San Mateo County adopts housing plan

The housing element is a state-mandated document meant to detail how a jurisdiction intends to facilitate housing construction. Once adopted by a jurisdiction’s governing board, the document is sent to the state Department of Housing and Community Development for review before changes are likely suggested and the plan is sent back for a second approval by the local jurisdiction.

The county has until Jan. 21 to adopt the final version of its housing element or risk allowing a provision, known as a builder’s remedy, to kick in which would remove land control from the county and allow developers to bypass zoning laws if their projects contain an adequate amount of affordable housing.

Beyond detailing how the county intends to hit its Regional Housing Needs Allocation goals, the housing element also calls out other policy initiatives meant to promote equal housing opportunities and equity through housing policy and investments and preserving existing affordable housing.

San Mateo County must plan for more than 2,883 homes to be built in unincorporated areas over the next eight years as part of its RHNA determined through the state’s housing element process. In addition to the overall goal, a specific number of units must be built at different affordability levels — 811 at very low, 468 at low, 433 at moderate and 1,121 at moderate affordability.

Like jurisdictions across the state, the county’s goal this year is substantially larger than those issued in previous cycles, particularly for low and very-low-income units, Gibson said.

“We have, essentially, a much greater burden ahead, and every jurisdiction in the Bay Area and throughout the state also has a similarly greater burden,” Gibson said.

The county could hit its overall goal without rezoning parcels to allow for greater density but would fall short of its target for very low-affordability units and would have little buffer room in the low and moderate categories.

Following best practices, county staff has instead aimed for a much higher target in case HCD rules an identified site is infeasible or a parcel is not developed by 2030. The move could result in the county substantially exceeding its RHNA goal by more than 2,500 units.

That would be done by implementing a rezoning program for 89 parcels in unincorporated Colma, Broadmoor and Harbor Industrial areas that are currently zoned for either commercial and industrial development or for very low-intensity residential development, according to staff. That alone would result in the county hitting and surpassing its subgoals by more than 1,900 units if projects are proposed to develop the sites.

Those units would be in addition to 675 units built on vacant single-family sites, 250 units from vacant multi-family sites, 1,384 units through redevelopment and 726 units from pipeline projects already underway. An additional 355 projected accessory dwelling units and 176 projected units developed through Senate Bill 9 — legislation permitting up to four units on a lot — could also add to the county’s overall goal but it’s unclear whether the state will allow for jurisdictions to include those figures in their housing elements.

“The numbers will change, but we think we will still have sufficient capacity with the rezoned sites that we’ve included in the housing element,” Gibson said, noting the selected rezoning program sites were selected because they were close to amenities such as schools, transportation and shopping centers.

Supervisors unanimously voted to send the document to HCD for review but not before Supervisor David Canepa encouraged staff to continue reviewing potential opportunities to increase density in parts of Colma.

“I do think there are opportunities outside of the areas we have now,” Canepa said. “I do think we have a huge opportunity in unincorporated Colma via density and it’s a perfect site location.”

As Gibson noted, the state review could result in some changes to the county’s current unit goal count. The board, featuring two new members, will take a final vote on the document early next year once the state grants its approval.

sierra@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 106