I am 68 and have always lived in the area and in San Mateo for 15 years. I believe we desperately need affordable housing in the area. I am confused and wondering why Habitat for Humanity and the county Democratic Party are opposing Measure Y. How have they decided that Measure Y keeps us from accomplishing the affordable housing we need? At this moment there are hundreds and hundreds of housing units being built in the city — I drive by them every day — so clearly development is going full speed ahead and the existing building plans have not halted development. So, I have to ask why aren’t more of these units affordable housing? Why didn’t the City Council demand a higher percentage of affordable units in these developments? And why aren’t office developers required to do more to solve the problems they create? Might our failure to build affordable housing be due, in part, to our council’s acquiescence to developers’ desire for profit?
Vote yes on Measure Y which doesn’t allow developers to pay in lieu fees instead of actually building affordable units.
The question is, how do you vote if you do not want any more affordable housing and any change in density and height limitations. That would be a good thing to tell the readers of SMDJ.
Every affordable housing developer who has worked in San Mateo County is opposing Measure Y.
That’s because Measure Y is a roadblock to affordable housing. We need to knock it down.
Builders need three things in order to build affordable housing: money, land, and zoning. Measure P has interfered with all three for thirty years. The authors of Measure Y decided behind closed doors to keep all of the old policies the same and to fix none of the huge technical problems with the old measure.
A height limit of 55 feet is appropriate in many parts of town, but around the rail transit stations this limit is a mistake. Proponents of Measure Y claim their measure encourages more housing around transit, but that just isn’t true.
Measure Y isn’t just a height limit. It has separate technical density limits for commercial and residential development, and the limits for residential development are far more restrictive than those for commercial. This imbalance limits affordable housing and makes more San Mateo workers commute, which is why both affordable housing and environmental advocates want voters to vote no on Measure Y.
Measure Y limits that apply only to residential development make it harder for housing builders to compete with commercial developers for the limited amount of land where Measure Y allows apartments to be built. The limits that apply only to housing also dramatically drive up per unit housing costs for affordable home builders.
Measure Y compounds the problem of poorly drafted zoning by freezing in place an out of date and weak inclusionary program that provides fewer units than inclusionary programs in other nearby jurisdictions. In other jurisdictions, affordable housing developers can get funds from in-lieu fees from market-rate developers.
When a market-rate developer pays in-lieu fees instead of building affordable units, that money is required to be used for affordable housing, and it goes to a non-profit developer. Non-profits are able to leverage in lieu fees with other funding sources to provide more units, and to provide better on site services like after school care and computer labs that improve the quality of life for residents.
Here are examples of affordable homes that would not have been possible without in-lieu fees. Please note that none of them are in San Mateo, because Measure Y doesn’t allow it:
Sequoia Belle Haven – 90 homes for seniors in Menlo Park
Sweeney Lane – 52 homes for families in Daly City
Mosaic Gardens at Friendly Acres – acquisition/rehab of 50 homes for people with special needs in Redwood City
Shorebreeze Apartments – addition of 62 homes for families in Mountain View
From MidPen Housing:
“Measure Y’s policies have severely constrained every major affordable housing development entitled for a generation. The height limit is sacrosanct and the City has not been flexible with it or certain technical ways of calculating density, even though the density bonus law explicitly permits concessions like height must be considered. Many sites in our portfolio could have accommodated more units if this voter-approved measure were not on the books. This is particularly true of Peninsula Station (68 homes for families) near the Hillsdale Station and Delaware Pacific (60 homes for families) near Hayward Park.”
It is time to overturn this old policy and replace it with a plan that is developed collaboratively with everyone in the community, vetted through environmental review, written by professional planners, and adopted through a community process by elected representatives.
HLC, in your mischaracterizations of Measure Y (and its parent measure P), you mentioned the four affordable complexes which you said could not be built without in-lieu fees. However, they very well could be built in San Mateo with commercial linkage fees, and they all fall well under the Measure Y standards.
No, they could not. We simply do not have enough money in San Mateo. In-Lieu fees would be very helpful. Also, the density in a number of those developments is much higher than the density allowed in Measure Y. Unfortunately, Measure Y was not written by anyone that worked as a city planner and mistakes were made that make it very difficult for affordable housing developers. Please, if you care about affordable homes or would like to have a greater say in the tradeoffs between new developments and open space, transit improvements, and other community amenities - VOTE NO ON Y! https://www.noonmeasurey.com/endorsements/
I think you are generally correct but you are putting the cart before the horse, An immediate family member who is in this business tells me that regulations, permitting and outrageous local ordinances get in the way of building more affordable housing. He is saying that the profit motive needs to be there to make any development attractive, but that red tape, recently required security measures around construction sites, and other local pet project requirements, unnecessarily delays projects rendering development uneconomic. If we are really interested in developing highly needed affordable housing, listen to the developers, not the screaming, ulterior motivated politicians.
"there are hundreds and hundreds of housing units being built in the city ... so clearly development is going full speed ahead"
In WW2 the Axis built thousands and thousands of planes "so clearly [building] is going full speed ahead". Yet the Allies built thousands and thousands more.
Housing construction should be a challenge on par with construction of the Liberty Ships not the defeatist strategy Measure Y puts forward "of hundreds". San Mateo has grown 8% in population since the last census... has housing stock grown by more than 8%?
Just because HLC says it, doesn't make it correct. They say they are affordable housing advocates but they also want more luxury, market-rate housing; the higher and denser the better. Perhaps they still believe that 'trickle-down' affordable housing works. Who funds this non-profit?
How interesting that the projects they reference being built with in-lieu fees in other communities are all built within Measure Y height and density standards. San Mateo has many good examples of stand-alone affordable projects, all built without in-lieu fees. And, in other neighboring communities, HLC is on the record for supporting transit-oriented developments within Measure Y standards, like the 5 story So. San Francisco former theater project highlighted in the DJ, Sep 21. Why are the Measure Y standards only a problem for HLC in the City of San Mateo?
San Mateo residents can be proud that our city has been at the forefront of providing affordable housing because of Measure Y standards that require affordable units be part of every new housing development more than 10 units.
Once the General Plan update process is complete, Measure Y standards can be updated with a vote of the people. Without their vote, the new standards will be the best that money can buy. Does anyone really believe that building more affordable housing is the reason over $1,000,000 is being spent by large developers to defeat Measure Y?
If you don't trust HLC, trust every affordable housing developer that has worked in the county. To build affordable homes, we need land, zoning, and money. Measure Y impacts all three. Measure Y is a poorly written, outdated policy that prevents affordable housing development.
Instead of allowing one neighborhood group to dictate future growth (and the arbitrary fixation on 5 stories), we should work together as a community on a general plan that has input from everyone in the city. A general plan that is vetted through environmental review. A plan written by professional planners that weighs and mitigates the impacts of specific policies and plans on affordable housing development, traffic, transit ridership, parks, schools, and the overall quality of life in San Mateo.
Measure Y has failed. If you care about affordable housing, equity, the environment, or good government - VOTE NO ON Y! If you want professional planning and a say in the future of development in the city, VOTE NO ON Y!
HLC continues to misrepresent Measure Y as an "outdated policy that prevents affordable housing development." Perhaps these lies are a reason HLC can't be trusted. Fact - the 5-7 story heights, density and affordable housing requirements in Measure Y doubled the amount of affordable housing built in the city between 1991-2017. Many affordable housing developments have been built in San Mateo under Measure Y standards. The San Mateo Daily Journal, in July 2017, wrote that “Compared to many neighboring jurisdictions, San Mateo has been progressive in looking for means to address the affordability crisis. It approved new housing developments, partnered with nonprofits to develop city-owned lots into low-income housing, and has inclusionary zoning ordinances requiring below market rate units be incorporated into new projects.”
Why would HLC say "one neighborhood group will dictate future growth" when Measure Y supporters come from every neighborhood in the city? Just take a look at all the YES on Y signs. These issues deserve truthful discussion, not code-word divisiveness. Measure Y supporters have participated in the General Plan update and will continue to do so. Measure Y does not interfere with proposing changes to the existing General Plan for the betterment of the community. But it does give voters the power to approve the changes to heights, density and affordable housing. Measure Y supporters trust that the voters care about affordable housing, equity, the environment and good government. But, without a vote, the General Plan will be the best that money can buy for the private benefit of a few powerful special interests. The vote is not only good government, it is democracy in action. VOTE YES on Y, NO on R.
Habitat for Humanity, Bridge Housing, MidPen Housing, and John Stewart company are just a handful of the affordable housing advocates and builders that oppose Measure Y because they have attempted (and in a few cases succeeded) in working under its arbitrary, rigid, and nonsensical requirements.
It is also opposed by one of the original authors, Senator Jerry Hill, who understands that we are in a different moment and need to update our planning.
It is opposed by racial justice organizations including Urban Habitat because it reinforces our segregated past.
It is opposed by unions who understand that creating homes for working people is critical for a stable community.
It is opposed by environmental organizations including Greenbelt Alliance, Save the Bay, and Citizens Climate Lobby.
It is opposed by every City Council member and candidate and the Democratic Party of San Mateo.
How many "supporter" have actually read and understood the measure? Have they only heard your explanation?
Please vote No on Y! https://www.noonmeasurey.com/endorsements/
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(12) comments
The question is, how do you vote if you do not want any more affordable housing and any change in density and height limitations. That would be a good thing to tell the readers of SMDJ.
Vote for Ozzie and Harriet and stay in your fantasy world.
Not to worry CC, you stated here in the SMDJ that you were moving from CA.
Every affordable housing developer who has worked in San Mateo County is opposing Measure Y.
That’s because Measure Y is a roadblock to affordable housing. We need to knock it down.
Builders need three things in order to build affordable housing: money, land, and zoning. Measure P has interfered with all three for thirty years. The authors of Measure Y decided behind closed doors to keep all of the old policies the same and to fix none of the huge technical problems with the old measure.
A height limit of 55 feet is appropriate in many parts of town, but around the rail transit stations this limit is a mistake. Proponents of Measure Y claim their measure encourages more housing around transit, but that just isn’t true.
Measure Y isn’t just a height limit. It has separate technical density limits for commercial and residential development, and the limits for residential development are far more restrictive than those for commercial. This imbalance limits affordable housing and makes more San Mateo workers commute, which is why both affordable housing and environmental advocates want voters to vote no on Measure Y.
Measure Y limits that apply only to residential development make it harder for housing builders to compete with commercial developers for the limited amount of land where Measure Y allows apartments to be built. The limits that apply only to housing also dramatically drive up per unit housing costs for affordable home builders.
Measure Y compounds the problem of poorly drafted zoning by freezing in place an out of date and weak inclusionary program that provides fewer units than inclusionary programs in other nearby jurisdictions. In other jurisdictions, affordable housing developers can get funds from in-lieu fees from market-rate developers.
When a market-rate developer pays in-lieu fees instead of building affordable units, that money is required to be used for affordable housing, and it goes to a non-profit developer. Non-profits are able to leverage in lieu fees with other funding sources to provide more units, and to provide better on site services like after school care and computer labs that improve the quality of life for residents.
Here are examples of affordable homes that would not have been possible without in-lieu fees. Please note that none of them are in San Mateo, because Measure Y doesn’t allow it:
Sequoia Belle Haven – 90 homes for seniors in Menlo Park
Sweeney Lane – 52 homes for families in Daly City
Mosaic Gardens at Friendly Acres – acquisition/rehab of 50 homes for people with special needs in Redwood City
Shorebreeze Apartments – addition of 62 homes for families in Mountain View
From MidPen Housing:
“Measure Y’s policies have severely constrained every major affordable housing development entitled for a generation. The height limit is sacrosanct and the City has not been flexible with it or certain technical ways of calculating density, even though the density bonus law explicitly permits concessions like height must be considered. Many sites in our portfolio could have accommodated more units if this voter-approved measure were not on the books. This is particularly true of Peninsula Station (68 homes for families) near the Hillsdale Station and Delaware Pacific (60 homes for families) near Hayward Park.”
It is time to overturn this old policy and replace it with a plan that is developed collaboratively with everyone in the community, vetted through environmental review, written by professional planners, and adopted through a community process by elected representatives.
HLC, in your mischaracterizations of Measure Y (and its parent measure P), you mentioned the four affordable complexes which you said could not be built without in-lieu fees. However, they very well could be built in San Mateo with commercial linkage fees, and they all fall well under the Measure Y standards.
No, they could not. We simply do not have enough money in San Mateo. In-Lieu fees would be very helpful. Also, the density in a number of those developments is much higher than the density allowed in Measure Y. Unfortunately, Measure Y was not written by anyone that worked as a city planner and mistakes were made that make it very difficult for affordable housing developers. Please, if you care about affordable homes or would like to have a greater say in the tradeoffs between new developments and open space, transit improvements, and other community amenities - VOTE NO ON Y! https://www.noonmeasurey.com/endorsements/
I think you are generally correct but you are putting the cart before the horse, An immediate family member who is in this business tells me that regulations, permitting and outrageous local ordinances get in the way of building more affordable housing. He is saying that the profit motive needs to be there to make any development attractive, but that red tape, recently required security measures around construction sites, and other local pet project requirements, unnecessarily delays projects rendering development uneconomic. If we are really interested in developing highly needed affordable housing, listen to the developers, not the screaming, ulterior motivated politicians.
"there are hundreds and hundreds of housing units being built in the city ... so clearly development is going full speed ahead"
In WW2 the Axis built thousands and thousands of planes "so clearly [building] is going full speed ahead". Yet the Allies built thousands and thousands more.
Housing construction should be a challenge on par with construction of the Liberty Ships not the defeatist strategy Measure Y puts forward "of hundreds". San Mateo has grown 8% in population since the last census... has housing stock grown by more than 8%?
Just because HLC says it, doesn't make it correct. They say they are affordable housing advocates but they also want more luxury, market-rate housing; the higher and denser the better. Perhaps they still believe that 'trickle-down' affordable housing works. Who funds this non-profit?
How interesting that the projects they reference being built with in-lieu fees in other communities are all built within Measure Y height and density standards. San Mateo has many good examples of stand-alone affordable projects, all built without in-lieu fees. And, in other neighboring communities, HLC is on the record for supporting transit-oriented developments within Measure Y standards, like the 5 story So. San Francisco former theater project highlighted in the DJ, Sep 21. Why are the Measure Y standards only a problem for HLC in the City of San Mateo?
San Mateo residents can be proud that our city has been at the forefront of providing affordable housing because of Measure Y standards that require affordable units be part of every new housing development more than 10 units.
Once the General Plan update process is complete, Measure Y standards can be updated with a vote of the people. Without their vote, the new standards will be the best that money can buy. Does anyone really believe that building more affordable housing is the reason over $1,000,000 is being spent by large developers to defeat Measure Y?
If you don't trust HLC, trust every affordable housing developer that has worked in the county. To build affordable homes, we need land, zoning, and money. Measure Y impacts all three. Measure Y is a poorly written, outdated policy that prevents affordable housing development.
Instead of allowing one neighborhood group to dictate future growth (and the arbitrary fixation on 5 stories), we should work together as a community on a general plan that has input from everyone in the city. A general plan that is vetted through environmental review. A plan written by professional planners that weighs and mitigates the impacts of specific policies and plans on affordable housing development, traffic, transit ridership, parks, schools, and the overall quality of life in San Mateo.
Measure Y has failed. If you care about affordable housing, equity, the environment, or good government - VOTE NO ON Y! If you want professional planning and a say in the future of development in the city, VOTE NO ON Y!
HLC continues to misrepresent Measure Y as an "outdated policy that prevents affordable housing development." Perhaps these lies are a reason HLC can't be trusted. Fact - the 5-7 story heights, density and affordable housing requirements in Measure Y doubled the amount of affordable housing built in the city between 1991-2017. Many affordable housing developments have been built in San Mateo under Measure Y standards. The San Mateo Daily Journal, in July 2017, wrote that “Compared to many neighboring jurisdictions, San Mateo has been progressive in looking for means to address the affordability crisis. It approved new housing developments, partnered with nonprofits to develop city-owned lots into low-income housing, and has inclusionary zoning ordinances requiring below market rate units be incorporated into new projects.”
Why would HLC say "one neighborhood group will dictate future growth" when Measure Y supporters come from every neighborhood in the city? Just take a look at all the YES on Y signs. These issues deserve truthful discussion, not code-word divisiveness. Measure Y supporters have participated in the General Plan update and will continue to do so. Measure Y does not interfere with proposing changes to the existing General Plan for the betterment of the community. But it does give voters the power to approve the changes to heights, density and affordable housing. Measure Y supporters trust that the voters care about affordable housing, equity, the environment and good government. But, without a vote, the General Plan will be the best that money can buy for the private benefit of a few powerful special interests. The vote is not only good government, it is democracy in action. VOTE YES on Y, NO on R.
Habitat for Humanity, Bridge Housing, MidPen Housing, and John Stewart company are just a handful of the affordable housing advocates and builders that oppose Measure Y because they have attempted (and in a few cases succeeded) in working under its arbitrary, rigid, and nonsensical requirements.
It is also opposed by one of the original authors, Senator Jerry Hill, who understands that we are in a different moment and need to update our planning.
It is opposed by racial justice organizations including Urban Habitat because it reinforces our segregated past.
It is opposed by unions who understand that creating homes for working people is critical for a stable community.
It is opposed by environmental organizations including Greenbelt Alliance, Save the Bay, and Citizens Climate Lobby.
It is opposed by every City Council member and candidate and the Democratic Party of San Mateo.
How many "supporter" have actually read and understood the measure? Have they only heard your explanation?
Please vote No on Y! https://www.noonmeasurey.com/endorsements/
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.