Redwood City plans for housing

Redwood City, like all jurisdictions in California, is mandated by the state to complete a Housing Element. The document outlines how the city will meet regional housing needs, or a Regional Housing Needs Allocation as determined by the state, every eight years.  

A final RHNA number has yet to be approved but city staff anticipates a goal of 4,588 units. The number is nearly double the goal set during the previous cycle, starting in 2014, Alin Lancaster, Housing Leadership manager, said. 

Given that the state can veto areas the city identifies for potential housing, Lancaster and Principal Planner Diana O’Dell said staff suggests the city strive to meet 150% of its RHNA goal by identifying where 6,882 can be built. 

Doing so could make the city eligible for a “pro-housing” designation which would give priority for state funding to developers proposing to build in the city. It would also give the city more flexibility in approving projects that may not meet the number of units initially proposed for one site, given that those units could be made up through a project on a different site. 

“There’s not a lot of downside to planning for the additional [units]. If we don’t happen to hit it we’re not penalized in any way,” O’Dell said.

Meeting RHNA

Though some state legislative changes have boosted home development in the city, including loosened restrictions around building accessory dwelling units, staff proposes the city implement a combination of mandated and optional strategies to meet its goal. 

Mandated strategies would include upzoning areas with density limits lower than what’s included in the General Plan and honoring Senate Bill 9, which allows duplexes and lot splits in single-family neighborhoods. 

As optional strategies, staff recommends that new mixed-use corridors be created along Woodside Road, Veterans Boulevard and Bay Road. Additional zoning changes can be made to restrict the areas to residential and retail uses only, eliminating the possibility of developers proposing office projects, O’Dell said. 

The goal would be to distribute the housing as evenly as possible across the city while also ensuring homes are placed in high opportunity areas, defined in the staff report as “residential neighborhoods with high property values and access to good schools, parks and jobs.” 

The focus differs from the city’s current tactic which has been focused on placing housing along the transit corridor and near downtown. Doing so will lead to about 3,000 homes to be built by the end of the current RHNA cycle with another 3,700 units in the pipeline that will count toward the next cycle.

“It’s a pretty big number and it’s just a snapshot in time right now. We could be in a different place next year and we will be in a different place next year,” she said. 

Staff is still greatly interested in increasing residential caps for downtown by 1,500 units, O’Dell said. With those units, the mandated changes and an estimated 60 new ADUs a year could get the city to its base RHNA goal but Lancaster and O’Dell said staff stands behind its recommendation to surpass the goal.

Pushing for density

The governing bodies broadly supported the suggested strategies with a priority of placing housing in high opportunity areas, largely single-family neighborhoods. Siding with a recommendation made by a public speaker, Mike Dunham, the members support the implementation of affordable housing overlay zones which would permit higher residential density in certain areas. 

Officials shared concerns that SB 9 would not drive much development after referencing a study staff cited in their report about the effects of similar legislation adopted in other states. Additional concerns were raised around the city’s jobs-to-housing imbalance, especially as the area prepares for millions of square feet of new office space to be built within the decade. 

They encouraged staff to consider ways to incentivize development of “missing middle” homes — duplexes, triplexes and fourplexes — in single-family neighborhoods, noting that zoning changes through SB 9 appear to be the only current strategy for boosting density. 

O’Dell said staff will do additional research on how SB 9 will affect density in the neighborhoods.

Where the members did differ is on whether zoning protections should be implemented for RV parks, an additional strategy staff proposed as a method of protecting forms of affordable housing. But some officials suggested doing so could stunt future hopes of increasing density on the lots. 

Instead, Planning Commissioner Isabella Chu suggested staff consider ways to preserve low-income earners in the area while leaving open the possibility for additional housing. 

“I’m very concerned about preserving affordable housing because of the people who live in those units but worry that we’re sacrificing future affordable housing by keeping that height limit and density low,” Chu said. 

Given the growing tensions around the boom of development being experienced in the city, Becker questioned how staff intends to address those concerns while adhering to state requirements.

City staff have attempted to facilitate community feedback through two workshops and by attending other community meetings, O’Dell said. Additional outreach will be conducted including workshops in Spanish. O’Dell also assured the boards that future environmental reviews of the areas identified for growth would lead to community feedback. 

Planning Commissioner Rick Hunter also encouraged staff to develop better methods for surveying renters, who represent about 50% of the city’s population but only 22% of survey responses, he estimated. 

“The hope is not that they’re going to find out late,” O’Dell said. “We’re hoping we can spread the word and they can be a part of this conversation now.” 

sierra@smdailyjournal.com 

(650) 344-5200 ext. 106