HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso - CC - 032-1994RESOLUTION No. 32-94
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF BURLINGAME ADOPTING THE 1990-1995 HOUSING ELEMENT
AND CERTIFYING ITS COMPLIANCE WITH
ARTICLE 10.6 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE.
WHEREAS, Article 10.6 of the California Government code
requires each city and County to adopt a Housing Element of its
General Plan and to update that Housing Element every five years;
and
WHEREAS, the Burlingame Housing Element was adopted in 1979
and is proposed to be replaced with the 1990-1995 Housing Element;
and
WHEREAS, the 1990-1995 Housing Element establishes the City's
objective to meet the state -mandated affordable housing share,
identifies sufficient sites suitable for development to meet the
City's specified housing objectives and includes programs designed
to meet the objectives, and it is determined that the findings
included with this resolution document the City's reasons for
finding further revisions recommended by HCD based on its review of
the 1990-1995 Housing Element fall beyond the scope of the
Department's advisory review authority; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65585 f(2) allows
cities to adopt a Housing Element without changes recommended by
HCD, if that Department finds that the Housing Element does not
substantially comply with the requirements of Article 10.6,
provided that the City Council includes in its resolution of
adoption written findings which explain the reasons the Council
believes that the Housing Element substantially complies with the
requirements of Article 10.6 despite the findings of the
Department; and
WHEREAS, the revised draft Housing Element has been discussed
at two public workshops, and the Planning Commission studied,
conducted a full public hearing and recommended approval of the
1990-1995 Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a joint Planning
Commission/City Council study session to review the 1990-1995
Housing Element, studied it a public meeting and conducted a public
hearing on June 6, 1994 at which time all persons desiring to be
heard were heard; and
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration ND -469P was adopted for the
1990-1995 Housing Element with the finding that based on the
initial study and written and oral testimony received there is no
substantial evidence that the 1990-1995 Housing Element will have
a significant effect on the environment; and
1
WHEREAS, the 1990-1995 Housing Element is consistent with the
current General Plan and its policy for the City of Burlingame and
no other adjustments to the General Plan are required in order to
implement the action program of the 1990-1995 Housing Element;
WHEREAS, implementation efforts to achieve the City's
affordable housing objectives using block grant funded programs and
city discretion are already underway; and
WHEREAS, the California Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD) reviewed a draft of the City of Burlingame's
1990-1995 Housing Element and responded on September 13, 1993 with
a list of required revisions to bring the element into compliance
with State housing element law, to which the city responded and
received on March 11, 1994 acknowledgement from HCD that with three
exceptions all of these requested revisions had been satisfactorily
met.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City -Council of the
City of Burlingame hereby makes the following findings based on the
March 11, 1994 review of the 1990-1995 Housing Element by the
California Department of Housing and Community Development and
further finds that the remaining revisions sought by HCD fall
beyond the scope of the Department's statutory review authority.
The City finds that it has met its responsibility by responding to
the remaining outstanding issues as follows:
1. REQUEST: HCD recommended more specific incentives to promote
the mixed use developments.
RESPONSE: In response to HCD's concern the City amended the
text listing the actions which it has taken in the
past to encourage mixed residential -commercial
projects including zoning and parking incentives.
The action program contains a commitment to expand
such programs and further modify regulations by
1995.
2. REQUEST: HCD recommended expansion of the second unit
program by relaxing development standards.
RESPONSE: The Housing Element presently includes a program of
amnesty for existing second units in single family
houses designed to encourage such units to be
upgraded to .safe and sanitary units as defined in
the Housing Code. Housing Code standards are
chosen so that the units could still be retained as
lower cost units but be upgraded. By this program
the city estimates 250 permanent units would be
added to the housing stock. The City of Burlingame
not only has the highest density in terms of the
largest percentage (50%) of its housing stock in
multiple family units in San Mateo but the early
subdivisions (pre World War II) were based on small
E
lot sizes (generally 4000 to 5000 SF) and narrow,
substandard by current dimension requirements,
street right-of-ways. In addition this much of
this early tract development allotted inadequate
space on site for parking, so neighborhoods are
impacted with on street parking, some to the extent
that emergency access might be a potential problem.
Relaxing the city development standards to allow
second units on all lots zoned for single family
development would create an unsafe condition in
many situations. In addition it would increase the
density of development through out the city, beyond
what is reasonable for the county. Through the
program proposed the city would address the second
units which already impact these older
neighborhoods since many of them were added to the
housing stock before the city had zoning.
Modifications to the regulations would change the
city's position and encourage these units, many of
which are not presently rentable because of their
condition, to be legally retained and maintained in
a safe and sanitary condition.
3. REQUEST: HCD requested clarification of how the unmet need
for emergency shelters and transitional housing
would be addressed.
RESPONSE: The analysis of families and persons in need of
emergency shelter or transitional housing in the
Housing Element documents that there were no such
persons or families in Burlingame at the time of
the 1990 Census. However, the analysis goes on to
note that Burlingame's share of San Mateo County's
homeless population, based on proportional
population, is 4.1% or 295 persons per year.
Because of the regional character of the need and
the fact that the persons in need are not located
in Burlingame the Housing Element proposes that the
city continue its practice of contributing
financially to those non-profit groups who provide
services and shelter for the county's homeless
population. In addition the element includes an
action that by 1995 the city would adjust the
zoning requirements in specific areas to allow,
with a use permit, group facilities for homeless
persons.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the self -certification of the
1990-1995 Housing Element for the City of Burlingame is further
documented by the findings of fact addressing each of the mandated
criteria for review, including provision of adequate .sites property
zoned to meet the assigned regional housing need prepared by the
Association of Bay Area Governments, attached as Exhibit A and the
3
text of the 1990-1995 Housing Element as adopted by the City
Council of the City of Burlingame; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city council of the City of
Burlingame finds and determines that the attached 1990-1995 Housing
Element, plus the proposed revisions, substantially complies with
the requirements of California Government Code Article 10.6 despite
the findings of HCD, for the reasons specified above; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Burlingame hereby approves and adopts the 1990-1995 Housing element
of the Burlingame General Plan (Exhibit B) along with changes shown
in the attached proposed revisions 3m&j&tx"x,which have been incorporated
into the housing element. 1• Ch- �u2
MAYOR
I, JUDITH A. MALFATTI, City Clerk of the City of
Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was
introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the
6th day of JUNE 1994, and adopted thereafter by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBER: HARRISON, KNIGHT, O'MAHONY, PAGLIARO, SPINELLI
NOES: COUNCILMEMBER: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER: NO
r �
City Clerk
El
EXHIBIT "A"
TABLE 9:
PROJECTED HOUSING NEED BY INCOME CATEGORY
City of Burlingame
Regional
Units
Remaining
Share
Produced
Share
Income Group
(1988-92)
(1992-95)
Very Low
271
0
271
Low
231
0
231
Moderate
285
0
285
Above Moderate
570
113
457
Subtotal
1,357
113
1244
According to the State Department of Housing and Community Development, San Mateo County's May, 1993
Area Median Income is $54,300. Income ranges for the various economic segments of the population are
listed below:
Very Low Up to 50% of Median (up to $26,700 per year)
Low 51 % to 80% of Median ($27,693 to $43,440)
Moderate 81% to 120% of Median ($43,983 to $65,160)
Above Moderate More than 120% of Median ($65,161 plus)
These income limits are adjusted for family size in Table 10 to illustrate how the income limits work for various
family sizes. A family of four, for example, would be very low income up to $ 29,200 per year, low-income
up to $ 39,700 and moderate income up to $ 70,000.