South San Francisco Planning Commission Special Meeting

This special meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission on October 22, 2020, focused on the General Plan Update Preferred Land Use Alternative. Staff presented the proposed map and community input, followed by public testimony and commission discussion. The commission unanimously voted to recommend the city council accept the preferred alternative and authorize preparation of an environmental impact report (EIR).

Public Comments & Testimony

• Golden Gate Produce Terminal (email read into the record): Expressed concern that residential uses too close to their essential business (which operates from 2:00 a.m.) could generate complaints threatening operations. Requested that residential uses not be required on site; instead, commercial uses should contribute off-site affordable housing.
• Gita Dev (Sierra Club): Expressed support for retaining industrial land and transforming Colma Creek, but urged inclusion of a riparian setback policy and nature-based sea level rise solutions. Also called for proportional parks and open space relative to new housing.
• Mary Buxton (non-resident, interested in Bay health): Urged planning for 3.5 feet of sea level rise by 2050 per California Ocean Protection Council, recommending setbacks along Colma Creek and natural resilience measures like tidal marsh restoration.
• June Jordan (Alexandria Real Estate Equities): Expressed full support for the preferred plan, urging careful growth, balance between commercial/industrial/residential uses, and flexibility for market forces.
• Catherine (resident): Asked about the process and timeline; concerned about parking and traffic impacts. Told that the plan will next go to city council on November 18, with further public input opportunities.
• Olga Perez: Praised efforts to preserve Old Town’s historical character but requested reconsideration of proposed changes along Airport Boulevard from Hillside to Pine Avenue, arguing it would be out of character.
• Susan: Questioned the necessity of the approved Genentech campus expansion post-COVID, and expressed worry about job-housing imbalance and traffic in the East of 101 area.
• Catherine (Winston Manor resident): Supported housing but insisted on smart, balanced development; asked for a sub-area meeting for Winston Manor, emphasizing traffic congestion on Hickey Boulevard and the need for parking and street improvements for the Sierra Vista school site development.

Discussion Items

Eric Yerkovich (Raimi + Associates) presented the preferred land use alternative, summarizing three prior alternatives and community engagement (approximately 450 touchpoints, with virtual meetings, surveys, and CAC input). Key points:

• The preferred alternative blends Alternative 1 for El Camino/Downtown with a hybrid of Alternatives 2 and 3 for East of 101 and Lindenville.
• The map aims to: (1) allow continued life science/biotech growth east of 101 while preserving industrial land; (2) create transit-oriented residential neighborhoods around Caltrain; (3) add housing citywide, especially in downtown and along El Camino; (4) reinforce downtown as the heart of the community; (5) improve active transportation and connectivity; (6) transform Colma Creek into an amenity.
• Most land use change occurs east of 101, Lindenville, and portions of El Camino. Downtown changes are light.
• On El Camino, the plan creates three mixed-use centers near BART stations and a mixed-use corridor. Heights in Chestnut area are proposed to be reduced to 85 feet (consistent with downtown).
• The current jobs-housing ratio of 2.6 (jobs per housing unit) is maintained, accounting for pipeline projects.
• Next steps: City council study session on November 18, then detailed policy development, zoning update, and EIR starting in 2021.

Commissioners asked about:

• Sea level rise: Staff confirmed compliance with SB 379, and noted the general plan will address climate hazards, building on existing Colma Creek adaptation planning.
• El Camino density and height concerns: Staff explained that densification is focused along transit corridors, not single-family neighborhoods (except state-required ADUs). The height reduction in Chestnut balances community desire for lower heights with bulkier buildings.
• Jobs-housing ratio: Commissioner Wong noted the alternative holds the ratio steady at 2.6. Staff clarified that pipeline non-residential development already approved led to this choice.
• Infrastructure and services: Commissioners emphasized need for adequate police, fire, and road infrastructure east of 101, and a grocery store in that area.
• Potential incompatibility: Commissioner Faria noted the Golden Gate Produce Terminal’s concerns and the risk of litigation; urged flexibility in land use designations.
• Gentrification and displacement: Commissioner Murphy highlighted policy steps ahead to address these through housing, equity, and community benefits.

Key Outcomes

• Motion (Commissioner Faria): Recommend the city council accept the preferred land use alternative and authorize preparation of required environmental analysis, including an Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
• Second (Commissioner Zhang).
• Vote: Unanimous (7–0) — Commissioners Bernardo, Faria, Murphy, Shahadeh, Zhang, Chair Wong, Vice Chair Evans all voted yes.
• The recommendation will be forwarded to the city council for consideration at its November 18, 2020 meeting.
• The Planning Division also acknowledged the departure of Secretary Sailesh Mehra, who served for over five years and will join the City of San Mateo.