Half Moon Bay Planning Commission Housing Element Work Session - August 27, 2024
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Half Moon Bay Planning Commission Housing Element Work Session - August 27, 2024
The Planning Commission held a public work session on the “2023-2031 Housing Element, Revised HCD Draft, May 31, 2024.” The commission received community and staff input on revisions required by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and discussed key sites, buffers, and next steps. The meeting concluded with a unanimous vote to recommend the City Council submit the revised Housing Element to HCD, incorporating comments heard during the session.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Sylvia Tang (Half Moon Bay resident of 25 years) expressed strong support for installing a traffic signal at either Murada Road or Roosevelt Avenue, citing safety hazards, fatalities, and difficulty accessing Highway 1. She noted the north end of the city has been neglected and that two fatalities and numerous injuries have occurred.
- A member of the public (name not stated) voiced concern about clustering of low-income housing in the downtown area (e.g., 555 Kelly), warning it could create segregated enclaves reminiscent of 80-year-old projects. The speaker urged the commission to fully assess each opportunity site to ensure compatibility with the community.
Discussion Items
- Housing Element Work Session (Item 1A): Mike Noce (Housing Programs Manager) and Asher Cohn (M Group) presented the revised draft. Key points included:
- The city’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) is 480 units, with 285 units for low- and very-low-income households (area median income for a family of four: under $156,000/year; for a single person: under $109,000/year).
- 58% of lower-income households are overpaying for housing.
- Pipeline projects include Cabrillo Unified School District, Hilltop Mobile Home Park, and others; ADU production averages 12–20 units per year (commissioner noted recent approvals exceed the 12 used in calculations).
- HCD comments (34 issues) addressed minority population impacts, fair housing, publicly owned sites, SB 423 compliance, and Measure D analysis.
- The Our Lady of the Pillar Church site (opportunity site #3, 40–50 units) drew extended debate. The church has expressed intent to develop a school and requested removal. Staff and most commissioners favored retaining it as a buffer site, citing HCD guidance and the need for flexibility under the “no net loss” law. The overall buffer would remain at 18.8% for very-low/low-income categories (within the recommended 15–30% range) even if removed. Commissioners Gorn, Ruddock, and Hernandez supported keeping the site as a potential opportunity without obligating the church.
- Commissioner Joannes raised concerns about the clustering of affordable units and the potential for segregation; staff noted the state’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) analysis requires locating housing near resources, which may concentrate units in the town center.
- Commissioner Joannes also noted the document’s language about affluent areas (e.g., Ocean Colony) needed better citation to avoid appearing subjective.
- Commissioner Ruddock inquired about the Hilltop Mobile Home Park timeline; staff confirmed it is an active application expected to develop within the eight-year cycle.
- Commissioner Joannes requested staff investigate home-sharing/co-housing programs; staff referenced existing Program 3-3.
Key Outcomes
- Motion (by Commissioner Hernandez, seconded by Commissioner Gorn): The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the revised Housing Element with the comments heard today and any written comments submitted by commissioners. The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
- Staff was directed to convey the commission’s comments and recommendations to the City Council at its special meeting on August 7, 2024.
- Staff will also update the Housing Element to reflect the recent city council direction on Measure D (administrative path, not ballot measure) and correct references to the ballot process.
- The next Planning Commission meeting (August 13, 2024) will feature the Hyatt Hotel project (102 rooms, 66,260 sq ft) for review.
Meeting Transcript
And to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God individual with liberty and just disparall. I just realized I didn't have my mic on. Welcome everyone. I'm going to at this point ask Joe to go over the Zoom protocol for us. Thank you, Chair Gossett. This meeting will be held in person and via Zoom for public participation. Public comments may be made in person or remotely via Zoom and interpretation will be available. Planning commissioners and staff will participate in person during any public comment portions. Attendee must use the raise their hand feature and will be called upon and unmuted when it's their turn to speak. If you're joining by phone, please use star nine to raise your hand and star six to mute and unmute. This meeting will also be streamed on Channel 27 on Pacific Coast TV. Thank you. And Joe, could you take a roll call, please? Yes. Commissioner Ruddick. Here. Commissioner Hernandez. I'm present. Commissioner Gordon. I'm here. Vice Chair Joanus. I'm here. And Chair Gossett? Present. Okay. All commissioners are present. Thank you. And also with PCTV, I think the text at the bottom is in backwards or inverted. Just so that you can you're aware of that. Thank you. And at this point, I would ask if anyone wants to talk about our draft minutes. I don't know if anybody else caught it. I think in the very bottom part, it it didn't mirror exactly what the resolution said, so I was wanted to make sure that I am not seeing things incorrectly. In fact, I think uh the resolution as voted on that I signed and Steve signed for to send to the city council. I think we should use that language in the minutes because what we voted on is in that resolution at the very bottom at towards the end. Is it the language about the downtown map on the balance? Yes. What we voted yes on and no on and such. What else is it? I mean it also says that we uh we had a motion to approve to recommend that the city council not place. I was like, wait, that's not English. And it was possibly consider, I think was the language that you um read into the record. Okay, so um is did staff understand the changes we were requesting? Could I could could um we hear the first request? I wasn't sure it's at the bottom of the minutes, which section exactly we were speaking to. Yes, the motions. Uh both of the motions. We we might what we were suggesting is to go to the uh resolution that we signed for that uh hearing and include that language for both motions. You have to that you would like the word possibly added into well just maybe just copy what's in the resolution that we you and I signed, Steve. Okay.
openpublica.com