Joint Special Meeting of South San Francisco City Council and Planning Commission - August 19, 2020

The meeting convened as a teleconference at 6:30 PM Pacific on August 19, 2020, under Governor's Executive Orders due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The meeting consisted of two parts: a special meeting on whether to appoint the sole candidate for District 2 City Council or proceed with an election, followed by a joint meeting with the Planning Commission to review the General Plan Update Land Use Alternatives. Public comments were received via email, voicemail, and live Zoom participation. The council took no action on the election item, allowing the candidate to appear on the ballot. On the General Plan, extensive discussion occurred, with direction to staff to prepare a preferred land use map based on community and board input.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Election Item: Several speakers urged the council to keep Mark Nogales on the ballot, citing the importance of democratic participation and the risk of going years without an election. James Coleman (lifelong resident, candidate for District 4) and others emphasized that uncontested elections could reduce voter engagement. One speaker (Loga Perez) also raised concerns about the General Plan.
• General Plan Update: Multiple public comments addressed the land use alternatives.
  • Marcella Rivera (resident) expressed that none of the proposed alternatives were fair and suggested Portland's residential infill program as a model to spread density citywide. She also advocated that affordable housing income limits be based on South San Francisco's median income, not the county's.
  • Eddie (resident) argued for medium-density housing in western/northwestern areas, stating it is inequitable to concentrate housing in eastern areas.
  • Russell (west side resident) supported high-density housing in his neighborhood, opposing concentration on the east side.
  • Gabe Gonzalez Jr. (lifelong resident, Country Club Park area) urged preserving the unincorporated farming community character and requested more community input from local cultures.
  • Olga Perez (Old Town resident) requested preservation of Old Town's historical charm, a formal response to her petition for a community center, and reiterated the need for youth services and open space, referencing a 1990 report.
  • Ms. Cortez (resident) emphasized prioritizing existing residents over biotech growth and focusing on equitable development.
  • Written comments included: Jim (preferred alternative 3, concerns about high density near schools); Granite Rock (supported alternative 3 for maintaining industrial use); Lane Partners (requested continued office designations for South Line project); Child Care Partnership Council (applauded city's leadership on child care and requested continued supportive policies); Martin Bloom (property owner) requested flexibility for high-density office/life-science use near produce terminal.
  • Later live comments: James Coleman (described personal experiences of displacement); Alan (requested concrete plan for Old Town resources and anti-displacement); Mark Melby (commercial real estate) encouraged embracing transit-oriented development.

Discussion Items

• Election Item (Item 2): City Attorney Sky Woodruff presented the certification that Mark Nogales was the only nominee for District 2. The council had the option to cancel the election and appoint him, or take no action, allowing the election to proceed with his name on the ballot. Write-in candidates could file between September 7 and October 20. Estimated cost savings from cancelling the election were $19,000–$23,000. Councilmember Mark Nogales (recused from vote) spoke in favor of having his name on the ballot to establish himself in the new district. Councilmembers noted that with no action, democracy is served and the public can vote. The council unanimously agreed to take no action, so Mark Nogales will appear on the November 3, 2020 ballot.
• General Plan Update (Item 1):
  • Staff and consultant Eric Yerkovich (Raimi + Associates) presented three land use alternatives (1, 2, 3) for four sub-areas: East of 101, Lindenville, Downtown, and El Camino Real. The alternatives test different patterns of housing, jobs, industrial preservation, and transit-oriented development. Community engagement included study sessions, sub-area meetings, online surveys, and a citywide workshop.
  • Key findings: Most community support for adding housing east of 101 while preserving some industrial; support for maintaining industrial in Lindenville (33% preferred current industrial, two-thirds supported adding housing); preference for Alternative 1 in downtown (with lower heights and park space); on El Camino, about 60% supported Alternative 1 (similar to current plan) with some support for reduced heights.
  • Council and Planning Commission discussion:
    • Councilmember Matsumoto suggested the vision statement should include education and more focus on resilience.
    • Commissioner Zhang asked for clearer communication of pros/cons and how community input connects to alternatives.
    • Councilmember Nogales supported spreading housing citywide, including El Camino (transit-oriented) and east of 101, but emphasized maintaining industrial areas.
    • Councilmember Garbarino raised concerns about hazardous materials in Lindenville, cost of cleanup, and design quality. He supported housing along the Caltrain corridor and in Old Town, and noted the potential of ADUs and lot splits.
    • Commissioner Murphy supported preserving industrial heritage and connecting dots for the community.
    • Commissioner Farai highlighted infrastructure needs east of 101 and transit-oriented development on El Camino.
    • Commissioner Bernardo emphasized affordable housing and maintaining city's diversity; she opposed removing school sites from consideration but noted community input requested removal.
    • Commissioner Wong (CAC member) recommended a hybrid of alternatives, supporting housing in Lindenville with Colma Creek activation, transit-oriented development on El Camino, and serious consideration of housing east of 101.
  • The Mayor and several members agreed that no single alternative is chosen yet; direction to staff is to prepare a preferred land use map incorporating feedback.

Key Outcomes

• Election Item: The council took no action on Resolution 2020-?? to cancel the election. Mark Nogales will appear on the November 3, 2020 ballot for District 2. Write-in candidates may file by October 20. The city will save $19,000–$23,000 if the election proceeds only with his name.
• General Plan Update: The council and planning commission provided broad direction to staff and consultants to develop a preferred land use alternative that balances housing and jobs, preserves industrial areas where possible, spreads housing across the city (including El Camino, East of 101, Lindenville), and emphasizes community amenities, equity, and affordability. Staff will return in fall 2020 with a preferred map for further community input and final adoption.