HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 108-1984RESOLUTION NO. 108-84
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RESOLUTION ADOPTING AMENDMENT NO. GP-84-25, AMENDING
THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND NEGATIVE
DECLARATION NO. 451 RELATED THERETO
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65302(c) and Title 7, Division 1, Article
10.6 of the Government Code (commencing with Section 65580) (hereinafter "Article
10.6") require that California Cities adopt a Housing Element to their General
Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco adopted such a Housing Element on
September 2, 1981, which Housing Element must be revised by July 1, 1984 in
accordance with Government Code Section 65588(b); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco reviewed
the proposed Amendment to said Housing Element (attached hereto as Exhibit "A"
and by this reference incorporated herein), held a duly noticed public hearing
regarding said proposed Amendment on June 14, 1984 and during said hearing did
consider all comments submitted to it before and during said hearing related to
said proposed Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, by its Resolution No. 2344 did approve the
proposed Amendment to said Housing Element and Negative Declaration No. 451
related thereto and did recommend that the City Council adopt same; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did, on June 27, 1984 and July 25, 1984 hold properly
noticed public hearings and did consider all comments submitted to it related to
said proposed Amendment and has conducted the review required by Section 65588
of the Government Code; and
WHEREAS, it appears that said proposed Amendment will result in a Housing
Element which conforms to the requirements of Article 10.6 and its adoption
would result in an integrated, internally consistent and compatible statement
of policies for the City of South San Francisco;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South
San Francisco finds that:
(1) The proposed Amendment to the Housing Element of the General Plan of
the City of South San Francisco (Exhibit "A" hereto) is consistent with the
remaining elements of said General Plan; and
(2) Said proposed Amendment is in compliance with the requirements of
Article 10.6 and Section 65302(c) of the Government Code and other applicable
state laws; and
(3) Said proposed Amendment is consistent with the comprehensive land use
plan adopted by the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Commission pursuant to
Section 21675 of the Public Utilities Code; and
(4) Adoption of the proposed Amendment will result in an integrated, inter-
nally consistent and compatible statement of policies for the City of South San
Francisco; and
(5) A proper Negative Declaration was prepared for the proposed Amendment
in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council:
(1) Approves and adopts the proposed Amendment (Exhibit "A" hereto) and
Negative Declaration No. 451; and
(2) Directs that said Amendment be endorsed as adopted by this Resolution
and the Mayor and City Clerk shall execute said endorsement.
-2-
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and
adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a regular
meeting held on the 2~th day of July , 1984, by the following
vote'
AYES-
NOES'
ABSENT-
Councilmembers Mark N. Addie.qo, Emanuele N. Damonte, Richard A. Haffey,
Gus Nicolopulos; and Roberta Cerri Te~qlia
None
None
Planning Commission Approval Endorsement
THE UNDERSIGNED certify that the South San
Francisco Planning Commission approved this
General Plan Amendment No. GP-84-25,
Amending the Ho~sjng Element ~
by Resolution/~o.1234~, passed
meeting th%4~~f ~/) 1~
Chairman
Dated:
~ecretary ~
June 15, 1984
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
City Council Adoption Endorsement
THE UNDERSIGNED certify that the City Council
of the City of South San Francisco by
Resolution No. 108-84, passed the 25th day of
July, 1984, adopted the amendment to the City's
General Plan of 1973.of which this is a part.
Dated:
, I
DRAFT
GENERAL PLAN
HOUSING ELEMENT
AMENDMENT
CITY
OF
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
April ll, 1984
Revised May 21, 1984
Revised July 12, 1984
Martin. Carpenter. Associates, City and Regional Planners
1640 Laurel Street, San Carlos, CA 94070 (415) 593-1681
f,
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ASSESSMENT .OF HOUSING NEEDS/INVENTORY OF RESOURCES AND
CONSTRAINTS ........................... 1
Employment Characteristics ................. 2
Housing Needs ................. 2
Statutory Requirements · HJusi~g a~d HJu~e~oid
Characteristics ....................... 13
Housing and Household Characteristics ....... 13
Statutory Requirements' Inventory of R~sidJn~ialiy
Suitable Lands ....................... 23
Inventory of Lands Suitable for Residential Development . . . 23
Statutory Requirements : Government Constraints ....... 26
Analysis of Potential and Actual Governmental Constraints . . 26
Biotic Resource Conflicts .................. 28
Noise Level Incompatibility ................. 29
Land Use Conflicts ..................... 30
Statutory Requirements : Non-Governmental Constraints .... 33
Analysis of Potential and Actual Non-Governmental
Constraints .' ......... ' ........ . 33
Statutory Requirements'Special ~ousing N~e~s' ] ] i . . . 34
Special Housing I(eeds .................... 35
.Statutory Requirements : Opportunities for Energy
Conservation .................. , ..... 39
Use of Active or Passive Solar Energy ............ 39
Insulation and Other Energy Conserving Techniques ...... 39
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES .................. 40
Statutory Requirements : Goals, Objectives and Policies . . . 40
Housing Goal s ........................ 40
Housing Objectives ..................... 40
Housing Policies ...................... 40
'HOUSING PROGRAM .... ? .................... 44
Statutory Requirements : Housing Program .......... 44
Specific Housing Programs .................. 44
Continued Support for Construction of Market Rate Quality
Housing Units for Above Moderate and Moderate Income
Households ......................... 52
i
Page
Shared Housing Program ................... 54
Second Housing Units ................... 54
Density Bonus for Inclusion of Low and Moderate Income
Units ........................ 55
Small Units for One Person Household in C~n~ral Business
District .......................... 55
Housing Revenue Bond Program ..... 56
Higher Density Provisions for Senior ~o~sin~ i ] ] ] ] ] i 56
Magnolia Center Senior Project ............... 56
Larger Unit Development in Multi-Family Projects ...... 56
Continued City Support for Housing Authority's Public
Housing Rental Program ................... 57
Section 8 Housing Support ................. 57
Support Development of an Apartment Hotel for Elderly . . . 57
Mixed Uses in Commercial and Office Zoning Districts . . . 57
Manufactured Housing/r.lobile Home Parks and Factory-Built
Housing .......................... 58
Removal of Handicapped Barriers .............. 58
Philanthropic Organization Housing Development ....... 58
Potential Mixed Use Development East of U.S. 101 ...... 58
Remodeling and Improvement of Existing Units ........ 59
San Mateo County-Administered Housing Rehabilitation
Program .......................... 59
Commercial, Multiple Family and Mixed-Use Rehabilitation
Program ......................... 59
Forest Homes Mobile Home Park Renovation .......... 59
Airport Noise Insulation Program .............. 60
Concentrated Neighborhood Strategy ............. 60
Support of Nondiscrimination in Housing .......... 61
Condominium Conversion Limitation ............. 61
Housing Referral Program .................. 61
Maintenance of Current Housing Records ........... 61
Promotion of Housing Policy ................ 62
Statutory Requirements : Citizen Participation ...... 62
Citizen Involvement .............. 63
Statutory Requirements · Housing Sites ~o b~ ~a~e Avail~bie 63
Identification of Adequate Itousing Sites .......... 63
Statutory Requirements : Program Contents ......... 67
Housing Program Contents .................. 67
HOUSING ELEMENT REVIEW ..................... 71
Statutory Requirements : Periodic Review .......... 71
Appropriateness of Housing Goals, Objectives and Policies . 71
ii
Housing Element Effectiveness ...............
Housing Element Implementation Progress .....
Page
72
72
EXHIBITS
A Census Area Map ...................... 4
B Resolution No. 155-83 ................... B-1
TABLES
H- 1 Historic Population Trends and Projections ........ 5
H- 2 Recent Trends in Local and Regional Population ...... 5
H- 3 Age Characteristics .................... 6
H- 4 Racial and Ethnic Groups ................. 7
H- 5 Employment/Unemployment .................. 8
H- 6 Employment by Occupation ................. 9
H- 7 Place of Employment .................... 9
H- 8 Employment Projections ......... 10
H- 9 Local Employment Projections by InduStry S~c~o~ ] ~ i i . 10
H-10 Travel Time to Work .................... 11
H-11 Means of Transportation to Work ............... 11
H-12 South San Francisco Projected Housing Need, ABAG
Determination ....................... 12
H-13 Number of Units, Type of~Units and Household Size ..... 13
H-14 Persons by Household Type . . . · .............. 14
H-15 Renter Household Income by Gross.Rent as a Percent of
Income in 1979 ...................... 14
H-16 Non-Condominium Owner Household Income by SeleCted Monthly
Housing Cost as a Percent of Income in 1979 ........ 15
H-17 Housing Occupancy Status and Household Size ........ 16
H-18 Overcrowding ....................... 17
H-19 Age of Housing Units ................... 18
H-20 Housing Tenure .................. 18
H-21 Housing Constructijn History ............... 19
H-22 Monthly Housing Costs for [~vner-Occupied Non-Condominium
Units by Mortgage Status and Selected Owner Costs ..... 20
H-23 Monthly Housing Costs for Renter-Occupied Housing Units by
Gross Rent ........................ 21
H-24 Annual Family Income- 1979 22
H-25 Inventory of Land Suitable for'R~sid~n~i~l'D~v~lJp~e~t' ] ] 24
H-26 rledian Home Values, 1980 ................. 33
H-27 Housing Needs for Special Groups ............. 36
iii
H-28 Non-Institutional Disabled Persons Over 16 Years of
Age ..........................
H-29 Location of Elderly ..................
H-30 Large Households and Families with Female Heads ....
H-31 South San Francisco Housing Program Summary . .
H-32 Identification of Adequate Sites to be Made AvJiia~le
for Housing ........
H-33 Housing Programs'RJlJtJd'tJ ~tJt~tJr~ 6bjeJtives . . .
Page
37
37
38
45
64
68
iv
ASSESSMENT OF HOUSING NEEDS/INVENTORY OF RESOURCES AND CONSTRAINTS
Statutory Requirements · Population, Employment and Housing. Needs
California Government Code CGC section 65583(a)(1) requires a housing
element to contain an analysis of population and employment trends and
documentation of projections and a quantification of the locality's
existing and projected housing needs for all income levels. Such
existing and projected needs shall include the locality's share of the
regional ~housing need in accordance with CGC section 65584.
PopUlation Trends. South San Francisco was incorporated in 1908 and by
1920 the city had grown to a population of slightly more than 4000.
By 1970 the City had grown to over 46,000 persons. Since 1970 the
annual average rate of growth has been 2.5 percent. This rate of growth
compares to an average County-wide increase of 5.7 percent and an overall
increase in the Bay Area of 8.9 percent.
The annual average rate of growth in South San Francisco is expected to
slow to less than 1 percent by the year 2000. The historic population
trends and regional projections are shown in Tables H'l and H-2.
The Census Areas Map, Exhibit A, shows the delineation'of census tracts
within the city limits. These areas are used to aggregate data collected
in the 1980 Census. Throughout this element, census tracts are referenced
in order to provide a more detailed description of socio-economic
characteristics within South San Francisco.
Age Characteristic~s. The most noticeable trend in age groups over the
past decade, both in South San Francisco and in the County, has been an
overall aging of the population. The percentage of children under 14
has decreased while the percentage of seniors 65 and over has increased.
In 1980 the senior citizen residents in South San Francisco were fairly
evenly distributed throughout the community. Census Tract 6024 had a
higher percentage of seniors than any other census tract. Census Tracts
6025 and 6026 had the lowest percentage of senior households. The age
characteristics of South San Francisco are exhibited in Table H-3.
Ethnic and Racial Characteristics. Between 1970 and 1980 the proportion
ot whites/caucasians in South San' Francisco has decreased. The percentage
of other racial and ethnic groups has increased with the highest increases
in the Asian and Hispanic populations. Smaller increases have been
registered in the Black population. Racial and ethnic characteristics
of the South San Francisco population are shown in Table H-5.
Employment Characteristics
Employment Pattern. Employment patterns have shifted somewhat since
19'?0, particularly in regard to the number of women entering the labor
force. The percentage of female population (over age 16) belonging to
the labor force increased substantially from 47 percent in 1970 to
62 percent in 1980. The percentage of male population belonging to the
labor force declined from 84 percent in 1970 to 74 percent in 1980. This
compares to County-wide 1980 figures of 81 percent of the male popula-
tion belonging to the labor force, and 59 percent of the female populat-
ion included in the labor force. Please see Table H-5.
Type and Location of Employment. The most frequent occupation types
given by South San Francisco residents in 1980 were clerical jobs and
craftsman occupations. The other frequently held occupations included
Sales, Service Workers, Managers and Professionals. Employment by
occupation statistics are shown in Table H-6.
The largest job market for South San Francisco residents is in the
SMSA* central cities of San Francisco/Oakland. The next largest job
market in 1980 was South San Francisco.
Employment Projections. According to the Association of Bay Area
Governments (ABAG) publication Projections '83 employment opportunities
in South San Francisco will increase until the year 2000. The rate of
growth is projected to slow from its currently projected rate of 9.2
percent to 7.4 percent by the year 2000. This represents an average
annual increase of 160 jobs. These projections are shown in Tables H-8
and H-9.
Housing Needs
The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), in their publication
titled Housing Needs Report, has determined the existing and projected
housing need for the Bay Area region. They have also calculated, for
cities and counties, a share of such need. The "Existing Housing Need"
is defined as the housing need for the Bay Area and its counties and
cities in 1980. The 1980 existing housing need for San Mateo County was
3,569 housing units and for South San Francisco was 104 housing units.
"Projected Housing Need" figures represent the projected share of the
region's housing need. The projected need numbers include existing
need for 1980 and a projection for the years 1980 to 1990. The ABAG
housing needs projections are exhibited in Table H-12.
* SMSA - Standard ~letropolitan Statistical Area as defined
by the U.S. Census Bureau.
The projected increase in housing needed, 2166 units over a l0 year
period from 1980 to 1990, translates to a rate of 217 units per year,
much higher than the average of 126 units per year which were constructed
during the 4-years from 1980 through 1983.
The South San Francisco City Council considered the ABAG Housing Needs
numbers and the proposed income distribution in draft form. The Council
accepted the total housing needs number but rejected the income distri-
bution allocations. The income distributions were rejected for the
following reasons: .
A. The distribution would serve to perpetuate existing patterns
of housing inequity in the region. Further, the income alloca-
tion would negatively impact the City of South San Francisco by
requiring a higher than reasonable proportion of lower income
housing units. This would be contrary to the provisions of
California Government Code Section 65584(a) which seems to
reduce further impaction of communities with relatively high
proportions of low and moderate income households.
B. The distribution is neither practical nor feasible considering
present economic conditions (e.g. high interest rates) and
limited Federal and State housing subsidies.
C. The distribution is both unfair and inequitable in that cities
which have, in the past, done a good job in providing housing
for low and moderate income families are being required to do
more in the future. Those cities which have, in the past,
provided little or no housing for these income groups are
being required to make a minimal effort in the future. This
is also contrary to State law as indicated in A above.
D. The distribution is based on arbitrary criteria in that it
ignores current policies of the City which seek to upgrade
existing housing stock and encourage~ a higher quality of
housing in the future.
E. The distribution ignores the relationship between incomes of
households and the current availability of lower cost housing
in the community as documented in the 1980 U.S. Census.
This action was formalized by adoption of City Council Resolution No.
155-83, "A Resolution Accepting the Total Housing Needs Number in the
ABAG Housing Needs Report, and Rejecting the Income Distribution
Allocations", adopted October 19, 1983 attached as Exhibit "B". ABAG
rejected the City's revision to the income allocation figures. The
City used the ABAG figures for planning purposes.
·
Z
4
TABLE H-1 HISTORIC POPULATION TRENDS AND PROJECTIONS
YEAR POPULATION SOURCE
1920 4,411
1930 6,193
1940 6,290
1950 19,351
1960 39,418
1970 46,646
1975 47,950
1980 49,393
1981 50,103
1985 51,400
1990 53,500
1995 53,600
2000 53,700
Full Buildout 65,000
U. S. Census
U. $. Census
U. S. Census
U. S. Census
U. S. Census
U. S. Census
California Department of Finance
U. S. Census
California Department of Finance
ABAG "Projections '83"
ABAG "Projections '83"
ABAG "Projections '83"
ABAG "Projections '83"
General Plan
TABLE H-2 RECENT TRENDS IN LOCAL AND REGIONAL POPULATION
YEAR
19701
19802
19903
SOUTH SAN SAN MATEO BAY
FRANC I SCO COUNTY AREA
46,646 556,234 4,1 74,562
49,393 558,1 64 4,547,792
53,500 607,1 O0 5,74 5,000
Source: 1 U.S. Census 1970 2 U.S. Census 1980
3 ABAG "Projections '83"
TABLE H-3 AGE CHARACTERISTICS
AGE GROUPS SOUTH SAN SOUTH SAN SAN MATEO SAN MATEO
(TOTAL FRANC I SCO FRANC I SCO COU~TY COUNTY
POPULATI ON) 1970% 1980% 1 970% 1 980%
0-14 30.6 20.8 26.4 19.0
15-24 17.0 19.2 17.1 17.0
25-34 13.2 17.2 13.7 18.0
35-44 13.6 12.0 12.4 13.0
45-54 13.0 12.0 14.1 12.0
55-64 7.6 10.6 8.6 ll .0
65+ 5.0 8.3 7.7 10.0
Source: 1980 Census
TABLE H-4 RACIAL AND ETHNIC GROUPS
SOUTH SAN SAN MATEO
FRANCISCO COUNTY
GROUP (1980) (1980)
White 71.8% 78.1%
Black 4.0 6.0
Asian/Pacific Islander 13.7 9.6
American Indian/Native
American 0.7 0.4
Other1 9.8 5.9
Total 1 00.0% 1 00.0%
Latin American/2
Spanish Origin
22.2% 12.5%
Source- 1980 U.S. Census
1
Includes all races not specifically identified.
Persons of Spanish Origin are counted in "Spanish Origin"
regardless of race. The percentage is drawn from a cross-
section of the other racial categories.
~00
>~
o~--
~0
D~--
0~--
>-
0
~J
u
o
u
o
TABLE H-6 EMPLOYMENT BY OCCUPATION
OCCUPATIO;i 1970 NUMBER 1980 NU?4BER
TYPE EMPLOYED EMPLOYED
Professional 1,822 1,763
Managers 1,481 2,280
Technicians 986 758
Sales 1,413 2,893
C1 eri cal 5,795 7,357
Craftsman 3,370 3,577
Operations (except
Transport) 2,247 1,374
Transport 1,367 1,342
Laborers (except Farm) 937 1,421
Farming 86 293
Service Workers 2,054 2,911
Private Household 87 77
TOTAL 21,645 26,046
1970 PERCENT*
CITY~'~IDE
8.42
6.84
4.56
6.52
26.78
15.57
10.38
6.31
4.32
0.39
9.48
0.40
1 980 PERCENT*
C I TYW I DE
6.76
8.75
2.91
ll.lO
28.25
13.73
5.27
5.15
5.45
1.12
11.18
0.29
Source: 1980 Census, Sample Count
* Percentage may not equal 100 due to rounding.
TABLE H-7 PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT
PLACE WHERE EMPLOYED
San Francisco/Oakland
South San Francisco
Elsewhere in San Mateo County
Outside San Mateo County
Source: 1980 U. S. Census
1980 PERCENT OF
WORKERS REPORTED
43%
33
21
3
100%
TABLE H-8 EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS
TOTAL INCREMENTAL PERCENT
YEAR EMPLOYMENT GROWTH GROWTH
1980 32,054
1985 35,000 2,946
1990 38,100 3,100
1995 41,800 3,700
2000 44,900 3,1 O0
9.2
8.9
8.9
7.4
Source: Projections '83, Association of Bay Area Governments
TABLE H-9 LOCAL EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS BY INDUSTRY SECTOR
EHPLOYMENT 1980 1 985 1 990 1 995 2000
Agriculture and
Mining 255 220 200 200 200
Manufacturing,
Wholesale 12,143 12,870 13,640 14,750 15,570
Retail 4,635 5,110 5,690 6,570 7,170
Services 5,317. 5,640 6,250 6,900 7,520
Other 9,704 11,210 12,360 13,360 14,440
Source: ABAG, Projections '83
10
TABLE H-10 TRAVEL TIME TO WORK
Number
of
Workers*
TRAVEL TIME IN MINUTES
Under
5 5-9 lO-14 15-19 20-29 30-44
291 2,645 3,860 4,873 6,115 4,922
45-59
1,376
60
Over
1,066
Mean Travel Time = 21.9 minutes
* Does not include those who work at place of residence.
Source: 1980 U. S. Census, Sample Count
TABLE H-11 MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION TO WORK
Drive Carpool
alone Work
in Car 2 Per- 3 Per- 4 Per- 5 or more Public at
Truck sons sons sons Persons Transp. Walk Other Home
Number
of
Workers 16,870 3,752 1,O19
272 1 51 2,065
537 478 240
% of
Workers
Report-
ing
67 15 4 1 < 1 8 2 2 1
Source: 1980 U. S. Census', Sample Count
11
TABLE H-12 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO PROJECTED HOUSING NEED, ABAG
DETERMINATION
TOTAL 1 980-90
AVAILABLE PROJECTED
1990 HOUSING INCREASE
PROJECTED NEEDED Ill HOUSING ABOVE VERY
HOUSEHOLDS IN 1990 NEEDED (TOTAL) MODERATE MODERATE LOW LOW
19,400 20,161 2,166 931 477 347 411
Sources: ABAG "Projections '83"
ABAG "Housing Needs Determinations, San Francisco
Bay Region," July 1983
For further discussion of the City's position please see
Exhibit "B" attached.
12
Statutory Requirements : Housing and Household Characteristics'
California Government Code section 65583(a)(2) requires a housing element
to contain an analysis and documentation of household characteristics,
including level of payment compared to ability to pay, housing character-
istics, including overcrowding, and housing stock condition.
Housing and Household Characteristics
Housing Units and Mix. A total of 17,995 housing units were counted in
South San Francisco during the 1980 Federal Census, 3,712 units more
than in 1970. The Census figures further revealed that the average
household size was 2.74 persons per occupied unit, a significant decline
from the 1970 average household size of 3.27. A detailed breakdown of
occupancy status and household size by type of dwelling unit is provided
in Table H-13.
TABLE H-13 NUMBER OF UNITS, TYPE OF UNITS AND HOUSEHOLD SIZE
PERCENT PERCENT POPULATION
ALL SINGLE MULTI- NUMBER PERCENT PER OCCU- TOTAL
YEAR UNITS FAMILY FAMILY VACANT VACAi;T PIED UNIT POPULATION
1980 17,995 76% 24% 461 2.56% 2.74 49,393
Households. In the 1980 Census, the term "household" is defined as the
person or persons occupying a housing unit. This general category
includes families which are defined as two or more persons, including
the householder, who are related by birth, marriage, or adoption and who
live together as one household. Traditional fa~.~ily situations represent
82 percent of all households. Other family situations account for
14 percent of total households, and include male or female households
with no spouse. Non-family household, and e.g., one person households,
account for the remaining 4 percent of households.
13
TABLE H-14 PERSONS BY HOUSEHOLD TYPE
MARRIED COUPLE FAMILY AND
YEAR ONE PERSON HOUSEHOLD
1980 14,308
OTHER
FAMiLy1
2,463
NON- FAMILY2
'HOUSEHOLD
763
1 Male or female household with no spouse.
2 Group quarters, etc.
Source: 1980 U.S. Census
Level of Payment/Ability to Pay. The California Department of Housing
and Community Development has provided communities with a "Methodology
for Calculating Lower Income Overpayment." This methodology has been
used to assemble Table H-15 and H-16, using 1980 Census Data.
TABLE H-15 RENTER HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY GROSS RENT AS A PERCENT OF
I~CO~.IE Ii~ 1 979
Rent as % $ O- $5,000- $10,000- $15,000- $20,000
of Income 4,999 9,999 14,999 19,999 or more
O-1 9% 7 68 97 399 1,809
20-24% 40 121 187 319 438
25-34% 87 171 468 1 71 1 79
35% + 525 654 399 1 ~9 23
i~ot Computed 103 20 35 0 18
Total 762 1,034 1,186 1,038 2,467
Total Household
Overpaying = 2,528
Source: 1980 U.S. Census, Sample Count
Total
2,380
1,105
1,076
1,750
176
6,487
14
The boxed figures in Table H-15 represent the total number of lower-
income renters, plus those renters in the income range from $18,500 (i.e.,
lower-income limit)~.to.~.$t~9,999 (i.e., the breakoff figure for the fourth
income range used in the'1980 Census tables) that are "overpaying," (i.e.,
paying more than 25% of their household income for housing). It was
therefore necessary to calculate the number of households in the fourth
income range that are lower income. The final numer of rentership house-
holds who are overpaying, and are also lower income is 2,528, or 39
percent of the total renting households.
TABLE H-16 NON-CONDOMINIUiq OWNER HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY SELECTED MONTHLY
HOUSING COST AS A PERCENT OF INCOME IN 1979
Housing Cost as $ O- $5,000- $10,000- $15,000- $20,000
% of Income 4,999 9,999 14,999 19,999 or more Total
0-19% 18 176 424 659 4,787 6,064
20-24% 43 78 ll6 94 492 823
25-34% 34 72 80 142 816 1,114
35% 247 189 148 198 291 1,073
Not Compute~ 66 0 0 .' 0 0 66
Total 408 515 768 1,093 6,386 9,170
Total Households
Overpaying = 1,008
Source: 1980 U.S. Census, Sample. County
The bored figures in Table H-16 represent the total number of lower-income
non-condominium ownership households, plus those owners in the income range
from $18,500 to $19,999 who are "overpaying." After performing the
necessary calculations to determine the number of households in the fourth
income range that are lower income, it was determined that 1,008 or
ll percent of the non-condominium ownership households are overpaying.
15
CO 0 ~ c~ 0 0 ~
u
16
Overcrowding. The Census Bureau defines overcrowded conditions as
dwelling units housing more than 1.00 persons per room. In 1980
South San Francisco had 1,223 or 6.7 percent of the units' with 1.O1
or more persons per room. Most overcrowding occurred in Census Tracts
6021 (Irish Town, Pecks Lots), 6022 (Urban Center) and 6023 (Mayfair
Villaqe, Town of Baden).
TABLE H-18 OVERCROWDI;IG
NUMBER OF
CENSUS OVERCROWDED
TRACT TOTAL # UNITS UNITS
601 7 1,228 70
6018 1,869 66
6019 2,772 161
6020 1,915 122
6021 1,071 1 76
6022 2,51 3 263
6023 884 90
6024 2,380 60
6025 1,1 49 55
6026 2,239 160
Totals 18,020 1,223
Source: 1980 U.S. Census
PERCENT OF
OVERCROWDED UNITS
IN CENSUS TRACT
5.7
3.5
5.8
6.4
16.4
10.5
10.2
2.5
4.8
7.1
6.7%
17
Housing Condition. The median age of residential structures in South
san Francisco is between 20 and 30 years. There has historically been
an irregular rate of housing construction, with the most significant
growth period occurring in the 1950's when over one-third of the current
housing supply in South San Francisco was built. Recently the rate has
slowed considerably as it has everywhere in the Bay Area.
TABLE H-19 AGE OF HOUSING UNITS
Year Structure After
Built 1969 1960-1969 1950-1959 1940-1949
Percent of
Total Units 23.7 16.6 34.2 16.1
1939
or earl ier
9.2
Source: 1980 Census
TABLE H-'20 HOUSING TENURE
1979
to
Years at March 1975- 1970- 1960- 1950-
Present Address 1980 1978 1974 1969 1959
Percent of
total units 22 29 14 17 14
Percent of
total units
in rentership
40 41 ll 7 1 0
1 949 or
Earl ier
Source: 1980 U.S. Census, Sample Count
18
TABLE H-21 HOUSING CONSTRUCTION HISTORY
YEAR
UNITS ADDED
SINGLE MULTIPLE
FAMILY* FAMILY*
TOTAL
PERCENT OF
TOTAL
1939 or earlier
1940-1949
1950-I 959
1960-1969
1970-1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
168
74
'1
60
43
12
5
140
2,052
2,819
6,175
3,225
3,749
211
86
6
200
18,523'*
11.1%
15.2
33.4
17.4
20.2
1.1
0.5
1.1
100.0%
* Statistics not available prior to 1980
** Include some units demolished. Records unavailable to determine
demolition date.
Sources: 1970 and 1980 U.S. Census
Building Division, City of South San Francisco
California Department of Finance
19
04 0~0~-- OC'~O 0~00,~- ~ 00~--
0 ,~- CM~-- O~ ,-- C~J ('MO0
I I I I I I I I I I I -"1- '~--
0000000000 00~
000~0~- ~000 O~
0,.-- 0'~0(~0 0 0 ~
2O
~--- O0 ~ N 0
! i I I I , I *1" G
0 O0 ~ (~ N O,J ,--- ,=:~- ,,-- ~ ~,---
c~ 0000000000~'~oO~O0~--CO
0 ~ 000
0
0
0
0
Z
0
0
N
I
~---
0
O0
~-- 000000~0~0~ 0~00~'~0~--0,~
COCO
21 :
N
N
0
N
0
~0
N
I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I
00000000000000000
O0 O0 O0 000 O0 O0 0(-~ O0
~ ~--- ~-- ~--- N N N N M M~- ~-O
O
O
c~- 0
~ N
0
0
U
0
22
Statutory Requirements - Inventory of Residentially Suitable Land
California Government Code section 65583(a)(3) requires a housing
element to contain an inventory of land suitable for residential
development, including vacant sites and sites having potential
for redevelopment, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning
and public facilities and services to these sites.
Inventory of Lands Suitable for Residential Development
Significant sites; those containing more than 1 acre, suitable for
residential development have been identified and are shown in
Table H-25. Approximately 278 acres of land are suitable for develop-
ment with about 2300 dwelling units.
23
O0
,~ 0'"
z
0
~....~ ,-.,
Zl--
ZZ
z
24
.~ -; g
z
ZZ
N~--~
w
~-0
O~
-~J o
0 m
o~-- t--
0 0 0 0
o~
25
Statutory Requirements : Government Constraints
California Government Code section 65583(a)(4) requires a housing element
to contain an analysis of potential and actual governmental constraints
upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all
income levels, including land use controls, building codes and their
enforcement, site improvements, fees and other exactions required of
developers, and local processing and permit procedures.
Analysis of Potential and Actual Governmental Constraints
Land Use Controls. The General Plan and Zoning Ordinance of a community
are two primary tools for planning and regulating land use.
General Plan. The City of South San Francisco completed an update of the
General Plan Land Use, Circulation and Transportation Element, as well as
a General Plan Environmental Impact Repor.t, in , 1984 Accord-
ing to the General Plan, the primary environmental constraints tS resi-
dential land use in the City are geotechnical constraints, including
flooding, biotic resource conflicts, noise level incompatability and land
use conflicts.
The environmental factors existing in South San Francisco discussed below.
are natural or human induced constraints that are recognized through
governmental regulation of land us~ location and development standards.
These governmental regulation constraints preclude intensive uses, such
as housing, in locations subject to natural hazards such as seismically
induced surface rupture, tsunami inundation and flooding. Similar con-
straints are placed on biological refuges for rare and endangered species.
Governmental regulatory constraints are also properly imposed in an effort
to separate incompatible land uses of audio impaction of residential uses
by environmental conflicts such as noise, seismically induced ground
shaking and liquefaction. The City's infrastructure for water supply,
sewage disposal, drainage and transportation has a definite constraining
effect on the ability to absorb greater population or additional housing.
Recognizing this limitation, the City has established an approximate
holding capacity of 65,000 people in its General Plan. These governmental
constraints are discussed in more detail in the various General Plan
elements. The Land Use Element formalizes the City's policy of resi-
dential land use location and is based, in part, on the constraints
discussed below. Consequently, these constraints limit the amount of land
and potential density available for housing in South San Francisco.
1. Geotechnical Constraints
a. Seismic-Related Hazard. Three fault traces are mapped
26
through the City'of South San Francisco. The San Andreas
Fault, which passes through the West Park Area, is con-
sidered active. The San Andreas Fault was the source of
earthquakes accompanied by surface faulting in 1838 and
1906. The San Bruno Fault, which runs generally east of and
parallel to E1 Camino Real; and the Hillside Fault, which
generally follows the base of San Bruno Mountain, are
considered inactive.
The San Francisco Bay Area has experienced considerable
seismic activity in the past. Events registering in excess
of 6.0 on the Richter Scale occurred in 1836, 1838, 1868,
1906 and 1911. The City is located in an area of potential
"violent" to "strong" ground shaking from a major earthquake
on the San Andreas Fault. Continued periodic seismic
activity, including the potential for ground shaking with a
Richter Scale magnitude of 5.0 or greater, appears likely.
Seismic-related hazards which might be expected to accompany
a strong earthquake include surface rupture, ground shaking,
liquefaction and tsunami inundations.
Surface rupture may be expected along the San Andreas Fault
zone in the Westborough area. Several buildings within the
rift zone have been adversely affected by movements along
the fault trace.
Strong ground shaking and the effects of liquefaction are
important geotechnical concerns in South San Francisco.
Much of the City is underlain by the Merced Formation,
consisting of sands and gravels with a low to moderately low
liquefaction potential. However, areas underlain with Bay
mud and associated sand lenses may experience liquefaction
due to sheer wave amplification within the poorly consolidated
to unconsolidated sediments. Though much of this latter
area is planned and developed for industrial uses, damage
may be extensive and will especially affect those structures
of preformed tilt-up construction. The area of highest
liquefaction potential is from Point San Bruno southward to
the City boundary and, principally, east of the Bayshore
Freeway. Local liquefaction may occur along Colma Creek.
Subsidence may also result from strong ground shaking due to
possible consolidation of existing fills which would result
in damage to foundations and possible failure of structures
with weak pinning to foundations.
27
Tsunami inundation can be anticipated to encroach on the
flatter areas of Bay mud. The areas most severely affected
would be those with elevations of 5 feet or less, including
the oil storage tanks and Oyster Point Marina.
b. Flooding. Flooding, in the event of a lO0-year storm, would
inundate the area adjacent to Colma Creek and spread out
through the industrial area from Point San Bruno to the City
boundary to the south.
c. Expansive Soils. Expansive soils can be anticipated locally
within the Merced Formation and on the lower slopes of San
Bruno Mountain, where colluvial deposits are known to
exist. These areas may present foundation problems for
existing structures.
d. Landslides. Some areas of unstable slopes can be anticipated
on the steeper lands in South San Francisco. Remedial stabiliza-
tion work for avoiding development on unstable areas may be
required to alleviate future landslide problems.
2. Biotic Resource Conflicts
a. The South Slope of San Bruno Mountain. The South Slope of
San Bruno Mountain is located in South San Francisco, and
San Bruno Mountain has been found to be a biological refuge
for a number of rare and endangered species. The South
Slope was investigated as part of a Biological Study con-
ducted in 1980 by Thomas Reid and Associates for San Mateo
County.
b. South San Francisco's Shoreline. The majority of South
San Francisco's Bayfront property today supports urban
development. In a two-volume publication on San Francisco
Bay's Wildlife Habitat prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and the California Department of Fish and Game,
South San Francisco's shoreline is classified as "Modified
Wetland" with the major undeveloped portion signified as
"New Filled or Reclaimed Land."
South San Francisco's shoreline was classified in the
Wildlife Study as "potentially restorable wildlife habitat,"
but is not considered as valuable and desirable for
restoration as land in the "historic marsh" classification
category. There are some remnant wetland sites within the
city limits which probably support a variety of biota. They
are classified in the previously cited San Francisco Bay
Wildlife Habitat report as: l) mud flats, 2) salt marsh, and
3) diked salt marsh.
28
3. Noise Level Incompatibility.
One major mobile noise source affecting South San Francisco
is aircraft. Air traffic above the City following three
particular departure paths contributes the highest aircraft-
related noise levels to the local environment. Takeoffs
which impose the most intense noise levels on the widest
residential areas are those from Runways 28-Right and 28-
Left proceeding northwestward through the San Bruno Gap.
Departures from Runways O1 at the San Francisco Inter-
national Airport, in general, produce the least intense
impingement of aircraft noise on' South San Francisco.
Detailed discussions of aviation noise are contained in
the City's I'~oise Element.
Other major local sources of noise in the City are from
highways, streets and railroads. Two major freeways,
U.S. 101 and Interstate Route 280 have corridors passing
through South San Francisco. U.S. 101 runs along the
eastern portion of the City dividing the predominantly
industrial Bayside Area from the remaining districts.
Interstate 280 is located in the western part of the City
and passes near residential districts in the San Bruno Gap
and southward. State Route 82, or E1 Camino Real, runs
northwest to southeast through the center of South San
Francisco, while State Route 35, Skyline Boulevard, forms
the western boundary of the City. The location of all
freeway and highway corridors is shown on the Circulation
Plan Diagram contained in the Circulation Element.
Other heavily traveled City streets are also identified
in the Circulation Element. Current and projected traffic
counts are quantified and illustrated in Exhibits 1 and 2
of the Circulation Element.
The full length of the eastern part of the City of South
San Francisco is traversed by the main line of the
Southern Pacific Transportation Company. The rail
line runs approximately parallel to the Bayshore Freeway
(U.S. 101),~and supports both heavy long-distance
freight transport and commuter passenger service for the
Peninsula Area.
29
4. Land Use Conflicts
Existing land use patterns in South San Francisco can be
considered a constraint to residential development in some
portions of the City. A major function of urban planning
law is to avoid conflicts which arise due to the juxtaposition
of incompatible land uses.
Land use patterns in South San Francisco have evolved from the
original town layout along Grand Avenue west of the Southern
Pacific Railroad tracks. This central area currently contains
a mixture of older and newer buildings with substantial
commercial development existing along Grand Avenue and Linden
Avenue. The downtown contains some mixed residential and
office uses in addition to the predominantly retail commercial
uses. The downtown is surrounded by an older residential
community. Here mixed densities of residential uses exist
ranging from single family to higher density apartments and
condominiums.
The Chestnut/Westborough/E1 Camino Real area contains commercial
development with highway commercial uses extending along E1
Camino Real. Primarily, single family developments exist both
east and west of E1 Camino Real with some multi-family development
located as buffers between the commercial and single family use
areas.
The Lindenville area contains a mixture of light industrial
uses, wholesale establishments, transportation centers,
warehousing, light fabrication and service facilities. This
has traditionally been South San Francisco's light industrial
community located south of the urban center and west of
Bayshore Freeway.
Examples of heavy industrial land uses in the City are
Fuller Paint Company and the Armour Meat Packing facility,
neither of which are located near incompatible or sensitive
land uses.
The community's newer industrial uses have generally located
in the Cabot-Utah area. This district is located east of
U.S. 101 and is composed of the older Utah Industrial Park
and the newer Cabot, Cabot and Forbes Industrial Park. The area
has evolved as a place for warehousing, distribution facilities,
wholesale outlets and research and development facilities. The
3O
older portions contain heavier uses such as the Armour ~leat
Packing facility and the Fuller Paint Manufacturing Company.
The newer residential communities of South San Francisco are
located in the Westborough-West Park area. Here, sub-neighborhoods
have been developed in single family, townhouse and multi-
family developm6nts. A community commercial center is located
at the intersection of Gel lert Boulevard and Westborough
Boulevard.
Zoning. The zoninq designation of each vacant site is listed in Table
H-25 (page 24-25). Approval of permit applications is based on conformity
with the Zoning Ordinance, although the Planning Commission has the
power to grant variances from the terms of the Ordinance within the
limitations provided in the ordinance and in the Government Code.
Amendments and reclassifications to the Ordinance can be made by the
City Col:ncil subject to applicable provisions of the State Laws and when
initiated by property owner petition or resolution of the Planning
Commission. Procedures for amendments and reclassifications are stated
in the Zoning Ordinance.
Zoning is one tool used to implement the policies and programs of the
General Plan. Zoning is a governmental constraint to housing develop-
ment, guiding residential uses away for other incompatible uses and
environmental hazards/conflicts. Zoning establishes location and
density constraints that are to be consistent with the General Plan. As
such, the Zoning Ordinance limits the number of dwelling units in South
San Francisco to a maximum of about 22,000 to 25,000. The South San
Francisco Zoning Ordinance may need amendment to achieve consistency
with the finally adopted Housing Element Amendment.
Building Codes. The latest edition of the Uniform Building Code is
enforced in South San Francisco. The City Building Division sees that
new residences, additions, auxiliary structures, etc., meet all of the
latest construction and safety standards. Building permits are required
for any construction work.
Buildi~g codes are governmental constraints that affect the cost of
housing development by establishment of structural and occupancy standards
for residential and other buildings. Examples of constraints included
in building codes which impact the cost of housing include materials
standards, mechanical and plumbing equipment requirements, fire protection
measures, handicapped access requirements and energy conservation measures.
31
City Processing and Permit Procedures and Fees. Building permits must
be secured before commencement of any construction, reconstruction,
conversion, alteration or addition. Approval of permit applications is
based on conformity with the Zoning Ordinance, although the Planning
Commission has the power to grant variances from the terms of the
Ordinance within the limitations provided in the ordinance. Building
permits generally are processed in a few weeks, Variance requests
approximately 1-1/2 months and Conditional Use permits require l-l/2
months.
While City processing, permit procedures and fees result in cost and
time constraints to the provision of housing, these are not extraordinary
in comparison to other jurisdictions, as indicated in the January 1982
ABAG report "Development Fees in the San Francisco Bay Area." The
City is generally receptive to the development and rehabilitation of
housing.
Availability of Assistance Programs. South San Francisco does not have
the financial resources or sufficient staff to undertake major housing
assistance programs without substantial backing by state or federal
agencies. Recent reductions in funding levels of federal and state
assistance programs places the City in a more tenuous position. There-
fore, the lack of availability of outside assistance programs acts as a
constraint to the provision of housing for families of modest incomes.
Site Improvements. A complete description of the transportation
circulation system of South San Francisco is included in the Circulation
Element. All public utilities, including sewage treatment facilities,
water supply, storm drainage, and solid waste disposal are described in
the Land Use Element. Site improvements exist throughout the community.
Roads, sewer mains aT~d water lines would require extension into areas
indicated in Table H-25 (pgs. 24-25).
32
Statutory Requirements : Non-Governmental Constraints
California Government Code section 65583(a)(5) requires a housing
element to contain an analysis of potential and actual non-govern-
mental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development
of housing for all income levels, including the availability of
financing, the price of land, and the cost of construction.
Analysis of Potential and Actual Non-Governmental Constraints
Primary among non-governmental constraints to housing development in
the Bay Area and South San Francisco, particularly low and moderate
income housing, is the price of real estate. When compared against
other Bay Area cities, South San Francisco has a relatively moderate
housing market. San Mateo County, when compared to the entire Bay
Area, is second only to Marin County in home values, as recently
revealed in the 1980 Census. South San Francisco's home prices are
closer to the median values for San Francisco housing shown in Table
H-26, than for'those of San Mateo County.
TABLE H-26 MEDIAN HOME VALUES, 1980
Non-Condominium
County Value ($)
Alameda $ 85,300
Contra Costa 94,600
Marin 151,000
Napa 78,200
San Francisco 104,600
San Mateo 124,400
Santa Clara 109,400
Solano 67,500
Sonoma 88,400
Another constraint to housing development is the availability of
financing for homes, and high interest rate levels. Current mortgage
interest rates are variable or negotiable, generally ranging from ll
to 15 percent.
33
The price of land is a significant ingredient in the total cost for
housing as reflected in the purchase price or the rental rate. Develop-
ed land costs typically account for about one-quarter of the total
house cost. For a $100,000 home land would cost about $25,000 or the
land component of a $450/month apartment would be slightly over $100/month.
Land costs in the Bay Area have consistently been increasing since
World War II. This has been the result of decreasing supply as San
Mateo County cities reach the build out stage, inflation, and population
immigration causing increased demand for housing. This increase has an
adverse effect on the ability of households to pay for housing,
particularly low and moderat~ income households. For example, each
$250 increase (1% of a $25,000 property) in the cost of land results in
slightly over $10 per month added to the housing cost. Land costs in
South San Francisco are typical of those in San Mateo County and do not
constitute a potential constraint to housing development in the City.
Construction cost increases have effects on the ability of consumers to
pay for housing similar to land cost increases. Construction cost
increases are due to the cost of materials, labor and higher government
imposed standards (e.g. energy conservation requirementS).
Interest rates can be particularly detrimental to the consumer's ability
to pay for housing. For example, a 1 percent change in interest rate
(i.e. from 11 percent to 12 percent) would cause the monthly payment on
a $70,000 mortgage to increase by $54. A similar effect occurs on
rental rates. Such increases can price many households out of the
reach of otherwise affordable housing. The high interest rates are
primarily responsible for low rate of rental housing construction
during the past few years. Most analySts are predicting an increase
in interest rates.
While mortgage money is currently available to finance home purchases
and condominium construction, the housing industry is expected to face
a significant capital shortfall over the remainder of the decade. This
will be due to large federal deficits which will consume up to 30
percent of funds raised in private credit markets. The outlook appears
to be difficult, particularly for low and moderate income households.
Inter~=.st rates will most likely be affected and the competition for
available funds will probably increase.
Statutory Requirements : Special Housing Needs
California Government Code Section 65583(a)(6) requires a housing
element to contain an analysis of special housing needs, such as those
of the handicapped, elderly, large families, farmworkers, and families
with female heads of households.
34
Special Housing Needs
In South San Francisco, disabled persons constitute about 2.8 percent of
the population over 16 years old. A s.ign.ificantly higher percentage of
the elderly are disabled (15 percent) than .that of younger people in the
16-64 year age group. Information on the number of disabled persons is
shown in Table H-28. Assuming one disabled person over 16 lives in each
household'occupied by persons with disabilities, then approximately 1060
households occupied by persons wi th disabilities existed in 1980.
About 8.3 percent of South San Francisco's population is age 65 or over
and classified as elderly. Significant numbers of senior citizens live
in Census Tracts 6018 (Buri Buri), 6019 (Sunshine Gardens), 6020
(Parkway-Sterling), 6022 (Urban Center) and 6024 (Avalon Park-Country
Club). Please see Table H-29, Location of Elderly.
Large households are located in the highest percentages in Census Tracts
6019 and 6024. Families with female heads of household are housed in
the greatest concentrations in Census Tracts 6025 and 6019. Census
information on these special needs groups is detailed in Table H-30.
Farmworkers account for only about 1 percent of the employed persons
living in South San Francisco in 1980. Housing for this special needs
group can be accommodated through the existing housing delivery system
and through the proposed programs for housing low and moderate income
households. No special farmworker housing is necessary. It should be
noted that the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)* concluded
that the need for additional housing for farmworkers is not demonstrable
in the region. In calculating the regional and local housing needs ABAG
concluded that no net increase in seasonal or migrant farmworker housing
was to be included in its projections.
Projections of the housing needs for these special groups were related
to the total housing needs projections for South San Francisco. The
projected increase in total housing needed by 1990 is slightly greater
than 12 percent over the housing supply existing in 1980. The housing
needs of each of these special groups are included in the total needs
projections of 2,166 housing units by 1990.
"Housing Needs Determinations, San Francisco Bay Region," ABAG,
July 1983.
35
TABLE H-27
HOUSING NEEDS FOR SPECIAL GROUPS
Housing Units For:
Disabled
Elderly
Large
Families
Families With
Female
Heads of
Households
1980 Existing
Increase Needed
1980-1990
Five Year
Increase Needed
1984-89
1057
127
64
3256
392
196
1067
128
64
1842
221
111
36
TABLE H-28 NON-INSTITUTIONAL DISABLED PERSONS OVER 16 YEARS OF AGE
TOTAL # OF PERSONS
PERSONS WITH PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION DISABILITY
1 6-64
16-64 65 Years Years
CENSUS TRACT Years and Over # %*
6017 2742 205 44 2
6018 4029 385 60 1
6019 4714 456 39 1
6020 3639 441 81 2
6021 2004 123 29 !
6022 3852 531 44 1
6023 1764 145 52 3
6024 3837 801 95 2
6025 2799 130 29 1
6026 4332 230 82 2
TOTALS 33,712 3,447 555 2
65 Years
and over
# %*
17 8
58 1 5
39 9
77 17
35 28
134 25
30 21
82 10
17 13
13 6
502 15
Source ·
1980 Census, Sample County
* Percent of total persons in age group
TABLE H-29 LOCATION OF ELDERLY
AGE 65+
PERCEi~T OF PERCENT OF
TOTAL CENSUS TRACT CITYWIDE
NUMBER POPULAT I ON POP ULATI ON
(1 980) (1 980) (1 980)
CT
6017 224 5.5% 0.45%
6018 427 10.5 0.86
6019 543 13.3 1.10
6020 538 13.2 1 . 09
6021 184 4.5 0.37
6022 659 16.2 1.33
6023 199 4.9 0.40
6024 888 21.8 1.80
6025 1 67 4.1 O. 34
6026 250 6.1 0.51
TOTAL
4,07'9
8.26
Source. 1980 Census
37
TABLE H-30 LARGE HOUSEHOLDS AND FAMILIES WITH FEMALE HEADS
TOTAL # Of HOUSEHOLDS WITH MORE
CENSUS HOUSEHOLDS IN T~IAN 6 MEMBERS
TRACT CENSUS TRACTS # %
6017 1,213 113 9
6018 1,893 lO0 5
601 9 2,623 57 22
6020 1,847 86 5
6021 1,000 93 9
6022 2,440 119 5
6023 845 64 8
6024 2,353 79 34
6025 1,124 141 13
6026 2,129 129 6
TOTALS 17,467 981 6
Source:
1980 U.S. Census, Sample Count
FAMILY HOUSEHOLDS
WITH FEMALE HEADS
# %
140 12
202 ll
353 13
129 7
99 l0
287 12
85 l0
144 6
161 14
242 11
1,842 ll
38
Statutory Requirements : Opportunities for Energy Conservation
California Government Code section 65583(a)(7) requires a housing
element to contain an analysis of opportunities for energy conservation
with respect to residential'development.
'Use of Active or Passive Solar Energy
The availability of solar energy is not significantly constrained by
topography in South San Francisco, however frequent coastal fog limits,
to some extent, the incorporation of active solar devices into resi-
dential buildings. Building height and setback limitations in all areas
of the City provide that building shadows do not substantially restrict
sol ar access. The City Department of Community Development reviews
proposed structures for passive desi.gn features such as building
orientation, window location, and landscaping species.
Insulation and Other Energy Conserving Techniques
The latest edition of the Uniform Building Code is enforced in South San
Francisco, and the building official inspects buildings for conformance
with State Standards for energy conservaiton. InSulation of ceilings
and walls, replacement of incandescent lighting fixtures with fluores-
cent fixtures, water heater insulation wraps, low-flow showerheads and
other measures will significantly reduce residential energy consumption.
Home owners can now obtain interest free loans and free energy audits
from Pacific Gas & Electric Company to upgrade their residential energy
effi ci ency.
South San Francisco is also implementing a noise insulation program for
residential units in areas of the City adversely affected by air, port
noise. This insulation program will have the si de benefit of energy
conservation as well as noise insulation.
39
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
Statutory Requirements : Goals, Objec%ives and Policies
California Government Code section 65583(b) requires a housing element
to contain a statement of the community's goals, quantified objectives,
and policies relative to the maintenance, improvement, and development
of housing.
Housing Goals
1. To encourage a sufficient supply of housing units to assure
each resident of an attractive, healthful, safe environment
with a wide range of designs, types, sizes and prices.
2. To avoid deterioration due to a lack of maintenance of existing
dwelling units and to provide a low cost rehabilitation program
for their improvement.
3. To encourage a variety of housing units in well planned
neighborhoods in order to assure people a choice of locations.
Housing Objectives
The following generalized objectives are supported by specific quantified
objectives in Table H-31, "South San Francisco Housing Program Summary."
1. Continue to support the provision of housing by both the private
and public sector for all income groups in the community.
2. Provide incentives that encourage mixed uses and manufactured
housing to attract more lower cost units.
3. Provide clear City Council policy supporting efforts of non-
governmental sponsors to generate affordable housing.
4. Assist citizens in locating and retaining affordable housing
without discrimination.
5. Provide local government direct involvement in retaining afford-
able housing.
Housing Policies
The following set of housing policies are intended to guide the City
4O
Council and Planning Commission in the formulation of an effective and
coordinated housing program.
1. New quality residential development shall be encouraged where
appropriately designated on the General Plan, public services
and facilities are adequate to support added population and/or
where sufficient improvements are already committed.
2. State and Federal legislation will be supported to make housing
more affordable by owners and renters.
3. State and Federal legislation to permit rehabilitation of existing
deteriorated housing without tax penalties will be supported.
4. The City will support State and Federal efforts to eliminate
"red lining." (Exclusion of certain neighborhoods from loan
qualification. )
5. The Housing Improvement Program shall be supported with con-
tinued funding in future HCDA program years.
6. Efforts will be made to eliminate discrimination by race, sex,
age, religion and national origin as an obstacle to housing for
all citizens.
7. The City's Zoning Ordinance shall be continually reviewed for
flexibility to encourage a variety and mix in housing types
including single family condominiums, cluster projects PUD's,
town-homes, cooperatives, mobile homes and manufactured housing.
8. Innovative subdivision and zoning ordinance design standards
shall be supported to promote improved residential and neighbor-
hood design, minimize costs and promote energy conservation.
9. The City will encourage semi-public and non-profit groups to
provide housing for the elderly, handicapped and low-income
citizens of South San Francisco.
10. In order to protect housing investment and public safety and
to keep down housing costs, new residential development shall be
discouraged in areas containing major environmental hazards
(such as floods, seismic and safety problems) unless adequate
mitigation measures are taken.
41
ll. All divisions, departments and levels of City Government shall
provide assistance within the bounds of local ordinances and
policies to stimulate private housing developments consistent
with local needs.
12. The design of new housing and neighborhoods shall comply with
adopted building security standards that aid the decrease of
burglary, vandalism and other property-related crimes.
13. The elimination of non-conforming uses and structures from
residential areas shall be encouraged.
14. South San Francisco will continue to cooperate with other govern-
mental and non-profit agencies and continue to take an active
interest in seeking solutions to area-wide housing problems.
15. Adequate public facilities including streets, water, sewerage
and drainage shall be provided throughout the residential areas
of th6 City.
16. New residential developments shall be compatible with the San Mateo
County Airport Land Use Plan noise criteria. Any incompatible
residential uses should either be eliminated or mitigation
measures should be taken to reduce interior noise levels within
acceptable ranges in accordance wi th the Noise Element.
17. All dwelling units shall have adequate public and private access
to all public rights-of-way.
18. The City supports the concept that all communities should make
a good faith effort to meet the housing needs of non-market rate
households in their area, in a manner that is not disproportionate
fo.r any community and which recognizes the degree of effort made
in prior years.
19. The housing type mix in South San Francisco should approximate
the following percentages:
Single-Family Residential 65%
Mul tiple-Family 35%
20. The City should develop policies and ordinances which require
new developments to pay proportionate costs of necessary new
utilities and capital improvements to accommodate these
developments.
42
21. Condominium conversions are acceptable to the community only
if they meet the following general criteria-
a. There is a multiple-family unit vacancy rate of at least 5%.
b. The conversion has an overall positive effect on the City's
available housing stock.
c. Adequate provisions are made for maintenance and management
of condominium projects for the health, safety and general
welfare of the community.
d. The project meets all current buildin§, fire, zoning and
other applicable codes in force at the time of conversion.
e. The conversion is consistent with all applicable policies of
this General Plan.
Specific criteria on condominium conversions are set forth
in Chapter 19.80 of the Municipal Code, and amendments thereto.
22. All future and especially major housing projects shall be
evaluated by the following criteria-
a. The effects the proposed densities will have on the sur-
rounding neighborhoods, streets and the community as a
whole.
b. The need for additional infrastructure improvements
including but not limited to sewers, water, storm drainage,
and parks.
c. The need for additional public services to accommodate the
project including but not limited to police, fire, public
works, libraries, recreation, planning, engineering, admini-
stration, finance, building and other applicable services.
d. The cost/revenue impacts; especially 6f major projects.
43
HOUSING PROGRAM
Statutory Requirements : Housing Program
California Government Code Section 65583(c) requires a housing element to
contain a program which sets forth a five year schedule of actions the
local government is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement the
policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the housing element
through the administration of land use and development controls, provision
of regulatory concessions and incentives, and the utilization of appro-
priate federal and state financing and subsidy programs when available.
Specific Housing Programs
South San Francisco's specific housing programs are summarized in
Table H-31, and are cross-indexed to the related problem which each
program is attempting to alleviate or solve. Quantified objectives and
results expected by 1990 are presented. The agent or official respon-
sible for program implementation is identified. The housing program
summary is followed by a detailed explanation of each program.
44
14--0
E
(-.) E*~
~.-
14-.)0
~ ~:.~
z
z
0
z
0
J
0
.-1-
45
oo
o uo~
o t-
u
~ o
46
o $-
· ,.- ~
0-~-
0 ~
Z
0
48
o~.
49
o ~ o ~.~ r-
Or'-- · O.r-
C.~ ~ 0
g ~- 'r
5O
~-- 0 ,-
O,--ID-
~o
g~
t.- 0
R1
Continued Support for Construction of Market Rate Quality Housing Units
for Above Moderate and Moderate Income Households
This program is designed to support the market function of constructing
new market rate housing units for above moderate and moderate income
households at a rate which will help meet the current and projected
housing needs. During the decade from 1970 to 1980 housing was produced
in South San Francisco at an average rate of about 375 units per year.
Housing production slowed substantially during the early 1980's due to
adverse financial conditions and a nationwide economic recession.
NEW UNITS ADDED*
YEAR
SINGLE FAMILY MULTIPLE FAMILY
1 980 1 68 43
1981 74 12
1 982 1 5
1983 60 140
* New construction less demolitions
Source: South San Francisco Building Division
It is expected that new housing starts will increase in response to
more favorable economic conditions during the balance of the decade.
While the quantity of units produced will probably not reach the average
experienced in the 1970's, it should approach two-thirds to three-
quarters of that rate. An average net production rate of from 250 to
280 units per year from 1984-90 will yield from 1,500 to 1,680 new
units. These added to the net 506 units produced from 1980-83
would result in a total of 2,006-2,186 units added to the City's
housing stock in the decade 1980-90. This estimated result compares
favorably with the projected need of 2,166 units during the same 10
year period.
Division of housing units into the various categories affordable to the
several income groups (e.g above moderate, moderate, low and very low)
can be projected based on 1980 conditions and anticipated future construc-
tion trends. In 1980 63.5 percent of the occupied housing units in
South San Francisco were owner-occupied and 37.5 percent were renter-
occupied. Trends point to continued production of a high percentage of
single family, townhouse and condominium units which are generally
designed for owner occupancy. However, as a practical matter about 30-
40 percent of townhouses and condominiums are investor owned and rented.
As a result, it is expected that a slightly higher percentage of newly
constructed units will be owner-occupied than existed in 1980. An
average ratio of 65 percent owner-occupancy and 35 percent renter-
occupancy is estimated to occur between 1980-90.
52
In 1980 moderate income households lived in 18.7 percent of the owner-
occupied units. Above moderate income households lived in 74.2 percent
of the owner-occupied units. The remaining owner-occupied units
provided residents for low and very low income households and accounted
for 7.1 percent of the units. For projection purposes, it is estimated
that new owner-occupied market rate housing units will be provided at a
ratio of 80 percent for above moderate income households, 20 percent
for moderate income households and none for low and very low income
households.
Traditionally, many moderate and most low and very low income households
have lived in rental housing units. In South San Francisco the following
percentages of rental units were occupiea by the various income groups
in 1980: very low - 48.9 percent, low - 38.9 percent, and moderate/above
moderate - 12.2 percent. It is estimated that this ratio will change
dramatically and new renter-occupied market rate housing units produced
from 1980-90 will only be affordable to households of moderate incomes
and above.
SUMMARY' PROJECTED MARKET RATE HOUSING UNITS ADDED TO SOUTH SAN
FRANC ISCO HOUS I NG STOCK, 1980-90
Owner-Occupied (65%)
Renter-Occupied (35%)
TOTAL (100%)
INCOME DIVISIONS
ABOVE
UNITS MODERATE
1304-1421 1043-1137
702- 765
2006-2186 1043-1137
MODERATE
261-284 0
702-765 0
963-1049 0
LOW/
VERY LOW
53
Shared Housing Program
The shared housing program seeks placement of individuals or small
households needing housing with people who have excess space in their
home and desire or are willing to share that space. This program is
sponsored by a non-profit organization (Human Investment Providers,
Inc.: Shared Homes) that arranges for the placement of seniors, students
and other individuals and small households needing housing with other
individuals who have housing available and wish to accept a boarder.
The organization maintains a list of both those people who have available
space and those who need to rent or otherwise obtain housing in the
community. The City supports this program through the following action.
A. City support and approval of the proqram through adoption of
a formal resolution of support.
B. City participation in funding to be used for provision of
limited office space, telephone, advertising and information
dissemination about the program.
The shared housing program was established to serve the north San Mateo
County cities. South San Francisco contributed $1,000 to the project
in the 1983-84 fiscal year. The active program has resulted in the
placement of about 15 applicants in the City from 7/1/83 to 1/31/83.
Second Housing Units
This program invovles the creation of second housing units when made
an integral part of a single family residence. In South San Francisco,
a second unit is defined as "a separate, complete housekeeping unit
with kitchen, sleeping, and full bathroom facilities and which is
located on the same parcel or lot as the primary unit." It includes
provisions for living, sleeping, cooking and sanitation within the main
residence. The City has amended its Zoning Ordinance to provide that
second units may be permitted upon the issuance of a Conditional Use
Permit providing unit meets the following specific standards. In general
those include:
A. The unit is compatible with design of the main unit and the
surrounding neighborhood.
B. The second unit is attached or within the primary unit.
C. The second unit shall not contain an area in excess of
640 square feet.
54
D. A minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet is required in
order to allow the development of a second unit.
E. Additional off-street parking on the site shall be provided on
the basis of one space for each second dwelling unit in
addition to any off-street parking spaces required for the
primary unit.
Density Bonus for Inclusion of Low and Moderate Income Units
The California Government Code Section 65915 requires cities to grant
certain density bonuses or provide other incentives of equivalent value
to housing developers providing low and moderate income housing units
within their projects. Specifically the density bonuses required are:
1. A 25 percent density increase when at least 25 percent of the
total units in the development are for persons and families of
low or moderate income.
2. A 25 percent density increase when at least l0 percent of the
total units in the housing development are for lower income
households.
The density increase is at least 25 percent over the otherwise maximum
allowable residential density under the applicable zoning ordinance and
land use element of the General Plan. The City will establish procedures
for implementing the density bonus provisions. Implementation to occur
during the five-year Program.
Small Units for One Person Household in Central Business District
The City is encouraging private developers to construct or add small
residential units above commercial facilities in the Central Business
District. These units would be primarily for one person households and
directed toward providing housing for persons of low and moderate
incomes. It is anticipated that a number of the units would be
occupied by seniors or possibly female heads of household with one
small child. It is anticipated that approximately 20 new small units
would be developed in the Central Business District by 1990. The
Departmert of Community Development would be responsible for encourag-
ing developers to construct or add these small units in conjunction
with commercial facilities. -
55
Housing Revenue Bond Program
South San Francisco participates with San Mateo County in its Housing
Revenue Bond program. That program provides below market rate interest
loans to sponsors of low and moderate income housing at various locations
in the County. The City has adopted a resolution of participation wi th
San Mateo County. Project sponsors may submit proposals to the County
Department of Housing Development for review and approval. Commitments
are issued on a competitive basis.
Higher Density Provisions for Senior Housing
Development of senior housing in South San Francisco is supported by
General Plan policies and Zoning Ordinance provisions which provide
higher density for senior housing projects. This program allows densities
of up to 50 units per acre for senior housing projects in multiple family
districts. The concept is designed to encourage the development of
senior housing in higher density areas close to shopping and transportation.
This program is supported by Policy No. 25 in the Land Use element.
Magnolia Center Senior Project
This project involves renovation of a former school auditorium into a
multi-purpose or senior citizen center in conjunction with the develop-
ment of approximately 90 new housing units on adjacent property owned
by the City of South San Francisco. This is planned as a redevelopment
project with a portion of the Feasibility Study to be funded by Community
Development Block Grant funds.
Larger Unit Development in Multi-Family Projects
This program focuses on City encouragement of private developers to ·
provide a portion of newly constructed multiple family units for large
families. The City staff will encourage development of at least 13 percent
of new multiple family units of sufficient size to accommodate large
families.
It is projected that approximately 120 new units per year would be
developed for low and very low income households using redevelopment
funds. Five percent of those units will be developed to accommodate
larger families.
This program should result in the creation of from 50 to 55 new units
for large families by 1990.
56
Continued City Support for Housing Authority's Public Housing Rental
Program
The South San Francisco Housing Authority has rehabilitated 40 units and
added 40 new units to its Public Housing Project. No additional units
are planned in the future. The City will continue to support the Housing
Authority's Public Housing Rental Program by cooperating with the Authority
in such areas as unit rehabilitation. While no new units would be
generated, the existing 80 affordable units will continue to be operated.
The Housing Authority has the potential for developing an additional 20
units although no plans for such development currently exists.
Section 8 Housing Support
South San Francisco will continue to support San I~ateo County's Federal
Section 8 Housing Assistance Program provided through the Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Through this program existing and
new rental units can be made affordable to low income households. The
difference between market rate rents and what a family can pay is paid
to the landlord by the program funds. Allocation of funds to a community
is dependent on HUD criteria and local interest. Approximately 160
Section 8 units are currently existing in the City.
Support Development of an Apartment Hotel for the Elderly
The City supports the development of an apartment hotel for elderly
citizens of South San Francisco. This would be a privately developed or
rehabilitated structure in the urban center designed specifically to
meet the needs of the elderly. Assistance could be obtained through
several Federal or State programs, (e.g. Section 202 Funds, Community
Development Block Grant program). Availability of funds is dependent
upon programs selected and local interest. A potential yield of 20-40
units is anticipated.
Mixed Uses in Commercial and Office Zoning Districts
This program will encourage housing uses on upper floors in commercial
and office zoning districts. Sections of the Zoning Ordinance pertaining
to commercial and office development permit residential uses on the same
site secondary to established commercial and office uses. Maximum
densities of 30 units per acre should be allowed in these areas. Adequate
off-street parking must be provided; however, there may be opportunities
for time share of parking facilities.
Manufactured Housing/Mobile Homes and Factory Built Housing
The General Plan Land Use element contains policies supporting the
development of manufactured housing/mobile homes and factory built
housing on conventional single family lots and within planned mobile
57
home park developments. Manufactured homes/mobile homes and factory
built homes provide a significant opportunity for the creation of
affordable housing units. Where individual manufactured/mobile home
units and factory built homes are allowed in single family residential
areas, the exterior appearance of these units should be compatible with
the residential structures in the surrounding area. New manufactured
housing/mobile home parks should be allowed on the periphery of the
existing residential areas. One specific site that may be appropriate
for this type of housing is on the east side of E1 Camino Real north of
Chestnut Avenue and south of Hickey Boulevard.
Removal of Handicapped Barriers
All new multiple residential structures in the City of South San
Francisco are required to be accessible to the handicapped as provided
in the 1979 edition of the Uniform Building Code. The City enforces
these provisions through plan review by the Building Department. This
will help increase the supply of residential units accessible to the
handicapped through new construction. In addition, any condominium
conversions allowed in the City are required to meet current building
code standards which include provisions for handicapped access. Although
conversions occur on a limited basis, this provision requires upgrading
of older buildings, making them more accessible to the handicapped.
Philanthropic Organization Housing Development
A local service club has developed and operates a 181 unit project for
the elderly in Census Tract 6024. This project provides assisted housing
for elderly residents of the community. The service club proposes to
construct an additional 54 unit project between Ponderosa School,
Blodin Way and Constitution Way. The project would be primarily for
low and very low income senior citizens and would be operated on the
same basis as the existing project.
Potential Mixed Use Development East of U.S. lO1
The potential for mixed office, commercial and residential uses exist
in some areas east of U.S. 101. While uses in this area have traditionally
been oriented to business and industry, there has been some expression of
interest in developing quality, higher density housing in a mixed use
setting. This would help provide housing for the large employment base
in this area.
58
Remodeling and Improvement of Existing Units
Considerable remodeling, rehabilitation and improvement of existing
housing units within the community has occurred over the past decade.
This trend is expected to continue to provide South San Francisco resi-
dents with a means of improving their housing opportunities without
acquiring new housing. The action involves city encouragement of the
remodeling and improvement of existing units. In this way the city
will be acting to remove governmental constraints by listing resources,
facilitating relations with local business, etc., and will therefore
increase affordable housing opportunities using the current housing
stock. The city will also enforce energy conservation requirements and
encourage the use of energy conservation techniques in remodeling, re-
habilitation and improvement of existing housing where building permits
are required.
San Mateo County - Administered Housing Rehabilitation Program
South San Francisco participates with San Mateo County in a county-wide
housing rehabilitation program. The program is funded by Community
Development Block Grant funds. The city has requested a $100,000
allocation for fiscal years 1984-87 to rehabilitate from 6 to 7 single
family dwelling units. It is anticipated that a similar number of
units would be rehabilitated during the fiscal years 1987-90. The
primary responsibility for the program would be vested in the San Mateo
County Housing Division.
Commercial, Multiple Family and Mixed-Use Rehabilitation Program
South San Francisco has requested funds for the rehabilitation of com-
mercial, multiple family and mixed-use structures through the Community
Development Block Grant program administered by San Mateo County. If
funds are granted, the County would administer the program through its
Housing Rehabilitation program. Funding is anticipated on a case-by-
case basis. It is anticipated that up to 10 units of multiple family
housing can be rehabilitated by 1990. Primary responsibility for the
program would be vested with San Mateo County Housing Division.
Forest Homes Mobile Home Park Renovation
This is a specific program with the objective of renovating and improving
an existing mobile home park. The objective of the project is to provide
various site improvements, seismic hold-down, landscaping, driveways,
relocation expenses and substandard building demolition to provide standard
housing in this mobile home park for 30 low and moderate income households.
59
The project will be funded over a two year period. A portion of the
funds will come from Community Development Block Grant sources and a
portion will be the responsibility of the property owner.
Airport Noise Insulation Program
The city has established a program to assist homeowners in the instal-
lation of noise insulation in units adversely affected by airport noise.
This is a broad based project for all income levels designed to reduce
aircraft associated noise impacts inside residences. The noise insulation
program will have a beneficial side effect of providing energy conservation
in a large area of the city. The first phase of the program is funded
with $1,000,000 ($800,000 from federal funding and $200,000 from local
sources including the City and County of San Francisco, P.G.&E ZIP loans
and other sources). A portion of the program is designed to assist low
and moderate income homeowners. Approximately $30,000 will be obtained
from Community Development Block Grants to be used as matching funds to
assist low and moderate income homeowners in the insulation program. It
is anticipated that Block Grant funds would pay for 80 percent of the
cost and the low and moderate income property owner would be responsible
for the remaining 20 percent of the cost. This project is conducted
pursuant to the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979 (Section
49 USC 2101 et seq). It is anticipated that future phases of the program
will result in additional noise insulation in impacted areas.
Concentrated Neighborhood Strategy
The City will designate and apply for future CDBG or other funds for
concentrated neighborhood strategy area projects for areas in need of
housing rehabilitation, open space and/or capital improvements. This
program is designed to provide a concentrated effort to rehabilitate and
upgrade existing residential neighborhoods needing various housing
capital improvements, rehabilitation and other related improvements. The
program will be utilized in the existing CDBG target area which generally
includes Census Tracts 6021 and 6022. Typical activities may include
the following:
A. Provision of new and rehabilitated affordable housing units.
B. Encouraging the creation of a non-profit housing development
corporation by private interests to aid in financing and imple-
mentation of projects.
C. Provision of public improvements such as recreation, land-
scaping and utilities.
D. Elimination of handicapped barriers.
The Planning and Building Division staff will be responsible for the
6O
promotion and implementation of the program. Partial funding sources
are varied but include HCDA funds, Section 8 funds, Gas Tax, local funds
and Redevelopment Agency funds. New unit generation is dependent upon
availability of financing and property owner interest. Emphasis of the
program' is on rehabilitation. It is estimated that 15-25 units per year
can be improved.
Support of Non-Discrimination in Housing
The city supports the concept of nondiscrimination in housing. While
the city does not have the resources to actively enforce nondiscriminatory
housing laws, persons requesting information or assistance relative to
their housing discrimination complaints shall be referred to the County
Community Services Department and provided with State and Federal printed
information concerning fair housing laws, rights and remedies available
to those who believe they have been discriminated against.
Condominium Conversion Limitation
Conversion of apartments to condominium ownership adversely affects the
number of affordable rental units available within the community. Chapter
19.80 of the Municipal Code highlights several social problems created
by conversion. This Chapter prohibits conversions unless an acceptable
vacancy rate in multiple family projects is achieved. This provision
has reduced the number of condominium conversions and will help retain
the City's existing rental stock. This rental housing stock provides a
substantial source of housing for low and moderate income families.
Housing Referral Proqram
A listing of major agencies and organizations participating in housing
related activities including address, telephone and brief description of
their function will be maintained by the Department of Community Develop-
ment and provided to city departments (particularly City Clerk, Police
and Building Division) for distribution to the public on request. Among
the referrals listed will be the South San Francisco Housing Authority,
San Mateo County Housing Authority, Realty Board, Chamber of Commerce
and housing counseling organizations.
Maintenance of Current Housinq Records
The Department of COmmunity Development will maintain the following
records ·
A. Maintenance of construction activity records is an ongoing
program of the Building Division. A monthly record of building
permits by unit type (single or multiple) is kept and an annual
61
summary of condominium units and mobile home units is available.
B. A master list of total housing units and estimated population
city-wide will continue to be maintained bY the Department of
Community Development and updated annually using the monthly
Building Division records.
C. The Planning staff will maintain a list of housing needs taken
from the General Plan Housing Element and provide an up-to-date
record of needs attainment for use by the Planning Commission
and City Council in reviewing new development proposals. The
Planning Commission will request information about anticipated
rent schedules and sales prices from project proponents to
facilitate the needs attainment determination. Current HUD
income schedules will be used to establish median income for
comparison with project rental and/or sales information.
Promotion of Housing Policy
At the time first contact is made with City staff, developers will be
alerted by the Department of Community Development to the City's desire
to provide a wide range of housing costs including units affordable to
lower income house holds. Particular attention will be paid to sites
meeting the locational criteria for non-market housing set forth in the
Housing Element. During the initial discussions with staff, during the
environmental review process and during the review of project proposals
by the Planning Commission and City Council attention will be given to
methods of reducing housing costs including the methods listed below:
A. The floor area of some units might be reduced where it is
deemed appropriate due to increased single person households,
reduced family size and greater occupancy by elderly people.
B. Extra amenities of some units such as convenience bathrooms,
family rooms, large patios or decks and dens might be elimin-
ated.
C. Opportunities to utilize modular construction will be con-
sidered.
D. Opportunities to reduce costs of common facilities in some
condominium projects might be possible when projects locate
near public park and recreation facilities.
Statutory Requirements : Citizen Participation
California Government Code section 65583(c) requires that the local
government make a diligent effort to achieve public participation of
62
all economic segments of the community in the development of the housing
element, and the program shall describe this effort.
Citizen Involvement
Citizen involvement in the preparation of the South San Francisco
Housing Element was accomplished through the process of Planning Commission
study sessions (1978-79) and Planning Commission and City Council
public hearings (1981). Planning Commission and City Council public
hearings were conducted during this 1984 update process. These hearings
were widely publicized in an effort to obtain input from the diverse
income groups in the community.
Statutory Requirements · Housing Sites to be Made Available
California Government Code section 65583(c)(1) requires a housine element.
to contain an identification of adequate sites which will be made avail-
able through appropriate zoning and development standards and with public
services and facilities needed to facilitate and encourage the develop-
ment of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including
rental housing, factory-built housing and mobile homes, in order to meet
the community's housing goals.
Identification of Adequate Housing Sites
Adequate sites to be made available for housing in South San Francisco
are identified in Table H-32. The identified sites have the potential
for development with 2932-3122 dwelling units. Some sites will require
rezoning which may be accomplished by city or developer initiation.
All sites have most public facilities and services available but need
extensions into the property.
63
w
w
N
z
ZL~
X
Z
o
0
N
0
Z
o"~
.xD o
o
z
o
o
s,- o o
.z~ o
o
z
N
N
0
0 0
64
.~ OO
o
o
z
o
z
~ 0
c_
0 ~
o
z
0
N
0
0
65
o
z
o
z
o
z
o o o o o ~
s.
J
J
~ ~ 'E
(..5
Z
~.-.., C...'.~
ZZ
(._,.,.~ ~,1 ~..-.,
x
~..
o
z
o
z
C~ ,-- t~d ,-- O~ C~
0 0 0 0 0 0
66
Statutory Requirements · Program Contents
California Government Code sections 65583(c)(2),(3),(4), & (5) require
housing element programs to do all of the following-
· Assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the
needs of low- and moderate-income households.
· Address and, where approprite and legally possible, remove
governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and
development of housin§.
· Conserve and'improve the condition of the existing affordable
housing stock.
· Promote housing opportunities for all persons regardless of
race, religion, marital status, ancestry, national origin,
or color.
Housing Program Contents
Each of soUth San Francisco's housing programs is designed to accomplish
one or more statutory objectives. The objectives supported by each
program are identified in Table H-33.
67
TABLE H-33 HOUSING PROGRAMS RELATED TO STATUTORY OBJECTIVES
PROGRAM
1.
Continued Support for Construction
of Market Rate Quality Housing
Units for Above Moderate and
Moderate Income Households
2. Shared Itousing
3. Second housing Units
4. Density Bonus for Inclusion of
Low and Moderate Income Units
5. Small Units for One Person
Households in Central Business
District
6. Housing Revenue Bonds
7. Higher Density Provisions
for Senior Housing
8. Magnolia Center Senior Project
9. Larger Unit Development in
iqul ti-Family Projects
10. Continued Support for Housing
Authority's Public Housing Rental
Program
11. Section 8 Housing Support
X X
X X
X X
X X
u
o
o ~
o
o x
u ~J
o ID_
~- o
68
TABLE H-33 HOUSING PROGRAMS RELATED TO STATUTORY OBJECTIVES (continued)
PROGRAM
12. Support Development of an
Apartment Hotel for the
Elderly
13. Mixed Uses in Commercial
and Office Zoning Districts
14. Manufactured Housing and
Mo'bil Home Parks
15. Removal of Handicapped
Barriers
16. Remodeling and Improvement
of Existing Units
17. San Mateo County-
Administered Housing
Rehabilitation Program
18. Commercial, Multiple Family
and Mixed-Use Rehabilitation
19. Forest Homes Mobile ttome
Park Renovation
20. Airport Noise Insulation
21. Concentrated Neighborhood
Strategy
22. Support of Non-Discrimination
in Housing
X X
X X
X X
69
TABLE H-33 HOUSING PROGRAHS RELATED TO STATUTORY OBJECTIVES (continued)
23. Condominium Conversion
Limitation
24. Housing Referral Program
25. Maintenance of Current
Housing Records
X X
26. Promotion of Housing
Pol icy
X X X X
7O
HOUSING ELEMENT REVIEW
Statutory Requirements · Periodic Review
California Government Code section 65588 requires each local..go.v, ern-
ment to review its housing element as frequently as appropriate to
review all of the' following' .... . .~ '
A. The appropriateness of the housing goals.v, objectives, and policies
.contributing to the attainment of the State housing goal.
B. The effectiveness of the housing element in attainment of the
community's housing goals and objectives.
C. The progress of the City in implementation of the housing element.
The housing element must be revised as appropriate, but not less than
every five years, to reflect the results of this periodic review, except
that the first revision shall be accomplished by July 1, 1984.
Appropriateness of Housing Goals, Objectives and Policies
In adopting this housing element amendment the City of South San
Francisco finds that its. housin'g goals, objectives and policies are
appropriate in contributing to the attainment of the State housing
goal in that:
A. They support increased housing availabi.lity through making adequate
sites available, support of new housing construction and the use
of innovative techniques such as shared housing, mixed land uses,
factory-built and manufactured housing.
B. They support early attainment of decent housing and a suitable
living environment for families of the community through making
adequate sites available, new housing construction, housing rehabili-
tation and conservation programs.
C. They support attainment of the State housing goal through cooperation
of the governmental and private sector to expand housing opportunities
and accommodate the housing needs through rezoning efforts, density
bonuses, mixed land uses, housing revenue bonds and rehabilitation
programs.
D. They support the provision of housing affordability to low and
moderate income households through new single family and multiple
71
family housing construction, use of factory-built housing and
mobile homes, creating of second units and shared homes, con-
struction of senior housing and other specific methods.
E. They support the responsibility to facilitate the improvement
and development of'housing to make adequate provision for the
housing needs of all economic segments of the community through
site availability, new housing construction, housing conservation
and rehabilitation.
Housing Element Effectiveness
In adopting this housing element amendment the City of South San
Francisco finds that while its existing housing element has been an
effective tool in the attainment of South San Francisco's housing
goals and objectives, this amendment will expand its effectiveness by
providing greater detail in program description, updated information
concerning the availability of certain programs and reflect changed
conditions since its original adoption.
Housing Element Implementation Progress
In adopting this housing element amendment the City of South San
Francisco finds that significant progress has been made in the imple-
mentation of its housing element in that'
A. 135 single family units and 157 multiple family units have been
constructed since its adoption.
B. An estimated 600 units have been conserved or rehabilitated since
its adoption.
C. An additional 60 units (103 percent increase) have been occupied
by low and moderate income households in South San Francisco using
the federally sponsored Section 8 Program.
D. The City has begun participation in the shared housing program with
21 new occupants in South San Francisco accommodated in a period
from June 1, 1983 to January 31, 1984.
E. The City has adopted a second unit ordinance providing for the
creation of second dwelling units in single family zoning districts.
F. The City is in the process of instituting the airport noise insulation
program which will benefit residents of all income levels and will
provide the beneficial side effect of energy conservation.
72
EXHIBIT "B"
RESOLUTION NO. ]55-83
C]TY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAH FRANCISCO, STALE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE IOTAL HOUSING NEEDS
NUHBER IN THE ABAG HOUSING NEEDS REPORT, AND
REJECTING THE INCOME DISTRIBUTION ALLOCATIONS
WHEREAS, the Association of Bay Area Governments is the council of qovernments
(hereinafter "ABAG") under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act (Section 6500 et seq. of
the Government Code) for the San Fr.anci.sco BBy. A.rea; and
~.;HEREAS, each council of governments is r-eq"u'~,~d.'b]y'.'SC~'t.'i'~h-~BS-B4.~of the
Government Code (hereinafter "Section 65584") to determine the existing and projected
housing needs for its region; and
I~HEREAS, each council of govel-nments is further required to detei-mine each
· city's and county's share of the regional housing needs; and
,---- ~.;HEREAS,ABAG's staff has prepared and circulated, for public review and
~mment, a draft _Housing ~eeds Report meeting the requirements of Section 65584; and
¥~HEREAS,the Housing Needs Re_port was approved by the ABAG ~ork Program and
Coordination Committee for the purpose of beginning the official review and revision
of the determinations contained therein; and
J~'HEREAS,ABAG's staff have worked with the staff of the City of South San
Francisco to ensure that the most complete and reliable information has been used in
the determination of housing needs for this jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco is in accord with the total Housing
J~eeds Report number prepared for the City, which .number is 2,166; and
~..,~HEREAS, the City of South San Francisco has review. Ced the income distribution
allocations prepared by ABAG.
.... NOW, THEREFORE, BE .IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the'City of South San
~ncisco that, pursuant to Section 65584, the City of South San Francisco accepts the
total Housing l,~eeds Report number of 2,166 as contained in said Report.
B-1
R[SOLU1]ON ND. ]55-83
Pa ge 2
BE ]T FURIH[R R£SOLVED THAI'
].The City of South San Francisco rejects ABAG's income distribution
allocation as contained in the Housing Needs Report; and
2. The City recommends that ABAG approve an in-come distFi.b.ut.iQn.alloc~ti'on
of 0 units for Very low income households, ]29 units fof.lbw ]'r, come
households, 85] units for l'~oderate ]nc.~me Households, and ],186 units
for Above Moderate Income h~)use~olds for the period ']980-.]990';.and
·
3. The rejection of ABAG's income distribution allocation is described in
the attached report (Exhibit "A"); and
4. Documentation supporting the City's FecoF.,mended income distribution
allocation is described in attached Exhibits "A" and "B", which exhibits
are ir, corpoFated herein by reference.
] hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was I-egularly introduced and
adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a regular
meeting held on the 19th day of .....October ]983, by the following vote'
AYES' Councilmembers Ronald G. Acosta, Mark N..,Addiego, Emanuele N. Damonte,
,
Gus Nicolopulos; and Roberta Cerri Teglia
NOES' None
ABSENI' None
AIIESI' ___/_s./__~;arhara A.
B-2
E×H]B]'[ "A" TO RFSOLU'F]ON NO. 155-83
( 'XH]B]T "A"
,. C. Mtdg. 10/19/83
'he ABAG Housin§ Needs Report assigns an increase of 2,166 housin§ units to the
:ity Of South San Francisco for the 1980-1990 period to satisfy projected housing
needs.
Of these, 2,166 units, 931 (43%) are earmarked for above moderate income households;
477 (22%) for moderate income households; 347 (16%)for low income households; and
411 (19%) for very low income households.
AlthOugh the City accepts its responsibilities in meeting re§ional housing needs
and is willing to accept the total housing figure of 2,166 units, it rejects the
recommended distribution by income categories as specified in the Reports.
The City recommends that the following alternate Housing Needs figures .be approved
,by ABAG based on 1980 Census information attached to this Resolution and findings
specified below-
Very Low Low "Moderate Above Moderate
Income ! ncome ! ncome Income Total
O 129* 851 ** 1,186*** 2,166
The City rejects the income distribution proposed by ABAG for the following reasons-
1. The distribution would serve to perpetuate existing patterns of housing
inequity in the region. Further, the income allocation would negatively
impact the city of South San Francisco by requiring a higher than reasonable
proportion of lower income housing units.
2. The distribution is neither practical nor feasible considering present
economic conditions (e.g. high interest rates) and limited Federal and
State housing subsidies.
3. The distribution is both unfair and inequitable in that cities which have,
in the past, done a good job in providing housing for low and modenate
income families are being required to do more in the future. Those
cities which have, in the past, provided little or no housing for these
income groups are being required to make a minimal effort in the future.
zt. The distribution is based on arbitrary criteria in that it ignores current
policies of the City which seek to upgrade existing housing stock and encourage
a higher quality of housing in the City in the future.
5. The distribution iQnores the relationship between incomes of households
and the current availability of lower cost housing in the Community as
documented in the ,1980 U.S. Census. (Exhibit "B").
The City understands the practical difficulties associated with devising an income
distribution for regional housing needs and encourages ABAG to approve the more
- -quitable distribution herein recommended by the City.
-'airway Apartments, Goldrick Kest (74 units) and Rotary Club Addition (55 units)
**Based on percentage (41.8%) of total shortfall of Moderate and Above Moderate
income housing contained in 1980 Census figures (5182 units). ~imes 2037 units.
***Based on percentage (58.2%) of total shortfall of Moderate and Above Moderate
income housin§ contained in 1980 Census figures (5,182 units) ~imes 2037 units.
B-3
Z
~- 0 U
5- C
C r'~
cO 0
:>~0
-,-- 0
0
C) ~3) (1)
r- ~13 0
0
('- 0
0
0
c 0 0
~ L~-,--
O.J CJ
.~,~.
,,¢__.
0
I
0
0
~ O0
O0
I
r-- 0
B-4
-ID
0
0
Z
r-- r-
· o
0 ~
JD L~
C
0 E3- X ~....
!
0
0
October 19, 1983
TO:
SUBJECT:
The Honorable City Council
ABAG Housing Needs Report
RE COIqlqENDAT ] Oil:
That the City Council adopt the attached Resolution relating to the ABAG Housing Needs
Report.
DISCUSSION:
On July 28, 1983, ABAG approved the ._H?u~.i_ng___!!e_e__ds__De_t_e_rm_in_a_t_i?_ns report for distribution
to Bay Area cities and counties for review and revision.
City action on the housing figures is to be made effective October 28, 1983, the conclu-
sion of the 90-day review period.
Last year the City Council adopted Resolution 31-82 which accepted ABAG's total Housing
~eed figure but rejected the proposed income distribution allocation. ABAG's current
Housing Needs proposal for South San F~-ancisco for 1980-1990 is as follows.
Very Low Low ~oderate Above ~oderate
Total Income Income Income Income
2,166 units 411 units 347 units 477 units 931 units
The recommendation contained in the attached Resolution proposes the following Housing
Needs allocation based on information contained in attached Exhibits "A" and "B."
Very Low Low I,;oderate Above ~oderate
Total Income Income Income Income
2,166 units
0 units 129 units 851 units 1,186 units
The above recommendation should not be construed as a City policy not to increase hous-
ing for lower income families in the future. Rather, it is intended to respond to
arbitrary dwelling unit needs proposed by ABAG for South San Francisco. The City should,
in the future as it has done in the past, continue to encourage and/or construct addi-
tional housing for low income families consistent with General Plan policies and subject
to the availability of funding. In addition, equal attention should be given to the
rehabilitation of existing dwellings in the community.
C. WALTER BIRKELO
City Manager
Louis Dell'Angela ~ -~ -~
Director of Commun. ity Development CWB:LD'A:JS
B-6
Attachments