Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Annual Progress Report topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Menlo Park housing panel recommends city council accept 2025 Annual Progress Report
Summary
The Menlo Park Housing Commission voted 6-0 (one absence) to recommend the City Council accept the 2025 Annual Progress Report, correcting a staff-report typo that listed 176 units instead of the APR's 102 for 2025. Principal Planner Tom Smith outlined RHNA totals, pipeline projects and next review dates.
The Menlo Park Housing Commission voted 6-0, with one absence, on March 4 to recommend the City Council accept the city's 2025 Annual Progress Report (APR) with a correction to a typographical error in the staff report.
Principal Planner Tom Smith told commissioners the APR documents production and program activity for the 2023'231 housing element cycle and tracks projects through entitlements, building permits and final occupancy. "2025 was the third year of the six-year cycle," Smith said, noting the city counts units when building permits are issued. He reported the city produced 102 units in 2025, down from 176 in 2024 and up from 65 in 2023.
The APR also shows the city's regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) for the 2023'231 planning period totals nearly 3,000 units across income categories, including 740 very-low, 426 low, 496 moderate and roughly 1,200 above-moderate units. Smith said large previously approved projects such as Willow Village and 123 Independence Drive together represent about 2,100 approved units that are proceeding toward building permits, and more than 1,500 units remain in earlier-stage pipeline review.
Commissioners identified an inconsistency between the staff report and the APR: a table in the staff report lists 176 new units for 2025 while the APR shows 102. A commissioner said, "On page D2.4 there's a total new housing units up to 2025; it says 176 and it should be 102." Staff confirmed the staff report contains a typo and the APR has the correct figure. Chair Schweitzer moved to recommend that the City Council accept the APR with an amendment correcting the staff report number; a commissioner seconded the motion.
A roll-call vote recorded support from six commissioners; Vice Chair Bealey was absent. The motion passed 6-0 with one absence. According to staff, the commission's recommendation will move to the Planning Commission on March 23 and to the City Council on March 24, ahead of the April 1 state submittal deadline.
Tom Smith emphasized that the APR is a year-to-year accounting tool and that some projects only count once they reach the building-permit stage. He also noted the state may follow up with questions and that a formal halfway review is expected after 2026 to determine whether any state-level streamlining or requirements apply.
The commission's recommendation does not itself change policy; it forwards the APR to the Planning Commission and City Council for their review and formal action.
