San Mateo won’t appeal housing ruling

The Housing Accountability Act limits a city’s ability to reject proposals for housing developments that satisfy general plan and zoning requirements. A ruling in the case, called California Renters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund vs. San Mateo, found the “design guideline the city invoked as part of its reason for rejecting this housing development is not ‘objective’ for purposes of the HAA, and so cannot support the city’s decision to reject the project,” the court’s decision said.

In a statement, the city said the city’s strong track record of promoting affordable housing through innovative policies and programs was overlooked in the attention the case received in the state and the media.

“This lawsuit over a 10-unit market rate housing development that offered no affordable units was not reflective of the city’s history of expanding affordable housing opportunities through innovative policies and programs. We agree that expanding housing in California is critical and over the last four years alone the city has approved over 2,000 new housing units, including more than 430 affordable below-market rate homes,” San Mateo Mayor Eric Rodriguez said in the statement.

Dylan Casey, CaRLA’s executive director, said in a statement that advocates, legislators and now the judiciary are on the same page about starting to solve the state’s housing crisis, which is not only a crisis for “affordable housing” but a crisis across all income levels. Casey also said the ruling sets a precedent for all of California.

“We applaud the city of San Mateo in being transparent about the costs of violating the Housing Accountability Act, which was created specifically because California cities have been denying housing for subjective reasons for decades,” Casey said in the statement. “CaRLA is very intentional in the suits it brings and the reason this case drew statewide attention is exactly because this is what is happening up and down California and it’s a message to cities that we are paying attention.”

The Planning Commission denied the project in 2017 because of concerns about height. The City Council considered the appeal Feb. 5, 2018, but it denied building the four-story, 10-unit multifamily residential building that would have been a block on North El Camino Real at 4 W. Santa Inez Ave. To the west of the project was a two-story house on West Santa Inez Avenue and a single-story house on Engle Road. The council made the decision based on height differences between properties and encouraged the applicant Tony Gundogdu to submit revised plans. In a petition filed weeks later, the California Renters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund alleged the council’s decision was subjective and illegal under the state’s Housing Accountability Act, which requires projects be denied for objective, well-defined criteria. A trial court initially denied the petition before being overturned.

The court ordered the city to vacate its action Feb. 5, 2018, upholding the Planning Commission’s decision to deny the application and reconsider the challenge to the commission’s decision.

On Monday, Oct. 18, the City Council will vote on a resolution approving the settlement with CARLA. The proposed development project will return to the council for reconsideration at a later date.

“We remain committed to assisting with development of much-needed affordable housing through inclusionary housing policies, long-range planning informed by community input, allocating local funding where available, and leveraging city-owned land to build affordable homes in our community,” Rodriguez said.