San Mateo seeks to speed new housing

One option is improving the pre-application and design review process for large projects, categorized as a residential project with more than 20 units and non-residential projects more than 10,000 square feet.

A pre-application study session is used to receive public and commission input on design plans that can be incorporated into a formal submittal and to resolve any initial issue. Some concerns are that the pre-application now involves several review rounds, which can take six months to a year and makes it difficult to incorporate feedback. The city is interested in starting a preliminary review of pre-applications to reduce processing times by three to four months. The city is looking at meeting format changes for pre-application study sessions and potentially adding more neighborhood meetings.

The commission wanted more conceptual planning free-form discussions during pre-applications rather than a high level of detail. Commissioner Adam Nugent suggested having more conversations between the commission and applicants to get answers and better feedback. Commissioner Seema Patel agreed and suggested having the applicants ask questions to commissioners. Nugent did not want a second neighborhood meeting because they can be used to stop needed housing development in San Mateo, citing research done on the housing process in Connecticut, which found public meetings decrease the likelihood of project approval.

“I think it’s important to strike a balance where we are not creating too much of a veto point but also positioning it at an early enough stage that we can get good feedback,” Nugent said.

Commissioner John Ebneter wanted to see more public engagement and outreach to communities affected by development, noting public input during meetings has significantly decreased over the years.

“There used to be a lot more people that would come to the meetings and, quite frankly, I am shocked the public has really pulled back from this process,” Ebneter said.

The commission also favored keeping third-party design reviews for larger projects, either as a requirement or an option. The design review process involves a third-party consultant, Cannon Design Group, which provides input on urban design, site planning, and architectural and landscape design. With new state housing laws requiring objective design standards, the need for design review requirements has become less needed. The commission discussed continuing to require third-party design review and what stage the review should occur.

Ebneter favored keeping third-party design reviews as an option, noting they were beneficial during the process. Vice Chair Margaret Williams favored keeping the third-party design review as a requirement and part of the pre-application study session.

“I actually find the design review reports very helpful. In the three years that I have been on the Planning Commission, I know I have said on numerous occasions I have agreed with what the design consultant has had to say,” Williams said.

Patel favored eliminating a requirement for design reviews. She said the feedback was often subjective and sometimes gave advice contrary to the commission. She instead suggested having the review be at the discretion of the Planning Commission. City staff will now come up with a draft resolution for City Council adoption.

curtis@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 102