After a court-ordered proposal reconsideration and significant court fees, the San Mateo City Council has approved moving forward with a controversial 10-unit condo building development at West Santa Inez Avenue it denied in 2018.
“We are at a point where we must bring this project forward,” Deputy Mayor Diane Papan said. “I’m willing to do that, but I really regret that it is four years later and cooler heads could not prevail to get this done in some other way than going to the courts.”
The project and subsequent legal battle have served as a landmark case in following housing law and the reasoning for approving or denying housing developments. The denial of the four-story structure at the corner of West Santa Inez Avenue and El Camino Real was due to concerns about height differences between the proposed building and a next-door single-story home. The decision led the California Renters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund to successfully sue the city to reconsider the project in a landmark case around the Housing Accountability Act, limiting a city’s ability to reject proposals for housing developments that satisfy general plan and zoning requirements. In October, the city was required to pay $450,000 to the group when the California Court of Appeals decided the case and ordered project reconsideration. The project was originally submitted in 2015. The Planning Commission denied the project in 2017, and the City Council upheld the denial in 2018.
The 2022 proposal would demolish two single-family residences, merge two properties into one and remove 22 trees to create a 15,322-square-foot property with an underground parking garage. The parcel is across the street from a 60-unit building and is in an area designated for multifamily buildings. It remains largely unchanged from the 2018 version.
Several neighbors spoke at the meeting and expressed concerns about the building’s impacts on homes and streets near the house, along with additional parking and traffic problems on narrow streets. The underground parking garage design calls for a “puzzle” system that allows cars to be stored in less space than a traditional structure. The proposed method has residents concerned it could lead to more on-street parking for convenience. Jack Matthews of John Matthews Architects, the project applicant and former city mayor, said the project would be consistent with the neighborhood character and area. He also noted the project would comply with mechanized parking standards.
“This project meets all the objective design standards of San Mateo and provides 10 new condominium apartments to help address the acute housing crisis we have in our city,” Matthews said.
Recommended for you
Councilmember Amourence Lee noted the city had little likelihood of winning an appeal if it denied the approval. Councilmember Joe Goethals voted for approval and was worried that a project rejection would result in denser housing projects under more relaxed state housing laws, further upsetting residents. He noted the current reality is state laws are primarily considering where housing is needed and little else.
“I think the direction state laws are headed in really don’t take into account neighbors and neighborhoods like this. They certainly don’t take into account traffic and public safety,” Goethals said.
Goethals wanted to add a condition of approval that residents of the project would not be allowed to get a residential parking permit. However, the city attorney and city staff dissuaded him. The council also asked for increased vigilance to ensure heritage trees on adjacent properties will be protected during construction.
The decision came at the Feb. 7 City Council meeting, with the vote 4-0, with Councilmember Eric Rodriguez recusing himself. The vote vacated San Mateo’s 2018 decision and approved a site plan, planning application for tree removal, and meets environmental requirements.
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(0) comments
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.