1.5 occupants per room to be severely overcrowded.
Overcrowding is often related to the cost of housing and can occur when demand in a city or region is high. In many cities, overcrowding is seen more amongst those that are renting, with multiple households sharing a unit to make it possible to stay in their communities. In San Mateo, 5.5% of households that rent are severely overcrowded (more than 1.5 occupants per room), compared to 0.5% of households that own (see Figure 34). In San Mateo, 7.5% of renters experience moderate overcrowding (1 to 1.5 occupants per room), compared to 1.5% for those who own.
388 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-53
Figure 34: Overcrowding by Tenure and Severity
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: The Census Bureau defines an overcrowded unit as one occupied by 1.01 persons or more per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens), and units with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-01.
Overcrowding often disproportionately impacts low-income households. 4.4% of very low-income households (below 50% AMI) experience severe overcrowding, while 1.0% of households above 100% experience this level of overcrowding (see Figure 35).
389 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-54
Figure 35: Overcrowding by Income Level and Severity
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: The Census Bureau defines an overcrowded unit as one occupied by 1.01 persons or more per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens), and units with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded. Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-04.
Communities of color are more likely to experience overcrowding similar to how they are more likely to experience poverty, financial instability, and housing insecurity. People of color tend to experience overcrowding at higher rates than White residents. In San Mateo, the racial group with the largest overcrowding rate is Other Race or Multiple Races (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) (see Figure 36) 390 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-55
Figure 36: Overcrowding by Race
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: The Census Bureau defines an overcrowded unit as one occupied by 1.01 persons or more per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens), and units with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded. For this table, the Census Bureau does not disaggregate racial groups by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity. However, data for the white racial group is also reported for white householders who are not Hispanic/Latinx. Since residents who identify as white and Hispanic/Latinx may have very different experiences within the housing market and the economy from those who identify as white and non-Hispanic/Latinx, data for multiple white sub-groups are reported here. The racial/ethnic groups reported in this table are not all mutually exclusive.
Therefore, the data should not be summed as the sum exceeds the total number of occupied housing units for this jurisdiction.
However, all groups labelled “Hispanic and Non-Hispanic” are mutually exclusive, and the sum of the data for these groups is equivalent to the total number of occupied housing units.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25014 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-03. 391 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-56
6 SPECIAL HOUSING NEEDS
The City of San Mateo receives a direct entitlement grant for CDBG funds that are deployed to address identified needs heard through the community engagement process, as well as through the Housing Element process. The City is also a member of the San Mateo County HOME Consortium, which administers HOME funds on the City’s behalf. The City manages a diverse portfolio of housing loans from several programs, including housing rehabilitation for low-income homeowners, First-time Homebuyer loans for those who live or work in San Mateo, and developer loans for new construction or acquisition/rehabilitation projects. Program income from this portfolio augments the City’s federal entitlement grant, as well as HUD’s Multi-Family Housing Programs that facilitate rehabilitation and the CalHOME owner rehabilitation loan program.
Loan repayments from those programs are now deposited into the Affordable Housing Fund to be used for future affordable housing programs and projects in the City. The City also collects subordination processing fees and fractional unit fees in its Housing Fund from the City’s Below-Market Rate program, which are typically used for regional housing initiatives outside of City limits. In addition to boomerang funds and loan payments from the former RDA, the City’s commercial linkage fee, which collected its first payments in 2017, continue to provide funds for affordable housing development.
Section 8 funds are provided to San Mateo residents through the Housing Authority of San Mateo County.
Additionally, McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act funds are managed by the San Mateo County Human Services Agency as part of the Continuum of Care, in which the City participates. The County of San Mateo also supports housing projects through its HOME and CDBG funds, which are often used to leverage City resources. The Housing Endowment and Regional Trust (HEART) of San Mateo County is a public/private partnership whose goal is to raise funds to create affordable housing opportunities in San Mateo County. Finally, with the dissolution of Redevelopment Agencies at the State level, the application process for Low-income Housing Tax Credits has become even more competitive. Nonetheless, the City will continue to support developer applications for that program and other State housing programs going forward
There are two publicly owned properties that will offer affordable housing in San Mateo. The first is Kiku Crossing, located on East 4th Avenue. The property was formerly a public parking lot and will provide 225 affordable homes for families and individuals. Of those units, 57 will be for public employees, 22 will house formerly homeless households, and eight units will be for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Additionally, Bespoke, also a former parking lot, will be located on South B Street and will provide up to 71 affordable units to extremely low- income, very low-income and low-income households along with community facilities, commercial space, and office space.
The goal of each of these programs and activities is to serve lower-income households, including seniors, persons with disabilities, homeless individuals and families, and other groups.
6.1 Large Households
392 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-57
Large households often have different housing needs than smaller households. If a city’s rental housing stock does not include larger apartments, large households who rent could end up living in overcrowded conditions. In San Mateo, for large households with 5 or more persons, most units (51.6%) are owner occupied (see Figure 37). In 2017, 33.1% of large households were very low-income, earning less than 50% of the area median income (AMI).
Figure 37: Household Size by Tenure
Universe: Occupied housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25009 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table LGFEM-01.
In addition to overcrowding, large households also often have a cost burden. In San Mateo, half of all large households that pay too much for housing are lower-income households earning between 0% and 80% of median income.
The unit sizes available in a community affect the household sizes that can access that community. Large families are generally served by housing units with 3 or more bedrooms, of which there are 17,173 units in San Mateo. Among these large units with 3 or more bedrooms, 18.7% are owner-occupied and 81.3% are renter occupied (see Figure 38).
393 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-58
Figure 38: Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms
Universe: Housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25042 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-05.
Resources for Large Households
Finding rental housing with more than two bedrooms is a typical problem for large families, particularly renters with lower income levels. Of the approximately 17,173 housing units in San Mateo with three or more bedrooms, only 18.7% (3,210) are occupied by renters. Due to the limited supply of adequately sized rental units and affordable homeownership opportunities to accommodate large-family households, large families face additional difficulty in locating housing that is adequately sized and affordably priced. While San Mateo has a large proportion of housing units with three or more bedrooms, the issue is with mismatch between availability and affordability. The Housing Choice Voucher is a program that can assist very low-income large renter-households in accessing adequately sized housing.
6.2 Female-Headed Households
Households headed by one person are often at greater risk of housing insecurity, particularly femaleheaded households, who may be supporting children or a family with only one income. In San Mateo, the largest proportion of households is Married-couple Family Households at 50.8% of total, while FemaleHeaded Households make up 9.1% of all households. 394 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-59
Figure 39: Household Type
Universe: Households
Notes: For data from the Census Bureau, a “family household” is a household where two or more people are related by birth, marriage, or adoption. “Non-family households” are households of one person living alone, as well as households where none of the people are related to each other.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B11001 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-23.
Female-headed households with children may face particular housing challenges, with pervasive gender inequality resulting in lower wages for women. Moreover, the added need for childcare can make finding a home that is affordable more challenging.
In San Mateo, 16.6% of female-headed households with children fall below the Federal Poverty Line, while
4.6% of female-headed households without children live in poverty (see Figure 40). 395 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-60
Figure 40: Female-Headed Households by Poverty Status
Universe: Female Households
Notes: The Census Bureau uses a federally defined poverty threshold that remains constant throughout the country and does not correspond to Area Median Income.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B17012 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table LGFEM-05.
Single-parent families, particularly female-headed families with children, often require special consideration and assistance because of their greater need for affordable housing and accessible day care, health care, and other supportive services. Female-headed families with children are considered a vulnerable group because they must balance the needs of their children with work responsibilities, often while earning limited incomes.
The 2015-2019 ACS showed that single parents comprised approximately 12.6% of San Mateo households.
Of these, the vast majority were female-headed single-parent households (72.0% of single-parent households). Female-headed families have a higher incidence of poverty when compared to all households and are more likely renters than owners. Of the female headed households in San Mateo,
20.0% of those with children are below the federal poverty level.
Resources for Single Parent Households
Female-headed households need affordable housing in areas suitable for child-rearing and with access to transit networks, schools and parks, and daily services. The City will also be looking at developing a policy for affirmative marketing to lower income special needs groups, which may involve a preference system for below market rate (BMR) units to ensure special needs groups are given opportunities to access housing that is affordable to them.
6.3 Seniors
396 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-61
Senior households often experience a combination of factors that can make accessing or keeping affordable housing a challenge. They often live on fixed incomes and are more likely to have disabilities, chronic health conditions and/or reduced mobility.
Seniors who rent may be at even greater risk for housing challenges than those who own, due to income differences between these groups. The largest proportion of senior households who rent make 0%-30% of AMI, while the largest proportion of senior households who are homeowners falls in the income group Greater than 100% of AMI (see Figure 41).
Figure 41: Senior Households by Income and Tenure
Universe: Senior households
Notes: For the purposes of this graph, senior households are those with a householder who is aged 62 or older. Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San JoseSunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table SEN-01.
According to American Community Survey 5-year data (2015-2019), of the approximately 38,549 households in San Mateo, 10,394 or 27.0% are senior households. While many earn incomes over 100% of median income, a greater percentage earns lower incomes. Approximately 6,140 senior households earn incomes less than 80% of median, or about 59.1%. Of the lower income households, 58.6% are homeowners, and 41.4% are renters.
Cost burden is prevalent amongst elderly households, especially those earning the lowest incomes. For example, although extremely low-income senior households represent 23.3% of total senior households, 397 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-62
they represent more than 42.6% of senior households with a cost burden. Of all senior households, 2,000 (18.6%) are cost burdened, and 2,534 (24.4%) are severely cost burdened.
Aside from overpayment problems faced by seniors due to their relatively fixed incomes, many seniors are faced with various disabilities. Among all disabilities, the most common are ambulatory disabilities (19.0%), independent living disabilities (15.0%), and hearing disabilities (13.2%).
Resources for Seniors
Housing resources available for seniors include senior apartments and residential care facilities for the elderly (RCFE). Residential facilities such as assisted living or board and care facilities are non-medical facilities that provide a level of care that includes assistance with activities of daily living. RCFEs provide room, board, housekeeping, supervision, and personal care assistance with basic activities like personal hygiene, dressing, eating, and walking for persons 60 years and older. According to the State Department of Social Services (CDSS), San Mateo has 1,190 beds in 65 licensed RCFEs.
In addition to funding programs that serve seniors, the City also provides information on a wide variety of services to seniors through its Services Link on the Department of Parks and Recreation website. These include, but are not limited to:
S.A.S.H. – Shopping Assistance for Seniors who are Homebound S.A.S.H. is a grocery shopping and delivery service for homebound seniors who are able to cook for themselves. A volunteer shopper will shop and deliver groceries on a weekly or bi-weekly basis.
H.I.C.A.P.
A very popular health insurance counseling and advocacy program occurs weekly at the Senior Center.
BenefitsCheckUp
Many older people need help paying for prescription drugs, health care, utilities and other basic needs.
Developed and maintained by The National Council on Aging (NCOA), BenefitsCheckUp is the nation's most comprehensive Web-based service to screen for benefits programs for seniors with limited income and resources.
Latino/Latina Discussion Group
The Latino/Latina Discussion Group meets every Wednesday at 11:00am at the Senior Center. 398 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-63
Through the County:
211bayarea.org
2-1-1 provides free and confidential information and referral. Call 2-1-1 for help with food, housing, employment, health care, counseling and more. 211 in San Mateo County can help you find food, housing, health care, senior services, childcare, legal aid and much more San Mateo County Aging and Adult Services
Select children, families, seniors and persons with disabilities Providing a wide range of services to keep seniors, people with disabilities and dependent adults living safely and as independently as possible in the community.
San Mateo County Network of Care
A website sponsored by the County of San Mateo which provides information on a wide array of services for seniors and persons with disabilities.
T.I.E.S (County of San Mateo)
Phone Hotline 1-800-675-8437 Teamwork Insuring Elderly Support (T.I.E.S.) provides general information on all senior services. Featuring a 24-hour hotline, designed to assist vulnerable elderly and dependent adults who need help but may be unable to get it for themselves.
Help at Home
Help at Home is a mini-reference guide published by the San Mateo County Commission on Aging. This guide contains a wide variety of information designed to assist San Mateo County adults of all incomes to remain safely in their homes.
6.4 People with Disabilities
People with disabilities face additional housing challenges. Encompassing a broad group of individuals living with a variety of physical, cognitive and sensory impairments, many people with disabilities live on fixed incomes and are in need of specialized care, yet often rely on family members for assistance due to the high cost of care.
When it comes to housing, people with disabilities are not only in need of affordable housing but accessibly designed housing, which offers greater mobility and opportunity for independence.
Unfortunately, the need typically outweighs what is available, particularly in a housing market with such high demand. People with disabilities are at a high risk for housing insecurity, homelessness and institutionalization, particularly when they lose aging caregivers. Figure 42 shows the rates at which 399 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-64
different disabilities are present among residents of San Mateo. Overall, 9.1% of people in San Mateo have a disability of any kind.21F21F
23 Figure 42: Disability by Type
Universe: Civilian noninstitutionalized population 18 years and over Notes: These disabilities are counted separately and are not mutually exclusive, as an individual may report more than one disability. These counts should not be summed. The Census Bureau provides the following definitions for these disability types:
Hearing difficulty: deaf or has serious difficulty hearing. Vision difficulty: blind or has serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.
Cognitive difficulty: has serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions. Ambulatory difficulty: has serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs. Self-care difficulty: has difficulty dressing or bathing. Independent living difficulty: has difficulty doing errands alone such as visiting a doctor’s office or shopping.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B18102, Table B18103, Table B18104, Table B18105, Table B18106, Table B18107.
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table DISAB-01.
In San Mateo and elsewhere, persons with disabilities have a wide range of different housing needs, which vary depending on the type and severity of the disability as well as personal preference and lifestyle.
Physical, mental, and/or developmental disabilities may prevent a person from working, restrict one’s mobility, or make it difficult to care for oneself. “Barrier-free design” housing, accessibility modifications, proximity to services and transit, and group living opportunities represent some of the types of considerations and accommodations that are important in serving this group. Also, some residents suffer from disabilities that require living in a supportive or institutional setting.
Resources for Persons with Disabilities
23 These disabilities are counted separately and are not mutually exclusive, as an individual may report more than one disability. These counts should not be summed.
400 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-65
In addition to housing and community development programs provided by the City, the County of San Mateo provides a variety of services and information for older adults and people with disabilities through its network of care efforts. Its website contains links to service providers on the following topics:
• Caregiver Support
• Food • Planning & Advocacy
• Counseling
• Health Care • Recreation & Activities
• Crisis and Emergency
• Housing • Residential Care
• Disability Related Services
• Information & Assistance • Safety and Prevention
• Employment
• In-Home Services • Support and Support
Groups
• End-of-Life Care
• Insurance and Benefits • Transportation
• Financial Assistance
• Legal Services
In addition, the Center for Independence of Individuals with Disabilities (CID) is a private, nonprofit corporation located in San Mateo, California. Incorporated in 1979, CID is a consumer-driven, communitybased, services and advocacy organization serving San Mateo County and beyond. By federal mandate, the majority of its Staff, Management, and Board of Directors consists of people with disabilities. Annually, CID provides direct and indirect services to more than 2,000 individuals with disabilities.
CID is one of 29 Independent Living Centers in the State of California and over 400 Independent Living Centers in the United States. It is affiliated with other ILCs through its membership and participation in the California Foundation of Independent Living Centers and the National Council of Independent Living.
CID is affiliated with other nonprofit agencies through its membership in the California Association of NonProfits.
CID services include Housing Accessibility Modification (HAM), which involves installing grab bars, rails, ramps, hand-held showers, etc. for low-income San Mateo County residents. It also provides Peer Counseling (individual and group) by licensed, trained persons with disabilities, and Financial Benefits Counseling (regarding applications or appeals for SSI, SSDI, or MediCal). The Assistive Technology (AT) Program is designed to educate and train the public concerning technology that can assist people with disabilities. CID maintains an information database of community resources and have links to the California statewide AT Network in Sacramento.
State law also requires Housing Elements to examine the housing needs of people with developmental disabilities. Developmental disabilities are defined as severe, chronic, and attributed to a mental or 401 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-66
physical impairment that begins before a person turns 18 years old. This can include Down’s Syndrome, autism, epilepsy, cerebral palsy, and mild to severe mental retardation. Some people with developmental disabilities are unable to work, rely on Supplemental Security Income, and live with family members. In addition to their specific housing needs, they are at increased risk of housing insecurity after an aging parent or family member is no longer able to care for them.2F2F 24 In San Mateo, of the population with a developmental disability, children under the age of 18 make up
35.6%, while adults account for 64.4%.
Table 13: Population with Developmental Disabilities by Age Age Group Number
Age 18+ 500
Age Under 18 277
Universe: Population with developmental disabilities
Notes: The California Department of Developmental Services is responsible for overseeing the coordination and delivery of services to more than 330,000 Californians with developmental disabilities including cerebral palsy, intellectual disability, Down syndrome, autism, epilepsy, and related conditions. The California Department of Developmental Services provides ZIP code level counts. To get jurisdiction-level estimates, ZIP code counts were crosswalked to jurisdictions using census block population counts from Census 2010 SF1 to determine the share of a ZIP code to assign to a given jurisdiction.
Source: California Department of Developmental Services, Consumer Count by California ZIP Code and Age Group (2020) This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table DISAB-04.
Many developmentally disabled persons can live and work independently within a conventional housing environment. More severely disabled individuals require a group living environment where supervision is provided. The most severely affected individuals may require an institutional environment where medical attention and physical therapy are provided. Because developmental disabilities exist before adulthood, the first issue in supportive housing for the developmentally disabled is the transition from the person’s living situation as a child to an appropriate level of independence as an adult.
The State Department of Developmental Services (DDS) currently provides community-based services to approximately 329,000 persons with developmental disabilities and their families through a statewide system of 21 regional centers, four developmental centers, and two community-based facilities. The Golden Gate Regional Center provides point of entry to services for people with developmental disabilities in San Mateo County. The center is a private, non-profit community agency that contracts with local businesses to offer a wide range of services to individuals with developmental disabilities and their families. According to its website, as of December 2020, 9,323 consumers were served, of which 63% are 24 For more information or data on developmental disabilities in your jurisdiction, contact the Golden Gate Regional Center for Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo Counties; the North Bay Regional Center for Napa, Solano and Sonoma Counties; the Regional Center for the East Bay for Alameda and Contra Costa Counties; or the San Andreas Regional Center for Santa Clara County.
402 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-67
male and 37% are female. The average per capita expenditures for all ages is $32,319. See website:
www.dds.ca.gov/rc/dashboard/overview
The most common living arrangement for individuals with disabilities in San Mateo is the home of parent, family, and/or guardian.
Table 14: Population with Developmental Disabilities by Residence Residence Type Number
Home of Parent /Family /Guardian 453
Community Care Facility 193
Intermediate Care Facility 73
Independent /Supported Living 45
Other 10
Foster /Family Home 10
Universe: Population with developmental disabilities
Notes: The California Department of Developmental Services is responsible for overseeing the coordination and delivery of services to more than 330,000 Californians with developmental disabilities including cerebral palsy, intellectual disability, Down syndrome, autism, epilepsy, and related conditions. The California Department of Developmental Services provides ZIP code level counts. To get jurisdiction-level estimates, ZIP code counts were crosswalked to jurisdictions using census block population counts from Census 2010 SF1 to determine the share of a ZIP code to assign to a given jurisdiction.
Source: California Department of Developmental Services, Consumer Count by California ZIP Code and Residence Type (2020) This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table DISAB-05.
People with developmental disabilities have a disability that emerged before age 18, is expected to be lifelong, and is of sufficient severity to require a coordinated program of services and support in order to live successfully in the community. Developmental disabilities include intellectual disability, autism, Down syndrome, epilepsy, cerebral palsy, and other disabling conditions similar in their functional impact to an intellectual disability. Under California’s Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act and related federal law, people with developmental disabilities are entitled to receive community-based services that allow them to live in the least restrictive community setting. This shift to de-institutionalization has led to the closure of the most restrictive segregated settings and to the requirement that local jurisdictions in their Housing Elements assess and plan specifically for the housing needs of people with developmental disabilities who receive services from the Regional Center in order to live in their home community.
According to data provided by Housing Choices, a nonprofit organization serving people with developmental disabilities, the City of San Mateo’s population with developmental disabilities grew by 12% since the last Housing Element and accounts for 21% of the County’s total population with developmental disabilities. The City of San Mateo is home to 835 people with developmental disabilities.
This represents an increase of 12% over the 2013 population of 746 reported in the City’s 2015 Housing Element and reflects a much higher growth rate than the general population. In addition, the City’s population with developmental disabilities accounts for 21% of the total County population with 403 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-68
developmental disabilities, although the City’s total population is only 14% of the County’s total population.
Of the City’s total population with developmental disabilities, 531 (64%) are adults and 304 (36%) are under age 18. Assessing the housing needs of adults with developmental disabilities is of particular importance because as they age the adults will require a residential option outside the family home, whereas the family home is the preferred living option for children with developmental disabilities. In 2021, 505 City of San Mateo residents with developmental disabilities lived in the family home compared to 389 in 2013 as reported in the 2015 to 2023 Housing Element. This 30% increase in reliance on the family home is 2.5 times greater than the City’s 12% increase in the developmental disabilities population during that same period. Increased reliance on the family home is primarily explained by overall growth in the population with developmental disabilities coupled with significant declines in opportunities for the City’s adults with developmental disabilities to live either in licensed care facilities (10% decline) or in affordable housing with supportive services (19% decline). As adults with developmental disabilities age, they need opportunities to live outside the family home both because of the aging of their family caregivers and also because many adults with developmental disabilities would like to live in their own apartment with supportive services.
Growth in the City of San Mateo’s population with developmental disabilities since the 2015 Housing Element correlates with a significant annual increase in the diagnosis of autism that began in the mid1980s and did not level out until after 2015. The cumulative impact of this trend is already seen in the growth in the San Mateo County population age 18 to 41 with developmental disabilities and will continue into the future. This trend has significant implications for housing needs among City of San Mateo adults with developmental disabilities during the period of the 2023 to 2031 Housing Element.
Between September 2015 and June 2021, the California Department of Developmental Services reports that the number of San Mateo County residents with developmental disabilities age 62 and older grew by 33%. This is not due to migration of senior citizens with developmental disabilities to San Mateo County, but rather to well-documented gains in life span among people with developmental disabilities. With longer life expectancy, more adults with developmental disabilities will outlive their parents and family members with whom a growing number of City of San Mateo adults with developmental disabilities now live because of the lack of other residential options. Longer life spans will also slow the pace of resident turnover in the county’s limited supply of licensed care facilities, which will further reduce opportunities for the growing population of people with developmental disabilities to secure housing outside the family home.
The California Department of Developmental Services reports that between September 2015 and June 2021, San Mateo County lost 5% of its supply of licensed care facilities for people with developmental disabilities (including Community Care Facilities, Intermediate Care Facilities, and Skilled Nursing Facilities), thereby increasing the need for affordable housing options coordinated with supportive services funded by the Regional Center. This trend is mirrored in the 11% decline in the number of City of San Mateo adults able to live in licensed care homes between 2013 and 2021. The reduced role of licensed 404 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-69
care facilities demonstrates the need for the City’s Housing Element to plan for affordable housing that includes people with developmental disabilities so that adults with developmental disabilities are not forced out of the county when they lose the security of their parent’s home.
The California Department of Developmental Services has documented a 12% decline in the age group 42 to 51 and a 10% decline in the age group 52 to 61 in San Mateo County between September 2015 and June 2021. In light of gains in life expectancy, this loss can reasonably be attributed to homelessness or displacement from the county because of the lack of residential living options (either licensed facilities or affordable housing) when a parent caregiver passes away or becomes unable to house and care for the adult. Displacement takes a particular toll on adults with developmental disabilities who depend on familiarity with transit routes and shopping and services, as well as support from community-based services and informal networks built up over years in living in the City of San Mateo.
Lastly, people with developmental disabilities are more likely than the general population to have an accompanying physical disability. Twenty-seven percent (27%) of San Mateo County residents with developmental disabilities have limited mobility, and 13% have a vision or hearing impairment. The need for an accessible unit coupled with the need for coordinated supportive services compounds the housing barriers faced by those with co-occurring intellectual and physical disabilities.
Some adults with developmental disabilities depend on monthly income of under $1,000 from the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program, pricing them out of even the limited number of Extremely Low Income affordable housing units in the City of San Mateo. Those with employment tend to work parttime in the lowest paid jobs and also struggle to income-qualify for many of the affordable housing units for rent in the City of San Mateo.
Many developmentally disabled persons can live and work independently within a conventional housing environment. More severely disabled individuals require a group living environment where supervision is provided. The most severely affected individuals may require an institutional environment where medical attention and physical therapy are provided. Because developmental disabilities exist before adulthood, the first issue in supportive housing for the developmentally disabled is the transition from the person’s living situation as a child to an appropriate level of independence as an adult. Currently, the majority of the developmentally disabled residents in San Mateo are residing at home.
Resources for Persons with Developmental Disabilities
Services for persons with disabilities are typically provided by both public and private agencies. State and Federal legislation regulate the accessibility and adaptability of new or rehabilitated multifamily apartment complexes to ensure accommodate for individuals with limited physical mobility. Housing options for persons with disabilities include various community care facilities. Many individuals continue to live with parents.
Housing Choices is a nonprofit that advocates for the housing needs of people with developmental disabilities. It is committed to educating local elected officials, city and county housing staff, and housing 405 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-70
developers about the opportunity to plan for and include people with developmental and other disabilities in their local housing plans. It supports and promotes the voices of people with developmental and other disabilities and encourage them to become effective self-advocates. Along with clients, their parents, and other members of the community, HC frequently attends and testifies at City Council and other relevant meetings with the goal of creating cities and neighborhoods which are inclusive of people with developmental and other disabilities.
The single largest component of its work is helping individuals with developmental and other disabilities find housing that suits their specific needs and priorities. Every year, our Housing Coordinators help more than 1,800 people with developmental and other disabilities create a housing plan and apply for affordable housing.
Each client has unique housing needs, constraints, and preferences. When a person is referred to Housing Choices, a Housing Coordinator helps to create an individual housing plan with input from the individual with disabilities and everyone in that person’s Circle of Support. Housing Coordinators help clients with their decision-making by discussing their finances, credit history, supportive service needs, household composition, and other background relevant to their housing choices. HC helps its clients identify and apply for rental properties for which they can income-qualify and that are in the right location. Depending on each person’s income and existing support network, this could involve applying for multiple waiting lists and monitoring waiting list status for several years.
The Golden Gate Regional Center, noted above, provides services and support to individuals with developmental disabilities in Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties. A resident of Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo counties who falls into any of the following four categories is eligible for GGRC services:
• Is an individual with a developmental disability
• Is an infant or toddler (up to 36 months of age) who has a developmental delay • Is an infant or toddler (up to 36 months of age) for whom there are established risk conditions that could lead to a developmental delay
• Is an infant or toddler (up to 36 months of age) at high risk of having a development disability due to a combination of biomedical factors
Individuals eligible under the first category are served by GGRC's Lanterman Act services program; infants and toddlers eligible under .the latter three categories are served by the regional center's Early Start program.
6.5 Homelessness
Homelessness remains an urgent challenge in many communities across the State, reflecting a range of social, economic, and psychological factors. Rising housing costs result in increased risks of community members experiencing homelessness. Far too many residents who have found themselves housing insecure have ended up unhoused or homeless in recent years, either temporarily or longer term. 406 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-71
Addressing the specific housing needs for the unhoused population remains a priority throughout the region, particularly since homelessness is disproportionately experienced by people of color, people with disabilities, those struggling with addiction and those dealing with traumatic life circumstances. In San Mateo County, the most common type of household experiencing homelessness is those without children in their care. Among households experiencing homelessness that do not have children, 75.5% are unsheltered. Of homeless households with children, most are sheltered in transitional housing (see Figure 43).
Figure 43: Homelessness by Household Type and Shelter Status, San Mateo County Universe: Population experiencing homelessness
Notes: This data is based on Point-in-Time (PIT) information provided to HUD by CoCs in the application for CoC Homeless Assistance Programs. The PIT Count provides a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night during the last ten days in January. Each Bay Area county is its own CoC, and so the data for this table is provided at the county-level. Per HCD’s requirements, jurisdictions will need to supplement this county-level data with local estimates of people experiencing homelessness.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2019)
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HOMELS-01.
People of color are more likely to experience poverty and financial instability as a result of federal and local housing policies that have historically excluded them from the same opportunities extended to white residents. Consequently, people of color are often disproportionately impacted by homelessness, particularly Black residents of the Bay Area. In San Mateo County, White (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) residents represent the largest proportion of residents experiencing homelessness and account for 66.6% of the homeless population, while making up 50.6% of the overall population (see Figure 44). 407 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-72
Figure 44: Racial Group Share of General and Homeless Populations, San Mateo County Universe: Population experiencing homelessness
Notes: This data is based on Point-in-Time (PIT) information provided to HUD by CoCs in the application for CoC Homeless Assistance Programs. The PIT Count provides a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night during the last ten days in January. Each Bay Area county is its own CoC, and so the data for this table is provided at the county-level. Per HCD’s requirements, jurisdictions will need to supplement this county-level data with local estimates of people experiencing homelessness. HUD does not disaggregate racial demographic data by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity for people experiencing homelessness. Instead, HUD reports data on Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity for people experiencing homelessness in a separate table.
Accordingly, the racial group data listed here includes both Hispanic/Latinx and non-Hispanic/Latinx individuals.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2019); U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001(A-I) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HOMELS-02.
In San Mateo, Latinx residents represent 38.1% of the population experiencing homelessness, while Latinx residents comprise 24.7% of the general population (see Figure 45). 408 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-73
Figure 45: Latinx Share of General and Homeless Populations, San Mateo County Universe: Population experiencing homelessness
Notes: This data is based on Point-in-Time (PIT) information provided to HUD by CoCs in the application for CoC Homeless Assistance Programs. The PIT Count provides a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night during the last ten days in January. Each Bay Area county is its own CoC, and so the data for this table is provided at the county-level. Per HCD’s requirements, jurisdictions will need to supplement this county-level data with local estimates of people experiencing homelessness. The data from HUD on Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity for individuals experiencing homelessness does not specify racial group identity. Accordingly, individuals in either ethnic group identity category (Hispanic/Latinx or non-Hispanic/Latinx) could be of any racial background.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2019); U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001(A-I) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HOMELS-03.
Many of those experiencing homelessness are dealing with severe issues – including mental illness, substance abuse and domestic violence – that are potentially life threatening and require additional assistance. In San Mateo County, homeless individuals are commonly challenged by severe mental illness, with 305 reporting this condition (see Figure 46). Of those, some 62.0% are unsheltered, further adding to the challenge of handling the issue.
409 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-74
Figure 46: Characteristics for the Population Experiencing Homelessness, San Mateo County Universe: Population experiencing homelessness
Notes: This data is based on Point-in-Time (PIT) information provided to HUD by CoCs in the application for CoC Homeless Assistance Programs. The PIT Count provides a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night during the last ten days in January. Each Bay Area county is its own CoC, and so the data for this table is provided at the county-level. Per HCD’s requirements, jurisdictions will need to supplement this county-level data with local estimates of people experiencing homelessness. These challenges/characteristics are counted separately and are not mutually exclusive, as an individual may report more than one challenge/characteristic. These counts should not be summed.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2019)
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HOMELS-04.
In San Mateo, the student population experiencing homelessness totaled 313 during the 2019-2020 school year and decreased by 24.6% since the 2016-2017 school year. By comparison, San Mateo County has seen a 37.5% decrease in the population of students experiencing homelessness since the 2016-17 school year, and the Bay Area population of students experiencing homelessness decreased by 8.5%.
During the 2019-2020 school year, there were still some 13,718 students experiencing homelessness throughout the region, adding undue burdens on learning and thriving, with the potential for longer term negative effects.
The number of students in San Mateo experiencing homelessness in 2019 represents 26.2% of the San Mateo County total and 2.3% of the Bay Area total.
410 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-75
Table 15: Students in Local Public Schools Experiencing Homelessness Academic Year San Mateo City San Mateo County Bay Area
2016-2017 415 1,910 14,990
2017-2018 422 1,337 15,142
2018-2019 362 1,934 15,427
2019-2020 313 1,194 13,718
Universe: Total number of unduplicated primary and short-term enrollments within the academic year (July 1 to June 30), public schools
Notes: The California Department of Education considers students to be homeless if they are unsheltered, living in temporary shelters for people experiencing homelessness, living in hotels/motels, or temporarily doubled up and sharing the housing of other persons due to the loss of housing or economic hardship. The data used for this table was obtained at the school site level, matched to a file containing school locations, geocoded and assigned to jurisdiction, and finally summarized by geography.
Source: California Department of Education, California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), Cumulative Enrollment Data (Academic Years 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020) This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table HOMELS-05.
The San Mateo County Human Services Agency (HSA), in close collaboration with community partners, conducts the bi-annual One Day Homeless Count and Survey (count). The purpose of the One Day Homeless Count and Survey is to gather and analyze information to help the community understand homelessness in San Mateo County. This is one data set, among others, that provides information for effective planning of services to assist people experiencing homelessness and people at risk of homelessness. HSA’s Center on Homelessness and the San Mateo County Continuum of Care (CoC) Steering Committee were responsible for overseeing this data collection effort, with assistance from a broad group of community partners, including non-profit social service providers, city and town governments, and people who had former or current homelessness experience.
The One Day Homeless Count and Survey was designed to meet two related sets of data needs. The first is the requirement of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) that communities applying for McKinney-Vento Homelessness Assistance funds (also known as Continuum of Care or “CoC” funds) must conduct a point-in-time count of homeless people a minimum of every two years. These counts are required to take place in the last ten days of January. The One Day Homeless Count and Survey was conducted in January 2019 to meet this HUD requirement. The previous HUDmandated count was conducted in January 2017.
The second set of data needs is for local homeless system planning, as the One Day Homeless Count and Survey provides information about people experiencing homelessness and about trends over time.
The 2019 count determined that there were 1,512 people experiencing homelessness in San Mateo County on the night of January 30, 2019, comprised of:
• 901 unsheltered homeless people (living on streets, in cars, in recreational vehicles (RVs), in tents/encampments), and
• 611 sheltered homeless people (in emergency shelters and transitional housing programs).
This finding of 1,512 people was higher than the 2017 and 2015 counts, but lower than the 2011 and 2013 counts. The number of people living in shelters in 2019 remained similar to the number counted in 2017. 411 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-76
The overall increase in homelessness from 2017 to 2019 was driven primarily by a significant increase in the number of people living in RVs (127% increase). There was also an increase in the number of people sleeping on the street (24% increase). However, compared to 2017, the 2019 count found a decrease in people estimated to be sleeping in cars (7% decrease) and in tents/encampments (31% decrease).
While no unsheltered families were directly observed during the 2019 count, the number of families with children experiencing unsheltered homelessness was estimated to have been 16 (in cars, tents/encampments, and/or RVs). This number represents a 16% decrease in families from the 19 families estimated to be unsheltered in the 2017 count.
The count found 74 unsheltered individuals in the City of San Mateo, representing 8% of the Countywide unsheltered population. This was an increase from 2017, when 48 homeless individuals were located, but lower than in 2013, when 103 people were counted. Although demographic data are not available for each individual jurisdiction, a number of key findings were made.
The 2019 One Day Homeless Count and Survey counted 1,018 households comprised of 1,110 single adults and 119 family households comprised of 401 adults and children.
A person in an adult only household was most likely to be unsheltered (75.5%), over 25 years old (95.1%), male (75.6%), non-Hispanic (64.9%), Caucasian (70.5%), and not experiencing chronic homelessness (71.4%). In contrast, family households were most likely to be in transitional housing (67.6%), have more children than adults (59.1% vs. 40.9% respectively), and be headed by a female (57.1%). People heading family households were also predominantly non-Hispanic (53.6%) and Caucasian (55.9%), however, race and ethnicity showed more variation in family households than adult only households.
Further, the percentage of people experiencing chronic homelessness over time increased from 19% in 2017 to 21% in 2019, but this figure was substantially lower than in 2013, when 45% were chronically homeless. Veterans in 2019 represented 5% of adults, a reduction from 11% in 2019. Severe mental illness, alcohol and/or drug use, and history of domestic violence were some of the self-reported conditions of those who were counted. For more information, see website: hsa.smcgov.org/2019-oneday-homeless-count 412 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-77
Resources for Persons Experiencing Homelessness
The County of San Mateo is the primary coordinator of services for people experiencing homelessness in the county. The City of San Mateo will continue to provide support for strategic initiatives to help address the challenges faced by people experiencing homelessness in the City, as well as to support the implementation of the County’s 2022-2025 CoC Strategic Plan on Homelessness.
The City continues to provide financial support to non-profit organizations providing housing services, including homeless prevention, supportive and emergency housing, and other services identified as priority needs through the community engagement process. The City continues to support The Vendome, the permanent supportive housing development for chronically homeless in San Mateo. Additionally, the City participates in the San Mateo County CDBG Cohort, along with the other jurisdictions in the county to coordinate funding for service agencies. The Cohort meets quarterly and enables jurisdictions to share best practices, identify gaps in service, and utilize a joint proposal system to streamline funding applications.
The Continuum of Care (COC) guides the implementation of the county's housing and service system to meet the needs of homeless individuals and families. The City of San Mateo participates in COC meetings and monitors decision-making to better understand latest trends in homeless outreach. The COC coordinates the following activities:
• System planning (identifying gaps, developing strategies to fill gaps, responding to emerging best practices, etc.)
• Setting funding priorities for Emergency Solutions Grant and COC funds • Assessing system performance and making system redesigns as needed • Coordinating with other planning entities such as the Community Action Agency • Undertakes a wide range of efforts to meet the needs of homeless individuals and families Chronically Homeless: COC has created a multi-disciplinary, bilingual, Homeless Outreach Team (HOT) to conduct intensive outreach and engagement with unsheltered and chronically homeless individuals and families located throughout the County, with specialized HOT teams in the cities of San Mateo, Redwood City, South San Francisco, Half Moon Bay, Pacifica, and East Palo Alto.
Families with children: To reduce the number of unsheltered families, the COC has developed a rapid rehousing program. The San Mateo County Human Services Agency has provided funding for a motel voucher program to assist families with children that are waiting to access shelter.
Veterans: Needs include housing and assistance for homeless, employment and education services, and improved and increased liaisons with the Veterans Benefits Administration. 413 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-78
Youth: Currently, HUD COC funds are provided to the San Mateo County Mental Health Association to operate its Support and Advocacy for Young Adults in Transition Program, which provides case management and housing search/stabilization services to homeless youth. The San Mateo County Housing Authority administers the Family Unification Program vouchers.
6.6 Farmworkers
Farmworkers are traditionally defined as persons whose primary incomes are earned through seasonal or permanent agricultural work. Farmworkers have special housing needs because they earn lower incomes than many other workers. In many parts of Northern California, agriculture production is an important contribution to local economies, especially in Napa and Sonoma Counties. According to the U.S.
Department of Agriculture Census of Farmworkers, the number of permanent farmworkers in San Mateo County has decreased since 2002, totaling 978 in 2017, while the number of seasonal farm workers has decreased, totaling 343 in 2017 (see Figure 47).
In San Mateo, there are no known farmworkers, and it does not have any farm housing or land remaining in agricultural use. Further, no land within San Mateo is designated for agricultural use, except for the San Mateo County Event Center site and a parcel located within the College of San Mateo. According to ACS 2019 five-year data, there could be an estimated 30 farmworkers in San Mateo; however, the margin of error for this figure is +/- 42, meaning that this information is unreliable. Even at 30 farmworkers, this represents only 0.03% of the total population in the City. Maps from the State of California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program show no farmland in San Mateo. Due to the low number of agricultural workers in the City, the housing needs of migrant and/or farmworker housing need can be met through general affordable housing programs.
In San Mateo, there were no reported students of migrant workers in the 2019-2020 school year, which is consistent with the finding that there are likely no farmworkers in the community (see Table 15). The trend for the region for the past few years has been a decline of 2.4% in the number of migrant worker students since the 2016-2017 school year. The change at the county level is a 57.1% decrease in the number of migrant worker students since the 2016-2017 school year.
Table 16: Migrant Worker Student Population
Academic Year San Mateo City San Mateo County Bay Area
2016-17 0 657 4,630
2017-18 0 418 4,607
2018-19 0 307 4,075
2019-20 0 282 3,976
Universe: Total number of unduplicated primary and short-term enrollments within the academic year (July 1 to June 30), public schools
Notes: The data used for this table was obtained at the school site level, matched to a file containing school locations, geocoded and assigned to jurisdiction, and finally summarized by geography.
Source: California Department of Education, California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), Cumulative Enrollment Data (Academic Years 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020) This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table FARM-01. 414 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-79
Figure 47: Farm Operations and Farm Labor by County, San Mateo County Universe: Hired farm workers (including direct hires and agricultural service workers who are often hired through labor contractors)
Notes: Farm workers are considered seasonal if they work on a farm less than 150 days in a year, while farm workers who work on a farm more than 150 days are considered to be permanent workers for that farm.
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Census of Farmworkers (2002, 2007, 2012, 2017), Table 7: Hired Farm Labor For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table FARM-02. 415 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O
20 4 0 G E N E R A L P L A N
H O U S I N G E L E M E N T
Page H-A-80
Resources for Migrant and/or Farm Workers
As mentioned above, there are no known persons employed in the farming, fishing, and forestry occupations. As such, no special programs target this population in San Mateo but they can be generally assisted with Housing Choice Vouchers or other affordable housing resources. 416 of 2271
C I T Y O F S A N M A T E O 2 0 31 H O U S I N G E L E M E N T Page H-A-81
6.7 Non-English Speakers
California has long been an immigration gateway to the United States, which means that many languages are spoken throughout the Bay Area. Since learning a new language is universally challenging, it is not uncommon for residents who have immigrated to the United States to have limited English proficiency.
This limit can lead to additional disparities if there is a disruption in housing, such as an eviction, because residents might not be aware of their rights or they might be wary to engage due to immigration status concerns. In San Mateo, 8.5% of residents 5 years and older identify as speaking English not well or not at all, which is above the proportion for San Mateo County. Throughout the region the proportion of residents 5 years and older with limited English proficiency is 8%.
Figure 48: Population with Limited English Proficiency
Universe: Population 5 years and over
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B16005 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table AFFH-03. 417 of 2271