|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
To update the city’s housing requirements and facilitate more development, the Redwood City Council approved several hundred pages of text changes to land use and city code last week.
The July 13 approvals aim to prepare for current and future housing needs, as outlined in the city’s current Housing Element. The council passed two ordinances amending the city’s Zoning Code and Municipal Code, and one resolution amending the city’s Engineering Standards in a 6-1 vote, with Council member Marcella Padilla opposed.
“We’re experiencing this severe housing crisis that requires significant action,” Senior Planner Apollo Rojas said at the meeting.
He outlined California’s requirement that Redwood City approve 4,588 units by 2031. The city “as a leader in housing in the Peninsula,” aims to do better than that and add at least 7,000 units in that same period, Rojas said.
An additional two amendments were sent back for further study after neighbors complained that the city hadn’t engaged with them about the decision. Both amendments deal with rezoning two commercial parcels in the Bair Island neighborhood.
When the city approved its Housing Element in 2023, it rezoned hundreds of parcels to accelerate housing production. Among them are the two parcels on Sea Anchor Drive, which are narrow and constrained by PG&E transmission lines, making multifamily residential development difficult.
In order to “clean up” the zoning of the Bair Island parcels to remain consistent with the surrounding area, Rojas said, city staff proposed rezoning the two Bair Island parcels from Mixed-Use Waterfront — which emphasizes housing and requires public shoreline access — back to General Commercial-Residential Combining — which emphasizes commerce and has no waterfront requirements.
Several Bair Island residents spoke against the latest rezoning. Neighbor dissent and the complexity of the matter prompted council members to remove those amendments from the slew that they did approve.
The Council did, however, approve over 20 other amendments. Some were intended to increase buildable areas by addressing requirements for open space, yard setbacks and spacing between buildings for natural light. The city also codified and clarified bike parking requirements, and reduced downtown restaurant and retail parking minimums for cars.
To streamline the development process, the council decided to reduce the number of public hearings for 100% affordable projects, three-story buildings under 45 feet tall, condo subdivisions and low-barrier navigation centers, which are temporary shelters for the unhoused.
Some of the approved amendments clarify existing regulations, such as by defining “prototype manufacturing” as a permissible research and development use and “food preparation” as an industrial use. The city also expanded the zoning definition for “indoor recreation,” which includes bowling lanes, skating arenas and gyms.
To stay consistent with ever-evolving state law on accessory dwelling units (ADU), the council decided to allow up to eight detached ADUs on a multifamily site — six more than before — and to help older ADUs secure a permit more easily. The council also decided to block short-term rentals for so-called junior ADUs, which are units within the structure of the main house.
Short-term rentals will now be limited to one rental listing per day per residence and hosts will face more hurdles in proving that their rental is their main residence. The city will also have more flexibility in collecting taxes.
To reduce development bureaucracy, the amended code eliminates parking requirements for senior and 100% affordable housing developments, as well as for group homes and low-barrier navigation centers. The city also removed the requirement for utilities to be installed underground.
While Padilla dedicated a couple of minutes on the dias to the value of open space and the dangers that some of the proposed amendments posed to it, Council member Chris Sturken noted the broad definition of open space, which includes balconies, patios and porches — not necessarily green grass.
Padilla also pointed to the problem of eliminating parking requirements for senior homes, before casting the lone dissenting vote against the ordinances and resolution.
Council member Diane Howard, who voted with the majority, said she has “grave concerns” about cars having “nowhere else to go” without parking requirements, which could be an unintended consequence of allowing more housing in smaller spaces. She also said it’s important to include neighbors in the development of temporary homeless shelters.
Council members Sturken and Isabella Chu, as well as Vice Mayor Kaia Eakin, unanimously agreed on the value of robust community engagement and the importance of pumping the brakes on the rezoning of the Bair Island parcels.
Because the council voted to look deeper into the Bair Island issue, the Planning Commission will have to hold a hearing on it. If the commission recommends rezoning, it will likely come before the council once more.
