San Mateo council subcommittee oppose extension for Measure P

“The City Council is committed to letting all residents’ voices be heard during [the general plan update] process and community input will dictate future zoning, including heights and densities and proximity to transit,” according to a staff report summarizing the subcommittee’s viewpoint. “Since the City Council will not change zoning until the general plan is finished, passing Measure P at this time would stifle the process and discourage participation. For these reasons, we encourage the City Council to oppose the measure and for residents to vote NO on this measure.”

The full council at a meeting Monday will weigh in on the subcommittee’s recommendation.

Measure P proponents, a group called San Mateans for Responsive Government, or SMRG, described the subcommittee’s recommendation as preposterous.

“To say that Measure P ‘stifles’ the general plan is preposterous, since it did not either in 1997 or 2010. [Goethals and Rodriguez] said the city will not change zoning until the general plan is complete, but there is no legal assurance of that. The only thing that would guarantee that is Measure P,” SMRG spokesman Michael Weinhauer said in a statement.

“SMRG knows the extension of Measure P will increase participation in the general plan update by ensuring everyone has a seat at the table, not just monied special interests,” Weinhauer said. “Measure P’s extension will also ensure voters get the chance to adopt the new general plan at the polls. What better way to find out what people truly believe than through their votes. That is what SMRG and its measure stand for.”

Initially passed in 1991 as Measure H, Measure P was reapproved by voters in 2004. It caps building height in the city at 55 feet but can go up to 75 feet in certain areas if there is a community benefit. It also limits density to 50 units per acre. It will sunset by the end of the year unless voters in November approve the proposed 10-year extension.

Proponents in 2018 gathered 7,000 signatures for the extension, more than is needed to get the measure on the ballot.

Goethals said the proposed Measure P extension is flawed in part because it’s outdated and includes the same language as when it was first proposed roughly 30 years ago.

He and Rodriguez also argued Measure P is limiting the construction of much needed affordable housing in the midst of a housing crisis.

“We can’t get more than five affordable housing units on 1 acre right next to the train station and that’s just wrong,” Goethals said. “How are we going to support teachers and nurses if we can only put five units of affordable housing on an acre?”

Weinhauer countered many conditions remain largely the same today as when Measure P was first instituted and said it has served the city well. He also rejects the claim that Measure P prevents the production of affordable housing, noting it includes a provision requiring large residential projects to have 10% affordable units.

“Taller and denser doesn’t equate to affordable and [councilmembers] need to stop touting that line because it’s just a fallacy,” Weinhauer said.

Rodriguez argued Measure P will ultimately backfire on its supporters. As the state requires more and more housing be built to meet the need, construction may increasingly have to occur in the city’s neighborhoods if it can’t be concentrated downtown, he said.

“I’m concerned that if it passes it’ll make it harder, perhaps impossible, for San Mateo to meet its upcoming [regional housing needs allocation] targets and this may force us to consider dense housing away from transit corridors into single-family neighborhoods and away from transit,” he said. “Regardless of what you think about taller or denser buildings, it’s how do you meet those numbers with a minimum impact to quality of life.”

RHNA is the state-mandated target for how much housing must be built in a given eight-year period.

Noting companies like Twitter are now allowing employees to work from home indefinitely, Weinhauer said COVID-19 will dramatically change the housing and office landscape in the Bay Area. He feels those changes should play out before the city looks to more development.

“For the council and for anybody to charge ahead in the old model of ‘hey we need to build more denser and taller buildings’ — when you think about it that’s anathema to social distancing and the environment we find ourselves in. I think you’ll see office space vanish, companies don’t need it or want it and that can all become housing,” he said. “I think you’ll see a fundamental change in the housing office landscape and we need to see that play out before we charge ahead and build big buildings.”

The council on Monday will also officially approve placement of the Measure P extension on the November ballot. While the group gathered the signatures, it is the City Council’s responsibility to place it on the ballot.

zachary@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 102