Agda Pkt 2026.07.13 Joint SA PFA

Browse Search

Page 3 of 17 City of Redwood City 1017 Middlefield Road, Redwood City, CA. 94063 Tel: 650-780-7000 www.redwoodcity.org addition, State law now requires that housing projects be evaluated by jurisdictions utilizing only objective design standards that are measurable and non-discretionary; the rationale for holding a public hearing—to provide subjective, discretionary feedback—is greatly diminished, even if such feedback would enhance the housing project. The proposed amendments would establish Article 41.15 of the Zoning Code to create a local ministerial (i.e., by-right) approval process for 100% affordable housing projects to facilitate and accelerate housing production. The proposed amendments would further implement Programs H4-6 and H4-9 of the City’s Housing Element, which obligate the City to streamline review and processing of all residential development, including affordable housing and to reduce the number of projects requiring Planning Commission review. Staff anticipate that these amendments could save affordable housing applicants several months' time in their entitlement process. 2.Increase Minimum Height Threshold for Review by AAC and Planning Commission – Currently, construction of a new building or an addition that exceeds 3 stories or 35 feet in height requires review by the AAC and approval of the Planning Commission. The proposed amendments to Article 41.4 of the Zoning Ordinance and Chapter 2.110 of the Municipal Code would increase the minimum building height threshold for review by the AAC and Planning Commission from 35 feet to 45 feet in height (but retain the 3-story threshold). The intent behind this update is twofold. First, it would streamline review and approval of smaller multifamily housing projects that utilize common typologies such as the 3-story townhome, which often exceed 35 feet in height due to factors such as lot slope, foundation design, garage design, floor heights, and roof form. An increase in the minimum building height threshold would allow for greater design flexibility for residential development without requiring multiple public hearings. Secondly, as noted above in the discussion on ministerial review of 100% affordable housing projects, reducing the number of public hearings can have a meaningful impact on the cost and feasibility of housing production and discretionary feedback is limited by State law requirements to evaluate housing projects utilizing only objective design standards. New buildings and additions exceeding three stories would still require review by the AAC and Planning Commission. 3.Increase Length of Entitlement Period from 3 years to 5 years – Currently planning entitlements, or planning permits, are active for 2 years and may, upon written request, be extended by the Zoning Administrator up to one 1 year, for a total of 3 years. Within the three-year entitlement period, an applicant must obtain financing, have construction plans drawn up for City review, and secure building permits. Larger projects require more complex construction plans with extensive lead times for drawings and permit review. In addition, affordable housing projects often need to secure various financing sources over multiple funding cycles, which may only occur once a year. Review of an expired entitlement can be extensive and costly for the applicant, particularly if local or state codes have been updated since the original entitlement, and the process can result in additional administrative costs for the applicant and additional staffing needs for the City. The proposed amendments to Article 41.9 would extend the initial entitlement period to three years, plus allow up to two 1-year extensions at the discretion of the Zoning Administrator, for a total of 5 years. A written request must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for the first 1-year extension, while the 8.B. - Page 3 of 212 318