|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
As a state deadline fast approaches, Atherton is still searching for ways to spur residential development that complies with California’s housing mandate while at the same time preserving the town’s historically large-lot, single-family character as much as possible.
To that end, limiting building heights and protecting residents’ privacy are among the key objectives as town officials consider design and development standards for multifamily dwellings at sites previously identified for potential future housing.
“What we’re trying to do is set the standards of how (developers) can build,” Mayor Bill Widmer told The Almanac. “We’ve made some good progress on what we’re going to do. We’ve said we would build multifamily houses, and we will meet the needs that (the state) identified to us.”
Over the past several weeks, the town held community workshops and joint City Council and Planning Commission study sessions to go over design and development standards. Besides building heights and neighborhood privacy concerns, those meetings also covered issues related to landscape screening, parking, respecting existing setbacks and different housing types.
Town staff will take the feedback from all the public discussion to craft an ordinance and zoning changes that speak to the standards, City Manager George Rodericks told The Almanac. The hope is the council will be able to approve the ordinance and revised zoning before the town has to resubmit its housing element plan to the state by the end of January.
The state twice already sent back Atherton’s housing element for further work. Atherton needs to plan for 348 net new housing units under the state Regional Housing Needs Allocation program for the current 2023-31 cycle – a considerable increase from the 93 dwellings required during the previous eight-year period.
‘Privacy is very, very important.’
Bill Widmer, Atherton mayor
The state is pushing jurisdictions to plan for increased numbers of residences to help tackle California’s longtime housing crisis.
“We’re trying to solve for more housing options,” Atherton’s Town Planner Brittany Bendix said during one of the study sessions.
Previously, the town focused on accessory dwelling units as a major approach in its housing element, but Bendix said that strategy doesn’t address populations such as large families that multifamily development would be able to do.
Among the multifamily housing types that Atherton could permit are fourplexes, apartments and condominiums.
“We talked about different types of potential homes,” Widmer said. “Some would be, for example, a single home like a fourplex, which would look like a very big house, but there’d be four apartments in there.”
The town is also looking at, but has yet to adopt, a requirement for multifamily projects to offer at least 20% of their units at below-market rates, a staff report said.
A big concern from town leaders and residents is how high future residential buildings could rise. But the town has eyed a maximum limit of three stories for most structures while school sites such as Menlo College could allow for four, Widmer said.
Town leaders also expressed concern about the state’s Density Bonus Law potentially giving developers exceptions to the standards depending on the amount and type of affordable units they plan to build. In such a scenario, a developer could bring in a project with more units than the town would want.
“We could get double the density of what we’ve expected,” Council member Rick DeGolia said.
But for the exceptions to be given, Bendix said, they have to contribute “to the facilitation of affordable housing. So if I were to deny a project or deny an exception, I would have to make that finding.”
Another challenge is maintaining the privacy of residents close to where new housing could go up.
“Privacy is very, very important,” Widmer said. “We don’t want to have multistory homes – two or even three stories — where then people can peer out the windows and see into the neighbor’s yard. So we talked about screening. We talked about how the windows should be established.”
Tom Giorgi, who lives on East Oakwood Boulevard near a site for potential new housing, said he felt his privacy in jeopardy.
Giorgi told town leaders that he would be able to view a new development right over his fence. The height “should be as low as possible,” he said. “I’m hoping we don’t have a building and windows looming over our fence.”
Jed Riddle, another resident who lives near sites targeted for future homes, implored the town to remove those areas – on Bay Road and Ringwood Avenue – for inclusion in the Housing Element.
“If you put six to 10 families adjacent to our area, you have stolen our property, you have stolen our character, you have taken the value of our homes away,” Riddle said. “It is absolutely untenable for us to live with six to 10 families immediately behind our property. … You’re harming your local citizens, who have lived here, paid taxes here and have a certain lifestyle that we have all grown to love and support.”
Watch the town’s most recent study session on multifamily housing, at a Nov. 27 joint City Council and Planning Commission meeting, here.
Redwood City attorney sues ‘First Amendment auditors’ after Menlo Park disputeApril 2, 2026 11:31 am
