Menlo Park settles housing lawsuit

City commits to updating plan, finding affordable housing sites

Identifying sites for affordable housing just jumped to the top of Menlo Park's priority list, according to a lawsuit settlement agreement released Thursday (May 17). Three housing advocacy groups filed the suit yesterday, alleging that the city has failed to comply with state-mandated housing laws.

"Unless compelled by this Court to perform those acts and duties and to refrain from acts as required by law, the City will continue to refuse to carry out those duties and will continue to violate the law, and Petitioners and lower-income persons and affordable housing developers and/or housing service providers will continue to be injured as a result," the lawsuit stated.

Every seven years, according to state law, cities must assess and plan to meet their fair share of regional housing needs, which includes affordable housing. Communities also must plan zoning so that it's possible to provide the right number of housing units, although the law doesn't require cities to actually build them.

The lawsuit -- filed by Peninsula Interfaith Action, Urban Habitat, and Youth United for Community Action -- points out that Menlo Park hasn't met the state requirements since 1992. Menlo Park must commit to finishing an update by March 2013 as part of the settlement.

"We're about 10 years behind," said Menlo Park City Manager Alex McIntyre. "We should have taken care of the Housing Element Update before now but fell behind due to other priority planning projects. These planning projects could achieve a substantial portion of what is required to meet Housing Element law."

Mr. McIntyre explained that, in the absence of the negotiated settlement, the court could force the City to complete the update within 120 days. "The benefit of the settlement agreement is to allow the City additional time to incorporate a public outreach and participation process that would otherwise not be possible under a shorter court-ordered timeline."

Possible sanctions for not complying with the state housing laws include a moratorium on all non-residential building permits and the withholding of grant funding to maintain the local roadway network.

"The last thing the City of Menlo Park wants right now is to interfere with the progress of our local economy," Mr. McIntyre said.

According to the staff, the city may need to provide the zoning necessary to add sites for 1,975 housing units, both market-rate and affordable housing, to its current stock of 12,500. One of the first steps will be an inventory of local housing, existing capacity for additional homes within current zoning, and any new housing built since 1998, which could be deducted from the preliminary number.

The settlement states that Menlo Park will identify potential housing sites for affordable housing, create zoning that provides incentives for affordable housing production at those locations, and set aside a portion of local below-market-rate funds for nonprofit development of affordable housing on those sites.

The city will also form a housing element steering committee made up of two council members, two planning commissioners and two housing commissioners. The steering committee will first meet in June and will oversee public involvement in the process.

The settlement agreement goes before the City Council on Tuesday, May 22. The council will also be asked to approve plans to launch a housing element update process within the next few weeks, review a set of draft criteria for choosing specific sites for zoning changes, and appoint two members to the steering committee.

The city plans to hold a series of community workshops in July and August to get public input on the proposed changes in order to finish the update by next spring.

"We want and need the community's help in deciding how and where we can plan for additional and high density housing in Menlo Park. If we work together, we can come up with a plan tailored to our community that will meet our needs and comply with state law," Mayor Kirsten Keith said.

Go to the project's website to review associated documents and the proposed process.

What is community worth to you?
Support local journalism.


Like this comment
Posted by anon
a resident of another community
on May 17, 2012 at 12:34 pm

Very convenient. The city is "forced" to go on this housing binge just as it was about to disband its Housing Department and layoff 3 city staff members. Hmm.

Like this comment
Posted by Gov't out of control
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on May 17, 2012 at 6:16 pm

1975 housing units is way too many housing units to be adding to an area the size of Menlo Park.

Also, I am not going to take on a life savings worth of debt to live in a condo or townhouse development with BMR in it. The HOA fees are $1000 or so for the non-BMR residents in the complex near the train station where I believe the city is still paying off the mortgage of a BMR place they had to take over because the woman defaulted on the mortgage and lived rent free for several months. This is in addition to having to pay property taxes at least 2 to 3 times what others in the community are now paying. It's just does not make sense, and it is not fair to keep constantly throwing the financial burdens of past guilts or excesses on the next generation, in this case the next generation of homeowners.

2 people like this
Posted by Hmmm
a resident of another community
on May 17, 2012 at 11:26 pm

Menlo should be ashamed for not having met state requirements for 20 years, if what the lawsuit states is true. Now the catch up will be painful in every way possible.

1975 units is a lot for a city the size of Menlo.

Gov't out of control - it's interesting the commenters keep using this one example over & over again of the woman who defaulted. It's time that we hear a more balanced view of affordable housing - both successes & failures.

2 people like this
Posted by Irvin
a resident of another community
on May 18, 2012 at 12:14 pm

Here in Palo Alto, it's worth noting that the city has yet to even submit a housing element to the Dept. of Housing & Community Development (Web Link), so I think it advisable that PA staff, planning commissioners, and yes, the city council, stay abreast of developments in MP.
I hope Menlo adopts the agreement.
Public Advocates has an excellent track record in this area.
Check out the Pleasanton agreement.
Town's Plan to Cap Residential Growth Violates State Law
Web Link, and a column on it: Residential Growth Cap Overruling Could Reshape California
Web Link

Like this comment
Posted by hmmm
a resident of Menlo Park: Allied Arts/Stanford Park
on Sep 2, 2012 at 3:10 pm

Why did this organization sue MP? Why not PA, Atherton, Los Altos Hills, Woodside??

Like this comment
Posted by Back story
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Sep 2, 2012 at 10:16 pm

The organizations were concerned that Facebook employees would displace current tenants living in relatively affordable homes in Belle Haven. The city was so thrilled by the honor of being anointed by Facebook that it blew off all such objections. The only legal leverage the groups had was the housing element, so that was the basis of their suit. Ironic enough, it's unlikely that this settlement will produce even one new additional affordable unit of rental housing.

Like this comment
Posted by Back backstory
a resident of another community
on Sep 3, 2012 at 7:22 am

Behind the backstory is the truth that Menlo has been dodging their legal responsibility for many years. Facebook just pushed that to the forefront and it's taken the collective groups to show that Menlo lost its integrity in this area a long time ago.

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Don't be the last to know

Get the latest headlines sent straight to your inbox every day.

Nationally renowned Indian restaurant expanding to Palo Alto
By Elena Kadvany | 3 comments | 2,849 views

Summer travel: Is anything changing?
By Sherry Listgarten | 14 comments | 1,276 views

Premarital and Couples: "Our Deepest Fear" by Marianne Williamson
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,054 views

Cap On? Cap Off? Recycling Bottles is Confusing
By Laura Stec | 20 comments | 928 views

Swimming with the kids
By Cheryl Bac | 2 comments | 687 views