land to convert to urban land uses over time, thereby changing the landscape and context in which TCRs exist and resulting in their overall reduction. Future development of currently undeveloped land could contribute to further reduction of unknown or previously unrecorded TCRs in the San Francisco Bay region and cumulative effects could be cumulatively significant and unavoidable.
(Draft EIR, p. 5.0-8.)
S. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Under buildout conditions, additional development allowed by the proposed Project would increase demand for water, wastewater conveyance, solid waste disposal, energy and telecommunications facilities. Each utility covers different areas and therefore varies in terms of area of cumulative impact. Therefore, the cumulative area for impacts to utilities is the service areas of the Cal Water South San Francisco Bayshore Water District (water supply), North San Mateo County Sanitation District Treatment Plant and South San Francisco Water Quality Control Plant (wastewater treatment), Pacific Gas and Electric and Peninsula Clean Energy (energy) and Ox Mountain Landfill.
The increased development and population allowed by the proposed Project would increase the
demand of each resource and impact each of the utilities. However, proposed GPU policies are included to ensure that utility supplies are adequate and have a mechanism for expansion when needed. Therefore, the impacts to utilities are l ess than cumulatively considerable . (Draft EIR, p. 5.0-13.)
T. WILDFIRE
The town is built out and does not include any fire hazard severity zones within the boundaries.
However, directly east of the town boundaries, lands that include San Bruno Mountain are classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. Therefore, the cumulative area for wildfire impacts is the Planning Area as well as surrounding jurisdictions.
F
uture developments would only nominally increase the demand for fire protection in the town due to the small geography of the planning area, the fact that there is no fire hazard severity zone in the town, and the regulations that new development and redevelopment projects are required to meet. Therefore, the impacts to wildfires are less than cumulatively considerable. (Draft EIR, p. 5.0-13.)
Findings
SECTION VI.
FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES Sections 15126(c) and 15126.2(c) of the CEQA Guidelines, require that an EIR address any significant irreversible environmental changes that would occur should the project be implemented. Generally, a project would result in significant irreversible environmental changes if any of the following would occur:
• The project would involve a large commitment of non-renewable resources; • The primary and secondary impacts of the project would generally commit future generations to similar uses;
• The project involves uses in which irreversible damage could result from any potential environmental accidents; or
• The proposed consumption of resources is not justified.
An irreversible commitment of non- renewable natural resources is inherent in any development project(s), or in the case of the Project here ( General Plan Update ), several development projects over a long period of time. The potential future development associated with implementation of the Project would consume limited, slowly renewable and non-renewable resources. Such resources used for future construction projects would include, but are not limited to, lumber and other related forest products; sand and gravel; native topsoil; a variety of metals used in the manufacture of building materials such as steel, copper piping and wiring; and hydrocarbon-based fuel sources that require extraction and chemical alteration and/or combustion of natural resources such as oil, natural gas, coal, and shale. As such, future construction activities related to implementation of the Project would result in the short-term, yet irretrievable, commitment of nonrenewable energy resources.
Resources that would be continually consumed with implementation of the Project include water, electricity, natural gas, and fossil fuels. However, the amount and rate of consumption of these resources would not result in the inefficient or wasteful use of such resources. With respect to operational activities, compliance with all applicable building codes, as well as the town’s General Plan policies and standard conservation features, would ensure that natural resources are conserved to the maximum extent possible. Although nominal, the energy requirements associated with implementation of the Project would, nonetheless, represent a long -term commitment of non-renewable resources.
Given the above, potential future development associated with the Project would result in the short- and long-term commitment of limited, slowly renewable, and nonrenewable resources, which would limit the availability of these particular resource quantities for future generations or for other uses through and potentially after the planning horizon. However, continued use of such resources would be nominal and would not conflict with the town’s growth forecasts. Therefore, although irreversible changes would result from implementation of the Project, such changes would not be considered significant.
SECTION VII.
GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS
Findings
Section 15126.2(e) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires a Draft EIR to discuss the ways the Project could foster economic or population growth or the construction of additional housing, directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(e), a Project would be considered to have a growth-inducing effect if it would:
• Directly or indirectly foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing in the surrounding environment;
• Remove obstacles to population growth (e.g., construction of an infrastructure expansion to allow for more construction in service areas); • Tax existing community service facilities, requiring the construction of new facilities that could cause significant environmental effects; or
• Encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively.
In addition, CEQA Guidelines that that growth inducement must not be assumed.
Based on Government Code Section 65300, the proposed Project is intended to serve as the overall plan for the physical development of the town of Colma. While the Project does not specifically propose any development/redevelopment projects, it does regulate future population and economic growth of the town that cou ld lead to indirect growth-inducing effects. Since the Draft EIR discusses the environmental effects associated with the implementation of the proposed Project, the environmental effects of growth, especially on lands beyond the town’s proposed Planning Area could be similar to those associated with the proposed Project evaluated in Sections
4.1 through 4.16 of the Draft EIR . (Draft EIR, p. 5.0- 2.) Implementation of the Project could refine existing land use designations in the town as it establishes new po licies to direct and manage future development. In addition, the Project could induce further population growth and job expansion in the town of Colma, as well as indirectly inducing growth if it were to remove an obstacle to additional growth and development, such as removing a constraint on a required public service, such as sewer service. (Draft EIR, p. 5.0-1.)
SECTION VIII.
ALTERNATIVES
A. BACKGROUND
The Draft EIR analyzed two alternatives to the Project as proposed and evaluated these alternatives for their ability to avoid or reduce the Project’s significant environmental effects while also meeting the majority of the Project’s objectives. The Town finds that it has considered and rejected as infeasible the alternatives identified in the EIR and described below. This section sets forth the potential alternatives to the Project analyzed in the EIR and evaluates them in light of the Project objectives, as required by CEQA.
Where significant impacts are identified, section 15126.6 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires EIRs to consider and discuss alternatives to the proposed actions. Subsection (a) states:
Findings
(a) An EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decision-making and public participation. An EIR is not required to consider alternatives which are infeasible. The lead agency is responsible for selecting a range of project alternatives for examination and must publicly disclose its reasoning for selecting those alternatives. There is no ironclad rule governing the nature or scope of the alternatives to be discussed other than the rule of reason.
Subsection 15126.6(b) states the purpose of the alternatives analysis:
(b) Because an EIR must identify ways to mitigate or avoid the significant effects that a project may have on the environment (Public Resources Code Section 21002.1), the discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly.
In subsection 15126.6(c), the State CEQA Guidelines describe the selection process for a range of reasonable alternatives:
(c) The range of potential alternatives to the proposed project shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic objectives of the Project and could avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects. The EIR should briefly describe the rationale for select ing the alternatives to be discussed. The EIR should also identify any alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were rejected as infeasible during the scoping process and briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency’s determination. Additional information explaining the choice of alternatives may be included in the administrative record.
Among the factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration in an EIR are: (i) failure to meet most of the basic project objectives, (ii) infeasibility, or (iii) inability to avoid significant environmental impacts.
The range of alternatives required is governed by a “rule of reason” that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The EIR shall include sufficient information about each alternative to allow meaningful evaluation, analysis, and comparison with the proposed Project. Alternatives are limited to ones that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the Project. Of those alternatives, the EIR need examine in detail only the ones that the lead agency determines could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the Project.
B. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The following objectives have been established for the Project (Draft EIR, p. 3.0-6):
Findings
1. To enable the community to agree on long- and short-term policies related to each of the elements encompassed within the General Plan;
2. To establish a vision for the physical nature of Colma in the future and set the tone for the corresponding land use and related policies required to advance this vision; and
3. Outline a long-range vision that reflects the aspirations of the community;
4. Establish goals and policies to guide development and conservation decisions by the City Council, and Town staff;
5. Provide a basis for determining whether specific development proposals and public projects are in harmony with the Town’s long-range vision;
6. Allow City departments, other public agencies, and private developer s to design projects that enhance the character of the community, promote public health, preserve environmental resources, and minimize hazards;
7. Provide the basis for establishing and setting priorities for detailed plans and implementing programs, such as the Zoning Ordinance, subdivision regulations, and the Capital Improvement Program.
C. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT REJECTED FROM DETAILED ANALYSIS Section 15126.6(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines specifies that an EIR should (1) identify alternatives that wer e considered by the lead agency but were eliminated from detailed consideration because they were determined to be infeasible during the scoping process; and (2) briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency’s determination. Among the factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration in an EIR are: (i) failure to meet most of the basic project objectives; (ii) infeasibility; and/or (iii) inability to avoid significant environmental impacts.
The following alternatives were considered but rejected as part of the environmental analysis for the Project:
• Off-Site Alternative (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-5.)
Finding: The City Council rejects the Off-Site Alternative, on the following ground, which provides sufficient justification for rejection of this alternative: (1) the alternative is technically, financially, and legally infeasible given that it would not be pertinent or possible to consider an off-site alternative since that would need to include a long-range plan for the Town; the project site (town of Colma) cannot be relocated since the T own’s boundaries are already established; and any off- site alternative that considers another location would not meet the basic project objectives and future development for the T own. Therefore, this alternative is eliminated from further consideration.
D. EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES SELECTED FOR ANALYSIS
The alternatives selected for further detailed review within the EIR focus on alternatives that could the Project’s significant environmental impacts, while still meeting most of the basic Project objectives. Those alternatives include:
Findings
• Alternative 1: No Project Alternative (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-1.) • Alternative 2: Residential Focused Alternative (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-1.)
1. Alternative 1: No Project Alternative
Description: The No Project analysis discusses both the existing conditions at the time the NOP is published as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved. Therefore under Alternative 1, the T own would
continue to implement the current (1999) General Plan, with no Climate Action Plan (CAP) in effect and with no changes made to update any of the Land Use, Open Space, Conservation, Noise, Circulation and Historical Resources Elements or the Land Use Map.
It assumes that the existing General Plan would continue to guide development in the Planning Area, without directly resulting in new development. In the case of this alternative, the proposed 2040 General Plan Update would not be approved and the existing 1999 Town of Colma General Plan, would continue as the primary guiding document for growth and development within the town. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-2.)
The 1999 General Plan Planning Area includes a total of 1225 acres and is the same as the town boundary and its sphere of influence (SOI). Buildout of the existing 1999 General Plan or No Project Alternative would result in approximately 680 housing units, a population of 2,310, and a total of 4,315 jobs within the Planning Area, expected to occur by year 2040 (See Table 6.0-1: Comparison of Alternatives at Buildout of the Draft EIR). In comparison, the proposed 2040 General Plan Update would increase the population to approximately 2,854 and housing units to 845. In relation to the proposed 2040 GPU, the No Project Alternative:
• Has different land uses— both in mix and location;
• Has lower allowable land use densities/intensities;
• Prohibits residential development in various commercially zoned areas; • Does not promote mixed -use development to the same extent as in the Proposed Project;
• Does not have a Medium Density Residential land use designation. Medium Density land uses such as multifamily developments are allowed on properties with a Commercial designation;
• Has reduced alternate modes of transportation.
Impacts:
AESTHETICS
The No Project Alternative would result in less development compared to the proposed Project. Therefore, this alternative will lead to fewer obstructions to views, fewer sources of light and glare, and less construction activity. Therefore, while the No Pr oject Alternative would result in less development than that under the proposed Project, it would potentially result in lower quality design or have other aesthetic -related impacts.
This has the potential to result in greater impacts under the No Project A lternative than under the proposed Project. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-6.)
Findings
AIR QUALITY
The air quality impacts between the proposed Project and the No Project Alternative would be similar and the degree of the impact is related to the amount of development and population at buildout. Air quality impacts to current as well as future businesses and residences under the No Project Alternative would be similar to those under the proposed Project, but less than the proposed Project. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-6.)
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
While the Planning Area is mainly developed with urban uses, there are small areas of diversified wildlife population within the town. Since the town of Colma is located along the Pacific Flyway, migratory birds are often found in the town’s open spaces related to cemetery uses. The No Project Alternative would focus future development on the few vacant and underutilized parcels that exist within the town of Colma. T he No Project Alternative would result in less development than the proposed P roject and has the potential to have less impacts to biological resources within the town. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-
6.)
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES
Cultural resources include buildings of historical importance, registered historic sites, and archaeological resources and tribal resources include site features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, or objects that are of value to a tribe and is either on or eligible for the California Historic Register or local historic register. A previously completed cultural resource studies and the town’s previous Historical Resources Element (1999) shows that no previously recorded archaeological resources, Cu ltural and Tribal resources or Native American remains are currently within the town limits. The town does have many historical resources (primarily in cemeteries) eligible for designation on the National Register.
However, future ground disturbing activities associated with construction excavation under the proposed Project, as well as the No Project alternative, could uncover unknown resources, and the potential impacts to cultural and tribal resources would depend on the location and amount of any future development. Since the No Project Alternative proposes less development than the proposed Project, it would have a less potential to impact cultural and tribal resources. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-7.)
ENERGY
The No Project Alternative would increase the amount of development and population in town, which in turn would increase the demand for energy use under varying degrees.
Compared to the No Project Alternative, the proposed Project proposes more potential development and has the most potential to increase the population and demand for energy use and thus could have an adverse impact on the environment. Construction of future development, or even redevelopment projects has the potent ial to consume gasoline and diesel during the operation of heavy -duty construction equipment and vehicles. However, these would -be temporary consumption of energy, only related to project construction under future development projects. Moreover the 2040 GPU policies promote energy efficiency which reduces the amount of energy used per capita, and future Findings
development/redevelopment under the proposed Project (2040 GPU). The proposed Project would also have to conform to the State of California’s AB 32 Scoping Plan (for Greenhouse Gas emissions) and the Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6) and CALgreen Code (Title 24, Part 11).
Therefore, the comparative energy and power use under the proposed Project would be lower than under the No Project Alternative conditions.
While the No Project alternative may use less electricity overall, it would likely result in a higher energy use per capita for the reasons above. Since the No Project Alternative does not consider the sustainability plans or programs as under the proposed Project, it would have greater impacts than the proposed Project. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-7.)
GEOLOGY
The town of Colma is located along the Serra Fault Zone and is approximately less than a mile east from the San Andreas Fault Zone. Therefore, the town has the potential to experience considerable ground shaking and rupture, in the event of an earthquake, particularly within the 2040 GPU’s planning horizon. The current state and federal engineering and design regulations that minimize seismic and geologic impacts apply equally to all future development/redevelopments under the proposed Project as well as the No Project Alternative. Since both of these alternatives have the potential to ultimately bring more people and businesses to the area, these future residences and businesses could be potentially exposed to seismic impacts from earthquakes and other geologic risks such as ground shaking and ground failure due to seismic activity, landslides, and soil expansion. Thus, the No Project Alternative and the proposed Project have the potential to expose people and businesses to seismic risks. The proposed Project has the potential to expose even more people to such risks since it proposes more residential development, while the No Project Alternative would expose a smaller amount of people and businesses to potential geologic and seismic impacts. (Draft EIR, pp. 6.0-7 through 6.0-8.) Impacts would be less under the No Project Alternative.
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
According to the town’s Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Inventories, the majority of the town’s GHG emissions come from transportation and energy use. Most of the on -road vehicles used for transportation burn fossil fuels such as gasoline or diesel which results in GHG emissions. Electric vehicles do not burn fossil fuels but GHGs may be emitted elsewhere, depending on the electric power source.. Most of the customers in town utilize 100% carbon -free electricity procured by Peninsula Clean Energy. Natural gas consumption is the main contributor to GHG emissions from energy use.
The No Project Alternative would result in less development and overall population growth, and therefore, less demand for energy use and transportation. However, the No Project alternative would likely result in more emissions per person without updated policies or the town’s compliance with the 2030 Climate Action Plan than would apply to the proposed Project. Since the No Project Alternative would not have the same, if any, energy saving and conservation measures as t hose under the proposed Project, its impacts to GHG is greater than those under the proposed Project. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-8.) Findings
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
The proposed Project anticipates that both infill and underutilized sites in the town would be developed, though with varying degrees of residential and commercial uses. While the proposed Project may facilitate more development than the No Project alternative, the town is generally built out and there are few industrial sites within the town boundaries.
Future development would be restricted to higher density uses in limited areas of the town; and the proposed project envisions more mixed-use development, particularly more residential development than the No Project Alternative. Such future development has the potential to increase exposure to possible hazardous materials, particularly as the town does have two open hazardous sites within its boundaries, one of which is the closed landfill
. In general, impacts with regard to hazardous materials come in the form of development near existing land uses that handle hazardous materials, areas where hazardous materials are stored or transported or by redeveloping contaminated sites.
Even though growth in the town under the proposed P roject would be greater than that anticipated under the No Project Alternative, any new development/redevelopment activities within the town of Colma would be required to follow the California Hazardous Waste Control Law, the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act, other legislation as well as the 2040 GPU policies to lessen impacts from hazardous substances. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0 -8.) The No Project Alternative would result in less development, and therefore would result in less of an impact to hazardous materials than the proposed Project.
HYDROLOGY
Urban development/redevelopment has the potential to increase impervious surfaces that could lead to increased runoff rates, water pollutants, flooding, and decreased groundwater recharge. Since the proposed Project encourage s more future development/redevelopment activities than under the No Project Alternative, these future development efforts would be in infill areas of the town, impacts to the town’s hydrology would be limited. Though the No Project Alternative would result in the least amount of future development and therefore impact less amounts of impervious surfaces than the proposed Project, all future construction activities would have to comply with the NPDES stormwater permits. Also, the proposed Project would have to adhere to the 2040 GPU policies that encourage the incorporation of green infrastructure in site designs, manage runoff, and comply with water quality regulations. With green infrastructure, new developments would be designed to capture, treat, and retain runoff while promoting infiltration. Even though the 2040 GPU policies would not be in place to benefit new developments under the No Project Alternative, all new development is still required to comply with green infrastructure requirements. The No Project Alternative would result in less development thereby resulting in less of an overall impact to hydrology and flooding than the proposed Project. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-9.)
LAND USE AND PLANNING
Generally, the proposed GPU and No Project Alternative are consistent in land use patterns, outside of a few minor land use designation changes. However, the proposed Findings
Project, if adopted, would become the Planning Area’s new guiding policy document for future land use planning as well as residential and commercial development.
The proposed Project would result in more residential and non -residential development than the No Project Alternative. Table 6.0-1 of the Draft EIR shows a comparison of housing units and population at full buildout of the proposed P roject and the No Project Alternative. The proposed Project would focus more on infill development and redevelopment of sites along El Camino Real, in order to encourage additional mixed-use housing opportunities at all income levels, while the No Project Alternative would continue existing trends with housing and commercial development within the town. While both scenarios allow for more development and housing, the proposed Project increases land use intensities and allows for more housing units and population growth. The proposed Project results in 845 housing u nits compared to 680 in the No Project Alternative at buildout in 2040. The scale of future housing development is far below that under the proposed Project. Therefore, the No Project Alternative has less impacts from future growth and land use planning than the No Project Alternative. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-9.)
NOISE
The proposed Project would result in increased land use intensity, and potentially more redevelopment of existing properties than under the No Project Alternative. However, the proposed Project and the No Project Alternative would result in similar short -term noise impacts, particularly with short-term construction noise levels and on longer activity days since the type of activities (excavation, removal of site debris, building construction etc.).
It should be noted that the duration of construction noise under the No Project Alternative would be different and potentially less than that under the proposed Project since the No Project Alternative would involve less development activities.
Roadway noise is the largest contributor to noise impacts in the town and all three scenarios would increase existing traffic and thus ambient noise levels between now and buildout in 2040. Though these future increase in noise levels within the town are significant and unavoidable due to potential future growth in the town, the No Project Alternative would still result in less impacts than the proposed project. Since the No Project Alternative proposes less development than the proposed project, it will result in less increases in overall operational noise levels in the town than the proposed Project.
The impacts on stationary noise so urces for the proposed Project and the No Project Alternative would be similar to each other since the proposed development/redevelopment of the town under any of the alternatives would not be significantly different between the alternatives. Construction activities and equipment used for the No Project Alternative as well as the proposed Project would result in similar vibration impacts. (Draft EIR, pp. 6.0- 9 through 6.0-10.)
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
Development under the proposed Project and the No Project Alternative would require additional public services and park areas. Other services such as police, fire, and emergency services would be required to be expanded to accommodate additional Findings
population growth. While the greatest growth in these services would be from the proposed Project, the impacts of such service expansion would be greater than those for the No Project Alternative. Since the No Project Alternative would have fewer population growth, it would have less impact related to public services and recreation facilities than the proposed Project. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-10.)
TRANSPORTATION
The proposed project would encourage better connectivity between all means of transportation (such as walking, biking, use of public transportation) and thus increased demand for these services more than the No Project Alternative. Similarly, the proposed Project would have better safety and roadway hazard improvements as well as emergency access components than under the No Project Alternative.
It should be noted that the No Project Alternative only characterizes future buildout under the town’s existing 1999 General Plan and does not include any of the local transportation network improvements that would be undertaken under the proposed P roject. The proposed Project would significantly generate more home-based VMT than the No Project Alternative, due to t he increased projected number of residents in the town and these residents needing to travel further for employment opportunities and other related uses.
Since the proposed P roject would result in greater development in the town center and the El Camino Real, these would have greater impacts on existing roadway operational deficiencies than the No Project Alternative. (Draft EIR, pp. 6.0-10 through 6.0-11.)
UTILITIES
The proposed Project and the No Project Alternative would require utilities and infrastructure, including water sewer electricity and landfill capacity. The demand on utilities and service systems is contingent on the amount of future growth. The proposed Project proposes similar types of development at buildout and is expected to demand a similar amount of resources from the utilities.
The proposed Project would result in higher population and commercial use, and thus have higher impacts to utility facilities at buildout. The No Project Alternative would result in less development and therefore lower population and jobs at buildout and thus would have less impacts to public utilities such as water, sewer, electricity, and landfill capacity than the proposed Project. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-11.)
WILDFIRE
Wildfire impacts could affect the town under the proposed P roject and No Project Alternative. The town of Colma is limited in its land area for future development which can only be focused on limited residential as well as commercial development/redevelopment on existing sites within the town. As new development occurs and existing structures are replaced with buildings built under more modern building codes, fire safety will increase. Moreover, any new construction would be required to comply with the town’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan as well as any criteria under the County of San Mateo’s Emergency Operations Services. Since the proposed Project (2040 Findings
GPU) would result in greater residential and commercial activities than under the No Project Alternative, impacts could potentially be greater under the proposed Project than under the No Project Alternative. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-11.)
Attainment of Project Objectives: The No Project Alternative would result in approximately 680 housing units, a population of 2,310, and a total of 4,315 jobs within the Planning Area, expected to occur by year 2040. It would not achieve many of the Project objectives to the same extent as the proposed Project. The No Project Alternative does not promote mixed-use development to the same extent as the proposed Project. It also would not reflect current community sentiment and changes in land use, growth patterns, and demographic and economic conditions, and therefore would not meet the objective of outlining a long-range vision that reflects the aspirations of the community.
Finding: The City Council re jects Alternative 1: No Project Alternative, on the following grounds, each of which individually provides sufficient justification for rejection of this alternative: (1) the alternative fails to meet most of the Project objectives to the same extent as the proposed Project ; (2) the alternative fails to avoid or reduce the Project’s significant and unavoidable impacts relating to greenhouse gas emissions ; and (3) the alternative would result in increased impacts relating to aesthetics, energy, and greenhouse gas emissions.
2. Alternative 2: Residential Focused Alternative
Description: This alternative provides an increased number of residential units and maintains/decreases future commercial land use development that already exist within the town. This alternative assumes that the Town Center opportunity site would be developed to include 20% more residential units than the proposed General Plan, resulting in 48 additional units. It also assumes that by constructing more residential uses at the site, the available space for commercial uses would be further limited at the site. This alternative also assumes that more residential development could occur elsewhere on El Camino Real, closer to the Colma BART station, and that less residential development may occur at the Town Center site.
The Residential Focused Alternative and the p roposed Project both empha size development within the El Camino Real Corridor. Both seek to provide new community amenities, improved local and regional connectivity, as well as enhanced economic activity. Given the large number of jobs in comparison to the town’s population, this alternative could potentially lower the total vehicle miles traveled by providing housing to those that work in the area.
The Residenti al Focused Alternative and the p roposed Project are based on similar assumptions of buildout of opportunity sites and sites designated with a commercial overlay within the Planning Area. Opportunity sites consist of sites that are currently vacant or underutilized. What distinguishes the Residential Focused Alternative is its revision of land use density to promote more residential units in the potential mixed-use environment around the town center. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-5.0 Impacts:
Findings
AESTHETICS
Differences in aesthetics between the proposed P roject and the Residential Focused Alternative are relatively minor and relate to the intensity of the future residential and commercial development/redevelopment of infill sites in the town. Compared to the Residential Focused Alternative, proposed Project (2040 General Plan Update) would allow for increased height and intensified residential land uses along El Camino Real. The increased height would be allowed at select opportunity sites where topography, setbacks, and existing developments would reduce the impacts of the additional height. The proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative would essentially include policies that would reduce impacts on aesthetics and light and glare issues with new design standards and policies. (Draft EIR, pp. 6.0 -5 through 6.0- 6.) The impacts under the Residential Focused Alternative would be similar to the proposed Project.
AIR QUALITY
The air quality impacts between the proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative would be similar because the degree of the impact is related to the amount of development and population at buildout. However, the Residential Focused Alternative would have more air quality impacts than the proposed Project. The Residential Focused Alternative, while anticipating slightly more growth and possibly in a geographically different area than under the proposed P roject, has not b een considered under the BAAQMD’s growth projections for the town or its related air quality impacts. Since more residences would be constructed under the Residential Focused Alternative than the proposed Project, construction emissions, exposure from TACs, exposure from operational emissions and all other related air quality emissions would be greater under the Residential Focused Alternative than under the proposed Project. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-6.)
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
While the Planning Area is mainly developed with urban uses, there are small areas of diversified wildlife population within the town. Since the town of Colma is located along the Pacific Flyway, migratory birds are often found in the town’s open spaces related to cemetery uses. The proposed Project and Residential Focused A lternative would focus future development on the few vacant and underutilized parcels that exist within the town of Colma. While the types of uses and intensity of future development would differ between the proposed P roject and the Residential Focused Alternative, the impacts to biological resources would be similar as this alternative would result in approximately the same urban footprint. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-6.)
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES
Cultural resources include buildings of historical importance, registered historic sites, and archaeological resources and tribal resources includes site features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, or objects that are of value to a tribe and is either on or eligible for the California Historic Register or local historic register. A previously completed cultural resource studies and the town’s previous Historical Resources Element (1999) shows that no previously recorded archaeological resources, Cultural and Tribal resources or Native American remains are currently within the town limits. The town does have many historical Findings
resources (primarily in cemeteries) eligible for designation on the National Register.
However, future ground disturbing activities associated with construction excavation under the proposed Project, as well as the Residential Focused Alternative, could uncover unknown resources, and the potential impacts to cultural and tribal resources would depend on the location and amount of any future development. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-7.) The impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources under the Residential Focused Alternative would be similar to the proposed Project because it would result in approximately the same footprint.
ENERGY
The two scenarios, under the proposed P roject and the Residential Focused Alternative, would increase the amount of development and population in town, which in turn would increase the demand for energy use under varying degrees. The proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative propose more potential development and has the most potential to increase the population and demand for energy use and thus could have an adverse impact on the environment. Construction of future development, or even redevelopment projects has the potential to consume gasoline and diesel during the operation of heavy-duty construction equipment and vehicles. However, these would be temporary consumption s of energy, only related to project construction under future development projects. Moreover the 2040 GPU policies promote energy efficiency which reduces the amount of energy used per capita, and future development/redevelopment under the proposed P roject (2040 GPU) as well as the Residential Focused Alternative would be subject to these same energy saving policies and standards. Both the proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative would also have to conform to the State of California’s AB 32 Scoping Plan (for Greenhouse Gas emissions) and the Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6) and CALgreen Code (Title 24, Part 11). Therefore, the comparative energy and power use under the proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative would be similar . (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-7.)
GEOLOGY
The town of Colma is located along the Serra Fault Zone and is approximately less than a mile east from the San Andreas Fault Zone. Therefore, the town has the potential to experience considerable ground shaking and rupture, in the event of an earthquake, particularly within the 2040 GPU’s planning horizon. The current state and federal engineering and design regulations that minimize seismic and geologic impacts apply equally to all future development/redevelopments under the proposed Project as well as the Residential Focused Alternative . Since the proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative both have the potential to ultimately bring more people and businesses to the area, these future residences and businesses could be potentially exposed to seismic impacts from earthquakes and other geologic risks such as ground shaking and ground failure due to seismic activity, landslides, and soil expansion. Thus, the proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative have the potential to expose people and businesses to seismic risks. (Draft EIR, pp. 6.0-7 through 6.0-8.) Because the Residential Focused Alternative proposes more residential development than the proposed Findings
Project, the Residential Focused Alternative would expose more people to such risks than the proposed Project, and impacts would be greater.
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
According to the town’s Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Inventories, the majority of the town’s GHG emissions come from transportation and energy use. Most of the on -road vehicles used for transportation burn fossil fuels such as gasoline or diesel which results in GHG emissions. Electric vehicles do not burn fossil fuels but GHGs may be emitted elsewhere, depending on the electric power source. Most of the customers in town utilize 100% carbon -free electricity procured by Peninsula Clean Energy. Natural gas consumption is the main contributor to GHG emissions from energy use.
The amount of development or even redevelopment efforts would be greater under the Residential Focused Alternative than that under the proposed Project, and so the GHG impacts from the Residential Focused Alternative would likely be greater than those under the proposed Project. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-8.)
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
The proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative anticipate that both infill and underutilized sites in the town would be developed, though with varying degrees of residential and commercial uses. While the Residential Focused Alternative may facilitate more development than the proposed Project, the town is generally built out and there are few industrial sites within the town boundaries. Future development would be restricted to higher density uses in limited areas of the town; and both the proposed Project and the Residenti al Focused Alternative envision more mixed-use development, particularly more residential development. Such future development has the potential to increase exposure to possible hazardous materials, particularly as the town does have two open hazardous sites within its boundaries, one of which is the closed landfill . In general,
impacts with regard to hazardous materials come in the form of development near existing land uses that handle hazardous materials, areas where hazardous materials are stored or transported or by redeveloping con taminated sites. Under both the proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative, new development/redevelopment activities within the town of Colma would be required to follow the California Hazardous Waste Control Law, the Porter -Cologne Water Quality Act, other legislation as well as the 2040 GPU policies to lessen impacts from hazardous substances. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-8.) Thus, impacts from the Residential Focused Alternative would be similar to those impacts under the proposed Project.
HYDROLOGY
Urban development/redevelopment has the potential to increase impervious surfaces that could lead to increased runoff rates, water pollutants, flooding, and decreased groundwater recharge. Since the proposed project and the Residential Focused Alternative encourage more future development/redevelopment activities, these future development efforts would be in infill areas of the town, and impacts to the town’s hydrology would be limited. All future construction activities would have to comply with the NPDES stormwater permits. Also, the proposed project and the Residential Focused Alternative would have Findings
to adhere to the 2040 GPU policies that encourage the incorporation of green infrastructure in site designs, manage runoff, and comply with water quality reg ulations.
With green infrastructure, new developments would be designed to capture, treat, and retain runoff while promoting infiltration. All new development is still required to comply with green infrastructure requirements. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-9.) Accordingly, the Residential Focused Alternative would have similar impacts to hydrology as the proposed Project.
LAND USE AND PLANNING
Generally, the proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative are consistent in land use patterns, outside of a few minor land use designation changes. However, as with the proposed Project, the Residential Focused Alternative, if adopted, would become the Planning Area’s new guiding policy document for future land use planning as well as residential and commercial development.
The proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative differ in the amount of residential and non-residential development assumed at buildout in the year 2040. The proposed Project would result in more commercial development and less housing units compared to the Residential Focused Alternative. Table 6.0-1 of the Draft EIR shows a comparison of housing units and population at full buildout of the proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative. The proposed P roject and the Residential Focused Alternative would focus more on infill development and redevelopment of sites along El Camino Real, in order to encourage additional mi xed-use housing opportunities at all income levels. Both the proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative increase land use intensities and allow for more housing units and population growth. The proposed Project results in 845 housing units compared to 887 in the Residential Focused Alternative. (Draft EIR, pp. 6.0 -9.) Thus, impacts to land use and planning would be greater under the Residential Focused Alternative than the proposed Project.
NOISE
The proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative would result in increased land use intensity, and potentially more redev elopment of existing properties. However, the proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative would result in similar short- term noise impacts, particularly with short-term construction noise levels and on longer activity days since the type of activities (excavation, removal of site debris, building construction etc.). Due to its greater development targets, construction noise impacts under the Residential Focused Alternative would be greater than those under the proposed Project.
Roadway noise is the largest contributor to noise impacts in the town and all three scenarios would increase existing traffic and thus ambient noise levels between now and buildout in 2040. The Residential Focused Alternative would generate increased residential and commercial activity than under the proposed P roject. Therefore, operational noise levels under the Residential Focused Alternative would be greater than that under the proposed Project.
The impacts on stationary noise so urces for the proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative would be similar to each other since the proposed Findings
development/redevelopment of the town under any of the alternatives would not be significantly different between the alternatives. Construction activities and equipment used for the Residential Focused Alternative as well as the proposed project would result in similar vibration impacts. However, since the Residential Focused Alternative would involve more construction activities due to its overall development efforts, the duration of vibration impacts due to construction would be slightly greater under the Residential Focused Alternative than the proposed Project. (Draft EIR, pp. 6.0-9 through 6.0-10.)
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
Development under the proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative would require additional public services and park areas. Other services such as police, fire, and emergency services would be required to be expanded to accommodate additional population growth. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0 -10.) Because development under the Residential Focused Alternative would be slightly greater than the development under the proposed Project, impacts under the Residential Focused Alternative would be greater.
TRANSPORTATION
The proposed Project as well as the Residential Focused Alternative would encourage better connectivity between all means of transportation (such as walking, biking, use of public transportation) and thus increased demand for these services. Similarly, the proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative would have better safety and roadway hazard improvements as well as emergency access components.
The proposed Project as well as the Residential Focused Alternative would significantly generate more home-based VMT, due to the increased projected number of residents in the town and these residents needing to travel further for employment opportunities and other related uses. Since the Residential Focused Alternative would result in greater development in the town center and the El Camino Real than the proposed Project, it would have greater impacts on existing roadway operational deficiencies. (Draft EIR,pp.
6.0-10 through 6.0-11.)
UTILITIES
The proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative would require utilities and infrastructure, including water sewer electricity and landfill capacity. The demand on utilities and service systems is contingent on the amount of future growth. The proposed Project and the Residential Focused Alternative propose similar types of development at buildout and is expected to demand a similar amount of resources from the utilities. Since the Residential Focused Alte rnative would result in more population growth than that under the proposed Project, it is possible that additional infrastructure may be needed under this alternative than that under the proposed Project. However, it is possible that any needed utility infrastructure upgrades will be of a similar size and extent to that for the proposed Project, since development will occur at magnitudes comparable to the proposed Project, and at locations similar to the proposed Project.
Findings
The Residential Focused Alternative would result in higher population and commercial use than the proposed Project, and thus have higher impacts to utility facilities at buildout. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-11.)
WILDFIRE
Wildfire impacts could affect the town under the proposed P roject and the Residential Focused Alternative. The town of Colma is limited in its land area for future development which can only be focused on limited residential as well as commercial development/redevelopment on existing sites within the town. As new development occurs and existing structures are replaced with buildings built under more modern building codes, fire safety will increase. Moreover, any new construction would be required to comply with the town’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan as well as any criteria under the County of San Mateo’s Emergency Operations Services. Since both the Residential Focused Alternative and the proposed Project (2040 GPU) would result in greater residential and commercial activities, wildfire impacts would be similar. (Draft EIR, p. 6.0-11.) Attainment of Project Objectives: The Residential Focused Alternative would attain all of the Project objectives. It would enable the community to agree on long - and short-term policies related to each of the elements encompassed within the General Plan. It would establish a vision for the physical nature of Colma in the future and set the tone for the corresponding land use and related policies required to advance this vision, and outline a long-range vision that reflects the aspirations of the community. It would also establish goals and policies to guide development and conservation decisions by the City Council and staff, and provide a basis for determining whether specific development proposals and public projects are in harmony with the Town’s long-range vision. It would also allow the Town departments, other public agencies, and private developers to design projects that enhance the character of the community, promote public health, preserve environmental resources, and minimize hazards. It would also provide the basis for establishing and setting priorities for detailed plans and implementing programs, such as the Zoning Ordinance, subdivision regulations, and the Capital Improvement Program.
However, the Residential Focused Alternative would not reduce any of the proposed Project’s impacts, and in fact would result in greater or similar impacts.
Finding: The City Counc il rejects Alternative 2: Residential Focused Alternative , on the following grounds, each of which individually provides sufficient justification for rejection of this alternative: (1) the alternative fails to avoid or reduce the Project’s significant and unavoidable impacts relating to air quality, cultural and tribal cultural resources, and greenhouse gas emissions ; and (2) the alternative would result in increased impacts relating to air quality, geology, land use and planning, public services and recreation, transportation, and utilities.
E. ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines indicates that an analysis of alternatives to a proposed Project shall identify an environmentally superior alternative among the alternatives evaluated in an EIR. Based on the alternatives analysis contained within the Draft EIR, the Residential Focused A lternative is identified as the Environmentally Superior Alternative.
Findings
The No Project Alternative reduces impacts in most areas, including air quality, which has a significant impact under the proposed Project. On the other hand, the No Project Alternative has impacts that are greater than the proposed Project with respect to aesthetics, energy, and greenhouse gas emissions. Most notable is the area of greenhouse gas emissions, where the implementation of a new 2030 Climate Action Plan could reduce greenhouse gas emissions within the town. The No Project Alternative is still environmentally superior, as impacts are reduced in more topical areas than they are increased.
Based on a comparison of the alternatives’ overall environmental impacts and their compatibility with proposed Project, the Residential Focused Alternative would be the environmentally superior alternative for this EIR (other than the No Project Alternativ e). (Draft EIR, p. 6.013.) The Residential Focused Alternative would support additional housing, which would result in a more balanced jobs/housing ratio in the town, and would meet the Project objectives. However, the environmental impacts of the additional development and population results in similar or greater impacts in every area. Therefore, the Residential Focused Alternative is worse than the proposed Project in terms of environmental impacts.
Findings
SECTION IX.
ADOPTION OF STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(a), the City Council must balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the Project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. If the specific benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those environmental effects may be considered acceptable.
Having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the Project to the extent feasible by adopting the mitigation measures; having considered the entire administrative record on the project; the City Council has weighed the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable adverse impact s after mitigation in regards to air quality, cultural resources, tribal cultural resources, and greenhouse gas emissions. While recognizing that the unavoidable adverse impacts are significant under CEQA thresholds, the City Council nonetheless finds that the unavoidable adverse impacts that will result from the Project are acceptable and outweighed by specific social, economic and other benefits of the Project.
In making this determination, the factors and public benefits specified below were considered. Any one of these reasons is sufficient to justify approval of the Project. Thus, even if a court were to conclude that not every reason is supported by substantial evidence, the City Council would be able to stand by its determination that each individual reason is sufficient. The substantial evidence supporting the various benefits can be found in the preceding findings, which are incorporated by reference into this section, and in the documents found in the Records of Proceeding.
The City Council therefore finds that for each of the significant impacts which are subject to a finding under CEQA Section 21081(a)(3), that each of the following social, economic, and environmental benefits of the Project, independent of the other benefits, outweigh the potential significant unavoidable adverse impacts and render acceptable each and every one of these unavoidable adverse environmental impacts:
1. The Project reflects the stated vision, goals and objectives of the Town of Colma.
2. The Project will designate areas fo r housing to ensure orderly development patterns that accommodate projected population and avoid or minimize land use conflicts.
3. The Project will ensure that sensitive land uses such as the Town’s cemeteries and historic resources are not significantly impacted by development.
4. The Project will improve and maximize economic viability of the currently vacant and underutilized Project site and area by providing strategic land use designations.
5. The Project will ensure that the Town of Colma’s public facilities and infrastructure system can effectively serve the land use framework.
Findings
6. The Project designates a Town Center area which will enhance the character of the Town of Colma and promote economic development and enhanced employment opportunities.
7. The Project will maximize and broaden the Town’s sales tax base by providing local and regional tax-generating uses.
Findings
EXHIBIT B
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CSG Consultants, Inc 4.0-1 Town of Colma General Plan Update February 2022 Final Environmental Impact Report
EXHIBIT B
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section §15097 requires a public agency to adopt a program for monitoring or reporting on the measures the public agency has required in order to mitigate or avoid significant environmental impacts. This requirement ensures that all environmental impacts found to be potentially significant or significant and unavoidable, are avoided or reduced as feasible to a proposed project. This mitigation and monitoring program (MMRP) has been developed in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines §15097 to ensure that the mitigation measures established in the Town of Colma 2040 General Plan Update Draft Program Environmental Impact Report are properly implemented, reported on, and monitored, per State law.
The objectives of this MMRP are then to:
• verify that each identified mitigation measure has been implemented; • assign responsibility for the monitoring and reporting of each mitigation measure ; • stipulate the procedure to identify the appropriate enforcement actions’ • identify areas, if any, of non-compliance; and,
• record the actions taken to implement each mitigation; and,
4.1 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
The Town of Colma , serving as the Lead Agency, is responsible for ensuring total compliance with t he mitigation measures adopted for the 2040 General Plan Update EIR. The Town will monitor and report on all required mitigation activities according to Table 4.0.1: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist. If, during project implementation, any of the identified mitigation measures cannot be implemented or appropriately monitored, and/or changes to the mitigation measures are required, the Town shall inform the affected responsible agency(s). The Town of Colma shall then in coordination with the affected responsible agencies, make the determination to make the appropriate modifications, substitution or deletion of mitigation measures, develop alternative feasible mitigation measures, or re - assign monitoring and reporting responsibilities. All changes to this MMRP shall be in accordance with Public Resources Code §21081.6 and State CEQA Guidelines §15162.
Table 4.0.1 presents the implementation plan, mitigation timing, and reporting/monitoring responsibilities for the mitigation measures that would be required under the 2040 GPU EIR:
4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CSG Consultants, Inc 4.0-2 Town of Colma General Plan Update February 2022 Final Environmental Impact Report
Table 4.0.1: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsibility
And Timing
Implementation
Monitoring
4.2 AIR QUALITY
Impact 4.2.2: The project would
result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of
criteria pollutants for which the
project region is in non-
attainment under applicable
federal or State ambient air
quality standard.
Mitigation Measure AQ-1:
As part of the town’s development approval process, the town of Colma shall require applicants for future development projects to comply with the current BAAQMD basic control measures for fugitive dust control, including:
• Water all active construction areas at least twice daily, or as often as needed to control dust emissions. Watering should be sufficient to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency may be necessary whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour. Reclaimed water should be used whenever possible.
• Pave, apply water twice daily or as often as necessary to control dust, or apply (non -toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites. • Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard (i.e., the minimum required space between the top of the load and the top of the trailer).
• Sweep daily (with water sweepers using reclaimed water if possible) or as often as needed all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at the construction site to control dust. • Sweep public streets daily (with water sweepers using reclaimed water if possible) in the vicinity of the project site, or as often as needed, to keep streets free of visible soil material. • Hydroseed or apply nontoxic soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas. • Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply nontoxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.).
• Limit vehicle traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. • Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.
Implementation:
Town of Colma
Building
Department or
Planning
Department
Timing: Prior to
issuance of any
construction permit
Confirm that all
construction
plans submitted
incorporate all
applicable
mitigation
measures.
Initials: ________
Date: __________
Impact 4.2.2: The project would
result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of
criteria pollutants for which the
project region is in non-
attainment under applicable
federal or State ambient air
quality standard.
Mitigation Measure AQ-2:
Prior to issuance of building permits, development project applicants that are subject to CEQA and exceed the screening sizes in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines shall prepare and submit to the town of Colma a technical assessment evaluating potential project construction-related air quality impacts.
The evaluation shall be prepared in conformance with the BAAQMD methodology in assessing air quality impacts. If construction-related criteria air pollutants are determined to have the potential to exceed the BAAQMD thresholds of significance, as identified in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, the town shall require that applicants for new development projects incorporate mitigation measures to reduce air pollutant emissions during construction activities to below these thresholds to the extent feasible. These identified measures shall be incorporated into all appropriate Responsibility:
Town of Colma
Building
Department
Timing: During
construction
activities
Confirm that
technical
assessment has
been submitted
and identified
measures are
incorporated into
construction
documents.
4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CSG Consultants, Inc 4.0-3 Town of Colma General Plan Update February 2022 Final Environmental Impact Report
Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsibility
And Timing
Implementation
Monitoring
construction documents (e.g., construction management plans) submitted to the town of Colma and shall be verified by the Town’s Building Division and/or Planning Division
Initials: ________
Date: __________
Impact 4.2.3: The project could
expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations
Mitigation Measure AQ-3:
Applicants for construction within 1,000 feet of residential and other sensitive land use projects (e.g., hospitals, nursing homes, day care centers) in the town of Colma, as measured from the property line of the project to the property line of the source/edge of the nearest travel lane, shall submit a health risk assessment (HRA) to the town prior to future discretionary project approval. The HRA shall be prepared in accordance with policies and procedures of the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and the BAAQMD. The latest OEHHA guidelines shall be used for the analysis, including age-sensitivity factors, breathing rates, and body weights appropriate for children ages 0 to 16 years. If the HRA shows that the incremental cancer risk exceeds ten in one million (10E-06), PM2.5 concentrations exceed 0.3 µg/m3, or the appropriate noncancer hazard index exceeds 1.0, the applicant will be required to identify and demonstrate that mitigation measures are capable of reducing potential cancer and noncancer risks to an acceptable level (i.e., below ten in one million or a hazard index of 1.0), including appropriate enforcement mechanisms. Measures to reduce risk may include, but are not limited to:
• During construction, use construction equipment rated as US EPA Tier 4 Interim for equipment of 50 horsepower or more.
• During construction, use of construction equipment fitted with Level 3 Diesel Particulate Filters for all equipment of 50 horsepower or more.
Measures identified in the HRA shall be included in the environmental document and/or incorporated into the site development plan as a component of the proposed project. Prior to issuance of any construction permit, the construction contractor shall ensure that all construction plans submitted to the Town of Colma Planning Division and/or Building Division clearly show incorporation of all applicable mitigation measures.
Implementation:
Town of Colma
Building
Department or
Planning
Department
Timing: Prior to
issuance of any
construction permit
Confirm that all
construction
plans submitted
incorporate all
applicable
mitigation
measures.
Initials: ________
Date: __________
Impact 4.2.3: The project could
expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations
Mitigation Measure AQ-4:
Prior to discretionary project approval, applicants for industrial or warehousing land uses in addition to commercial land uses that would generate substantial diesel truck travel—i.e., 100 diesel trucks per day or 40 or more trucks with diesel-powered transport refrigeration units per day based on the CARB recommendations for siting new sensitive land uses—shall contact the BAAQMD or the town of Colma in conjunction with the BAAQMD to determine the appropriate level of HRA (See next page.)
(See next page.)
4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CSG Consultants, Inc 4.0-4 Town of Colma General Plan Update February 2022 Final Environmental Impact Report
Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsibility
And Timing
Implementation
Monitoring
required. If preparation of an HRA is required, all HRAs shall be submitted to the town and the BAAQMD for evaluation.
The HRA shall be prepared in accordance with policies and procedures of the OEHHA and the BAAQMD. If the HRA shows that the incremental cancer risk exceeds ten in one million (10E 06) or the risk thresholds in effect at the time a project is considered, or the appropriate noncancer hazard index exceeds 1.0, or 0.3 µ/m3 of PM2.5 or the thresholds as determined by the BAAQMD at the time a project is considered, the applicant will be required to identify and demonstrate that measures are capable of reducing potential cancer and noncancer risks to an acceptable level, including appropriate enforcement mechanisms.
Measures to reduce risk impacts may include but are not limited to:
• Restricting idling on-site beyond Air Toxic Control Measures idling restrictions, as feasible. • Electrifying warehousing docks.
• Requiring use of newer equipment and/or vehicles.
• Restricting off-site truck travel through the creation of truck routes.
Measures identified in the HRA shall be identified as mitigation measures in the environmental document and/or incorporated into the site development plan as a component of the proposed General Plan.
Implementation:
Town of Colma
Planning
Department
Timing: During
discretionary
permit review
Confirm that
discretionary
projects meet
BAAQMD
requirements.
Initials: ________
Date: __________
4.4 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact 4.4.1: Future
development to implement the
proposed project could
potentially cause a direct
substantial adverse change in the
significance of an historical
resource as defined in CEQA
Guidelines Section §15064.5
Mitigation Measures: CUL-1
1. For any project with potential to impact historical resources, a historical resource inventory of the project footprint shall be required to identify any historical resources. Before actual field reconnaissance occurs, background research shall include a record search at the NWIC, as well as a review of the SLF maintained by the NAHC. The project archaeologist shall determine the likelihood for the project site to contain archaeological resources by reviewing site photographs and existing historic information and conducting a site visit (for projects with exposed ground).
2. If archaeological resources cannot be avoided, significance evaluations shall be required when a survey identifies new resources, when a survey re-locates previously recorded resources that have not been previously evaluated, and when the survey does not re-locate previously recorded sites if there is a likelihood that the resources still exist.
3. Significance evaluations shall not be required if the historical resource has been evaluated for CEQA significance or f or NRHP eligibility within the last five years, and if there has been no change in the conditions that contributed to the determination of significance or eligibility. A historical resource shall be reevaluated if its condition or setting has either improv ed or deteriorated, if new information is available, or if the resource is becoming increasingly rare due to the loss of other similar resources.
Implementation:
The Town of
Colma Planning
Department or
Building
Department
Timing: During
construction
activities
Confirm that
procedures have
been followed
before and
during
construction as
applicable.
Initials: ________
Date: __________
4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CSG Consultants, Inc 4.0-5 Town of Colma General Plan Update February 2022 Final Environmental Impact Report
Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsibility
And Timing
Implementation
Monitoring
4. An archaeological testing program shall be required for archaeological sites in need of historical resource si gnificance evaluation. Archaeological testing programs include evaluating the horizontal and vertical dimensions of a site, the chronological placement, site function, artifact/ecofact density and variability, presence/absence of subsurface features, and r esearch potential. Tribal representatives and/or Native American monitors shall be involved in making recommendations regarding the significance of prehistoric archaeological sites during this phase of the process. The testing program may require reevaluation of the proposed project, which could result in a combination of project redesign to preserve significant resources as well as mitigation in the form of data recovery and monitoring (as recommended by the qualified archaeologist and Native American representative).
5. If significant historical resources are identified within the project footprint, the site may be eligible for designation in one or more registers. If no significant resources are identified, and site conditions are such that there is no poten tial for further discoveries, then no further action shall be required. If a survey and/or assessment finds nonsignificant resources, no further work shall be required beyond documentation of the resources on the appropriate California Department of Parks
and Recreation site forms and inclusion of results in the survey and/or assessment report.
If the survey finds no significant resources but results of the initial evaluation and testing phase indicate there is still a potential for resources to be present in portions of the property that could not be tested, then mitigation monitoring shall be required.
6. Preferred mitigation for historical resources shall be to avoid and preserve the resource through project redesign. If the resource cannot be entirely avoided, an archaeologist who meets the U.S.
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards (SOIPQS) for Archaeology shall take all prudent and feasible measures to minimize harm. For archaeological resources for which preservation is not an option, an archaeologist who meets the SOIPQS for Archaeology shall prepare a research design for a data recovery program. The data recovery program shall be based on a written research design and is subject to the provisions as outlined in CEQA, Section 21083.2.
Archaeological monitoring may be required during building demolition and/or construction grading when significant resources are known or suspected to be present on a site but cannot be recovered prior to grading due to obstructions such as existing development or dense vegetation.
7. When subsurface investigations, including geotechnical testing and other ground -disturbing activities, impact an archaeological site or a Native American Traditional Cultural Property within the project footprint, a Nativ e American monitor shall be retained. In the event that the data recovery and/or monitoring program reveals human remains, the provisions of PRC Section 5097 shall be applied. An archaeologist who meets the SOIPQS for Archaeology shall consult the Native American monitor during the preparation of the written report, at which time the monitor may express concerns about the treatment of sensitive resources.
4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CSG Consultants, Inc 4.0-6 Town of Colma General Plan Update February 2022 Final Environmental Impact Report
Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsibility
And Timing
Implementation
Monitoring
Impact 4.4.2: Future
development to implement the
proposed General Plan Update
could result in the potential
disturbance of cultural resources
(i.e., prehistoric archaeological
sites, historical archaeological
sites, and isolated artifacts and
features) within the Planning
Area
Mitigation Measures: CUL-2
1. If an archaeological resource is identified during future development or operations, all activity within 100 feet of the archaeological resource shall cease and be flagged for avoidance. An archaeologist who meets the S OIPQS for Archaeology shall be immediately notified of the discovery. The archaeologist shall inspect the find and notify the Town of their assessment.
2. If the assessment concludes that the discovery constitutes a significant or unique archaeological resource, or TCR, the resource shall be avoided if possible. If avoidance is not possible, the Town shall consult with all applicable parties, including Native American tribes if prehistoric, in an effort to determine measures to mitigate any potential impacts to the resource in accordance with PRC Section 21083.2 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4. An archaeologist who meets the SOIPQS for Archaeology shall employ measures that include documentation of the resource.
3. If an archaeological site does not meet the c riteria defined in subsection (a), but does meet the definition of a unique archaeological resource in Section 21083.2 of the PRC, the site shall be treated in accordance with the provisions of section 21083.2. The time and cost limitations described in PR C Section 21083.2 (c -f) do not apply to surveys and site evaluation activities intended to determine whether the project location contains unique archaeological resources.
4. If an archaeological resource is neither a unique archaeological nor a historical resource, the effects of the project on those resources shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment.
These procedures shall be included as Condition of Approval for all projects. Where appropriate, preconstruction measures will follow the guidelines as stated in CUL-1 (See next page)
Implementation:
The Town of
Colma Planning
Department or
Building
Department
Timing: During
construction
activities
(See next page)
Confirm that
procedures have
been followed
before and
during
construction as
applicable.
Initials: ________
Date: __________
Impact 4.4.3: The proposed
project would cause a substantial
adverse change in the
significance of a TCR as defined
in Public Resources Code Section
§21074 or §5020.1(k)
Mitigation Measures: CUL-3
1. For any project with potential to result in adverse impacts to TCRs, the Town shall avoid and/or minimize impacts by facilitating the identification of tribal cultural resources through field studies. Coordination and collaboration regarding the resource shall be completed with agencies, tribes, and institutions, such as the Northwest Information Center, the Native American Heritage Commission, and local tribal governments, including consultation as outlined in Senate Bill 18 and Assembly Bill 52. The resource shall be treated with culturally appropriate dignity, taking into account the tribal cultural values and meaning of the resource, including, but not limited to, the following: (A) Protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource; (B) Protecting the traditional use of the resource; and (C) Protecting the confidentiality of the resource.
2. If possible, the Town shall avoid and preserve the resources in place, including, but not limited to, planning and construction to avoid the resources and protect the cultural and natural context.
3. Greenspace, parks, or other open space shall use appropriate planning to incorporate the resources with culturally appropriate protection and management criteria. Permanent conservation easements or other interests in real property shall be created with cu lturally Implementation:
The Town of
Colma Planning
Department or
Building
Department
Timing: During
construction
activities
Confirm that
procedures have
been followed
before and
during
construction as
applicable.
Initials: ________
Date: __________
4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CSG Consultants, Inc 4.0-7 Town of Colma General Plan Update February 2022 Final Environmental Impact Report
Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsibility
And Timing
Implementation
Monitoring
appropriate management criteria for the purposes of preserving or utilizing the resources or places.
Impact 4.4.4: Adoption of the
proposed General Plan Update
could result in the potential
disturbance of human remains,
including those interred outside
of cemeteries within the
Planning Area
Mitigation Measures: CUL-4
1. If Native American human remains are discovered within a project footprint, the Town shall work with the most likely descendants identified by the NAHC as provided in PRC Section 5097.98.
The applicant may develop an agreement for treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains, and any items of cultural patrimony associated with Native American burials with the appropriate Native Americans as identified by the NAHC. Action implementing such an agreement is exempt from the general prohibition on disinterring, disturbing, or removing human remains from any location other than a dedicated cemetery (Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5).
2. In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, the following steps shall be taken:
a. All construction activity shall cease within 100 feet of the discovery until the San Mateo County Medical Examiner is contacted and has completed their study. b. The San Mateo County Medical Examine r shall be contacted to determine whether an investigation of the cause of death is required.
c. If the medical examiner determines that the remains are Native American, the medical examiner shall contact the NAHC within 24 hours.
d. The NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant from the deceased Native American.
e. The landowner shall discuss and confer with the Most Likely Descendant regarding all reasonable options for treatment of human remains and any associated gra ve goods as provided in PRC Section 5097.98.
3. As part of the objectives, criteria, and procedures required by PRC Section 21082, a lead agency shall make provisions for historical or unique archaeological resources accidentally discovered during constructio n. These provisions shall include an immediate evaluation of the find by a qualified archaeologist. If the archaeologist determines the find to be a significant historical or archaeological resource, contingency funding and a time allotment sufficient to a llow for implementation of avoidance measures or appropriate mitigation shall be necessary. Work may continue on other parts of the project site while resource mitigation takes place. (See next page)
Implementation:
The Town of
Colma Planning
Department or
Building
Department
Timing: During
construction
activities
(See next page)
Confirm that
procedures have
been followed
before and
during
construction as
applicable.
Initials: ________
Date: __________
4.7 Greenhouse Gas
Impact 4.7.1: Implementation of
the proposed project would
Mitigation Measure GHG-1: (See next page)
(See next page)
4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CSG Consultants, Inc 4.0-8 Town of Colma General Plan Update February 2022 Final Environmental Impact Report
Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsibility
And Timing
Implementation
Monitoring
generate GHG emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the
environment
The town of Colma shall update the Climate Action Plan (CAP) every five years to ensure the town is monitoring the plan’s progress toward achieving the town’s greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction target and to require amendment if the plan is not achieving a specified level. The update shall consider a trajectory consistent with the GHG emissions reduction goal established under Executive Order S-03-05 for year 2050 and the latest applicable statewide legislative GHG emission reduction that may be in effect at the time of the CAP update (e.g., Senate Bill 32 for year 2030). The CAP update shall include the following:
• GHG inventories of existing and forecast year GHG levels. • Tools and strategies for reducing GHG emissions to ensure a trajectory with the long -term GHG reduction goal of Executive Order S-03-05.
• Plan implementation guidance that includes, at minimum, the following components consistent with the proposed CAP:
• Administration and staffing
• Finance and budgeting
• Timelines for measure implementation
• Community outreach and education
• Monitoring, reporting, and adaptive management
• Tracking tools
Implementation:
Town of Colma
Planning
Department
Timing: Ongoing,
every five years
Complete CAP
update every five
years to monitor
progress toward
GHG reduction
goals.
Initials: ________
Date: __________
Attachment B
i
Acknowledgements
Town of Colma
City Council
Diana Colvin
Helen Fisicaro
Raquel Gonzalez
Joanne F. del Rosario
John Irish Goodwin
City Staff
Brian Dossey, City Manager
Consultants
CSG Consultants
CSDA Design Group
Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
PlaceWorks
Copies of this General Plan can be obtained by contacting the Town of Colma Planning Department
1198 El Camino Real
Colma, Ca 94014
(650) 997-8300
(650) 997-8308, Fax
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction, Vision and Legacy
Introduction ................................................................................................................... I-1 Overall Plan Concept ..................................................................................................... I-11 General Plan Organization ............................................................................................. I-14 The General Plan Process .............................................................................................. I-16 General Plan Legacy ...................................................................................................... I-18 Land Use Element
Purpose ....................................................................................................................... LU-1 Existing Land Use ........................................................................................................ LU-3 Land Use Density/Intensity ........................................................................................... LU-6 Land Use Designations ................................................................................................. LU-8 Equity and Civic Engagement ...................................................................................... LU-17 Land Use Public Benefits Program ............................................................................... LU-19 Planning Areas ........................................................................................................... LU-22 Implementation ......................................................................................................... LU-45 Mobility Element
Purpose ......................................................................................................................... M-1 Streets and Highways..................................................................................................... M-3 Roadway Performance ................................................................................................. M-10 Public Transportation ................................................................................................... M-14 Active Transportation ................................................................................................... M-19 Scenic Corridors ........................................................................................................... M-25 Transportation Demand Management ............................................................................ M-28 Parking........................................................................................................................ M-29 Implementation ........................................................................................................... M-30 Housing Element
Introduction .................................................................................................................. H-1 Population, Housing and Employment Trends .................................................................. H-7 Housing San Mateo County’s Workforce .......................................................................... H-9 Household Trends and Characteristics ........................................................................... H-16 Housing Characteristics ................................................................................................ H-22 Below Market Rate Housing Trends and Characteristics .................................................. H-26 Ability to Meet Housing Needs ...................................................................................... H-37
iii
Governmental Constraints ............................................................................................ H-51 Community Health, Safety and Services Element
Purpose ....................................................................................................................... CS-1 Community Health ....................................................................................................... CS-3 Geologic and Seismic Hazards ....................................................................................... CS-6 Flood Hazards ............................................................................................................ CS-10 Fire Prevention and Protection Services and Emergency Medical Response .................... CS-14 Fire Hazards .............................................................................................................. CS-16 Hazardous Materials ................................................................................................... CS-20 Emergency Preparedness and Disaster Response ......................................................... CS-23 Law Enforcement ....................................................................................................... CS-28 Airport Safety ............................................................................................................ CS-30 Noise ........................................................................................................................ CS-33 Implementation ......................................................................................................... CS-40 Open Space and Conservation Element
Purpose ..................................................................................................................... OSC-1 Open Space and Parks ............................................................................................... OSC-4 Conservation ........................................................................................................... OSC-11 Implementation ....................................................................................................... OSC-25 Historical Resources Element
Introduction ................................................................................................................ HR-1 Past Preservation Efforts .............................................................................................. HR-2 Context Statement ....................................................................................................... HR-3 Benefits of Preservation .............................................................................................. HR-11 Challenges and Obstacles ........................................................................................... HR-13 Incentives for Preservation ......................................................................................... HR-14 Goals and Policies ...................................................................................................... HR-17 Implementation ......................................................................................................... HR-19 Appendix A – Definitions ............................................................................................ HR-21 Appendix B – Historic Resource Inventory ................................................................... HR-24
Introduction,
Vision and Legacy
I-1
INTRODUCTION
The Town of Colma 2040 General Plan (“Town”; “GP”; “GP Update”) articulates the shared long-term community vision for preservation, enhancement and improvement of the Town. It is a long-range plan that directs decision making and establishes rules and standards for town improvements and new development within the corporate boundaries of the Town.1 The GP Update reflects the community’s vision for the future and is intended to provide direction through the year 2040. This document therefore updates the current General Plan document and is based on a set of guiding principles that protect the Town’s unique history and character.
A General Plan serves as the jurisdiction’s “constitution” or “blueprint” for future decisions concerning a variety of issues including land use, health and safety, and resource conservation.
All specific plans, subdivisions, public works projects, and zoning decisions must be consistent with the local jurisdiction’s General Plan. California State Law requires that every city adopt a General Plan “for the physical development of the town and any land outside its boundaries that bears relation to its planning” (California Government Code Section §65300).
While the General Plan can cover a variety of topics based on a community’s specific needs, each one is required by State Law to address: Land Use, Circulation/Transportation (Mobility), Housing, Conservation, Open Space, Noise and Safety.
These elements establish policy direction relating to:
1 The Town of Colma is coterminous with its Sphere of Influence (SOI).
I-2
▪ The use and development of all remaining land within the Town of Colma ▪ The types and provision of housing growth in the community ▪ The protection and continued use of cemetery uses
▪ The growth of existing businesses as well as the attraction of new commercial ventures ▪ The provision of public safety services and protection against natural and human caused hazards (including noise)
The Town of Colma has chosen to prepare five elements for the 2040 General Plan update.
Titles include: Land Use, Open Space and Conservation, Community Services and Safety, and Mobility Elements. The existing Housing Element is not being currently updated since the Town is awaiting direction on its Regional Housing Numbers Allocation (RHNA) allocation but is included in this document. In addition, the Town has chosen to prepare a Historic Resources Element to provide an information base of the Town’s historic resources and to provide policy direction for their preservation.
COMMUNITY OVERVIEW
Setting and History
Known as the “City of Souls”, the Town of Colma is the smallest city in San Mateo County. The Town of Colma is a unique greenbelt community with attractive cemeteries and agricultural fields surrounding a regionally oriented commercial core. The Town is located approximately two miles south of the City of San Francisco on the San Francisco Peninsula, midway between the San Francisco Bay and the Pacific Ocean. The Town of Colma is bounded on the north and west by the City of Daly City, on the south by the City of South San Francisco, and on the east by San Bruno Mountain State and San Mateo County Park (see Figure I-1: Regional Location Map). San Bruno Mountain provides the natural visual backdrop to the Town from the surrounding areas. Interstate State Highway 280 parallels the Town’s western boundary, and State Highway 82 (El Camino Real/Mission Street) runs through the geographic center of the Town (see Figure I-2: Project Location Map)
By the early 1900s, the Town of Colma was established as a community of homes, small businesses, churches, and thirteen cemeteries, and its farms and flower crops. An expanse of 450 acres located between the Town and the City of Daly City was used exclusively for raising violets that were sold in flower stands as far away as Missouri and Kansas. All of the land between the City of San Francisco border and the City of South San Francisco border, the Pacific Ocean and the San Bruno Mountain was known as (unincorporated) Colma until 1911, when the north end of San Mateo County became the City of Daly City.2 In order to avoid relocating again, cemetery owners got together and incorporated the town on August 5, 1924. Originally known as Lawndale, the name was changed to the Town of Colma
2 Town of Colma, California. 2020. < https://www.colma.ca.gov/colma-history/> Accessed April 29, 2020.
I-3
on November 24, 19413. By 1960, close to 500 residents called the Town of Colma their home.4 In the early 1970’s and early 1980’s the Town boundaries were expanded by annexing unincorporated portions of the Sterling Park subdivision located northeast of the intersection of F Street and El Camino Real. According to the corrected 2010 Census, the Town’s population was estimated at 1,454. Currently, among its 1,504 residents, the Town’s population is approximately 51% white, 26% Asian American, and 13% other minorities.
3 Colma, California: The City of the Dead by Richard Stockton 4 Town of Colma, California. 2020. < https://www.colma.ca.gov/demographics/> Accessed April 29, 2020.
I-4
I-5
I-6
Within the Town’s boundary, the ground elevation ranges from about 100 feet to about 500 feet above Mean Sea Level. The Town includes approximately 1.89 square miles of a wide valley associated with Colma Creek. The Town is
comprised of 17 cemeteries, which is
approximately 76% of the Town’s land area.5 Most
of the land east of El Camino Real is committed to
cemetery use or agricultural fields. These uses lead
up to the foot of San Bruno Mountain and impart a
rural atmosphere. Land west of El Camino Real is
oriented more to commercial uses although the
Town’s regionally oriented commercial core is bracketed on the north and south by cemeteries.
Identity and Culture
The Town of Colma is different from other Bay Area cities because of its large expanses of open space created by cemeteries and land held by cemeteries but currently in agricultural use. The Town is protected on the east from development by San Bruno Mountain Park. Junipero Serra Boulevard and Junipero Serra Freeway (Highway 280) provides a clear boundary to the town.
The 2040 General Plan policies promote the retention of the greenbelt theme as well as creating “key development sites” which provide for visual punctuation and to provide a greater sense of place within the town. In addition, the plan policies promote sustainable development and to link potential new development to the town’s Economic Development Plan.
The Town is also different from other Bay Area cities because of the regional orientation of its commercial core area. To the extent that it is practical the 2040 General Plan focuses on Serramonte Boulevard as the regional commercial spine with retail activities concentrated between Junipero Serra Boulevard and El Camino Real.
Since the previous General Plan update in 1999, Lucky Chances card room was constructed and is currently operational. Lucky Chances is located on the southwest corner of Serramonte and Hillside Boulevards.
The majority of residential uses are located in the small residential neighborhood of Sterling Park, with other residential uses on Mission Road and other sites scattered through the Town.
Given the small size of the Town, there are no educational facilities, waste facilities, Timberland Preserve Zone lands, or Military lands. Table I-1: Land Use Distribution, below indicates the share of total land resources currently designated in each major land use category.6
5 Colma California, Facts for Kids. 2020. < https://kids.kiddle.co/Colma,_California> Accessed May 4, 2020. 6 Town of Colma November 2020. Town of Colma General Plan: Land Use Element. Colma, California.
I-7
The Town of Colma has a large commercial core, and as indicated in Table I-1: Land Use Distribution, the retail industry dominates the Town’s job sectors7. Serramonte Boulevard serves as the regional commercial spine with retail activities concentrated between Junipero Serra Boulevard and El Camino Real. The Town has encouraged regional commercial facilities centering on Serramonte Boulevard, Collins Avenue, Junipero Serra Boulevard and Colma Boulevard. There is a significant concentration of automobile and truck dealerships located along the Serramonte Auto Sales District in Colma and there are two large shopping centers (Serra Center and 280 Metro Mall) offering a total of approximately 450,000 square feet of retail space. These facilities provide employment opportunities and sales tax revenue benefiting the Town.
Table I-1: Land Use Distribution
Land Use Percentage of Total Land Area in
Town of Colma
Cemetery/Agriculture 76%
Commercial 14%
Public 1%
Residential 2%
Roads 7%
Total 100%
Residents and business owners/operators were surveyed in 2014 on the most important attributes of Colma that they would want to see preserved, enhanced, and/or sustained into the future. The top responses, listed in rank order were:
• Small-town
• Quiet
• Shopping
• Sense of community
• Friendly people
• Location
• Safety
• Sterling Park neighborhood
• Helpful city hall
• BART
• Clean & well maintained
• Benefits to residents
• Peaceful
• Recreation programs
• Police Dept
• Quaint
• Subsidized home utilities
7 Town of Colma. January 20, 2020. Existing Conditions Report: Demographics and Economic Conditions. Colma, California.
I-8
Values
The Colma City Council places significant emphasis on the values they share and which they believe reflect the Colma community. The City Council Value-Based Code of Conduct guides the policy-making decisions process. This General Plan is supported by these values, some of which directly underpin the vision and themes:
Fairness
• Meaningful public involvement
• Decisions based on the merits of the issue
Honesty and Integrity
• Decisions in the public’s best interest
• Open, honest and transparent communications
Responsibility
• Strong relationships and collaboration within the community • Decisions driven by prudent consideration of long-term financial needs of the Town Vision
• Intelligent and thoughtful innovation drive the Town’s policies and services forward • Future needs are anticipated to adapt and flex to solutions for unforeseen circumstances • Consideration always given to broad regional and statewide implications of the Town’s decisions
• Change can be stressful but is a necessary part of the innovative process Respect
• Civility prevails, even when there are disagreements
• Ideas and opinions are valued and shared freely before decisions are made • Trust fosters an inclusive, supportive and open environment
TOWN OF COLMA GENERAL PLAN THEMES AND VISION
The Town of Colma will remain steadfast to its values of fairness, honesty & integrity, responsibility, vision, and respect to guide the adoption and implementation of this 2040 General Plan. Colma will preserve and protect its quiet, small-town qualities while embracing thoughtful change in designated areas to sustain its safe and friendly appeal as a prosperous regional shopping and visitor destination. The Town will continue to leverage its Bay Area location to draw new businesses and high-quality development while enhancing itssense of community and ensuring beneficial services to its citizens and the visiting public.
I-9
The vision for 2040 is grounded in the community’s highest priorities for continued and new land uses:
• Preserve existing neighborhoods
• Historic preservation
• Sustainability
• Additional park space and public multi-use plaza
• Walkable town center
• More restaurants and stores
• Entertainment opportunities
The vision is further articulated in the Land Use Element and its companion planning studies and documents which reflect a progressive approach to sustainable new development as supported by Colma’s residents and business community.
The following themes are intended to give direction and focus to the official policies and action programs contained in the individual General Plan elements. Overall, the themes are aimed at sustaining essential economic, environmental and social attributes of the Town while allowing new development that will enhance the community.
Preservation and Enhancement: Preserve the uniqueness of the Town of Colma as a town of cemeteries, historical significance and regional commerce. Preserve and enhance existing residential neighborhoods and public services Economic Development and Fiscal Sustainability: Encourage businesses and activities that will allow the Town to maintain a high standard of public services and improvements into the future.
Resiliency. Promote actions that will increase the Town’s resiliency in the face of environmental changes and promote sustainability
ADOPTION AND AMENDMENT OF THE PLAN
The General Plan is adopted and amended by City Council Resolution. Amendments to any one element is limited to four times each year. Each amendment may make an unlimited number of changes to the Plan. Amendments must not be made capriciously but only when a change is in the best interest of the community at large and when public health, safety and welfare is not endangered. Because the requirement for internal consistency is never relaxed, particular care must be taken to ensure that amendments maintain consistency with text and diagrams in all Plan elements.
RELATIONSHIP OF THE TOWN’S GENERAL PLAN TO ZONING
The General Plan is the principal policy document for Town Council reference and guidance on development matters. The location and overall orientation of land uses are designated in the General Plan. The Land Use Element is the principal reference for the distribution and intensity
I-10
of present and planned future use of all lands within the Town of Colma. The Zoning Code is the principal guide to implementation of the various land use goals and policies. It designates specific land use and sets forth appropriate limitations such as building heights, floor area, land coverage, off-street parking and setbacks from buildings to property lines. Zoning designations must be consistent with the General Plan.
RELATIONSHIP OF THE TOWN’S GENERAL PLAN TO RELATED PLANS
AND DOCUMENTS
The General Plan is consistent with and is informed by the following Plans and Documents:
• 2012 Economic Study
• 2014 Urban Design Study
• Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
• Serramonte Boulevard and Collins Avenue Streetscape Master Plan • El Camino Real Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
• City Council Value-Based Code of Conduct
I-11
OVERALL PLAN CONCEPT
The Plan concept is to strengthen the Town’s identity. Emphasis is placed on the important greenbelt theme of Colma, on enhancing its residential environment and on promoting its important status as a regional center for cemeteries and commerce.
PLANNING AREA IDENTIFICATION AND CHANGE AREAS
Several distinct Planning Areas are defined primarily by the major circulation routes through the Town of Colma. These Planning Areas, shown on the Figure I-3: Town of Colma Planning Areas, are defined as:
Commercial Core (Change Area)
The Commercial Core Planning Area consists of the
majority of the Town’s commercial area. It includes the 280 Metro Center, Serra Center, Vivana Fair, a large
portion of Auto Row, and auto and light industrial related businesses on Collins Avenue. The commercial core
primarily consists of large floor plate commercial spaces and showrooms, in addition to smaller in-line tenant
spaces in the shopping centers. The Planning Area is
well connected by major roadways with El Camino Real
on the East, Junipero Serra Boulevard and Highway 280
on the west, and Serramonte Boulevard, Collins Avenue,
and Colma Boulevard each providing east/west
connections between El Camino Real and Junipero Serra
Boulevard. The Commercial Core is considered a
“Change Area” where thoughtful development is desired.
El Camino Real Corridor (Change Area)
The El Camino Real Corridor Planning Area centers on the intersection of El Camino Real and Serramonte Boulevard and extends from the northern Town boundary to the
southern Town boundary along El Camino Real. The
Planning Area includes sites on both sides of El Camino Real, including the properties near the BART station and the east side of the El Camino Real between the
intersection of Mission Road and the City of South San
Francisco boarder. In concert with other plans, the El
Camino Real is considered a “Change Area” where thoughtful, transit-oriented development is desired.
I-12
Mission Road
Extending south from the junction of Mission Road and
El Camino Real, this Planning Area is oriented primarily to service commercial facilities with the potential for commercial and residential infill. It includes the 63-unit Verano residential community at the southernmost end
and the 66-unit veteran’s housing development at the
northernmost end. Mission Road has limited change
potential due to smaller lots and well-established
businesses.
Hillside Boulevard
The Hillside Boulevard Planning Area includes Hillside Boulevard and the abutting properties from the northern to southern Town boundary. The majority of the abutting properties are located on the east side of Hillside Boulevard but key sites, including the Town’s Community Center and the Lucky Chances Cardroom are included in this Planning Area. This area may see change during the life of the General Plan to allow for new businesses development.
Sterling Park
The Sterling Park Planning Area contains the Town of Colma’s primary residential district. The neighborhood has one vacant single-family lot and one vacant multi-family lot. Sterling Park is built out and is not considered a change area.
I-13
I-14
GENERAL PLAN ORGANIZATION
The organization of this General Plan is summarized in Table I-2: General Plan Cross Reference Guide. The table illustrates the 2040 General Plan policies relating to its Elements.
Table I-2: General Plan Cross-Reference Guide
Required General
Plan Element
State-
Mandated? Major Issues Addressed
Cross-
Reference
Section
Land Use Yes
Distribution of land uses, standards
for population density,
intergovernmental relations
Land Use
Circulation
Yes,
(Required
Transportation
Element)
Street Classifications, transit
service, pedestrian and bicyclist
needs, truck routes
Mobility
Housing Yes
Identification of housing needs,
conservation of housing and low
and very low income households,
identification of locations for
potential housing expansion
Housing
Open Space and
Conservation
Yes (combines
two required
elements)
Open space identification, air
quality, water quality, public
recreation needs, sustainability
Open Space /
Conservation
Noise Yes Identification of noise sources,
noise attenuation and reduction
Community
Services and
Safety
Safety Yes Emergency preparedness, safety
services
Community
Services and
Safety
Historic Resources No Identification of historic resources, preservation
Historic
Resources
Within each Element, there are separate sections which include topical discussions of an aspect of the Element. For example, there is a section titled “Land Use Designations” in the Land Use Element. Following the discussion, there are Goals and Policies that the Town will use to guide future land use decisions and to guide policy and capital decisions for the next 20 years. The goals in the General Plan articulate a desired end state or outcome. They are purposefully broad, since there may be many ways and aspects to achieve the goal. A policy is a clear statement that guides a specific course of action to achieve the goal. The following is an example of a goal and policy taken from the Land Use Element:
I-15
LU-1-1: General Plan Land Use Diagram. Maintain and implement a Land Use Diagram for purposes of describing the types of allowed land uses by geographic location and the density and/or intensity of allowed uses within each designation.
Goals are placed under the element that they support and are organized by an acronym for the element, in this case, “LU.” Following the acronym is a sequential number for the goal. In the example above, the policy number 1-1 denotes that this is the first policy supporting goal LU-1.
Equally important are implementation programs which can be found at the end of each element. These programs identify the specific steps to be taken by the Town to implement the policies. They also identify a timeframe and Town departments which are responsible for implementing the program. A program may relate to or implement more than one policy.
Below is an example of an implementation program as shown in the format found in the General Plan:
Land Use Implementation
Programs 2021-2030 2031-2040 Annual Ongoing
LU-IP1: The Town shall
review the Zoning Ordinance
to ensure that standards and
regulations reinforce quality
design, are clear and are
easily monitored.
X
X
Implements Policies: LU-1-2, LU-1-5
Responsible Dept.: Planning
I-16
THE GENERAL PLAN PROCESS
The Town of Colma’s General Plan is intended to be used by its community residents and businesses in all future development projects (residential or commercial). It is internally consistent and community issues are addressed through policies and program items. The General Plan policies were formulated with some flexibility in their implementation so that they are balanced against each other, as applicable.
In preparing this General Plan Update, the Town followed these steps:
• Conducted a town-wide survey;
• Held an initial community meeting;
• Prepared an Existing Conditions Report;
• Prepared technical analysis;
• Developed draft goals, policies and action items;
• Prepared the Draft General Plan;
• Presented these draft goals and policies to the
Town’s residents and businesses for their input;
• Prepared the Implementation Plan;
• Prepared the Draft Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) to analyze changes proposed in the General
Plan Update;
• Conducted public hearings to adopt the General
Plan and certify the EIR
As required by State law, the Town’s General Plan is based upon existing conditions and development trends in the community. It is therefore responsive to the needs and issues identified in an analysis of existing conditions. Background Reports were prepared for each of the Elements. In addition, technical studies such as traffic impacts, noise, transportation, air quality, green-house gases, and noise. The goals, policies, programs, as well a implementation measures were prepared based on the land use maps, consistency with current legislation community needs, and community values. The Draft General Plan was first made available for public review and comments in May of 2021. All comments were incorporated into the revised Draft GPU and was circulated for public review along with the Environmental Impact Report on *****.
A Draft EIR was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and public as well as agency comments were requested at the Notice of Preparation (NOP) meeting on June 24, 2020. Between **** and ***, the Draft EIR was circulated for a 45-day public review and comment. Responses to comments received were prepared and incorporated into the Final EIR, which was then certified by *** on ***.
Once adopted, implementation of the Town’s updated General Plan will begin in accordance with its Implementation Plan. Implementation of the General Plan will be monitored and reported on an annual basis. The Implementation Plan is a set of the principal actions and
I-17
procedures necessary to achieve the goals and policies set forth in the General Plan. Though the Implementation Plan is directly correlated, and cross referenced to the policies in the General Plan, this is a “living” document that may be modified and updated as necessary without the necessity of a General Plan amendment.
I-18
GENERAL PLAN LEGACY
Colma’s 1999 General Plan, which replaced the Town’s 1987 General Plan, positioned the Town for much of the positive change and improvement that has occurred over the past twenty years.
The 1999 General Plan included policies that led to public and private improvements that will benefit the Town for years to come. Some of the many policies that were implemented include:
• Preserving the El Camino Real Corridor to be respectful of cemeteries by limiting uses to offices or cemetery related uses with minimal signage.
• The identification of the location of Town Gateway Elements, which have been mostly installed.
I-19
• Allowing only single-family residential infill development to prevent overcrowding and increased parking demand.
• The phasing out of commercial use of the property on Hoffman Street, which led to the building of attractive townhomes.
• The requirement that BART be placed underground so as not to disrupt the Town’s greenbelt theme and to preserve peace and privacy in the Town’s cemeteries.
• Requiring that the utilities for all new development be placed underground. As a result of this policy, visual clutter has been reduced.
I-20
• The encouraged acquisition of vacant or underutilized properties for civic purposes. This policy led to the creation of Sterling Park, the Community Center, the Historical Museum, and the purchase of the Corporation Yard.
• The policy directive to expand and improve Police Department services which led to the acquisition of property and the construction of a new police station.
I-21
• The development of sidewalks and public
improvements. This policy led to the
improvement of Junipero Serra Boulevard,
with sidewalks, the installation of sidewalk on
the east side of Hillside Boulevard and the
installation of sidewalk along sections of El
Camino Real.
• The extension of Hickey Boulevard. The Town was successful in implementing Lawndale Boulevard, which connects Mission Road to Hillside Boulevard.
I-22
• The addition of bikeways. The Town successfully added bikeways and improvements to Junipero Serra Boulevard, Mission Road and Hillside Boulevard.
• Amendments to the Town’s noise ordinances. As a result of policies in the Noise Element of the General Plan, the City Council has made amendments to the construction noise ordinance and added a noise and unruly gathering ordinance. Additional noise provisions were adopted for gardening equipment operation hours.
Colma property owners, businesses, residents, and visitors should be proud of these accomplishments. The Town’s City Council and decision makers successfully implemented and put resources behind projects identified in the General Plan to make them a reality. The 2040 General Plan builds on this legacy with polices that make Colma an even better place to live, work, recreate and shop.
Land Use Element
LU-1
PURPOSE
The Land Use Element for the Town of Colma’s 2040 General Plan Update describes existing and planned land uses in the town of Colma (the town) and present the policy decisions that will guide future growth and development in the town. The Land Use Element consists of land use classifications, policies and a land use map, that together represent the planning values and ideals of the community. This Element also designates the general distribution and intensity of present and future land uses within the Town’s jurisdiction.
The town’s urban form, design, character, and “sense of place” are addressed in the Land Use Element using various maps, diagrams, and illustrations to articulate a “form based” vision that focuses on relationships between Colma’s buildings, open spaces, and thoroughfares. The Land Use Element is not designed to discourage or promote development, but rather describes the manner in which development should be managed, since it will have a major impact on the town’s form and character over the next 20 years. This Element will play a significant role in answering the question, “What will Colma look like in 2040?”.
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS
The Land Use Element is influenced by, and related to, the other General Plan elements and thus brings consistency from the proposals of each individual element into a town-wide plan that will support the future development. While each land use type has certain basic land area requirements and service needs, the distribution of uses is significantly influenced by circulation
LU-2
and access (Mobility Element), topographic features, noise factors, commercial growth (Community Safety and Services Element), existing cemetery lands (Historic Resources Element), the need for additional housing (Housing Element), and the community’s desire for open space and attractive surroundings (Open Space and Conservation Element). Since the town of Colma also contains many historic resources, the Land Use Element is also closely tied to the Historic Resources Element. The Plan is intended to provide guidance from 2020 through 2040 and should be re-evaluated annually to ensure that the policies, objectives, and programs remain relevant.
LAND USE CONCEPTS
The following land use concepts and terms are used in the General Plan:
Compatibility
There are inherent differences among typical land use types which help determine the most compatible location for each type. The locational designations set forth in the Town of Colma’s Land Use Element are meant to provide for compatibility between adjacent uses and the features of the setting, such as topography, geologic condition, and noise level.
Use of Buffer
A buffer to provide separation between land uses is recommended when it is necessary or desirable to place diverse land use types near each other, such as residential uses adjacent to manufacturing uses, or commercial uses adjacent to a cemetery. This usually consists of fencing and planting but may include a shift in building orientation to minimize conflicts that could result from such factors as noise, lighting, trespassing, building aesthetics, large signage, traffic, and parking.
Land Use and Flood Hazards
The land use element is required to identify and annually review areas that are subject to flooding identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) or Department of Water Resources. The Safety Element contains a discussion on flood hazards and contains a Flood Hazard Map. It should be noted that the town of Colma does not contain any FEMA designated flood zones.
LU-3
EXISTING LAND USE
According to State law, a jurisdiction’s General Plan must establish standards of population density and building intensity for each of its land use classification. Approximately 1.91 square miles are contained within the town of Colma’s boundaries. Of this land area, approximately 72% is presently committed to cemetery and agricultural land uses. This dominant land use type gives Colma its greenbelt theme. The Town is primarily viewed by its residents as a community of cemeteries, although the town has a significant commercial core that primarily serves a regional market. The majority of residential uses are located in the small residential neighborhood of Sterling Park, with other residential uses on Mission Road and other sites scattered through town. Given the small size of the Town, there are no educational facilities, waste facilities, timberland preserve zone lands, or military lands. Furthermore, there are no designated flight paths or military air space areas within the town. Table LU-1 below indicates the share of total land resources currently designated in each major land use category. The Land Use Map (Figure LU-3) illustrates the locations of these uses.
Table LU-1: Existing Land Use Designations
Existing Land Use Acreage Percent of
Total
Cemetery 922.13 75.27%
Commercial1 169.47 13.83%
Executive Administrative 14.64 1.20%
Public/Quasi-Public/Utility2 8.56 0.70%
Residential 20.1 1.64%
Roadway 90.2 7.36%
Total 1225.1 100.00%
1 Includes Industrial Uses
2 Includes Town-owned Parks and Open Space
Source: Town of Colma Planning Department GIS Analysis
– August 2020
RESIDENTIAL LAND USE
Only 2% of the area within the town boundary is currently committed to residential land use.
This is primarily concentrated in the Sterling Park Planning Area, and at the south end of the town of Colma, along Mission Road.
LU-4
Single-family residential housing exists in a
variety of unit sizes and forms in the town.
Single family homes and a small number of
duplexes, three, and four-unit structures
comprise the predominant form of
residential development. Residential
structures have a median age of about 70
years. The prevailing standards for lot size
and housing unit size are 3,300 square feet
and 1,000-2,500 square feet, respectively.
See the Housing Element for more details
on the town’s existing housing stock.
COMMERCIAL LAND USE
Approximately 14% of the land area within the town limits is committed to commercial land use, which includes two regional shopping centers, “Auto Row,” Lucky Chances Casino, and a small convenience center with primarily food and beverage uses.
The two regional shopping centers include the Serra Center located at the corner of Serramonte Boulevard and Junipero Serra Boulevard, and the 280 Metro Center located at the corner of Colma Boulevard and Junipero Serra Boulevard. A food/beverage convenience center, Vivana Fair, is located at the corner of Serramonte Boulevard and Junipero Serra
Boulevard. Auto Row includes a majority of properties fronting Serramonte Boulevard between Hillside Boulevard and
Junipero Serra Boulevard.
In addition to retail commercial uses, the town of Colma has service commercial uses including auto servicing, light manufacturing, warehousing, contractors’ supplies, and other non-retail uses, primarily located on Collins Avenue and Mission Road.
Lucky Chances Casino, Colma’s largest employer, is located on Hillside Boulevard at its intersection with Serramonte Boulevard. The casino is a regional commercial entertainment draw to the Town of Colma.
CEMETERY, AGRICULTURAL AND OPEN SPACE LAND USES
The most extensive existing and established land uses in the town are cemeteries and associated uses including monument shops and florists. Cemetery, agriculture and open space
LU-5
uses make up approximately 75% of the land area in town. The aesthetic component of the community’s character is largely a by-product of these land uses.
Large properties throughout the town are
rich in aesthetic amenities. Well-groomed
lawns, rolling hills, manicured landscaping
and natural vegetation, quiet scenic areas
for meditation, and tranquil paths for
strolling are common and essential features
of the town of Colma’s cemetery uses.
Some future high intensity land uses could
present conflicts with this established land
use. Visual effects of future development
and noise impacts upon the town’s
cemeteries are two factors which will require consideration for any future proposed development applications. Despite this constraint to properties adjacent to, or within cemetery land, there are areas in the town which are sufficiently removed or buffered from the cemeteries to allow for the development of a variety of higher intensity land uses.
LAND USE FOR CIRCULATION
The amount of land used for freeways, local roads, and railroads in most communities is significant. The town, however, has a relatively small amount of land committed to circulation routes because of the large tracts of land held by the various cemeteries. At the present time approximately 7% of the total land area is devoted to public roads. The road system is discussed in detail in the Mobility Element.
LU-6
LAND USE DENSITY/INTENSITY
State planning law requires general plans to establish “standards of population density and building intensity” for the various land use designations in the plan (Government Code Section 65302(a)). Population density is determined by multiplying the maximum number of units allowed within a land use designation by the average number of persons per household. To satisfy this requirement, the General Plan includes standards for each land use designation appearing on the Land Use Diagram. These standards are stated differently for residential (density standards) and nonresidential (intensity standards) development. The following are explanations of how these standards are applied to each land use designation. In addition, the Town of Colma also applies Lot Coverage standards to certain land uses.
Residential Density
In the Town of Colma 2040 General Plan, residential density is expressed in terms of units per net acre. A net acre is defined as an acre area of land, which does not include in its measurement, public streets or other areas to be dedicated or reserved for public use. The number of residential units that can be accommodated on a development parcel can be calculated by dividing the acreage of the parcel by the number of units allowed per acre for a specific location in the town.
Figure LU.1: Residential Density
Floor Area Ration (FAR)
In the Town’s 2040 General Plan, commercial, industrial, and mixed-use developments are regulated by a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) standard. FAR refers to the ratio of interior building floor space on all floors of a building compared to the square footage of the site. FAR is calculated by dividing the floor area of all buildings on the site by the net square footage of the site. Spaces such as parking garages, structured parking levels, and exterior open space, such as courtyards, roof gardens, and balconies are not included. The floor area can be provided in one building or divided between multiple buildings.
LU-7
Figure LU.2: Floor to Area Ratio (FAR)
Lot Coverage
Some land uses designations in Colma include Lot Coverage limitations to prevent over-building of a property. Lot Coverage is the footprint area of the structure(s) on the lot divided by the lot area. For example, a building with a footprint of 5,000 square feet on a 10,000 square foot lot would have a Lot Coverage of 50%.
LU-8
LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
A central component of the Land Use Element is the inclusion of a diversity of land use designations to adequately classify and distinguish the various land uses needed within the town, as well as descriptions that distinguish between corresponding levels of intensity, density, and allowable uses, as required by Government Code Section §65302(a). These are documented in Table LU-2 and described in further detail in the text below.
RESIDENTIAL LAND USE
Residential Land designated for residential purposes can be used for single family homes, small and large family day care facilities, group residential facilities, supportive/transitional housing, home offices and cottage food operations as allowed uses. Residential facilities, including multiple dwellings, may be allowed in areas designated for commercial use upon approval of a Use Permit.
Areas suitable for residential use include
Sterling Park, El Camino Real near the
Colma BART station, Mission Road near
the South San Francisco BART station, in
cemeteries as caretaker units and several
scattered sites. These areas are
identified in the Housing Element.
Recent State legislation encourages the
development of Accessory Dwelling Units
(ADU’s) within existing single-family
dwellings or as additions to existing single-family residential property. The Town will comply with current and forthcoming legislation regarding ADU’s. Despite the generally small lot size (roughly 3,300 square feet) it is anticipated that a few residents may add ADU’s to their property in future years.
COMMERCIAL LAND USE
This Commercial land use category provides for a wide range of retail commercial uses including auto dealerships, retail stores, personal and professional services, furniture stores, restaurants, and wholesale-retail trade. Other uses, where permitted in a Planning Area, may include stand-alone or mixed-use multifamily residential, mixed-use, and auto-related uses.
LU-9
EXECUTIVE ADMINISTRATIVE LAND USE
The Executive Administrative land use category was established to expand the range of possible land uses and economic opportunities along El Camino Real while continuing to protect the green belt theme of the cemeteries. In this land use category, cemetery or cemeteries and floricultural or agricultural uses, are permitted by right. Compatible uses in this designation are low intensity uses that generate minimal traffic, do not require large signs and occupy buildings heavily screened with landscaping. Fast food facilities and most restaurants, for example, are not compatible with this designation. At this time, just over one percent of the town’s land area is designated for Executive Administrative land use. Designations occur along both sides of El Camino Real from just north of Colma Boulevard to the southern town boundary.
PUBLIC AND QUASI-PUBLIC LAND USE
Many basic utilities, public facilities, and services are provided by contract with special districts or through agreements with adjacent cities. Town of Colma residents are provided with utilities such as water, sewer, and power; public facilities such as local government and schools; and services such as police and fire protection. This land use category typically includes the types of activities and facilities which are generally recognized to be more efficiently provided by a public or quasi-public agency than by individuals. Public facilities and Town-owned facilities other than streets or the BART Right-Of-Way, include:
▪ Town Hall at 1198 El Camino Real at Serramonte Boulevard ▪ Police Station at 1199 El Camino Real at Serramonte Boulevard ▪ Colma Senior Apartment Complex (18 units) at 1180 El Camino Real ▪ Colma Historical Park and Community Center at 1500 and 1520 Hillside Boulevard ▪ Sterling Park neighborhood park and Community Center site at 427 F Street, between E and F Streets
▪ SFPUC pump station in the 500 block of F Street
▪ Corporation Yard at 601 F Street; and
▪ Bark Park on D Street
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
The Town of Colma’s Planned Development
designation allow flexibility of design and land
uses to deal with special situations as might
be encountered with mixed uses or uniquely
shaped properties. Developments with a PD
designation are expected to be similar in
intensity to projects that would be allowed by
adjoining land uses and must be compatible
with the surrounding neighborhood.
LU-10
CEMETERY
In addition to cemeteries, uses found in this designation include flower growing operations, florists, greenhouses, monument shops, the Cypress Hills Driving Range and a closed landfill.
This land use designation is essential in maintaining Colma’s greenbelt theme and it contributes to the economic base by drawing people from around the Bay Area as a regional destination.
Colma’s greenbelt theme is reinforced
through the unique impression one gets
while driving through the town. Open
space features such as large tree masses
throughout the cemeteries; median strip
landscaping and street trees on principal
routes; and the open, naturalized channel
along open sections of Colma Creek, are
all necessary in maintaining the open
space character of the town. Further
discussion of open space is found in the
Open Space/Conservation Element.
GATEWAY SITES
Colma’s image is dependent on what is seen from the road as people approach and enter the town. Colma’s separate identity and sense of containment is strengthened by nine gateway locations:
▪ El Camino Real - North: In median near intersection of B Street ▪ El Camino Real - South: In landscaped area forming “T” intersection (not yet installed) ▪ Serramonte Boulevard: At northeast corner of Junipero Serra Boulevard ▪ Junipero Serra Boulevard – North: In median near northern town boundary ▪ Junipero Serra Boulevard – South: In median at southern town boundary ▪ Junipero Serra Boulevard: At southwest corner of Southgate Avenue ▪ Hillside Boulevard – North: In park
strip near Hoffman Street
▪ Hillside Boulevard – South: In park
strip north of Lawndale Boulevard
(not yet installed); and
▪ Mission Road – South: At northeast
corner of Lawndale Boulevard
Each gateway location is or will be
landscaped and contains a stone sign which
reads, “Welcome to Colma.”
LU-11
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE TABLE AND MAP
The General Plan Land Use Map (see Figure LU.3) provides a graphic representation of the distribution of allowed land uses within the Planning Area, providing direction for where and what kind of development may occur.
Table LU-2: Land Use Designations
Land Use Designation Density/Intensity
Range*
Cemetery
This designation provides for cemetery, planned cemetery, agricultural and public recreation uses.
N/A
Low Density Residential
This designation provides for single family, residential development on lots of approximately 3,300 square feet in area.
Density: up to 13 units
per acre
Medium Density Residential
This designation provides for compact residential
developments such as townhomes, condominiums, and
apartments.
Density: 13 to 30 units
per acre
Commercial
This designation provides for a wide range of retail
commercial uses including auto dealerships, retail stores, personal and professional services, furniture stores,
restaurants, and wholesale-retail trade. Other uses, where permitted in a Planning Area, may include stand-alone or mixed-use multifamily residential, mixed-use, and auto- related uses.
FAR: 1.0 to 2.0
Lot Coverage: 50%
Density: 13 to 30 units
per acre
Executive Administrative
This designation provides for low intensity office and
cemetery related uses, such as flower and monument
shops. These sites allow for economic activities along El Camino Real, while continuing to protect the green belt theme.
FAR: 1.0 to 2.0
Lot Coverage: 50%
Public and Quasi-Public
This designation provides for uses that are public serving in nature, including government offices/operations, parks, utilities, transportation, and community centers.
N/A
*Additional FAR and Density may be granted to opportunity sites as noted in the Planning Area descriptions.
LU-12
LU-13
LU-1-1: General Plan Land Use Diagram. Maintain and implement a Land Use Diagram for purposes of describing the types of allowed land uses by geographic location and the density and/or intensity of allowed uses within each designation.
LU-1-2 Zoning Consistency. Ensure that zoning designations are consistent with the General Land Use Diagram (Figure LU-4).
LU-1-3 Balance New Development with Existing Setting. Prioritize new and higher density development consistent with the town’s Planning Areas to ensure new development is context sensitive and contributes to creating a strong sense of place.
New development shall serve to protect and enhance the positive aesthetic qualities of the town and each geographic area.
LU-1-4: Land Uses that Support Transit. Encourage higher-intensity development on the specific opportunity sites designated in the El Camino Real Planning Area.
LU-1-5: Clear and Predictable Development Standards. Strive to adopt and communicate clear and predictable development standards to ensure new development meets the expectations of the Town.
LU-1-6: Public-Private Partnerships. Consider opportunities to use public investment to form partnerships with the private sector to achieve quality infill development, enhance the public realm, and encourage public transit, walking, and biking.
LU-1-7: Experience-Oriented Shopping. Ensure the Town’s land use standards support “experience-oriented” uses and activities in commercial districts, such as restaurants, breweries, entertainment uses, events, and unique shops.
LU-2-1: Water Conservation. Promote water conservation by educating and encouraging residents and businesses to incorporate drought tolerant and low water using planting, smart irrigation systems, water efficient appliances, and recycled water systems.
LU-2-2: Water Efficient Landscape. Apply the Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance to new development and projects that include a qualifying amount of replacement or new landscaping.
LU-14
LU-2-3: Open Space. Require accessible, attractive open space that is well maintained and uses sustainable practices and materials in all new multiple dwelling and mixed-use development.
LU-2-4: Low Impact Development. Regulate new development and construction to minimize pollutant and sediment concentrations in receiving waters and ensure that surface water meets or exceeds applicable regulatory water quality standards.
Require new development to incorporate Low Impact Development features that treat and reduce surface runoff volumes.
LU-2-5: Energy Efficiency. Support energy efficient improvements in aging building stock.
LU-2-6: Solar Energy. Provide incentives for installation of solar and photovoltaic systems on existing buildings and new development.
LU-2-7: Electric Vehicles. As Town gasoline-powered vehicles are replaced, purchase electric and hybrid vehicles when practicable. Install electric vehicle charging stations with new commercial and mixed-use developments.
LU-2-8: Climate Action Plan. Maintain a Climate Action Plan and continue to partner with San Mateo County’s Regional Climate Action Planning Suite (RICAPS) to prepare community-wide greenhouse gas inventories.
LU-2-9: Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets. Work to achieve greenhouse gas emissions reductions that are consistent with the targets established by AB32 (California Global Warming Solutions Act) and subsequent supporting legislation.
LU-2-10: Green Building. Support sustainability and green building best practices through the orientation, design, and placement of buildings and facilities to optimize their energy efficiency in preparation of State zero-net energy requirements for residential construction and commercial construction.
LU-2-11: Cultural Resource Preservation. Promote preservation of buildings, objects, and sites with historic and/or cultural significance.
LU-3-1: Quality of Colma’s Residential Neighborhoods. Ensure that all new construction, renovation, or remodeling projects meet the design standards of the Town.
LU-15 LU-15
LU-3-2: Private Open Space in Multifamily Residential. In addition to the required dedication of parkland or payment of a park in-lieu fee, the Town shall also require all multifamily residential projects, including those that are part of a mixed-use project, to provide a minimum of 100 square feet of private open space for use by residents of the project, such as courtyards, private balconies and rooftop patios.
LU-3-3: Adequate and Affordable Housing. Continue to provide opportunities for a variety of housing types at varying densities and affordability levels.
LU-3.4 Maintenance of Colma’s Residential Neighborhoods. Strive to maintain public improvements and landscaping in residential neighborhoods to a high level.
LU-3-5: Neighbor-to-Neighbor Mediation. For issues that do not involve violations of Town laws, continue to encourage residents to employ the Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center (PCRC) to resolve neighbor-to-neighbor disputes in a fair and equitable way.
LU-3-6: Walkable Neighborhoods. Promote walkable neighborhoods by supporting alternative modes of transportation, enhancing bike and pedestrian connectivity to local commercial districts and transit centers and maintaining sidewalks, public plazas, parks and greenways, parkways, street tree canopies, and landscaping throughout residential neighborhoods.
LU-4-1: Maintaining Adequate Public Infrastructure and Facilities. Adequately maintain public infrastructure to ensure the provision of safe and reliable infrastructure to meet the town’s current and future needs, including facilitating upgrades to the utility infrastructure necessary for improved and emerging technologies.
LU-4-2: Adequacy to Serve New and Existing Developments. Continue to ensure that new and existing developments can be adequately served by municipal services and facilities in accordance with Town standards.
LU-4-3: New Development Fair Share. Regularly evaluate and update development impact fees to ensure that new development pays its fair share of providing new public facilities and services and/or the costs necessary to improve or expand infrastructure to serve them, including street improvements, parks, wastewater, stormwater drainage, and other public services.
LU-16
LU-4-4: Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Continue to fund maintenance, improvements, and expansion of town infrastructure, including sewer lines and street infrastructure through a multi-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP).
LU-4-5: Undergrounding and Screening of Utilities. Require new developments to underground utilities, at a minimum from the nearest above-ground pole to the building. Transformers shall be located as far away from a public street as possible and shall be screened from view by landscaping to the extent feasible.
LU-4-6: Install Remaining Gateway Monuments. Look for opportunities to install the remaining two gateway monuments at the south end of El Camino Real at Mission Road and on Hillside Boulevard at Lawndale Boulevard.
LU- 5-1: Regional Cooperation. Participate with other cities in the county and across the region in working towards solutions to the issues of regional land use, housing, homelessness, and transportation planning through partnership with the Association of Bay Area Governments, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, and the San Mateo City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG).
LU-5-2 San Mateo County Collaboration. Continue to consult with San Mateo County and other cities in the region on effective land use, transportation, sustainability, and economic development strategies to learn about additional strategies that could be used in Colma to achieve the community’s vision and goals.
LU-17 LU-17
EQUITY AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT
General Plans adopted after January 1, 2018 are required to incorporate environmental justice goals, policies, and objectives to address health risks. The State enacted Senate Bill 1000 (SB 1000) in 2016 in response to increasing concerns about vulnerable communities in California experiencing environmental injustice. SB 1000 focuses on, and addresses environmental injustices by reducing unique or compounded health risks in communities by reducing exposure to pollutants or other hazards, promoting healthy habits, prioritizing infrastructure improvements and programs that address the needs of the entire community, and promoting civic engagement in the public decision-making process.
The town of Colma is not technically designated as a disadvantaged community. However, areas just north of Colma’s Sterling Park neighborhood are categorized as disadvantaged.
Colma’s ethnic diversity and socio-economic diversity are important characteristics of the community. The following goals and policies are included in the General Plan to assure that all members of the community are supported and included in the town’s decision-making process.
LU-6-1: New Incompatible Land Uses. Prohibit the introduction of new incompatible land uses and environmental hazards into existing residential areas.
LU-6-2: Safe and Sanitary Housing. Through implementation of the Town’s Housing Element, provide standards of development that will result in housing within the town that is safe and sanitary.
LU-6-3: Environmental Protection. Apply environmental protection measures equally among geographic and socioeconomic neighborhoods of the town.
LU-6-4: Equitable Public Services. Provide desirable public services and infrastructure to Colma residents, including parks and recreational facilities, equitably, whenever possible.
LU-18
LU-7-1: Community Input. Continue to facilitate opportunities for all residents and stakeholders to provide meaningful and effective input on proposed planning activities early on and continuously throughout the public review process.
LU-7-2: Communication Channels. Continue to improve communication channels and methods for meaningful dialogue between community members and decision-makers.
LU-7-3: Times and Locations of Public Engagement Opportunities. Hold meetings, workshops, and other public engagement opportunities at times and locations that make it convenient for disadvantaged community members to attend, particularly stakeholders who are the most likely to be directly affected by the outcome, whenever possible.
LU-7-4: Variety of Public Communication Methods. Continue to share public information across a variety of media, technological, and traditional platforms, and languages, based upon the demographics of the community.
LU-19 LU-19
LAND USE PUBLIC BENEFITS PROGRAM
As described in more detail under the Planning Areas section, the term “opportunity sites” in the Colma General Plan refers to underdeveloped sites, underutilized sites, and those with non- conforming uses. Generally, the current uses of these sites are not considered the “highest and best” uses, therefore, opportunity sites identified in the Planning Areas for the Town of Colma GPU utilize a public benefit approach to allow larger developments that include value that directly benefits the town as a whole.
The Public Benefits Program ensures developers provide benefits to the town in exchange for approval to develop additional floor area. Development above the established General Plan FAR shall provide public improvements or equivalent resources to improve the quality of life for the community.
The benefits listed below are representative of the amenities expected by the Town. Additional benefits may be determined in the future, or may be determined during project review, based on local needs. In general, public benefits should be provided within or accessible to the project site. Project applicants may elect to directly construct or provide the benefits in the list below if they can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Town, that the value of the benefits provided is equivalent to the value identified in the previous section. However, the Town has discretion to accept a monetary contribution to construct the benefit/improvement. The list of benefits does not limit the Town’s discretion to determine the appropriate level of public benefits required in exchange for increased intensity or density. Other than the plan priority for affordable housing units on the Town Center site, the list is in no particular order.
LU-20
Table LU-3: Public Benefits List
Type of Improvement Examples of Public Benefit
Affordable Housing
Development of affordable units above the amount
required by existing regulations (only applies where
housing is permitted).
Pedestrian and bicycle amenities
Off or on-site pedestrian and bicycle improvements
beyond those required by development standards.
These may include but are not limited to:
• Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle-oriented
streetscapes;
• Protected bicycle lanes and pedestrian pathways,
improved; and
• Bicycle and pedestrian crossings/signals
Publicly accessible parking
facilities
Providing accessible parking to serve area-wide parking needs.
Public Art Providing public art within the development area.
Creek daylighting
Daylighting a portion of Colma creek to satisfy
stormwater requirements and to provide accessible open
or park space.
Public parks and open space
Publicly accessible but privately maintained parks,
plazas, tot lots, etc. above and beyond existing park
dedication fees and requirements.
Other
• Contributions of land or financial resources to
acquire land and/or space for community facilities
• Off-site utility infrastructure improvements above
and beyond those required to serve the development
• Additional funding for town programs and/or
recreation services
• Subsidizing commercial tenants and other small
businesses
• Other public benefits proposed by the developer and
approved by the City Council
fits
The public benefits approach allows larger developments that include value that directly benefits the town as a whole. Specifically, projects that create a new open space area or a public plaza can be eligible for an increase in height and FAR. “Base” development is allowed in each of the areas and does not require the contribution of public benefits. Development bonuses allow projects to exceed height and FAR requirements, dependent on the amount of public benefit contributed to the Planning Area. Projects that may qualify for bonuses are listed under the Height and Intensity section of each Planning Area.
The Public Benefits Program ensures developers provide benefits to the town in exchange for approval to develop additional floor area. Development above the established 1999 General
LU-21 LU-21
Plan FAR shall provide public improvements or equivalent resources to improve the quality of life for the community. In addition, the development should financially contribute to the Town budget in a way that fully covers the Town’s service costs necessary to provide public services to the development.
LU-8-1: Development Agreement. Require a development agreement for the development of opportunity sites. The agreement will specify the public benefits that will be provided in exchange for the requested higher intensity or density (see public benefits information in Table LU-3 of this section). The Town will negotiate the terms of the Development Agreement including the period during which the entitlement will be available to the developer and public benefits that will be provided by the developer.
LU-8-2: Funding District. For residential and office development on opportunity sites, consider the creation of a funding district or other funding mechanism to assure that the project will pay for Town services required to support and maintain the project in perpetuity.
LU-22
PLANNING AREAS
This section presents a guide for land use and development decision making in each Planning Area. The section includes both design and development guidelines as well as implementation goals and policies for each Planning Area. The goals and policies do not replace or augment building safety code or other non-planning related codes. All applications for new construction, substantial modifications, and changes in land use shall be reviewed for conformance with the Planning Area goals and policies.
The 1999 General Plan identified nine (9) specific Planning Areas. This General Plan Update has reconfigured and condensed the Planning Areas into five (5) new Planning Areas to clearly express the town’s vision for 2040 and create a roadmap for the future development of these areas. The five Planning Areas are:
▪ Commercial Core
▪ El Camino Real Corridor
▪ Hillside Boulevard
▪ Mission Road
▪ Sterling Park
The Planning Area concept is used in the Colma General Plan to consider how vacant and opportunity sites could be used to maximize community potential. In exchange for greater development density or intensity, community benefits are desired which will provide for the long-term livability and fiscal stability of the community.
LU-23
LU-24
VACANT AND OPPORTUNITY SITES
Colma has a limited number of vacant and redevelopable sites. Not all vacant sites are available for urban development. However, some of the larger tracts of vacant land in the Hillside Boulevard Planning Area east of Hillside Boulevard may be appropriate for commercial development.
The term “opportunity sites” in the Colma General Plan refers to underdeveloped sites, underutilized sites, and those with non-conforming uses. Generally, the current uses of these sites are not considered the “highest and best” uses. These sites represent private redevelopment opportunities.
New development projects should be reviewed for their impacts on the transportation infrastructure, as well as compatibility with surrounding land uses. The impacts of a specific project can vary, depending on its relationship to roadways and public transportation facilities, and neighboring land uses. Large-scale projects are subject to City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) Congestion Management Program review.
In 2014, the Town commissioned the preparation of an Urban Design Study. The study evaluated the development potential of existing sites and considered form-based planning concepts to consider the most appropriate development massing for the sites that were studied.
A key component of this study was the development of concept massing ideas for the potential future development of a Town Center site on the southwest corner of El Camino Real and Serramonte Boulevard. Sites identified in this study will be further discussed within the individual Planning Area narratives.
LU-25 LU-25
COMMERCIAL CORE
The Commercial Core Planning Area consists of the majority of the town’s commercial area. It includes the 280 Metro Center, Serra Center, Vivana Fair, a large portion of Auto Row, and auto and light industrial related businesses on Collins Avenue. The commercial core primarily consists of large floor plate commercial spaces and showrooms, in addition to smaller in-line tenant spaces in the shopping centers. The Planning Area is well connected by major roadways with El Camino Real on the east; Junipero Serra Boulevard and Highway 280 on the west; and Serramonte Boulevard, Collins Avenue, and Colma Boulevard each providing east/west connections between El Camino Real and Junipero Serra Boulevard.
Figure LU-5: Commercial Core Planning Area
Land Use
Land uses should be consistent with existing uses in the Commercial Core Planning Area with a variety of retail and service commercial uses in the shopping centers, primarily auto dealers on Serramonte Boulevard, and service commercial uses on Collins Avenue. Uses on Collins Avenue
LU-26
should be auto service-related businesses that do not attract a large amount of traffic and support the function of Auto Row. Sufficient off-street parking and loading/unloading areas should be provided for all new uses. Residential land use is prohibited in the Commercial Core since the introduction of residential uses would conflict with the existing large-scale commercial uses.
Allowed Land Use
▪ Collins Avenue: Commercial (Automobile Service/Auto Related/Light Industrial/Hotel) ▪ Serramonte Boulevard: Commercial (Retail/Restaurant/Auto Related/Hotel/Entertainment/Large Floor Plate Office)
▪ Colma Boulevard: Commercial (Restaurant/Retail/Entertainment/Hotel) Height and Intensity
Base Height and FAR Bonus Height and FAR
Max Height: 40 Feet
FAR: 1.5
Coverage: 50%
Max Height: 72 Feet*
FAR: 2.0
Coverage: 70%
* Review design guidelines and height envelope in the Serramonte Collins Master Plan Street Design
The Commercial Core includes three of the town’s major roadways including Serramonte Boulevard, Colma Boulevard and Collins Avenue. Each roadway merits consistent street design that enhances the respective commercial businesses in the area. All properties in the Planning Area should maintain a consistent five (5) to ten (10) foot wide landscaping strip behind the sidewalk along roadway frontages. Tall vegetation should be limited or maintained so that business identification features are visible.
On Collins Avenue, cemeteries will be allowed to utilize portions of the five (5) foot tree planting strip, with the placement of a decorative block wall, similar to the wall installed along the southern border of Cypress Lawn. The five (5) feet in front of the wall and reserved for public utilities will be utilized for ground cover and low growing shrubs. The additional five (5) feet will be available for tree planting. All developments are encouraged to use a drought tolerant selection of ground cover materials for the five (5) foot wide planting area over the public utility easement.
To promote pedestrian activity at the shopping centers, Serramonte Boulevard and Colma Boulevard should include high-visibility crosswalks, median refuges, corner bulb-outs, and widened sidewalks that incorporate street trees, bus stop amenities and pedestrian-scaled lighting. In addition, an established General Plan policy provides for keeping Colma Creek in an open visible condition at the south edge of Collins Avenue. Construction of a pedestrian bridge without culverting the creek or large-scale crossings is compatible with the established policy.
LU-27 LU-27
In 2020, the Town completed a Streetscape Master Plan for Serramonte Boulevard and Collins Avenue. The plan proposes a lane reduction for the section of Serramonte Boulevard from the Serra Center driveway to El Camino Real to allow for wider sidewalks, landscaping and two pedestrian crosswalks. For Collins Avenue, improvements would include parking.
Commercial Core Opportunity Sites
In addition to development opportunities on Collins Avenue, the Urban Design Study identified the 280 Metro Center as a site that can accommodate additional building square footage to allow for public amenity space.
Enhanced 280 Metro Center
The 280 Metro Center strengthens Colma’s identity as a regional shopping destination. The 280 Metro Center shall be preserved and enhanced to the extent possible. Consistent with current trends, additional amenities such as office, lifestyle retail, a public gathering space or hotel would be considered by the Town. Residential uses would not be supported due to the lack of public amenities along the corridor, conflict with commercial uses, and the desire to concentrate residential development in a more central location to activate central Colma (the Town Center).
Figure LU-6: Enhanced 280 Metro Center Concept
The Enhanced 280 Metro Center concept illustrated above is consistent with the development standards for the site and shows 110,000 SF of new commercial space added by a new second
LU-28
story. The maximum height shown is 36 feet (2 stories), and the total FAR (Floor-Area-Ration) is > 1.0. This concept includes a 46,000 square foot plaza and three-level parking structure.
Similar concepts can be considered where massing and height is concentrated along Junipero Serra Boulevard so as not to visually impact Woodlawn Cemetery to the north. Any redevelopment concept will need to include sufficient parking to support additional commercial, office or hotel square footage.
LU-9-1: Auto Sales Uses. Encourage the development of auto sales establishments above other commercial, retail uses along Serramonte Boulevard.
LU-9-2: Commercial Office. Support the development of commercial offices along Serramonte Boulevard only if auto or other retail sales uses are no longer viable.
Commercial office will only be considered if it can be demonstrated through a fiscal analysis, development agreement or business registration fees that the use will not burden public services and infrastructure.
LU-9-3: Hotels. Support the development of hotels within the Commercial Core, including boutique hotels and internationally recognized hotel chains.
LU-9-4: Residential Prohibited. Discourage residential development in the Commercial Core due to inherent conflicts with large format retail and sales uses.
LU-29 LU-29
EL CAMINO REAL CORRIDOR
The El Camino Real Corridor Planning Area centers on the intersection of El Camino Real and Serramonte Boulevard and extends from the northern town boundary to the southern town Boundary along El Camino Real. The Planning Area includes sites on both sides of El Camino Real, including the properties near the BART station and the east side of El Camino Real between the intersection of Mission Road and the South San Francisco border.
Figure LU-7: El Camino Real Corridor Planning Area
Land Use
Low impact offices and other executive/administrative uses are encouraged to provide a buffer between existing cemetery uses and El Camino Real between the BART bridge to the north and the South San Francisco border. Multi-modal mixed-use development is promoted surrounding the Colma BART station, at the Town Center site, and where feasible along Mission Road. For the central portion of the Planning Area, land use intensity and use types can vary. A Town Center type development is encouraged.
LU-30
Allowed Land Use
▪ Commercial Mixed Use, Town Center
(Restaurant/Hotel/Residential/Retail/Office/Entertainment) ▪ Cemetery, Cemetery Related: (Cemeteries/Flower Shops/Monument Shops) ▪ Office: (General or Medical Office)
Height and Intensity
Base Height and FAR Bonus Height and FAR
Max Height: 40 Feet
FAR: 2.0
Lot Coverage: 50%
Residential Density: 30
units/acre
As noted by project site below
El Camino Real Opportunity Sites
The Urban Design Study identified several sites that can accommodate additional building square footage and which can create public amenity space. These sites include:
Walkable Town Center
There is general community support for a retail, dining, and entertainment district in the form of a walkable Town Center that is accessible to local residents, workers, visitors, and travelers.
The district should include pedestrian-oriented streets and/or paths; incorporate a density that sustains pedestrian traffic; and project a recognizable style or identity that is consistent with the Town’s existing Design Review Overlay Requirements, which requires Spanish/Mediterranean architecture for facades facing El Camino Real. It should be a mixed-use development with commercial, and restaurant spaces at ground level, and residential and/or office above. It should also incorporate entertainment uses and public gathering spaces. The property at the southwest corner of El Camino Real and Serramonte Boulevard and surrounding sites are suitable for this type of development.
LU-31 LU-31
Figure LU-8: Town Center Concept 1
The Town Center concept illustrated in figure LU-8 is consistent with allowances for the site (with the exception of a height bonus) and shows a mixed-use Town Center consisting of 160,000 SF of Commercial space and up to 240 residential units (22 dwelling units/acre). The maximum height shown is 72 feet (5 stories), and the total FAR is 1.8. Colma Creek is shown as being restored above ground. In this concept development standard bonuses would be considered due to the project providing the following Desired Components:
▪ High quality design/construction/materials
▪ Incorporation of outdoor public gathering spaces
▪ Significant public improvements; and
▪ A diverse mix of land uses
Figure LU-9: Town Center Concept 2
LU-32
The Town Center concept illustrated in figure LU-9 for the Town Center site incorporates a cardroom with hotel/office component and is consistent with the Allowances for the site (with the exception of a Height Bonus). The concept shows a mixed-use Town Center consisting of 325,000 SF of retail/office/hotel/cardroom with no residential development. The maximum height shown is 100 feet (8 stories), and the total FAR (Floor-Area-Ratio) is 1.2. In this concept, development standard bonuses would be considered due to the project providing the following desired components:
▪ High quality design/construction/materials
▪ Incorporation of outdoor public gathering spaces
▪ A diverse mix of land uses.
At Town staff’s discretion, a project which provides at least three (3) the following desired components:
▪ A diverse mix of land uses
▪ A “live/work” environment
▪ High quality design/construction/materials
▪ Incorporation of outdoor public gathering spaces; and/or ▪ Significant public improvements.
Shall be considered for one (1) of the following bonuses:
▪ Height: 56 - 110 Feet
▪ Residential Density: 30 - 60 Units/Acre
▪ FAR: 2.0 - 3.0
▪ Max Lot Coverage: 75%
Mixed-Use Commercial/Residential
Mixed Use Commercial/Residential projects with densities up to 30 units per net acre are encouraged along the west and east sides of El Camino Real north of the BART bridge. New buildings should be setback at least 10 feet from the curb and include frontage areas inviting to the pedestrian, which include sidewalks, planters, street trees and benches. It is intended that mixed commercial/residential uses will consist of pedestrian-oriented retail or commercial facilities on the ground floor with two or more levels of residential or office uses above. The Bocci site is a suitable site for this use.
LU-33 LU-33
Figure LU-10: Conceptual Plan for Bocci Site
Located near the BART station, the Bocci site is a suitable site for a mixed-use development.
The Bocci Site is an approximately .62 acres (27,005 sq. ft.), triangular lot located on the corner of El Camino Real and Albert Teglia Boulevard. The site currently contains three vacant buildings: an office building for the monument business, and open workshop and warehouse, and small shed-type garage. As the Colma BART station abuts this parcel, any development proposed on this site should encourage good pedestrian access to the station.
Proposed mixed-use developments should include ground floor retail, with two to four stories of residential above. Buildings should be located close to the sidewalk to allow a “window shopping” experience for pedestrians, with retail entries oriented toward El Camino Real.
Parking should be provided in an underground parking area, parking structure, parking behind the building or parking through use of parking stackers. The site is within a Design Review Overlay zone and is required to exhibit Spanish-Mediterranean design influences, such as a tile roof, tower element, and appropriate detailing. Required streetscape and frontage improvements may include wider sidewalks, decorative streetlight, landscaping, and street furniture. Any required frontage improvements performed as part of development of the property will require design approval and an encroachment permit from CalTrans. Development standard bonuses are granted due to the project providing the following desired components:
▪ High quality design/construction/materials
▪ Pedestrian access to major public transit; and
▪ A diverse mix of land uses.
At Staff’s discretion, a project which provides all of the following desired components:
▪ A mix of land uses
▪ High quality design/construction/materials.
▪ Significant public improvements.
LU-34
▪ parking; 1-2 spaces/residential unit; and
▪ Pedestrian access to BART station.
Shall be considered for a significant height bonus as follows:
▪ Height: 40-68 feet
▪ Lot Coverage: 75%
Mixed-Use Commercial/Residential or Office
A Mixed-Use Commercial/Residential or Office project with densities up to 30 units per net acre could be feasible on the Italian Cemetery property located on El Camino Real south of the BART bridge. New buildings should be setback at least 10 feet from the curb and include frontage areas inviting to the pedestrian, which include sidewalks, planters, street trees and benches. It is intended that mixed commercial/residential uses will consist of pedestrian-oriented retail or commercial facilities on the ground floor with two levels of residential or office uses above. No new access points would be permitted for the development, and access should be taken from the existing BART access driveway. Any parking for the site should not be visible from El Camino Real.
In addition to mixed-use development, the site could be developed with cemetery or cemetery related land uses as currently permitted under the General Plan designation for the property. In addition, a commercial office could be developed on the property. If a mixed-use project is not feasible for the site, the site could be developed with only multi-family housing.
Proposed mixed-use developments should include ground floor retail, with two stories of residential above. Buildings should be located close to the sidewalk to allow a “window shopping” experience for pedestrians, with retail entries oriented toward El Camino Real.
Parking should be provided in an underground parking area, parking structure, parking behind the building or parking through use of parking stackers. The site is within a Design Review Overlay zone and is required to exhibit Spanish-Mediterranean design influences, such as a tile roof, tower element, and appropriate detailing. Required streetscape and frontage improvements may include wider sidewalks, decorative streetlight, landscaping, and street furniture. Any required frontage improvements performed as part of development of the property will require design approval and an encroachment permit from CalTrans. Development standard bonuses can be considered if the project provides the following desired components:
▪ High quality design/construction/materials
▪ Pedestrian access to major public transit; and
▪ A diverse mix of land uses.
At Staff’s discretion, a project which provides all of the following desired components:
▪ A mix of land uses
▪ High quality design/construction/materials.
LU-35 LU-35
▪ Significant public improvements.
▪ parking; 1-2 spaces/residential unit; and
▪ Pedestrian access to BART station.
Shall be considered for a height bonus as follows:
▪ Height: 40-55 feet (3 stories)
▪ Lot Coverage: 75%
Street Design
El Camino Real is a designated State Highway with a high volume of fast-moving traffic that runs from the northern boundary to the southern boundary of the town. The roadway is a six- lane, two-way road with a large median in the center from the northern boundary to the El Camino Real Mission Road intersection and slims down to a 4-lane, two-way road to the southern boundary. The roadway is owned and maintained by Caltrans.
The Town is coordinating with Caltrans to realign the intersection at Mission Road and El Camino Real to create a “tee” intersection that will allow protected left turns between Mission Road and El Camino Real. A landscaped area will be used to form the realigned intersection.
This area will also include an entry sign to the town, improved sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, and decorative streetlights. The timing of this project is unknown.
The Town is currently preparing a Bicycle and Pedestrian plan for El Camino Real that will evaluate future improvements to El Camino Real.
In order to maintain the unique greenbelt theme of El Camino Real between the intersection with Mission Road and the BART bridge, a thirty-foot landscape setback is required. Only surface parking is permitted in this setback area, and the use of berms and landscape screening is required.
Signage
New signage requires sign permits and are subject to the approval of the City Planner. Sign types shall be limited to wall signs and monument signs, no pole signs are allowed on El Camino Real. Internally illuminated signs are prohibited along El Camino Real, with indirectly illuminated or halo type lighting preferred. Sign programs are encouraged for multitenant buildings to maintain consistency.
LU-10-1: Neighborhood and Small Scale Commercial and Service Uses. Encourage neighborhood and small scale and service uses on the east side of El Camino Real from the BART bridge north.
LU-36
LU-10-2: El Camino Real Housing. Limit housing on El Camino Real to the Town Center site and sites by the BART station.
LU-10-3: Mixed Use and Nonresidential Development. Limit parking, traffic, and other impacts of mixed-use and nonresidential development on adjacent uses and promote high-quality architectural design and effective transportation options.
LU-10-4: Grand Boulevard Initiative. Continue to participate in collaboration with other cities, counties, and regional agencies to further the Grand Boulevard Initiative (GBI) and develop strategies to improve the performance, safety and aesthetics of El Camino Real.
LU-10-5: Hotels. The Town shall support the development of hotels within the El Camino Real corridor at the Town Center or Bocci sites, including boutique hotels and internationally recognized hotel chains.
LU-10-6: Spanish Mediterranean Design. To create a consistent design theme along El Camino Real and at entry gateways, require properties included in the Spanish Mediterranean Design Overlay to utilize Spanish and Mediterranean design elements.
LU-10-7: Landscape Setback. To create a consistent greenbelt theme along El Camino Real between Mission Road and the BART bridge, require a 30’ landscape setback be observed. Within the setback, only surface parking is permitted. Surface parking must maintain a minimum setback of 10’, with the setback area heavily landscaped and bermed to visibly screen vehicles.
LU-11-1: Town Center. Encourage mixed-use projects consistent with the height and floor area parameters established in the General Plan.
LU-11-2: Fiscal Sustainability. Conduct a fiscal analysis prior to the development of the Town Center site to assure that the proposed project will not impact public services.
A development agreement and/or establishment of a public facilities services district may be required to assure the long-term viability of the project.
LU-11-3: Town Center Public Realm. In exchange for additional height and floor area, require an outdoor plaza, enhanced streetscape and/or creek daylighting, and linear park.
LU-37 LU-37
HILLSIDE BOULEVARD
The Hillside Boulevard Planning Area consists of Hillside Boulevard and the surrounding properties.
Figure LU-11: Hillside Boulevard Planning Area
Land Use
The Planning Area consists primarily of cemetery uses, agricultural uses, and uses incident to cemetery and agricultural uses, such as florists and monument shops. Key sites such as the town’s Community Center and museum, Lucky Chances Cardroom, Cypress Abbey Golf Course, and the underutilized closed landfill on Sandhill Road are also located in this Planning Area.
Proposed uses should not disrupt the greenbelt aesthetic as viewed from the public lands. All buildings, including buildings related to cemetery uses, such as crematories, shall be setback so as not create significant visual disruptions from the public right-of-way. There are existing properties that are used for auto related services. If these uses are destroyed, abandoned or eliminated, they may only be replaced with conforming uses.
LU-38
Allowed Land Use
▪ Cemetery: (cemetery, agriculture, and uses incidental to cemetery and agricultural uses) ▪ Commercial: (retail/hotel/entertainment where existing, or just south of Sand Hill Road, along Hillside Blvd. to Lawndale Boulevard)
▪ Public: (Community center, museum)
Height and Intensity
Base Height and FAR
Max Height: 40 Feet
FAR: 1.5
Lot Coverage: 50%
Hillside Boulevard Opportunity Sites
A portion of the land along the east side of Hillside Boulevard, just south of Sand Hill Road, may be appropriate for future commercial development with utility and infrastructure improvements.
Hillside Boulevard South of Sand Hill Road
This land area currently is in use and designated Cemetery. However, as there is a need for more commercial land and development in the town, any future development of this property would follow zoning and land use parameters of the Commercial designation, namely a height limit of 40 feet, FAR of 1.5, and lot coverage of 50%.
Landfill and Golf Course Property
The former Cypress Hills Golf Course will logically continue to transition into cemetery land use.
Since use of the landfill site located at the top of Sand Hill Road is limited, vehicle storage shall be considered where vehicles are not visible from Hillside Boulevard or other vantage points. In order to maintain through access by emergency vehicles through the cemeteries, internal driveways shall be connected to provide access from the Cypress Lawn entrance at Hillside Boulevard and Serramonte Boulevard to the former golf course access road.
Signage
Minimal signage should be used in order to preserve Colma’s greenbelt theme. Pole signs and cabinet signs are prohibited in the Hillside Boulevard Planning Area.
Street Design
Hillside Boulevard is a major thoroughfare for commuters that runs along the east side of Town, connecting the town to Daly City and South San Francisco via Sister Cities Boulevard. The road is bisected by Serramonte Boulevard, providing access to El Camino Real and Highway 280.
LU-39 LU-39
Since the majority of the surrounding properties are cemeteries, a large amount of vegetation exists along the roadway to maintain a greenbelt aesthetic. All properties in the Planning Area should maintain the greenbelt with new trees and shrubs screening proposed developments.
Tall vegetation should be maintained so that business identification features are visible.
Improvements to Hillside Boulevard are planned in the future, from Serramonte Boulevard to Lawndale Boulevard.
Access to In-Holding Lots
The Hillside Boulevard Planning Area has a number of historic “in-holding” lots. These are lots that were typically purchased many years ago for speculative purposes and remain even though the bulk of the land has been acquired by Holy Cross Cemetery and Cypress Abbey Company.
Roads were never physically constructed to provide access to these lots, although public rights- of-way, known as “paper streets,” still exist to provide theoretical access. These paper streets remain on the maps presented in the general plan as well as on the county assessor’s maps.
LU-12-1 Cemetery and Agriculture. Consider cemetery and agricultural uses as the primary permitted land uses in the Hillside Boulevard Planning Area.
LU-12-2 Commercial. Consider commercial businesses only in the commercial portion of the Hillside Boulevard Planning Area if it can be demonstrated through a fiscal analysis, development agreement or business registration fees that the use will not burden public services and infrastructure.
LU-12-3 Hotels. Support the development of a hotel within the commercially designated portion of the Hillside Boulevard Planning Area, including boutique hotels and internationally-recognized hotel chains.
LU-12-4 Residential. Prohibit residential development in the Hillside Boulevard Planning Area.
LU-40
MISSION ROAD
Mission Road is a two-way, two-lane street with sidewalks. The Mission Road Planning Area centers on Mission Road and is bounded by El Camino Real to the north and west, Holy Cross Cemetery to the east, and Lawndale Boulevard to the south. The Planning Area includes historic structures and districts such as Holy Cross, Molloy’s, and the Lagomasino residences.
Figure LU-12: Mission Road Planning Area
Land Use
The Mission Road Planning Area consists of a wide variety of uses. On the west side, existing uses include commercial uses such as auto servicing, light manufacturing, warehousing, contractors’ supplies, and other non-retail uses, as well as single family residential and multifamily uses. On the east side, the majority of the Planning Area consists of cemetery use with the exception of a 66-unit veteran’s housing project.
With a growing residential population within the Mission Road Planning Area, there is growing demand for restaurant and retail nearby that is accessible to them. Many of the existing
LU-41 LU-41
commercial businesses do not have enough space and need to expand. Proposed uses should respect existing residential uses, any uses that may impact residential units should be contained within a building and adequately screened. All proposed uses should include an adequate number of off-street parking spaces so that businesses do not further burden street parking.
Allowed Land Uses
▪ Commercial: (Auto Repair, Services, Retail, Restaurant, Mixed-Use Residential/Commercial, Boutique Hotel)
• Residential: (Single and Multi-family residential)
• Cemeteries: (Cemeteries and cemetery related businesses)
Height and Intensity
Base Height and FAR Bonus Height and FAR
Max Height: 40 Feet
FAR: 1.0
Lot Coverage: 50%
Residential Density: 30
Units/Acre
Max Height: 42 Feet
FAR: 1.5
Lot Coverage: 60%
Mission Road Opportunity Sites
Commercial Office at the “Y”
There is demand for office space that is accessible by public transit, with inter-connecting pedestrian-oriented streets and/or paths, and incorporates commercial uses, including restaurants and convenience stores. The development of these uses, when incorporating high quality landscaping, well screened parking, and minimal signage will contribute to the town’s greenbelt theme. Other office uses which the City Council finds are of a similar nature to the specified uses may also be permitted. Regardless of the use, it can be demonstrated that all parking for the use can be provided on-site, and the maximum group size for the assembly space will not overburden the site and surrounding area.
The property located at the Y intersection between El Camino Real and Mission Road is a suitable site for this use. The Y project site is triangular in shape, approximately one acre in size, and is created by the fork-intersection of El Camino Real and Mission Road. Colma Creek runs north/south through the middle of the site and adjacent to, and paralleling, the creek is a water pipeline easement, varying in width from 20 to 50 feet. Large, mature eucalyptus, pine and cypress trees exist on site.
Unfortunately, it has been determined that the triangular site on the east side of El Camino and west side of the creek is heavily encumbered by easements, with a portion of the site owned by the SFPUC. A much smaller office building or project, roughly 10,000 square feet, is all that can be accommodated on this site.
LU-42
Figure LU 13: Mission Road Commercial/Office Park Concept
The commercial/office park concept illustrated above is consistent with the allowances for the site (with the exception of a height and FAR bonus, explained below). The maximum height shown is 42 feet (2-3 stories), and the maximum FAR (Floor-Area-Ratio) is 1.5.
This concept illustrates a theoretical project that would take advantage of a height bonus and FAR bonus by providing the following Desired Components:
▪ High quality design/construction/materials;
▪ Incorporation of outdoor public gathering spaces;
▪ Significant public improvements.
▪ Small commercial ground-floor uses, including restaurant(s) and convenience store(s); ▪ Pedestrian-oriented streets and/or paths connecting office space with public transportation.
At Staff’s discretion, a project which provides all of the following desired components:
▪ Small commercial ground-floor uses, including restaurant(s) and convenience store(s); ▪ Pedestrian-oriented streets and/or paths connecting office space with public transportation;
▪ High quality design/construction/materials;
▪ Incorporation of outdoor public gathering spaces; and ▪ Significant public improvements
Projects shall be considered for significant Height and FAR Bonuses as follows:
▪ Height: 40-42 Feet
▪ FAR: 1.0 – 1.5
LU-43 LU-43
Signage
All proposed signage requires the approval of a sign permit. Due to limited space and narrow sidewalks, monument signs are not encouraged, but may be considered where space allows.
Pole signs are not allowed in the Planning Area.
Street Design
Mission Road extends for approximately two thirds of a mile from the “Y” at El Camino Real to the southern border of the town with no stop signs or stop lights. The road includes four clearly marked pedestrian crossings to slow down traffic and allow pedestrians to safely cross the road.
With the potential for low density commercial restaurant and retail, roadway improvements should promote and enhance walkability and the pedestrian experience.
In the Mission Road Planning Area, some commercial parcels have frontages on both Mission Road and El Camino Real. Access to and from the parcels from El Camino Real is potentially hazardous because of poor visibility due to the curvature of the road, relatively high traffic speeds, and a steep embankment. Access to parcels with frontage on both El Camino Real and Mission Road should be restricted to Mission Road.
Street improvements to include wider sidewalks, new lighting, high visibility crosswalks and other improvements on Mission Road are anticipated to be completed in 2021.
LU-13-1: Existing Commercial Uses. Support the creation and improvement of commercial uses on Mission Road.
LU-13-2: Historic Buildings. Maintain and enhance historic buildings and uses along Mission Road according to the Secretary of the Interior’s standards. And encourage adaptive reuse of structures.
LU-13-3: Existing Residential Uses. Design and maintain new development or new uses adjacent to existing residences on Mission Road to not negatively impact existing residential uses.
LU-13-4: Infill Housing. Promote the provision of lower- and moderate-income housing on in-fill sites on Mission Road.
LU-13-5: Mixed Use. Encourage mixed use buildings with ground floor food, retail, or food use on Mission Road.
LU-44
STERLING PARK
Sterling Park is the residential area bounded by Hillside Boulevard on the east, El Camino Real on the west, and B Street and F Street on the north and south, respectively. It is largely the result of annexation of unincorporated County land to the town of Colma. This neighborhood contains the majority of the town’s population and housing structures. Approximately 300 housing units are located in this area and it contains approximately 90% of Colma’s resident population. Homes here consist of modest sized homes east of Clark Avenue, and both older single family and multi-family units to the west. A number of the buildings west of Clark Avenue were relocated to the area during the construction of Highway 280 in the 1960’s and, because of this, some units were placed with reduced front, side or rear setbacks, which adds to the eclectic charm of the neighborhood. The low end of the density range (13 units per net acre) corresponds to the density that is realized by constructing single family detached residential units on 33 1/3 x 100 foot lots for all infill development in the residential area.
Figure LU-14: Sterling Park Planning Area
LU-45 LU-45
Land Use
Land uses should be consistent with the residential neighborhood. If existing duplex or multiple units are destroyed, they may be replaced with an equal number of units. There are properties that are used for flower shops. If these uses are destroyed, abandoned or eliminated, they may only be replaced with new flower shops or conforming residential uses.
Allowed Land Use
• Residential: (Single Family Dwelling Units / Existing Multifamily) • Commercial/Cemetery: (only where existing)
• Public: (Sterling Park Recreation Center and Sterling Park) Height and Intensity
Base Height and FAR
Max Height: 36 Feet
FAR: 1.0
Lot Coverage: 50%
Residential Density: 13
Units/Acre
Sterling Park Opportunity Sites
There are no opportunity sites in the Sterling Park neighborhood Signage
All proposed signage at existing commercial businesses require sign permit approval. Proposed signs should not impact residential uses.
Street Design
The Sterling Park neighborhood includes streets and sidewalks with brick pavers, underground utilities, and attractive light fixtures and landscaping.
See Goal LU-3 and associated policies LU-3.1, LU-3.3, LU-3.4, and LU-3.5 which apply to Sterling Park.
LU-46
IMPLEMENTATION
Land Use Implementation
Programs 2021-2030 2031-2040 Annual Ongoing
LU-IP1: The Town shall
review the Zoning Ordinance
to ensure that standards and
regulations reinforce quality
design, are clear and are
easily monitored.
X
X
Implements Policies: LU-1-2, LU-1-5
Responsible Dept.: Planning
LU-IP2: The Town shall
continue to implement current
codes, development standards
and requirements to increase
building and site efficiency of
new and existing buildings
over time.
X
Implements Policies: LU-2-1, LU-2-2, LU-2-4, LU-2-6, LU-2-8, LU-2-10 Responsible Dept. Planning; Supporting Depts. Building and Public Works LU-IP3: The Town shall
periodically review the
development impact fee
structure to ensure that new
projects pay their fair share of
the costs necessary to
improve or expand public
infrastructure and services to
serve them.
X
Implements Policy: LU-4-1, LU-4-3
Responsible Dept.: Planning; Supporting Dept. Engineering LU-IP4: The Town shall
annually review and update
the Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) to ensure
adequate and timely provision
of public facilities and
infrastructure to serve
economic development
activities.
X
Implements Policy: LU-4-4, LU-4-6
Responsible Dept.: Public Works; Supporting Dept. Planning
LU-47 LU-47
LU-IP5: Establish a
community benefits ordinance
based on market demand and
feasibility. The ordinance
would allow development
projects to exceed the
maximum density or intensity
if the project demonstrates
that it provides significant
community benefits, such as
incorporation of affordable
housing, incorporation of
public or community facilities,
traffic reduction measures,
creek daylighting or superior
design and integration of a
mix of uses.
X
Implements Policies: LU-8-1, LU-8-2
Responsible Dept. Public Works; Supporting Depts. Planning and Administration
Mobility Element
M-1
PURPOSE
The Mobility Element provides the goals, policies, and actions to develop a safe, efficient, and environmentally responsible multimodal transportation system in the town of Colma, ensuring that these facilities reflect the land uses contemplated by the Land Use Element, and ensuring appropriate facilities that enhance mobility for pedestrians, bicycles, automobiles and which encourages the use of public transit. There are no military airports or ports within the town.
RELATIONSHIP TO STATE LAW
California State law (Government Code Section 65302(b)) mandates that a city or county adopts a general plan with a mobility (circulation) element that consists of the general location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, and terminals, as well as other local public utilities and facilities. Discussion of other public utilities and facilities are addressed in the Open Space and Conservation and the Safety elements in the General Plan, in order to allow transportation to be the focus of the Mobility Element.
RELATION TO OTHER ELEMENTS
State law requires that the Mobility and Land Use elements of a General Plan be cooperatively developed. Integration of the Mobility and Land Use elements results in a General Plan that ensures adequate and appropriate mobility for all transportation modes and users with future planned development. The Mobility Element is primarily related to the Land Use, Housing,
M-2
the community and decision-makers to ensure transportation facilities are built to provide mobility, support and enhance neighborhoods and activity centers built alongside them, and encourage travel by non-automobile modes while also improving public health.
M-3
STREETS AND HIGHWAYS
The street system within Colma is structured around State Highway 82 (El Camino Real) and Interstate 280, (I-280, Junipero Serra Freeway) which carry traffic into and out of town in a generally north-south direction. The internal street system consists of arterial streets, collector streets and local streets. Usable road width, sight distance, and travel speed generally decrease from major highways to local streets.
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS
Roadways serve two primary functions: mobility and property access. Higher and reliable speeds are desirable for mobility, while low speeds are more desirable for property access and bicycle and pedestrian safety, particularly in residential areas. A functional classification system provides a hierarchy of streets to meet both access and mobility needs. Arterials emphasize high mobility for through traffic, local streets emphasize property access, and collectors provide a balance between both functions.
The Town of Colma uses a modified version of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) classifications. The street classifications table retains a correlation to the FHWA classification to ensure that Colma remains eligible for federal transportation funds.
Table M-1: Roadway Classifications
FHWA Roadway
Classification
Major
Highway
Principal
Arterial Arterial Commercial
Collector
Residential
Collector Local
Principal Arterial,
Interstate
Principal Arterial,
Freeways
Principal Arterial,
Other
Minor Arterial
Commercial
Collector
Local
A street’s classification dictates the way a street is designed. Current one-size-fits-most design standards make it difficult to safely accommodate modes (meaning different forms of travel) and to adjust designs based on the unique needs of a neighborhood or street. Mode priorities for each street type are illustrated in Table M-2. This provides a guideline for prioritizing modes
M-4
on new and improved roadways within the town. The recommended modal priorities aim to strike a balance between functional classification, adjacent land use, and competing travel needs and uses. Within limited right-of-way, these priorities allow the Town to make design trades-offs to best fit the function and need of various travel modes. In constrained conditions, modes identified as priority must be accommodated.
Table M-2: Roadway Transportation Priorities
Transit Bicycles Pedestrian Trucks Automobiles
Major Highway
Principal Arterial
Arterial
Commercial Collector
Residential Collector
Local
High Priority Medium Priority Low Priority Prohibited
M-5
M-6
Major Highways
Major highways are limited access regional freeways that are a part of the state and regional network of highways. They are controlled by Caltrans (California Department of Transportation) and subject to State design standards.
Principal Arterial
El Camino Real is a principal arterial and a part of the state and regional network of highways, carrying a significant volume of regional motor vehicle traffic as well as providing regional transit service and transit connections. The corridor has mixed commercial and retail frontages.
The roadway is controlled by Caltrans and is subject to State design standards. Pedestrian improvements are comfortable to walk along and provide safe crossings at designated locations.
In areas of significant travel mode conflict, bicycle improvements may have lower priority, particularly where parallel corridors exist.
Arterial Streets
Arterial streets are primarily streets that serve as a majority of trips and that form the key connections within and to the town. Arterial streets provide a service for vehicles, transit, bicycles, and pedestrians wherever possible. Serving bicyclists is a greater priority along identified bicycle corridors. Pedestrian improvements are comfortable to walk along and provide safe crossings at designated locations.
Commercial Collector
Commercial collectors are streets with commercial frontages that accommodate intra-city trips while also distributing local traffic to major arterials. These roadways prioritize truck and vehicle modes of travel. Pedestrian improvements are comfortable to walk along and provide safe crossings at designated locations
Residential Collector
Residential collectors are streets that serve the same level of travel activity, and with the same connectivity, as commercial collectors, but have primarily residential frontages. Residential collector streets accommodate intra-city trips while also distributing local traffic to major arterials. These streets prioritize non-motorized travel, providing high quality conditions for walking and bicycling.
Local Streets
Local streets are low volume residential streets, serving mostly local traffic. They provide access primarily to abutting uses. These streets serve people walking and biking.
Private Streets
M-7
Private streets may be permitted for planned residential, commercial, or cemetery developments in Colma. The improved width of private roads should be designed to accommodate the level of traffic the road is expected to carry. Colma has two unique private streets worth noting:
Cypress Hills Access Road (Partially Existing and Proposed) Cypress Hills Access Road is a proposed emergency access loop road extending from the Cypress Lawn Memorial Park’s Hillside Campus entrance to the golf driving range access road.
The road is intended to provide emergency access to the cemetery properties and the base of San Bruno Mountain. The proposed access road would be a private road, available for police and fire emergency use.
Decommissioned Landfill/Park Access Road
Access to the decommissioned Hillside Landfill is provided by a two-lane road (Sand Hill Road; privately owned road). If the decommissioned landfill is redeveloped in the future, this access road will become the entrance to the site. The actual configuration and routing of the road may change depending on the end uses and conformance to accessibility and emergency access standards.
“Paper” Streets
The Cypress Hills area and Holy Cross lands east of Hillside Boulevard have a series of public easements remaining from when the land was originally platted for development. Although the streets were never built, a number of lots within the platted area were sold speculatively. These “in-holding” lots have not been developed, but nevertheless the Town is obliged to maintain the paper streets as a theoretical means of access. The paper streets remain on the County Assessor’s maps. The Town supports landowner applications to abandon paper streets that do not provide access to in-holding lots, are not needed for utility purposes, or are redundant with other paper streets.
VISION ZERO
Transportation safety can always be improved. “Vision Zero” is the simple notion that any loss of life on city streets is unacceptable. Humans, by nature, make mistakes. Vision Zero includes design practices to keep and make road networks safer for human activity and protect all users of the street and adjacent spaces. Colma has established a Vision Zero goal incorporating three key efforts: (1) project prioritization through Capital Improvement Plan projects, (2) engineering, and (3) enforcement to create safer streets by slowing vehicle traffic and reducing the impacts associated with vehicle travel. For example, streets can be made safer by minimizing truck routes through town, diverting goods movement to specific thoroughfares to protect vulnerable populations and minimizing risk to residents.
M-8
Project prioritization through the Town’s Capital Improvement Plan promotes review of projects to ensure that the needs of non-motorized travelers are met in all stages of the design and implementation process. This effort also aims to upgrade existing infrastructure before incurring the costs associated with building new infrastructure. By using data driven findings, engineering efforts can more easily focus on critical safety components. Enforcement encourages safety and reduces unsafe behavior among pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers.
STREET TREES
Street trees can improve Colma’s appearance and provide a link between cemetery/open space and developed areas, especially where new development occurs. Street trees can enhance the building scale, soften the visual impact of development in new and existing areas, and act as a moderator to Colma’s windy climate. The Town’s Climate Action Plan encourages/mandates the planting of street trees when street projects or opportunities exist. The Town received Tree City USA certification in 2019.
GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE
Green Infrastructure (GI) is a means of restoring water quality through implementing a range of natural and built approaches to stormwater management that mimic natural systems. GI can reduce the amount of runoff that enters the traditional piped stormwater system below ground, prevent overflows that pollute nearby water bodies, clean stormwater, and allow water to reabsorb back into the ground. GI uses vegetation, soils, filter media, and/or natural processes to create healthier urban environments.
Implementation of GI improvements,
such as landscaping, irrigation,
bioretention areas, stormwater capture
devices, and pervious paving will
improve the water quality of
stormwater in Town rights-of-way and
facilities. The Town of Colma Adopted
a Green Infrastructure Plan in July
2019. The plan describes how the
Town will, over time, transition its
existing “gray” (i.e., traditional)
infrastructure to “green” infrastructure.
The document also provides guidance
to meet stormwater pollutant load
reduction goals and creates a process
for prioritizing the integration of GI
into Capital Improvement Program
projects.
M-9
The Town successfully implemented its first Green Infrastructure project on Hillside Boulevard between Hoffman Street and Serramonte Boulevard.
M-1-1: Vision Zero. Eliminate traffic fatalities and reduce the number of non-fatal collisions by 50 percent by 2040.
M-1-2: Capital Improvement Prioritization. Maintain and upgrade exiting rights-of-way and ensure that the needs of non-motorized travelers are considered in planning, programing, and design of improvements.
M-1-3: Fair Share Contributions. Require new development and redevelopment projects both within and outside of Colma to construct or pay their fair share towards improvements for all travel modes to provide enhanced connectivity to existing transportation facilities.
M-1-4: Street Trees. Require street trees as a condition of private development, where feasible. In addition, look for opportunities to increase street tree planting as part of existing street renovation projects.
M-1-5: Green Streets. Incorporate Green Streets best practices, as appropriate to the context, for new streets and street retrofits.
M-1-6: Truck Routes. Consider Principal Arterials, Arterials, and Commercial Collectors as truck routes to provide for the safe transportation of goods and services through the town while minimizing risk to vulnerable populations.
M-10
ROADWAY PERFORMANCE
EVALUATING ROADWAY PERFORMANCE
The determination of environmental impact as it relates to the transportation system has changed since the last General Plan update. The traditional performance measure has been Level of Service (LOS). LOS is a measure used to rate roadway traffic flow characteristics and serves as an indicator of roadway performance, relative to locally established standards for service quality. With the passage of SB 743, Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) has replaced LOS as the basis for determining transportation impact identification and mitigation under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). VMT is a measure of the amount of travel for all vehicles in a geographic region over a given time period. VMT levels are lower in communities that are more walkable and compact and in communities that have strong public transportation systems.
Increased population density is also associated with lower VMT per capita (ChangeLab Solutions, 2007; U.S. EPA, 2013). Some strategies that have shown success include:
• Expanding public transportation and improving service; • Providing active transportation infrastructure (sidewalk, ADA, and bikeway improvements and connections);
• Instituting higher parking fees;
• Placing higher density and more affordable housing closer to transit, employment, and services;
• Balancing the number and type of jobs in the community with the type and range of housing units and costs; and
• Discouraging low density development in more remote areas without services that requires vehicle use.
This Element provides a policy framework for determining the impact of VMT changes resulting from discretionary development within the town. The Town LOS standards and policies will remain for use as part of the transportation planning and consideration of land use changes and entitlement applications. Current LOS thresholds are shown in Tables M-3 and M-4.
M-11
Table M-3 Roadway Segment Traffic Level of Service (LOS) Definitions LOS Roadway Segment Traffic Flow Conditions
A Free flow. No traffic-related restrictions on vehicle maneuverability or speed. Speed is determined by drivers' desires, speed limits, and physical roadway conditions.
B Stable flow. Operating speeds start to be restricted; little or no restrictions on maneuverability from other vehicles. Slight delays.
C Stable flow. Speeds and maneuverability more closely restricted. Occasional backups behind left-turning vehicles at intersections. Acceptable delays.
D
Approaching unstable flow. Queues develop. Temporary restrictions on speed may cause extensive delays. Little freedom to maneuver. Comfort and convenience low. Delays at intersections may exceed one or more signal changes.
E Unstable flow. Stoppages of momentary duration. Low operating speeds. Maneuverability severely limited. Intolerable delays. At-capacity operations.
F Forced flow. Gridlock/over-capacity conditions. Stoppages for long periods. Low operating speeds.
Table M-4 Signalized Intersection LOS Definitions
LOS Intersection Conditions
A Progression is extremely favorable and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths contribute to low delay.
B Good progression and/or short cycle lengths. More vehicles stop causing higher levels of average delay.
C
Fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures, resulting in drivers having to wait through more than one red signal indication begin to appear. The number of vehicles stopping is significant, although many still pass through the intersection without stopping.
D
The influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high volumes. Many vehicles stop. The proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures noticeable.
E The limit of acceptable delay. Poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high volumes.
Individual cycle failures are frequent. At-capacity operations.
F Unacceptable to most drivers. Oversaturation, arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection. Many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths.
Guidelines from the California Office of Planning and Research require that cities replace LOS standards with multimodal VMT standards. This approach has changed the way municipalities measure transportation impacts. By using VMT, the project evaluation process may prioritize more sustainable transportation modes over high-capacity intersections. This can generate far- reaching impacts, leading to safer, more efficient, and more sustainable local street design, and encouraging development in locations well served by multimodal infrastructure, rather than those characterized by low vehicle volumes.
M-12
The following goal and policies establish a VMT standard and outline specific actions and programs the Town will undertake to ensure a multimodal approach to traffic impact analysis.
M-2-1: Reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled. Require new development projects to achieve a reduction in VMT per capita or VMT per service population compared to both baseline VMT performance conditions and General Plan 2040 VMT performance conditions. The Town will regularly monitor baseline VMT to provide updated benchmarks for project applicants. Encourage use of VMT reduction strategies and methods to encourage non-automobile travel.
M-2-2: Other Traffic Flow Benchmarks. Establish additional traffic flow benchmarks, such as vehicle-hours of travel and safety-related metrics, in order to evaluate and monitor changes in traffic flow over time.
M-2-3: VMT Transportation Performance Measures. Update the Town’s transportation measures and thresholds to use VMT standards for traffic impact analysis rather than LOS.
M-2-4: Multi-Modal Impact Fee. Consider establishing a transportation impact fee for new development tied to performance measures to generate funds for improving all modes of transportation.
M-2-5: LOS Planned Operating Conditions. Strive to achieve LOS D as the planned operating condition for all arterial and collector roadway segments (“segments”) and intersections, except for (1) those specified segments and intersections for which planned LOS conditions are otherwise established; and (2) segments and intersections that are operating at LOS E or lower at the time an application for a proposed development project is submitted, if no feasible improvements exist to improve the LOS. The Town may permit the then-existing LOS to be the minimum acceptable operating condition for those segments and intersections in category (2), provided that the LOS does not deteriorate further due to the proposed development.
M-13
M-2-6: Development Review Requirements. Require proposed development projects that could result in increased traffic to include improvements that assure LOS levels do not fall below the established minimum standard. Ensure that improvements are coordinated with roadway improvements programmed for funding through transportation-related impact fees and that the operational benefits of large-scale, automobile capacity-focused improvements are balanced against the induced VMT resulting from the improvements.
M-14
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
The public road system allows schedule and routing flexibility for those who use it. In contrast, transportation facilities (such as public transit) provide for the movement of goods and people generally along fixed routes and on a fixed schedule. Colma is fortunate to have access to three different modes of public transportation: air, rail, and bus. In addition, Colma residents and workers can take advantage of paratransit opportunities.
BUS TRANSIT
San Mateo County Transit District (SAMTRANS)
San Mateo Transit District (SamTrans) provides bus service throughout San Mateo County with connections to the Colma, Daly City, and South San Francisco BART Stations, San Francisco International Airport, Peninsula Caltrain Stations, San Francisco Greyhound Depot, and Downtown San Francisco’s Transbay Terminal. It also provides access to Santa Clara County Transit, with connections in Menlo Park and Palo Alto.
Colma residents can catch SamTrans Mainline Routes along El Camino Real or SamTrans Local Routes along El Camino Real and Junipero Serra Boulevard. Senior citizens and disabled patrons may ride anywhere in the County for a reduced fare
Paratransit Service
SamTrans provides two on-call, curb-to-curb paratransit services for disabled and elderly residents of San Mateo County. Redi-Wheels serves the bay side of San Mateo County while
M-15
Redi-Coast serves the coast side of San Mateo County. Colma is served by Redi-Wheels. Redi- Wheels passengers must reserve trips one to seven days in advance or set up subscription services for regular trips. Paratransit customers may ride any fixed-route services for free.
Long Distance Bus Service
There is no scheduled intercity bus service (Greyhound or other carriers) serving Colma. The closest long-distance bus stations are in San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose.
DEMAND RESPONSIVE TRANSIT
Demand Responsive Transit can best be described as participant or provider scheduled, collective transit using smaller vehicles such as vans and automobiles. Colma is fortunate to have many types of Demand Responsive Transit available for the benefit of citizens, employees, and customers of local establishments. The following are examples of Demand Responsive Transit operating in Colma:
Airport Shuttle Services
Numerous airport shuttle services provide pickup and drop off service from a home or business in Colma to and from San Francisco International Airport. These trips are arranged via a telephone or smartphone and booked in advance.
Taxis
Private taxi companies provide door-to-door private rides. These trips are arranged via a street hail, taxi stands, telephone orders, and a smartphone app. Colma is served by taxicab companies located in Pacifica, Daly City, unincorporated Daly City, and South San Francisco.
Auto Dealer Shuttles
Many of the local auto dealers provide a shuttle service to customers who are having auto repair work done on their cars. These shuttles assist individuals who live or work in Colma or neighboring communities.
Transportation Network Companies (TNCs)
Also known as ride-hail or ride share companies, TNCs provide a variety of services ranging from door-to-door-private rides to shared trips with other passengers. These trips are arranged utilizing a smartphone app. These companies include Uber and Lyft.
RAIL TRANSIT
Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)
M-16
The San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit district (BART) provides heavy-rail, regional transit service via five rail lines in the following four Bay Area counties: Alameda, Contra Costa, San Francisco, and San Mateo. There are
two BART stations located just outside
of the town limits. BART runs trains
north and south through the Colma
station. North bound trains pass
through Daly City and San Francisco
stations on their way to the East Bay
(East Bay destinations include
Richmond, Pittsburg/Bay Point, Dublin,
and Fremont), and south bound trains
pass through South San Francisco, San
Bruno, and Millbrae stations on their
way to San Francisco International
Airport. Trains run Monday through
Friday from 4:00 A.M. to midnight and on Saturday and Sunday from 6:00 A.M. to midnight.
The Colma BART station is located at Mission Street and Albert M. Teglia Boulevard, just north of the Colma town Limits.
Caltrain
Caltrain, operated by the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board, provides passenger rail service to the Peninsula cities, extending from San Francisco to San Jose and Gilroy. Trains run Monday through Friday from 5:00 A.M. to midnight, Saturday from 7:00 A.M. to midnight, and Sunday from 8:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. Colma’s nearest Caltrain station is located approximately four miles away in South San Francisco.
AIR TRANSIT
San Francisco International Airport (SFO)
San Francisco International Airport is located approximately six miles from Colma, east of Highway 101 and adjacent to the Cities of San Bruno and Millbrae. The airport is a major regional passenger and cargo air terminal and the seventh most active commercial airfield in the world. It can be reached by Colma residents via private auto, SamTrans bus, and BART.
M-17
M-3-1: Agency Collaboration and Coordination. Collaborate with Caltrans, the City and County Association of Governm ents ( C/CAG), surrounding jurisdictions , and other agencies to improve connectivity between the county, cities, and the town.
M-3-2: El Camino Real. Ensure that El Camino Real retains its distinct character, while encouraging improvements which support increased multi-modal use.
M-3-3: Regional Transportation Planning. Actively participate in and support regional transportation planning efforts.
M-3-4: Transit Funding. Seek joint transportation and transit funding opportunities with adjoining jurisdictions or agencies to improve transit access in and around Colma.
M-3-5: Transportation Gaps. Eliminate gaps in the regional active transportation network in Colma.
M-4-1: Transit Stops. Support the installation of
transit stop amenities including shelters,
benches, real-time information panels, lighting,
bike parking, and bike sharing stations.
M-4-2: Reliable Transportation Services.
Encourage SamTrans and other public transit
providers to provide service on regular
schedules along El Camino Real, arterial streets,
and, as feasible, major collectors; support these
transportation services to increase the mobility
of seniors, the disabled, and others who depend
on public transportation.
M-4-3: Encourage Transportation Options.
Encourage and support various public transit
agencies and companies, ride-sharing programs,
and other incentive programs that provide residents and visitors with transportation choices other than the private automobile.
M-18
M-4-4: Transit Oriented Development. Promote the development of multi-modal mixed- use development at sites surrounding the Colma BART station, where feasible along Mission Road, and at the Town Center site.
M-4-5: Connections to Homes and Businesses. Seek opportunities to improve first and last mile connections between transit, homes, and businesses.
M-19
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
Active Transportation offer numerous benefits, including congestion reduction, economic competitiveness, environmental stewardship, public safety, social equity, and community health.
Much of Colma can be reached with a short walk or bicycle ride. Walking and Biking can support commuter and recreational needs and provide connectivity between residents and schools, parks, shopping areas, jobs, and transit connections to areas outside the town limits.
COMPLETE STREETS
The California Complete Streets Act of 2008 requires that Colma plan a multimodal transportation network that allows for effective travel by motor vehicle, foot, bicycle, and transit to key destinations within the community and the larger region. The law emphasizes that cities prioritize the construction of public improvements that accelerate the development of a balanced, multimodal transportation network. The Mobility Element accomplishes this goal in- part through a Complete Streets Policy. The Town of Colma is committed to improving mobility whenever possible as capital improvement projects or private developments are considered.
PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Walking is a basic and often overlooked part of all trips that also involve transit or automobiles.
Walking can be ideal for short, local trips for shopping, school, and recreation. Providing adequate facilities for pedestrians will help to ensure access to commercial, educational, recreational, and residential uses.
Pedestrian facilities include sidewalks, paths, trails, curb ramps, and crossings. Amenities such as street furniture, pedestrian-scale lighting, and landscaping, serve to create an environment that is conducive to walking and is conformable and safe for pedestrians. The Town will continue to identify areas in need of appropriate pedestrian improvements. Currently there are two plans and one project to improve pedestrian facilities. These are:
• The El Camino Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan
• The Serramonte Boulevard and Collins Avenue Master Plan • The Mission Road Improvement Project
The El Camino Real and Pedestrian and Bicycle Master plan proposes to improve both pedestrian and bicycle circulation. An initial alternative includes the removal of a travel lane in each direction between F Street to the north and El Camino Real’s intersection with Mission Road to the south. Project implementation will require a significant capital improvement investment as well as grant funding and is not anticipated until after the year 2025. Cost estimates have not been prepared, but the project is anticipated to exceed ten million dollars.
M-20
The Serramonte Boulevard and Collins Avenue Master Plan was completed in 2019 and proposes improvements on Collins Avenue, Serramonte Boulevard West, and Serramonte Boulevard East. Proposed improvements include the reduction of lanes on Serramonte Boulevard from 4 to 3 between the Serra Center driveway and El Camino Real. With the lane reduction, there is an opportunity to widen sidewalks, install high-visibility crosswalks, and install landscaping. Implementation is not anticipated until after 2023 or later, with a possible initial phase which includes roadway restriping to remove a travel lane on Serramonte West.
The Mission Road Improvement Project was implemented in 2021 and included pedestrian, bicycle, and roadway improvements on Mission Road.
M-21
M-22
BICYCLE FACILITIES
Biking is ideal for trips which may be too long to walk but are short enough that a vehicle is not needed. Biking is presently not a frequent means of travel in the town, which may be attributed to gaps in infrastructure and hilly terrain.
Bicycle facilities include bikeways, crossings and amenities such as bicycle racks, lighting, and landscaping, which serve to create an environment that is conducive to biking and is conformable and safe for bicyclists.
The Town will continue to identify areas in need of appropriate bicycle improvements. Currently there is one plan and one project to improve bicycle facilities. Descriptions are provided above.
These include:
• The El Camino Real Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan • The Mission Road Improvement Project
The following are the four types of established bikeway classifications:
• Class I Bikeways (Shared-Use Path) provide a completely separate right-of-way and are designated for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians, with vehicle and pedestrian crossflow minimized. In general, bike paths serve corridors where on-street facilities are not feasible or where sufficient right-of-way exists to allow them to be constructed. • Class II Bikeways (Bicycle Lanes) are dedicated lanes for bicyclists generally adjacent to the outer vehicle travel lanes. These lanes have special lane markings, pavement legends, and signage. Bicycle lanes are typically five feet wide. Adjacent vehicle parking and vehicle/pedestrian crossflow are permitted.
• Class III Bikeways (Bicycle Route) are designated by signs or pavement markings for shared use with pedestrians or motor vehicles but have no separated bike right-of-way or lane striping. Bike routes serve either to a) provide a connection to other bicycle facilities where dedicated facilities are infeasible, or b) designate preferred routes through high-demand corridors.
• Class IV Bikeways (cycle tracks or “separated” bikeways) provide a right-of-way designated exclusively for bicycle travel within a roadway and are protected from other vehicle traffic by physical barriers, including, but not limited to, grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible vertical barriers such as raised curbs, or parked cars.
In Colma, as shown in Figure M-3, only Class II and Class III bikeways are existing.
M-23
M-24
M-5-1: Complete Streets. Incorporate Complete Streets infrastructure elements into new streets, street retrofits and certain maintenance projects to encourage multiple modes of travel, based on the modal priorities in Table M-2, as appropriate to the context and determined reasonable and practicable by the Town.
M-5-2: Design for All Travel Modes. Plan, design, and construct transportation projects to safely accommodate the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, motorists, people with mobility challenges, and persons of all ages and abilities.
M-5-3: Bicycle Connection Coordination. Coordinate with BART, South San Francisco, Daly City, Caltrans, and San Mateo County to plan and implement bicycle and pedestrian improvements which connect with improvements to BART facilities and regional networks.
M-5-4: Accessibility and Universal Design. Prioritize implementation of pedestrian facilities that improve accessibility consistent with guidelines established by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), allowing mobility-impaired users, such as the disabled and seniors, to travel safely and effectively within and beyond the town.
M-5-5: Design of New Development. Require new development to incorporate design that prioritizes safe pedestrian and bicycle travel and accommodate senior citizens, people with mobility challenges, and children.
M-25
SCENIC CORRIDORS
Many of Colma’s rights-of-way, including streets, trails, and sidewalks, offer a special visual experience. Distant, panoramic views of Colma and its environs can be appreciated in a number of locations. The State of California has identified I-280 as a State Scenic Highway from the Santa Clara County line to the San Bruno City limit. The section from the San Bruno City limit north through Colma is an Eligible State Scenic Highway, however, it has yet to be officially designated. Although there are no State designated scenic highways in Colma, foreground views of San Bruno Mountain and panoramic views of the built environments of Colma, South San Francisco, and Daly City provide a memorable and highly valued landscape.
SCENIC CORRIDORS PROTECTION
The Town of Colma has
designated I-280, El Camino Real,
and Hillside Boulevard as scenic
corridors through Colma in order
to protect and enhance the overall
visual experience along each of
the identified scenic corridors,
primarily through sensitive site
planning in these locations taking
into consideration the possible
impacts on the views (see Figure
M.3).
M-26
M-27
M-6-1: Site Planning. Locate and design d evelopment projects within a scenic corridor to carefully fit within their environment and setting . The scenic character of the site should be maintained as much as possible. All development should be sited and designed to minimize the impacts of noise, light, glare , and odors on adjacent properties with the community at large.
M-6-2: Access to Scenic Corridors. Minimize t he number of access roads to a scenic corridor wherever possible. Development of access roads shall be combined with the intent of minimizing intersections with scenic roadways.
M-6-3: Visual Impacts. Minimize visual impacts along scenic corridors.
M-6-4: Paving Integration. Require new development to design site plans that integrate paved areas into the site, relate paved areas to their structure, and landscape paved areas to reduce their visual impact from scenic corridors. Encourage use of textured paving.
M-28
TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs are intended to reduce vehicle trips and parking demand by promoting the use of a variety of transportation options and shifting travel mode and time of day to take advantage of available capacity to reduce crowding and congestion. By implementing TDM programs, municipalities and private entities can use available transportation resources more efficiently.
TDM measures cover a broad spectrum, including subsidies for use of alternatives to the solo occupant vehicle, parking and road pricing, work scheduling alternatives, car sharing programs, and many others. The Town is a member of the Commute.org joint powers authority which is San Mateo County’s transportation demand management agency. Funding for Commute.org is provided by C/CAG, the San Mateo County Transportation Authority, Bay Area Air Quality Management District, and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). Commute.org offers a wide array of commuter incentives and countywide TDM services to employers and employees.
The Town adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) in 2013 which identified strategies to support statewide greenhouse gas reduction. The CAP included a recommendation to promote TDM strategies for businesses with more than 50 employees.
M-7-1: TDM Program. Continue to participate in the TDM Program as outlined by the San Mateo City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG).
M-7-2: TDM Program for New Development. Require major development proposals to include a detailed, verifiable TDM program for consideration by the Town during the review of the development application.
M-7-3: Vehicle Trip Reduction. Support vehicle trip reduction strategies, including building safer and more inviting transportation networks, supporting connections to high frequency and regional transit, implementing TDM programs, and integrating land use and transportation decisions.
M-29
PARKING
Encouraging the development of an efficient and adequate parking supply can reduce the negative effects of parking on the pedestrian environment and surrounding neighborhoods, and support the Town’s goals for complete streets, walkability, bikeability, and effective transit. A shared public parking approach and “park-once” strategies allow motorists to complete multiple daily tasks before moving their vehicle, thereby reducing both vehicle trips and parking demand, particularly in mixed-use areas. With decreased parking demand and establishment of public parking management strategies, the on- and off-street parking supply can be used more efficiently, ensuring that adequate parking is available for short-term and nearby uses.
M-8-1: Parking Standards. Reevaluate minimum parking standards to account for emerging mobility trends, such as shared mobility, micromobility, autonomous vehicles, and future technology changes. Consider reducing parking requirements for mixed-use developments.
M-8-2: Flexible Residential Parking Standards. Establish flexible parking standards, review residential parking requirements in the Zoning Ordinance, and consider new parking provisions and exceptions with the objective of “right-sizing” parking areas and reducing the reliance on automobile use.
M-8-3: Town-wide Parking Zone Adjustments. Continue to monitor street parking needs of Colma businesses and adjust parking time limits, signage and striping when needed.
M-8-4: Residential Parking Permit Program. Monitor and continue to make needed adjustments to the residential parking permit program.
M-8-5: Alternative Energy Vehicle Parking. Support the provision of infrastructure for alternative fuel vehicles, such as electric vehicle charging stations, to facilitate low and zero-emission vehicle use.
M-30
IMPLEMENTATION
Mobility Implementation
Programs 2021-2030 2031-2040 Annual Ongoing
M-IP1: Regularly monitor
collisions to respond to safety
problems and changing
conditions. Prioritize locations
with high collision rates for
safety improvements.
X
Implements Policy: M-1-1, M-1-2, M-1-3
Responsible Dept.: Engineering, Supporting Dept. Planning M-IP2: Review proposed
improvement plans to ensure
that roadway projects,
retrofits, and maintenance
projects incorporate Complete
Streets elements which
support multiple modes of
travel.
X
Implements Policy: M-1-2, M-1-5
Responsible Dept.: Planning, Supporting Dept. Engineering M-IP3: Implement Grand
Boulevard Initiative
principles, where appropriate,
along El Camino Real within
town limits.
X
Implements Policy: M-3-2, M-3-3
Responsible Dept.: Planning
M-IP4: Consider adopting a
transportation impact fee for
new development which does
not satisfy VMT goals to
generate funds for improving
all modes of transportation.
X
Implements Policy: M-2-1, M-2-2, M-2-3, M-2-4, M-2-6
Responsible Dept. Planning, Supporting Dept. Engineering M-IP5: Assess the
maintenance of sidewalks,
pavement and markings,
pedestrian crossing signals,
and lighting on an on-going
basis and prioritize projects
X
M-31
based on need and available
funding.
Implements Policy: M-1-2, M-5-1
Responsible Dept. Engineering
M-IP6: Identify alternative
energy vehicle charging
locations and opportunities to
integrate emerging
technology into public parking
infrastructure to encourage
and expand the use of zero-
emissions vehicles.
X
Implements Policy: M-8-5
Responsible Dept.: Engineering, Supporting Dept.: Planning M-IP7: Periodically review
Town Code parking
requirements and standards
to ensure that they are
adequate to meet demand.
X
X
Implements Policy: M-8-1, M-8-2 and M-8-3
Responsible Dept.: Planning
Housing Element
H-1
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT
The purpose of the 2015 Housing Element of the Town of Colma General Plan is to plan for the Town’s housing needs and establish the housing-related goals, objectives and programs necessary to allow for and encourage the development and maintenance of housing for all economic segments of the community over the 2015 – 2023 planning period. The Housing Element is designed to comply with State Housing Element Law and guidelines for the preparation and adoption of Housing Elements.
SETTING, CONTEXT AND HOUSING NEED
Colma’s location just south of San Francisco and Daly City makes it a desirable and slightly more affordable location to live than San Francisco, with easy transit into San Francisco from the Colma and South San Francisco BART stations. Colma is also a regional shopping destination for automobiles and retail goods. Colma has limited land available for new development given that about 76% of its two square miles is devoted to cemetery land uses.
Remaining land uses include developed residential properties and commercial uses.
H-2
The San Francisco Bay Area continues to be one of the most desirable and expensive real estate markets in the country. Despite the economic downturn and a lowering of housing prices that began in 2008, rents generally continued to rise throughout region. Housing sales prices have regained losses associated with the recession and most Bay Area homes are too expensive for families with average household incomes to afford. Despite its small size and limited land resources, opportunities exist within Colma to provide new and affordable housing with good transit access.
In a collaborative process, the 20 cities of San Mateo County and the County of San Mateo formed a countywide “Sub-region,” an ad-hoc joint powers authority formed to specifically administer ABAG’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. From this process, it was determined that Colma’s allocation is 59 units, 37 of which are allocated as units affordable to moderate, low, very-low and extremely low income households. The RHNA applies to the years 2015 to 2023. No units have been developed within Colma since 2009, leaving an estimated need of 59 units for the 2015 – 2023 period. Colma has the capacity for these 59 units through the development of vacant and underutilized parcels located throughout the Town. Colma has The Town’s historic cemetery uses make Colma a truly unique community, but also place constraints on the development of housing. Here townhomes in the Villa Hoffman development look out over Olivet Cemetery.
H-3
also adopted goals, policies and programs to encourage and facilitate the development of these units.
Development of an additional 59 units before the close of the planning period is feasible (since the sites are zoned for housing) but construction before the end of the planning period is unpredictable due to the economy. Colma, however, faces significant non-governmental constraints to the development of housing units, the most pressing and unique of which is Colma’s cemetery land uses. Cemetery and related land uses comprise approximately 76% of the Town’s total land area, and are an historic use in Colma, a Town originally incorporated to protect cemetery land uses and accommodate the regional need for these uses. By State law, the dedication of property for cemetery uses makes these lands unavailable for housing projects.
Cemeteries tend to suffer from vandalism when residential uses are built nearby. Furthermore, some cultural groups and some individuals may avoid living near cemeteries if possible; however, Colma’s cemeteries are easily visible from many development sites within the Town.
Cemetery uses also place fiscal constraints on the Town, which receives no tax revenue from cemetery uses or burials. This financial constraint increases the dependence of the Town on its regional commercial and retail uses to fund Town services. See the Governmental Constraints Section and Non-Governmental Constraints Section for more information regarding constraints to residential development in Colma.
CONTENTS AND ORGANIZATION OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT
The contents of the 2015 Housing Element include an analysis of population, employment and housing trends, an evaluation of housing needs, statements of goals and policies, a schedule of programs and actions, and an estimate of the number of housing units the Town expects to be developed, improved and maintained in the local housing stock. Programs and policies in the 2009 Housing Element were evaluated and modified where necessary to reflect changing market conditions and policy priorities. The 2015 Housing Element is organized into the following sections:
▪ Introduction to the Housing Element
▪ Population, Housing and Employment Trends
▪ Existing and Projected Housing Needs
▪ Ability to Meet Housing Needs
▪ Evaluation of Housing Programs
▪ Housing Program Strategy
▪ Housing Goals, Policies, and Programs
BACKGROUND AND HISTORY OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT
The Town of Colma has previously adopted several Housing Elements, as follows:
H-4
▪ 1991 Housing Element (1988-1995 Planning Period);
▪ 1999 Housing Element (prepared with comprehensive General Plan update, 1995-1999 Planning Period);
▪ 2004 Housing Element (1999-2007 Planning Period); and ▪ 2009 Housing Element (2007-2014 Planning Period; adopted October 2012) When referred to in the text of this document, previous Housing Elements will be referenced primarily by date and title and not planning period. This Housing Element is an update and revision of the 2009 Housing Element, adopted in October 2012. This current Housing Element is titled and referenced as the 2015 Housing Element throughout this document. The State of California requires housing element updates at regularly designated time periods or when a city or town makes any change in its policies, zoning and land use designations. State law mandates that all cities in the San Francisco Bay Area submit an adopted housing element by January 31, 2015 which takes into account the housing needs assessment numbers allocated to the jurisdiction by the Association of Bay Area Governments, or ABAG for 2015 through 2023.
To meet this requirement, policies from the 2009 Housing Element were reviewed, projected housing needs of all economic segments of Colma evaluated, and new policies and programs aimed at the preservation and improvement of housing have been developed.
RELATED PLANS AND PROGRAMS
Relationship to other General Plan Elements
The Housing Element is closely related to the Land Use, Conservation/Open Space and Circulation Elements of the Town of Colma General Plan.
The Land Use Element sets forth the amount and type of residential development permitted under the General Plan, thereby establishing housing opportunity in Colma. In addition, the Land Use Element contains policies directed at maintaining the existing housing stock, as well as ensuring the quality of new residential development.
The Circulation Element contains policies to minimize traffic spillover into residential neighborhoods and includes complete street considerations for alternate transportation such as transit, bicycling and walking. The Conservation/Open Space Element establishes policies to minimize the impact of residential development on sensitive resources, such as ecological habitat, and scenic viewsheds.
Finally, the Safety Element sets forth policies to ensure the safety of the Colma’s housing stock through such measures as mitigation of environmental hazards as a condition to development.
The Housing Element has been reviewed for consistency with Colma’s other General Plan elements, and the policies and programs in this Element reflect the policy direction contained in other parts of the General Plan. As portions of the General Plan are amended in the future, this
H-5
Housing Element will be reviewed to ensure that internal consistency is maintained. It is entirely consistent with the policies and proposals set forth by the Plan.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65400, the City will annually review its progress in implementing this Housing Element and ensuring consistency between this and the City’s other General Plan Elements.
Climate Action Plan
The Town of Colma joins a growing number of California cities who have adopted a Climate Action Plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and meet State emission reduction targets. The Town adopted the Plan in May of 2013. The Plan includes programs such as energy efficiency, water conservation, and improved recycling programs for residents and businesses. Colma will also see an increase of bicycle lanes, green business program participation and a new green building program. These programs not only reduce emissions, they also help residents and businesses save money and conserve natural resources.
The 2015 Housing Element is fully consistent with the Climate Action Plan. Housing Element policies that encourage the maintenance and upgrades to existing residences are inherently sustainable since new resources are not used to reconstruct units. New housing units will be required to be constructed to the latest energy and water saving standards, which will make them efficient and economical to maintain.
HOPE Plan to End Homelessness
HOPE (Housing Our People Effectively) is a ten-year action plan initiated by San Mateo County that brings together the business, nonprofit, and public sector communities to address the challenging issue of homelessness. This plan reflects the Board of Supervisors' goal that housing should exist in our community for people at all income levels and all generations of families, including those who are extremely low-income or who are homeless. To end homelessness, San Mateo County must follow the housing strategy successfully documented in other communities around the country. The HOPE Plan is built around the following two key strategies:
▪ Housing - increasing the supply of permanent affordable and supportive housing for people who are homeless and developing strategies to help them move into housing as rapidly as possible; and
▪ Prevention - prevent individuals and families from becoming homeless in the first place by assisting them to maintain their housing. These goals are consistent with the Town of Colma Housing Element.
Grand Boulevard Initiative
The Grand Boulevard Initiative is a coordinated effort of 19 cities (including the Town of Colma), San Mateo and Santa Clara counties, and local and regional agencies united to improve
H-6
the performance, safety, and aesthetics of El Camino Real. Starting at the northern Daly City boundary (where it is named Mission Street) and ending near the Diridon Caltrain Station in central San Jose (where it is named The Alameda), the initiative brings together for the first time all of the agencies having responsibility for the condition, use, and performance of the El Camino Real. The Grand Boulevard Initiative looks to transform El Camino Real from a suburban, low-density strip commercial highway to vibrant, mixed-use pedestrian-friendly boulevard and destination that links regional transportation improvements and local economic development efforts.
Within Colma, much of the El Camino Real is dedicated to cemetery uses and the Town desires development that is respectful of this established land use. However, opportunities exist on the northern edge of Colma for the development of housing across the street and adjacent to the Colma BART station and to the south on Mission Road.
Plan Bay Area and Priority Development Areas (PDA)
Plan Bay Area is an integrated transportation and land-use strategy through the year 2040 that marks the Bay Area’s nine-county first long-range plan to meet the requirements of California’s landmark 2008 Senate Bill 375. This bill calls on each of the state’s 18 metropolitan areas to develop a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) to accommodate future population growth and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light trucks. Working in collaboration with cities and counties, the Plan advances initiatives to expand housing and transportation choices, create healthier communities, and build a stronger regional economy.
The Plan was prepared by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and approved in July of 2013. It is the long-term regional land-use and transportation strategy for the Bay Area, and Transportation funding from state and federal sources will be distributed consistent with the plan. In addition, it will be used to determine housing needs allocations for Bay Area jurisdictions, including Colma.
The El Camino Real corridor and is in a “Priority Development Area” (PDA) along which a majority of the new residential development in San Mateo County is expected to be created.
The defined ¼-mile buffer around El Camino Real from Daly City to San Jose is a planned PDA to encourage and leverage future growth near transit in existing communities.
All of Colma’s new housing is anticipated to be within the PDA area, on El Camino Real or on Mission Road. By placing new housing in this corridor, residents will benefit from good transit options for local and regional travel.
H-7
POPULATION, HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
GENERAL DEMOGRAPHICS AND PROJECTIONS SUMMARY
Colma is a town of 1,458 residents according to Department of Finance estimates from January 2013. Colma’s small population grew from 2000 to 2010 from 1,187 to 1,454: increasing by 267 residents or 22 percent. ABAG predicts Colma will continue to grow over the next 20 years, albeit not as rapidly, to reach a population of 1,874 in 2030.
Table H-1: Colma’s Population Growth
Table H-2: San Mateo County and State Population Growth
Number Percent Change
Colma County State Colma County State
1990 1,103 649,623 29,760,021 x x x
2000 1,187 707,163 33,871,648 8% 9% 14%
2010 1,454 718,451 37,253,956 22% 2% 10%
2020 (Projected) 1,700 801,300 x ?% 12% x
2030 (Projected) 1,874 862,800 x 29% 8% x
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments, Projections 2009; US Census SF1 1990-2010 Colma is more diverse than San Mateo County as a whole. Only a third of the residents are white (compared to well over half in the county) and almost half are Asian. Over the past decade, the white population has declined, while the Asian population has grown.
Approximately a quarter of the residents are non-white or more than one race. Additionally, 40 percent of the population is Hispanic. Latino or Hispanic is not a separate racial category on the 0 200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
1990 2000 2010 2020
(Projected)
2030
(Projected)
H-8
American Community Survey, and so all individuals who identify as Latino or Hispanic also belong to another racial category as well (i.e.- black, white, other etc.).
Table H-3: Race and Ethnicity
Race and Ethnicity Colma County State
White 32% 59% 62%
Black 1% 3% 6%
Asian 44% 25% 13%
Other 20% 8% 14%
More than one Race 3% 5% 4%
Hispanic 40% 25% 38%
Not Hispanic 60% 75% 62%
Total population 1,785* 720,143 37,330,448
Source: 2007-2011 American Community Survey
*Includes additional population in unincorporated San Manteo County and Daly City immediately adjacent to Colma.
The average age in Colma has decreased notably over the past decade. In 2000, the median age was 37 but in 2011 it was 31. This appears to be due to a growth in the 20-34 segments of the population, which grew from one-fifth of the total population in 2000 to a third in 2011.
Almost 30 percent of Colma’s population is comprised of children under 19, and only 12 percent of the population includes seniors over the age of 60. Colma is the only city in San Mateo County whose population has gotten younger.
Table H-4: Age of Residents
Age
2000 2011
Colma Colma County State
Under 5 years 5% 9% 6% 7%
5 to 19 years 21% 18% 18% 21%
20 to 34 years 21% 33% 19% 22%
35 to 44 years 18% 12% 15% 14%
45 to 59 years 15% 17% 22% 20%
60 to 74 years 10% 8% 13% 11%
75 years and over 9% 3% 6% 5%
Median age 37 31 39 35
Total population 1,191 1,785* 720,143 37,330,448
Source: 2000 US Census SF1, 2007-2011 American Community Survey *Includes additional population in unincorporated San Manteo County and Daly City immediately adjacent to Colma.
H-9
HOUSING SAN MATEO COUNTY’S WORKFORCE
INCOME CATEGORIES
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) use household income categories to help standardize analysis of housing needs. The income categories are summarized below and are based on a household’s percentage of San Mateo County’s Area Median Income (AMI).
Table H-5: Income Category Definitions
Income Category Definition
Extremely Low Below 30% of area median income
Very Low 30%-50% of area median income
Low 50%-80% of area median income
Moderate 80%-120% of area median income
Above Moderate Above 120% of area median income
HCD uses these categories, sometimes with minor adjustments, to establish the annual income limits for San Mateo County, as shown in the table below.
Table H-6: San Mateo County Income Limits (2013)
Income
Category
Number of Persons Per Household
(Maximum Income)
1 2 3 4 5
Extremely Low $23,750 $27,150 $30,550 $33,950 $36,650
Very Low $39,600 $42,250 $50,900 $56,550 $61,050
Lower Income $63,350 $72,400 $81,450 $90,500 $97,700
Median Income $72,100 $82,400 $92,700 $103,000 $111,250 Moderate Income $86,500 $98,900 $111,250 $123,600 $133,500 Source: HCD State Income Limits 2013 and State CDBG and HOME Income Limits also available at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/hrc/rep/state/incNote.html
The table on the following page shows Plan Bay Area projections (approved July 2013) for housing units, households and local jobs. The following tables are ABAG Projections 2013, which provide more detailed information on household characteristics, types of jobs, etc. ABAG Projections 2013 provide an indicator of trends and conditions in San Mateo County and its jurisdictions.
H-10
ABAG Projections 2013 are based on 2010 demographic data taken directly from the U.S.
Census. The 2010 employment data are derived from (1) California County-Level Economic Forecast, 2011-2040, California Department of Transportation; (2) Bay Area Job Growth to 2040: Projections and Analysis, Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy; and, (3) 1989-2009 National Establishment Times-Series (NETS) Database, Walls & Associates using Dun and Bradstreet data; and labor force data from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the U.S.
Census Bureau's 2005-2009 ACS.
Table H-7: ABAG/MTC Plan Bay Area Projections for Housing, Households and Jobs (2010-2040)
City
Housing Units
%
Change Households
%
Change
Jobs
%
Change
2010 2040
2010
2040 2010 2040
Atherton 2,530 2,750 +9% 2,330 2,580 +11% 2,610 3,160 +21% Belmont 11,030 12,150 +10% 10,580 11,790 +11% 8,180 10,450 +28% Brisbane 1,930 2,180 +13% 1,820 2,090 +15% 6,780 7,670 +13% Burlingame 13,030 16,700 +28% 12,360 16,170 +31% 29,540 37,780 +28% Colma 430 680 +58% 410 660 +61% 2,780 3,200 +15%
Daly City 32,590 36,900 +13% 31,090 35,770 +15% 20,760 26,580 +28% East Palo Alto 7,820 8,670 +11% 6,940 8,340 +20% 2,670 3,680 +38% Foster City 12,460 13,350 +7% 12,020 12,950 +8% 13,780 17,350 +26% Half Moon Bay 4,400 4,660 +6% 4,150 4,410 +6% 5,030 6,020 +20% Hillsborough 3,910 4,230 +8% 3,690 4,010 +9% 1,850 2,250 +22% Menlo Park 13,090 15,090 +15% 12,350 14,520 +18% 28,890 34,980 +21% Millbrae 8,370 11,400 +36% 7,990 11,050 +38% 6,870 9,300 +35% Pacifica 14,520 15,130 +4% 13,970 14,650 +5% 5,870 7,100 +21% Portola Valley 1,900 2,020 +6% 1,750 1,900 +9% 1,500 1,770 +18% Redwood City 29,170 37,890 +30% 27,960 36,860 +32% 58,080 77,480 +33% San Bruno 15,360 19,820 +29% 14,700 19,170 +30% 12,710 16,950 +33% San Carlos 12,020 13,800 +15% 11,520 13,390 +16% 15,870 19,370 +22% San Mateo 40,010 50,200 +25% 38,230 48,620 +27% 52,540 72,950 +39% South San
Francisco 21,810 28,470 +31% 20,940 27,900 +33% 43,550 53,790 +24% Woodside 2,160 2,250 +4% 1,980 2,080 +5% 1,760 2,060 +17% Unincorporated 22,510 27,470 +22% 21,070 26,170 +24% 23,570 31,180 +32% County Total 271,030 326,070 +20% 257,840 315,09
0 +22% 345,20
0 445,080 +29%
SMC Change
(2010-2040) + 55,040
+
57,240
+
99,880
Source: Draft Plan Bay Area, Final Forecast of Jobs, Population and Housing, July 2013 http://onebayarea.org/pdf/final_supplemental_reports/FINAL_PBA_Forecast_of_Jobs_Population_and_Housing.pdf
H-11
Table H-8: Projections for Population, Households and Total Jobs (2010-2040) Geographic
Area 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2035
2010-
2040
Change
Bay Area Regional Total
Population 7,150,739 7,461,400 7,786,800 8,134,000 8,496,800 8,889,000 9,299,100 1,738,261 Households 2,608,023 2,720,410 2,837,680 2,952,910 3,072,920 3,188,330 3,308,090 580,307 Persons Per
Household 2.69 2.69 2.69 2.70 2.71 2.73 2.75 0.06
Employed
Residents 3,268,680 3,547,310 3,849,790 3,949,620 4,052,020 4,198,400 4,350,070 929,720 Jobs 3,385,300 3,669,990 3,987,150 4,089,320 4,196,580 4,346,820 4,505,230 961,520 Jobs/Employed
Residents 1.04 1.03 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 0.00
San Mateo County
Population 718,451 745,400 775,100 805,600 836,100 869,300 904,400 150,849 Households 257,837 267,150 277,200 286,790 296,280 305,390 315,100 47,553 Persons Per
Household 2.75 2.76 2.76 2.77 2.79 2.81 2.83 0.06
Employed
Residents 342,060 368,790 398,220 406,310 413,740 425,830 438,770 83,770 Jobs 345,190 374,940 407,550 414,240 421,500 432,980 445,070 87,790 Jobs/Employed
Residents 1.01 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.01 0.00
% of Bay Area
Population 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 9.9% 9.8% 9.8% 9.7% -0.3%
% of Bay Area
Jobs 10.2% 10.2% 10.2% 10.1% 10.0% 10.0% 9.9% -0.3%
Colma Planning Area (City Limits)
Population 1,403 1,500 1,700 1,800 2,000 2,200 2,300 797 Households 412 450 490 530 580 620 660 208
Persons Per
Household 3.33 3.33 3.47 3.40 3.45 3.55 3.48 0.21
Employed
Residents 810 920 1,050 1,120 1,190 1,280 1,370 470
Jobs 2,780 2,910 3,030 3,070 3,090 3,140 3,200 360
Jobs/Employed
Residents 3.43 3.16 2.89 2.74 2.60 2.45 2.34 0.00
% of County
Population 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.1%
% of County Jobs 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% -0.1% Source: ABAG Projections 2013
H-12
Table H-9: Projections for Types of Jobs (2010-2040)*
Geographic
Area 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
2010-
2040
Change
Bay Area Regional Total
Agriculture and
Natural Resources
Jobs 24,640 25,180 25,690 24,800 23,940 23,330 22,750 -1,890 Mfg, Wholesale
and Transportation
Jobs 863,420 711,380 717,180 763,680 819,010 861,170 861,170 -2,250 Retail Jobs 402,670 367,180 347,400 370,880 399,950 453,870 453,870 51,200 Health, Educ. and
Recreation Service
Jobs 1,056,030 1,053,510 1,120,700 1,216,120 1,322,650 1,403,080 1,403,080 347,050 Financial and
Professional
Services Jobs 851,610 780,260 766,860 824,190 893,550 990,840 990,840 139,230 Other Jobs 555,260 513,240 499,180 534,850 580,460 645,670 645,670 90,410 Total Jobs 3,753,460 3,449,640 3,693,920 3,979,200 4,280,700 4,595,170 4,595,170 841,710 Total Employed
Residents 3,452,117 3,225,100 3,410,300 3,633,700 3,962,800 4,264,600 4,264,600 812,483 San Mateo County County
Agriculture and
Natural Resources
Jobs 2,220 2,270 2,330 2,170 2,050 1,920 1,810 -410
Mfg, Wholesale
and Transportation
Jobs 67,480 72,420 77,750 74,520 71,470 69,260 67,140 -340 Retail Jobs 35,350 36,680 38,060 38,210 38,340 38,760 39,180 3,830 Financial and
Professional
Services Jobs 86,150 93,920 102,400 106,780 111,300 116,930 122,770 36,620 Health, Educ. and
Recreation Service
Jobs 86,980 95,860 105,670 110,160 114,870 120,830 127,060 40,080 Other Jobs 67,010 73,790 81,340 82,400 83,470 85,280 87,110 20,100 Total Jobs 345,190 374,940 407,550 414,240 421,500 432,980 445,070 99,880 Total Employed
Residents 342,060 368,790 398,220 406,310 413,740 425,830 438,770 96,710 Ratio of Jobs to
Employed
Residents 1.01 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.01 0.00
*Continued on next page
H-13
Geographic
Area 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
2010-
2040
Change
Colma Planning Area (City Limits)
Agriculture and
Natural Resources
Jobs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mfg, Wholesale
and Transportation
Jobs 130 140 150 140 130 120 110 -20
Retail Jobs 1,430 1,460 1,490 1,490 1,490 1,500 1,520 90 Financial and
Professional
Service Jobs 140 140 140 150 150 150 150 10
Health, Educ. and
Recreation Service
Jobs 910 990 1,070 1,100 1,130 1,180 1,220 310
Other Jobs 170 180 180 190 190 190 200 30
Total Jobs 2,780 2,910 3,030 3,070 3,090 3,140 3,200 420 Employed
Residents 810 920 1,050 1,120 1,190 1,280 1,370 560
Ratio of Local Jobs
to Employed
Residents 3.43 3.16 2.89 2.74 2.60 2.45 2.34 0.75
Source: ABAG Projections 2013
Though San Mateo County has a robust economy, much of its workforce cannot afford to live within the county. Job growth has been strong, although cyclical, over the past 10 years, and is projected to continue. Housing development has not kept up the pace with the growth in local jobs. According to the Department of Housing (Housing Needs Study, 2007), by 2025, San Mateo County’s supply of housing will only meet one third to one half of the demand.
Additionally, 40 percent of new jobs in the county will pay lower income wages.
A home meets the standard definition of affordability if it does not cost more than 30 percent of a household’s income. A household that spends more than 30 percent of its gross income on housing is considered to be overpaying for housing. Housing that costs more than 30% of household income is a more acute problem for lower income households, since there is less discretionary money for other necessities.
While individual household income conditions vary, an example can be useful to illustrate affordability conditions for a low income family in San Mateo County. A four-person family with one parent working fulltime as a cook and the other parent working in retail, can afford a monthly rent of about $1,400 and a home sales price of $222,000. A single parent family with the adult working as a police officer would be considered moderate income, and can afford a monthly rent of about $2,400 and a home costing $374,000. Neither of these example households can afford San Mateo County’s median condominium, costing $579,418, or single- family home, which costs $1,246,121 (SAMCAR), although the example single-parent family can afford the median county rent of $2,234.
H-14
Other examples of affordable home sales and rents based on occupation are shown in the table below.
Table H-10: Home Affordability by Occupation (2013)
Occupation
Annual Salary Affordable Home
Affordable
Rent
Elementary School Teacher $66,590 $255,805 $1,665
Police Officer $97,487 $374,495 $2,437
Cook $29,247 $112,352 $731
Retail Salesperson $28,427 $109,202 $711
Registered Nurse $112,137 $430,774 $2,804
Source: HCD State Income Limits 2013; www.hsh.com/calc-howmuch.html Maximum Affordable House Price is based on the following assumptions: 4.5% interest rate; 30-year fixed loan; 50% Yearly Salary as Down Payment; 1% property tax; PMI, .5% insurance rate; and no other monthly payments/debt.
Colma has more than three times as many jobs as residents, with approximately 2,900 jobs in the town. Colma serves as a regional shopping destination for retail goods and used and new automobiles and automobile services. In addition, Colma serves a regional need for cemetery land and associated services. The town also has a card room, Lucky Chances, which employs over 600 individuals. About 45 percent of the workers in the town make between $1,251 and $3,333/month, and almost 30 percent make more than $3,333 per month. Almost all (99 percent) of the workers in Colma commute in from other cities to work, according to 2011 US census data.
According to ABAG projections, Colma can expect to see its workforce increase by a quarter by 2025, with much of that job growth coming from the financial and professional services sector.
H-15
Table H-11: Workforce Age, Salary and Education
Category Colma County
Jobs by Worker Age
Age 29 or Younger 27% 19%
Age 30 to 54 51% 61%
Age 55 or Older 23% 20%
Salaries Paid by Jurisdiction Employers
$1,250 per Month or Less 27% 14%
$1,251 to $3,333 per Month 44% 27%
More than $3,333 per Month 28% 59%
Jobs by Worker Educational Attainment
Less than High School 13% 9%
High school or Equivalent, No College 17% 13%
Some College or Associate Degree 22% 23%
Bachelor's Degree or Advanced Degree 21% 36%
Educational Attainment Not Available 27% 19%
Total Workers 3,597 303,529
Source: 2011 U.S. Census On The Map
Note: Educational Attainment Not Available is for workers 29 and younger
H-16
HOUSEHOLD TRENDS AND CHARACTERISTICS
In 2008, the estimated number of households within Colma was 450 per US Census and Department of Finance data.
OCCUPANCY CHARACTERISTICS
Colma has a relatively large average household size, at three, but this size has decreased since 2000 when it was 3.5. Households in owner-occupied units tend to be slightly larger at 3.2.
Table H-12 Household Size
Year Household Size Colma County State
2000 Average Household Size 3.5 2.7 2.9
2011
Average Household Size 3.05 2.7 2.9
Owners Average Household Size 3.2 2.8 3.0
Renters Average Household Size 3.0 2.7 2.9
Source: 2010 US Census SF1, 2007-2011 American Community Survey Colma has a high percentage of families with children: more than 40 percent of the households.
An additional 30 percent of the population consists of families without children, though this percentage has declined since 2000. Single people make up 20 percent of the households.
Table H-13 Household Type
Household Type Colma County State
Single person 20% 25% 24%
Family no children 29% 37% 35%
Family with children 41% 31% 33%
Multi-person, nonfamily 10% 7% 7%
Total households 585* 256,305 12,433,049
Source: 2007-2011 American Community Survey
*Includes additional units in unincorporated San Manteo County and Daly City immediately adjacent to Colma.
Overcrowded Households
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, a unit is considered overcrowded if it the unit is occupied by more than 1.01 persons per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens). Homes with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded. Overcrowding increases health and safety concerns and stresses the condition of the housing stock and infrastructure.
Overcrowding correlates strongly with household size, particularly for large households.
H-17
Colma has a small number of overcrowded homes. Almost six percent of owner-occupied homes, or 12 homes, are overcrowded. The vast majority of rental homes are not overcrowded, however, six homes are considered overcrowded and 25 homes are extremely overcrowded.
The percent of overcrowded households has decreased since 2000, when close to a quarter of the homes were considered overcrowded.
H-14 Number of Overcrowded Units
Occupant Overcrowded
Occupied
Homes
Percent
Colma County State
Owner
Not overcrowded 192 94% 96% 96%
Overcrowded 12 5.9% 3% 3%
Extremely overcrowded 0 0.0% 1% 1%
Renter
Not overcrowded 350 92% 86% 86%
Overcrowded 6 1.6% 8% 8%
Extremely overcrowded 25 6.6% 5% 6%
Source: 2007-2011 American Community Survey
Note: 0-1 people per room is not overcrowded, 1-1.5 people per room is overcrowded, more than 1.5 people per room is extremely overcrowded
Trends in Household Income and Tenure
Colma’s median household income is $79,000, below the countywide average of $92,000. Just over 40 percent of Colma’s households make more than a moderate income, and another 40 percent of Colma’s households are lower income. 20 percent of all households are considered low-income, 13 percent are very low income, and seven percent are extremely low income.
Table H-15: Households by Income
Extremely
Low
7%
Very Low
13%
Low
20%
Moderate
18%
Above
Moderate
42%
H-18
Table H-16: Household Income
Income Colma County State
Under $25,000 10% 12% 21%
$25,000 to $34,999 2% 6% 9%
$35,000 to $49,999 6% 10% 13%
$50,000 to $74,999 27% 16% 17%
$75,000 to $99,999 22% 12% 12%
$100,000+ 31% 44% 28%
Poverty Rate 7.4% 7.4% 16%
Total 585 256,305 12,433,049
Median Income 2000 $79,313 $95,606 $64,116
Median Income 2011 $86,640 $91,958 $63,816
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments
Note: Adjusted for inflation to 2013 dollars
Table H-17: Households by Income and Tenure
Occupant
Extremely
Low
Very
Low Low Moderate
Above
Moderate
Owner 56% 68% 37% 41% 64%
Renter 44% 32% 63% 59% 36%
Total 34 59 95 85 195
% of all households 7% 13% 20% 18% 42%
Sources: CHAS Data 2006-2010
HOUSING VALUES AND COSTS
With relatively few homes, housing price data for Colma is hard to come by. According to Trulia data from October 2013, the median sale price for a home (including both multi-family and single-family) in Colma is $500,000. Colma’s home prices are below countywide averages for single-family homes, yet above the prices for multi-family homes. Despite the seemingly more reasonable prices, the median home in Colma is unaffordable to most households making less than the median income. A four-person family making moderate income, however, can afford the median home in Colma.
H-19
Table H-18: Ability to Pay for For-Sale Housing
Annual
Income
Maximum
Affordable
Home Price
Median Home
Sale Price
Affordability
Gap
Single Person
Extremely Low Income $23,750 $97,114 $500,000 -$402,886 Very Low Income $39,600 $161,925 $500,000 -$338,075
Low Income $63,350 $259,039 $500,000 -$240,961
Median Income $72,100 $294,818 $500,000 -$205,182
Moderate Income $86,500 $353,699 $500,000 -$146,301
Four Person
Extremely Low Income $33,950 $138,822 $500,000 -$361,178 Very Low Income $56,550 $231,233 $500,000 -$268,767
Low Income $90,500 $347,655 $500,000 -$152,345
Median Income $103,000 $370,055 $500,000 -$129,945
Moderate Income $123,600 $505,402 $500,000 $5,402
Source: Baird+ Driskell Community Planning: San Mateo County Association of Realtors; www.hsh.com/calc-howmuch.html Note: Maximum Affordable House Price is based on the following assumptions: 4.5% interest rate; 30-year fixed loan; 50% Yearly Salary as Down Payment; 1% property tax; PMI, .5% insurance rate; and no other monthly payments/debt.
Extremely limited rental data is available in Colma due to the very small number of homes.
According to this limited data, Colma’s rental prices for one and two-bedroom apartments are higher than the countywide averages for apartments of a similar size.
The existing Sterling Park neighborhood was improved to include brick streets, sidewalks, landscaping, lighting and underground utilities.
H-20
Table H-19: Summary of 2013 Rents
Bedrooms Colma County
Studio x $1,429
One Bedroom $2,633 $1,990
Two Bedroom $2,904 $2,660
Three Bedroom x $3,758
Four Bedroom x $6,418
Source: RealFacts Annual Trends Report, based on reporting from large apartment complexes, Craigslist Survey conducted in June and July 2013 Note: County Craigslist information derived from average of municipal sampling.
Overpayment for Housing
A household is considered to be overpaying for housing if they spend more than 30 percent of their income on rent or mortgage payments. Almost 70 percent of Colma residents making under $75,000 annually are overpaying for homeownership, and even 20 percent of those making more than $75,000 are overpaying for their homes. All of the lowest income renters, those making under $35,000, are overpaying on rent, and almost 40 percent of those making under $75,000 are overpaying as well.
If there is not enough affordable housing in Colma, lower-income people may choose to live elsewhere and commute into the city to work. Those who do live in Colma may live in overcrowded homes, and have extremely limited money to dedicate towards other necessities such as food, transportation, and medical care. Extremely low income households paying more than 50 percent of their income towards housing are at greater risk for becoming homeless.
Table H-20: Households Overpaying for Housing by Income
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Less than $35,000
$35,000-$74,999
$75,000+
Less than $35,000
$35,000-$74,999
$75,000+
Owners Renters
Percent Overpaying
H-21
Table H-21: Households Overpaying for Housing
Occupant Income
Colma County State
Number Percent Percent Percent
Owner-occupied
Less than $35,000 0 0% 68% 68%
$35,000-$74,999 31 69% 53% 54%
$75,000+ 27 19% 33% 27%
Renter-occupied
Less than $35,000 52 100% 95% 90%
$35,000-$74,999 58 38% 61% 49%
$75,000+ 41 25% 11% 9%
Source: 2007-2011 American Community Survey
Note: Excludes Households with no income or cash rent.
H-22
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Colma’s housing stock has grown even faster than its population. In 2000, Colma had 342 homes, and by 2010 it had 446 homes - an increase of 31 percent. Most of the homes in Colma are single-family detached buildings (percent). There are two newer townhome/attached single family developments with a total of 81 units which account for 18% of the total housing units.
Close to 40 percent of homes in Colma have three bedrooms. Half the homes have 1-2 bedrooms.
In 2000, almost half the population owned, while half
rented. Due to the erroneous inclusion of 135 rental units in the housing count for the Town in the 2010 census, it is not possible to accurately determine how many properties are owner-occupied and how many are tenant-occupied.
Due to the addition of 81 for sale units between 2000 and 2010, and no new rental housing, it is likely that the
percentage of owner-occupied units has increased since
2000, and may be consistent with the county average of 59 percent.
Colma has extremely low vacancy rates. According to 2011 data from the American Community Survey, Colma has no
vacant ownership units, and only a vacancy rate of two percent for rental units. A housing market with a vacancy rate under five percent is considered to be a tight market. Tight markets can lead to high housing prices and subsequent higher rates of overcrowding.
A remodeled historic single family home
(top) and duplex units (bottom) in
Colma’s Sterling Park neighborhood.
H-23
Table H-22: Building Type Chart
Table H-23: Total Housing Units
Year
Colma County State
Number Percent
Change Number Percent
Change Number Percent
Change
2000 342 x 260,576 x 12,214,549 x
2011 446 31.0% 271,140 4% 13,688,351 12%
Source: 2007-2011 American Community Survey, 2000 US Census, adjusted 2010 Census Table H-24 Tenure Type
Year Occupant Colma County State
2000 Percent Owners 52% 61% 57%
Percent Renters 48% 39% 43%
2011 Percent Owners unknown 59% 56%
Percent Renters unknown 41% 44%
Source: 2010 US Census SF1, 2007-2011 American Community Survey
Single Family
Detached
46%
Single Family
Attached
23%
2 units
20%
3 or 4
units
6%
5 to 9 units
1%
10 to 19 units
4%
H-24
Table H-25: Building Type
Building Type Colma County State
Single Family Detached 45% 57% 58%
Single Family Attached 22% 9% 7%
2 units 20% 2% 3%
3 or 4 units 6% 5% 6%
5 to 9 units 1% 6% 6%
10 to 19 units 4% 6% 5%
20 or more units 0% 14% 11%
Mobile Home or Other 0% 1% 4%
Total 446 271,140 13,688,351
Source: 2007-2011 American Community Survey, Town of Colma Building Permit records, San Mateo County Assessor’s Records
Table H-26: Bedrooms
Bedrooms Colma County State
No bedroom 1% 4% 4%
1 bedroom 22% 16% 14%
2 bedrooms 28% 26% 28%
3 bedrooms 39% 34% 33%
4 bedrooms 7% 16% 16%
5 or more bedrooms 2% 5% 4%
Total 446 271,140 13,688,351
Source: 2007-2011 American Community Survey.
Table H-27: Vacancy Rate
Year Occupant Colma County State
2000
Owner 0.0% 0.5% 1.4%
Renter 0.6% 1.8% 3.7%
2011
Owner 0.0% 1.2% 2.2%
Renter 2.1% 4.0% 5.5%
Source: 2007-2011 American Community Survey, 2000 US Census
HOUSING CONDITIONS
In addition to issues with affordability and overcrowding, housing can have physical problems such as age or lack of facilities. One of the best ways to assess the condition of the housing
H-25
stock is through a windshield tour. However, barring that, the census gives some useful information as to the status of the housing.
Approximately 19 percent of Colma’s housing stock has been built since 2000. This is an extremely high percentage: for comparison only approximately five percent of San Mateo County’s housing stock has been built since 2000. An additional 40 percent of Colma’s housing stock was built in the 1950s or earlier. Older housing can be more expensive to maintain and renovate.
The census tracks other housing problems, including a lack of plumbing and kitchen facilities and found no facilities lacking from homes in Colma.
Table H-28: Year Structure Built
Colma County State
Built in 2000 or more recently 19% 5.4% 12%
Built in 1990s 10% 6% 11%
Built in 1980s 12% 9% 15%
Build in 1970s 10% 17% 18%
Built in 1960s 9% 17% 14%
Built 1950s or Earlier 40% 45% 30%
Total 446 271,140 13,688,351
Source: 2007-2011 American Community Survey Town of Colma Building Permit Records and windshield survey(February 2014)
Table H-29: Number of Potential Housing Problems
Colma County
Number Percent Percent Percent
Lacking complete plumbing facilities 0 0.0% 0.3% 0.6%
Lacking complete kitchen facilities 0 0.0% 0.9% 1.3%
No telephone service available 0 0.0% 1.2% 1.9%
Source: 2007-2011 American Community Survey
H-26
BELOW MARKET RATE HOUSING TRENDS AND
CHARACTERISTICS
Units offered at rents or sale prices below that which they would command on the open market are referred to as “below-market rate” or BMR units. They are also often referred to as “affordable housing” units. Just over 40 percent of Colma’s households make more than a moderate income, and another 40 percent of Colma’s households are lower income. 20 percent of all households are considered low-income, 13 percent are very low income, and seven percent are extremely low income.
There are 18 units that were developed by the Town of Colma with monies from the Town’s general fund in the early 1990’s. The units, located along El Camino Real, are reserved for senior tenants. The below-market rate rents collected from these housing units are paid into the general fund. The Town also purchased one housing unit within a multi-unit complex at 1365 Mission Road, and has dedicated it as a below-market rate unit, renting it to qualifying very low-to-moderate income households.
POTENTIAL LOSS OF SUBSIDIZED UNITS
Government Code Section 65583 requires local jurisdictions to address the potential conversion of multi-family rental housing that receive governmental assistance under federal programs, state and local multi-family revenue bond programs, or local density bonus programs to no low- income housing use. There are no locally subsidized units at risk in Colma, as the Town has not issued mortgage revenue bonds, has not approved any density bonus units with financial assistance, and has not assisted multi-family housing with redevelopment or CDBG funds.
Existing and Projected Housing Needs
DETERMINATION OF HOUSING NEEDS
The Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process addresses housing needs across income levels for each jurisdiction in California. All of the Bay Area’s 101 cities and nine counties are given a share of the Bay Area’s total regional housing need. The Bay Area's regional housing need is allocated by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), and finalized though negotiations with the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). San Mateo County jurisdictions, through a unique process different from other Bay Area counties, collaboratively developed a formula to divide up San Mateo County’s overall housing allocation among the 21 jurisdictions in the county.
H-27
Table H-30: Regional Housing Needs Allocation (2014 – 2022)
Extremely
Low
Income
Up to
$31,650
Very
Low
Income
$31,651-
$52,750
Low
Income
$52,751-
$84,400
Moderate
Income
$84,401-
$123,600
Above
Moderate
Income
$123,601+ Total
Atherton 17 18 26 29 3 93
Belmont 58 58 63 67 222 468
Brisbane 12 13 13 15 30 83
Burlingame 138 138 144 155 288 863
Colma 10 10 8 9 22 59
Daly City 200 200 188 221 541 1,350
East Palo Alto 32 32 54 83 266 467
Foster City 74 74 87 76 119 430
Half Moon Bay 26 26 31 36 121 240
Hillsborough 16 16 17 21 21 91
Menlo Park 116 117 129 143 150 655
Hillsborough 96 97 101 112 257 663
Pacifica 60 61 68 70 154 413
Portola Valley 10 11 15 15 13 64
Redwood City 353 353 429 502 1,152 2,789
San Bruno 179 179 161 205 431 1,155
San Carlos 97 98 107 111 183 596
San Mateo 429 430 469 530 1,242 3,100
South San
Francisco 282 283 281 313 705 1,864
Woodside 11 12 13 15 11 62
Unincorporated 76 77 103 102 555 913
San Mateo
County Total 2,292 2,303 2,507 2,830 6,486 16,418
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments, Final 2014-2022 Regional Housing Need Allocation by County. Yearly Income is based on a family of four.
According to the RHNA, Colma will need to ensure there is land available for a total of 59 new units between 2015 and 2023. Approximately 37 percent of those units will be for households making more than moderate income, 15 percent will be for households making moderate income, 13 percent for low-income, and 17 percent for very low income and extremely low income households each.
The housing policies and programs set forth in this document are intended to reach the local housing objective of 59 units within the 2015 to 2023 period.
H-28
SPECIAL HOUSING NEEDS
Certain groups have greater difficulty in finding decent, affordable housing due to their special circumstances. Special circumstances may be related to employment and income, family characteristics, disability, and household characteristics.
State Housing Element law states that special needs groups include the following: senior households, disabled persons, developmentally delayed persons, large households, female- headed households with children, students, homeless persons, and farmworkers. This section provides a discussion of the housing needs facing each group.
HOUSING NEEDS FOR SENIOR RESIDENTS
Seniors face many housing challenges as they age, including a fixed budget, higher medical costs, and greater likelihood of disabilities. It is estimated that 11% of Colma’s population is over the age of 60 (about 160 individuals)
The Town of Colma owns 18 Senior Housing Units, located on El Camino Real
H-29
Almost a quarter of the seniors in Colma have incomes higher than $100,000, but almost half the seniors have an income below $50,000.
Seniors in Colma, like seniors in San Mateo County at large, are significantly more likely to be homeowners than renters. Thus, housing concerns for seniors in Colma might include retrofits to allow seniors to age in place (stay in their current home as they get older). Often, homeownership means greater housing security. According to the “Key Housing Trends in San Mateo” report, 52 percent of seniors who rent in San Mateo County are economically insecure while only 27 percent of seniors who own their own home without a mortgage are economically insecure.
As the large baby boomer population ages, Colma, like the rest of San Mateo County, is expected to see a growing senior population. According to the “Key Housing Trends in San Mateo County” document, the county can expect to see a 76 percent increase in the number of seniors. A key challenge in the coming years will be how to accommodate the needs of aging residents. For more information about senior trends and preferences, see the 2013 “Key Housing Trends in San Mateo” report in Appendix A.
Table H-31: Senior Households by Tenure (2011)
Occupant Colma County State
All Ages
Owners 35% 60% 57%
Renters 65% 40% 43%
Total 585 256,423 12,433,172
Age 65-74
Owners 35% 79% 75%
Renters 65% 21% 25%
Total 37 27,053 1,265,873
Age 75-84
Owners 19% 81% 75%
Renters 81% 19% 25%
Total 21 18,014 823,750
Age 85 +
Owners 100% 75% 69%
Renters 0% 25% 31%
Total 11 9,136 342,029
Source and Notes: 2007-2011 American Community Survey, Seniors are age 65 +
PEOPLE LIVING WITH DISABILITIES
People with disabilities face many challenges when looking for housing. There is a limited supply of handicap accessible, affordable housing generally, and the supply is especially tight near transit. Being near transit is important because many people with disabilities cannot drive.
People with disabilities are also often extremely low income due to the challenge of securing long-term employment, and to higher medical bills. Additionally, because some people with
H-30
disabilities, particularly developmental disabilities, have lived with their parents they often do not have rental or credit history. This makes it harder for them to compete for the limited housing that is available.
PEOPLE WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
A recent state law, SB 812, requires Housing Elements to include an analysis of the special housing needs of people with developmental disabilities. Additionally, SB 812 requires that individuals with disabilities receive public services in the least restrictive, most integrated setting appropriate to their needs
California defines developmentally disabled as a, “severe and chronic disability that is attributable to a mental or physical impairment. The disability must begin before the person’s 18th birthday, be expected to continue indefinitely, and present a substantial disability.” Some development disabilities cause mental retardation and some do not. Common developmental disabilities include Down’s syndrome, autism, epilepsy and cerebral palsy.
People with developmental disabilities in San Mateo County have various diagnoses. The common ones are summarized below. Because people can have multiple diagnoses, the numbers total more than 100 percent.
Table H-32: Type of Developmental Disability
Developmental Disability Percent
Mild/Moderate Mental Retardation 50%
Autism 18%
Epilepsy 18%
Cerebral Palsy 17%
Severe/Profound Mental Retardation 11%
Source: Golden Gate Regional Center
People with developmental disabilities tend to be younger than the general population. There are several reasons for this. For some diagnoses there is a shorter life expectancy. More importantly, starting in the 1990s there was an “autism wave” with many more young people being diagnosed with the disorder, for reasons that are still not well understood. The racial demographics of the developmentally disabled population mirror that of the population of the Bay Area.
H-31
Table H-33: Age of People with Development Disabilities Age Range
People with
Developmental Disability
0-5 19%
6-21 30%
22-51 36%
52+ 15%
Total 100%
Source: Golden Gate Regional Center. (County level data) Many people with developmental disabilities are unable to secure long-term employment. This results in many people relying on Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and many earn 10-20 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI).
People with developmental disabilities have various housing needs and housing situations.
Almost all (88 percent) of Colma residents with disabilities live with a parent or legal guardian.
Table H-34: Living Arrangements of People with Developmental Disabilities Lives with
Number Percent
Colma County Colma County
Parents/Legal Guardian 162 2,289 88% 66%
Community Care Facility (1-6 Beds) 7 532 4% 15%
Community Care Facility (7+ Beds) 3 73 2% 2%
Independent/Supportive Living 12 349 7% 10%
Intermediate Care Facility 0 191 0% 5%
All Others 0 60 0% 2%
Total: 184 3,494 100% 100%
Source: Golden Gate Regional Center
Note: Counts based on zip code and may include areas outside of jurisdictional borders.
Trends that are affecting the people with developmental disabilities include California’s moves to reduce institutionalization, ageing family caregivers not being able to continue providing in- house care and the growing wave of people with autism.
▪ Deinstitutionalization – In 1977, California, passed the Lanterman Developmentally Disabled Services Act, to minimize the institutionalization of developmentally disabled people, help them remain in their communities, and to allow them to live their lives as similar to non-disabled people as possible. To accomplish this end the state has been closing large institutional care facilities, resulting in more people with disabilities being
H-32
integrated into the community. However, this has increased the demand for community based independent living options to serve the needs of the developmentally disabled. ▪ Aging Baby Boomers Unable to Care for their Children with Developmental Disabilities – As displayed in the table below, almost three quarters of people with developmental disabilities live with a parent or caregiver, and many of these caregivers are baby boomers. As these caregivers age their ability to continue to care for their developmentally disabled children will decrease to the point where it is no longer possible. This trend is also going to be a factor in the increased need for community- based independent living options for the developmentally disabled. Many service delivery systems and communities are not prepared to meet the increasing need.
Table H-35: Housing Type of People with Developmental Disabilities in San Mateo County (2014)
Age
Home of
Parent or
Guardian
Own
Home
Licensed
Group
Home
Licensed
Health
Care
Facility
Foster
-Type
Care
Hom
eles
s
Subtot
al of
Autism
Only
Total
Number
for All
Diagnoses
0-3 609 0 0 0 11 0 ** 620
4-12 930 0 11 0 1 1 329 943
15-29 908 47 113 17 13 2 212 1,100
30-44 294 103 135 35 12 0 34 579
45-59 156 109 245 71 11 1 52 593
60-74 35 53 122 91 6 0 10 307
75-89 3 5 20 17 0 0 0 45
90-104 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 5
Total 2,935 317 650 232 54 4 637 4,192
**No diagnosis yet
Source: Golden Gate Regional Center, February 2014
▪ Increasing Numbers of People with Autism - There is a large number of people with developmentally disabilities that have autism. They have been brought up as independent members of the community and want to remain independent and involved in the community. There is a coming need to supply community based independent living options for these individuals.
OTHER DISABILITIES AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
People in Colma have non-developmental disabilities, such as hearing disabilities or vision disabilities, as well. Some residents have both developmental and non-developmental disabilities.
H-33
In San Mateo County, almost a third of the senior population has some kind of disability. Eight percent of the total population in the county has some kind of disability. The most common disabilities in the county are ambulatory disabilities (four percent of the population) and independent living disabilities (three percent).
The census does not have numbers specifically for Colma because it is too small, but the percentages are likely similar to the countywide averages.
Table H-36: Age and Type of Disability
Number Percent
County State County State
Under 18 with Disability 3,270 280,649 2.1% 3.0%
Age 18-64 with Disability 23,231 1,843,497 5.0% 7.9% Age 65 + with Disability 28,703 1,547,712 31% 37%
Any Age with Any Disability 55,204 3,671,858 8% 10% Any Age With Hearing Disability 15,651 1,022,928 2.2% 2.8% With Vision Disability 8,199 685,600 1.1% 1.9%
With Cognitive Disability 19,549 1,400,745 2.7% 3.8% With Ambulatory Disability 29,757 1,960,853 4.2% 5.3% With Self Care Disability 12,819 862,575 1.8% 2.3%
With Independent Living Disability 22,735 1,438,328 3.2% 3.9% Source: 2007-2011 American Community Survey
Note: Some people may have multiple disabilities
The three major needs for people with disabilities are low cost (subsidized) rents, handicapped accessible homes, and buildings near public transportation. These needs are very similar to the desires of other segments of the population. Policies that promote affordable housing generally are also good for the disabled community. Specific recommendations from the Golden Gate Regional Center (with a note of Colma’s actions or programs) include:
▪ Jurisdictions assisting with site identification for low income developments (Colma’s Program 5.5, regular meetings with non-profit developers, Program 3.2, Density Bonus allowance and Program 4.3 Emergency Shelters);
▪ Policies to promote accessible homes (Colma’ Progam 4.1, Reasonable Accommodation and enforcement of building codes related to accessibility); ▪ Inclusionary zoning (Colma’s Program 3.7, Inclusionary Housing); ▪ Second units (Colma’s Program 2.1), Second Unit Ordinance); and ▪ Mixed use zoning (Colma’s Program 3.3, High Density Housing near BART).
Additionally, some people with development disabilities need supportive housing that is affordable and located near public transit. In supportive housing, additional services are provided at the home.
H-34
FEMALE-HEADED AND LARGE HOUSEHOLDS
Households headed by a single parent can have special needs due to the economic limitation of earning only one income, and the challenges of childcare without a partner. Although gender equality has made strides over the past 50 years, women continue to earn lower incomes than men. Therefore, female-headed households in particular have specific housing needs that must be addressed. Female-headed households can have special needs that include low cost housing, suitable for children and located near schools and childcare facilities. Innovative, shared living arrangements, including congregate cooking and childcare, could also be appropriate Female-headed households comprise 28 percent of the households in Colma. The most vulnerable female-headed households can be those where women are living with children without a partner. Colma has 90 such households, or 15 percent of the total number of households. An additional, approximately 80 households are headed by women living alone or with other family members. Female-headed households are more likely to be living under the poverty line than other households: 10 percent of female-headed households in Colma are under the poverty line.
Table H-37: Female Headed Households
Colma
County State Number Percent
Female living with own children, no husband 90 15% 4% 7% Female living with other family members, no
husband 17 3% 6% 6%
Female living alone 61 10% 15% 13%
Total Households 585 100% 256,305 12,433,049
Female Households Below Poverty Level NA 10% 8% 17%
Source: 2007-2011 American Community Survey
Large households are defined as households with five or more members living in the same home. Large households are a special needs group because of the difficulty in finding adequate and affordable housing. Many jurisdictions have few large homes, and often these larger homes are significantly more expensive than smaller ones. Large households throughout San Mateo County are much more likely than smaller households to have some kind of housing problem.
Colma has approximately 90 large households. In Colma, overcrowding is rare; however large renter households are much more likely to have some housing problems.
H-35
Table H-38: Households of 5 or more by Tenure and Housing Problems
Colma County
State
Number Percent
Owner-occupied Housing Problems 10 29% 59% 61%
No Housing Problems 24 71% 41% 39%
Renter-occupied Housing Problems 35 64% 84% 81%
No Housing Problems 20 36% 16% 19%
Source: 2006-2010 CHAS Data
HOUSING NEEDS FOR FARM WORKERS
Farmworkers are traditionally defined as persons whose primary incomes are earned through seasonal agricultural labor. Most jurisdictions in San Mateo County have no farms or farmworkers; however there are 334 farms and 1,722 farmworkers in the county, primarily located in coastal communities. Of these 1,722 farmworkers, 88 are migrant workers and 329 work less than 150 days annually (and are therefore considered to be “seasonal labor”). Farm workers who are migrant or seasonal workers have special housing needs because of their relatively low income and the unstable nature of their job (i.e. having to move throughout the year from one harvest to the next). These workers generally face higher rates of overcrowding and other substandard housing conditions. Continued efforts to provide affordable housing, especially affordable housing suitable for families, will help meet the needs of these Farm workers.
The Town of Colma has several commercial container plant nurseries that operate year-round and offer their employees regular pay and benefits. In addition, Colma has two small flower farms that are maintained by individual farmers that lease land and successfully sell their crops to local merchants.
Table H-39: Farm workers in San Mateo County (2012)
2007 2012
Total Farms 329 334
Land in farms (acres) 57,089 48,160
Hired Farm Labor - 1,722
Migrant labor - 88
Working > 150 days annually - 718
Working <150 days annually - 329
Source: USDA Census of Agriculture, 2012.
H-36
HOUSING NEEDS FOR THE HOMELESS
All 21 jurisdictions within San Mateo County have adopted the ten-year HOPE Plan (Housing Our People Effectively: Ending Homelessness in San Mateo County), designed to end homelessness within ten years. The HOPE Plan adopts a Housing First policy, which seeks to move homeless people into permanent housing instead of shelters by increasing the stock of affordable and subsidized housing. Although the HOPE planners recognized that there is a lack of needed resources throughout the housing continuum, including emergency and transitional housing, the greatest need and the most effective use of new and/or redirected resources is for creating and sustaining quality affordable housing and supportive housing.
According to a 2013 countywide homeless survey there are 2,281 homeless people living in San Mateo County. Close to 90 percent of the homeless population was living in San Mateo County when they became homeless.
Table H-40: Demographics of Homeless Population
County
Unsheltered Homeless Sheltered Homeless
Single Adult or Living w/Another
Adult 94% 79%
Family 6% 21%
Male 71% 60%
Female 29% 40%
White 60% x
Latino 19% x
African American 13% x
Other Races 10% x
Non-Veteran 89% 76%
Veteran 11% 24%
Alcohol / Drug Problems 72% 8%
Physical Disability 52% x
Chronic Health Problem 47% x
Mental Illness 37% 10%
Source: 2013 San Mateo County Homeless Census and Survey, prepared by the San Mateo Human Services Agency, Center on Homelessness. May not total 100% due to rounding
H-37
ABILITY TO MEET HOUSING NEEDS
RESIDENTIAL LAND INVENTORY
A key component of the Housing Element is a projection of a jurisdiction’s housing supply.
State law requires that the element identify adequate sites for housing, including rental housing and manufactured housing, and make adequate provisions of the existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community. This includes an inventory of land suitable for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having potential for redevelopment, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public services to these sites.
Existing Residential Development
Existing housing units are identified on Exhibit H-1, Housing and Exhibit H-2, Sterling Park Neighborhood. These maps include all dwelling units constructed prior to 2011. Based on American Community Survey (2007-2011) and Census records, there are a total of 463 dwelling units in the Town of Colma, 274 of which are located in the Sterling Park neighborhood and the remaining are located outside of Sterling Park.
Due to the recession and limited available land, no new residential units have been constructed in Colma since 2007.
This former greenhouse is located in Sterling Park. The parcel is zoned for residential use and has a realistic development potential of nine single family detached units.
H-38
Approved Residential Development
As of July 31, 2014, there are no residential projects under construction in the Town, nor are there any approved residential projects not yet under construction.
Development Potential
In total, there are parcels available for the development of approximately 75 new residential units, including 12 single family units and 63 multi-family units. Of these units, there is potential for at least 10 units available to extremely low income households, 10 units to very low income households, 8 units to low income households, 9 units to moderate income households and 22 units to above moderate income households. The potential for 75 new units exceeds the development need for 59 units to be constructed between 2015 and 2023.
Adequate Sites Inventory
Planning staff inventoried vacant and underutilized parcels in Colma to determine what land is available for development at various levels of density. These density levels were then equated to the affordability levels set during the RHNA process and the number of units which might be developed at each affordability level was estimated. The analysis was also completed using the actual average built densities for developments built on land with various zoning designations; the State has determined that it is not sufficient to simply calculate it at the zoned densities, especially if there are significant differences between zoned and built densities.
The Town of Colma’s land inventory for future housing includes property zoned for multi-family use that is currently vacant, as well as land that is underutilized. The adequate sites analysis demonstrates that there is enough land to meet the ABAG Regional Housing Needs Allocation.
The analysis for affordable housing units for extremely low, very low, low and moderate income households is based on the assumption that any property zoned to accommodate multi-family development of twelve or more units will produce 20% affordable units through the provisions of the Inclusionary Housing Subchapter 12 of the Colma Municipal Code.
The ability to provide affordable units in Colma is more dependent on available financial resources than zoning density. If qualified developments are able to obtain federal tax credits and other funding or incentives, there is a higher probability that more affordable units will be provided than in a development where no government or other subsidies are available or obtained.
H-39
Table H-41: County Homeless Population Location 2007-2013 Location 2007 2013 Change
On the Street 29% 15% -41%
In Car, R.V., or Encampment 24% 41% 90%
In Emergency Shelter 14% 11% -18%
In Motel with Motel Voucher 5% 1% -73%
In Transitional Housing 15% 19% 41%
In Institution 13% 12% 7%
Total: 2,064 2,281 217
Source: 2013 San Mateo County Homeless Census and Survey, 2011 San Mateo County Homeless Census and Survey, 2009 San Mateo County Homeless Census and Survey, prepared by the San Mateo Human Services Agency, Center on Homelessness
The homeless in San Mateo are both sheltered, meaning they live in emergency shelters, transitional housing, treatment centers or other similar institutions; and unsheltered, meaning they live on the street, in encampments or in a vehicle.
The number of homeless people living on the street in San Mateo County has decreased since 2007. However, the number living in an RV, car or encampment has risen dramatically to just over 40 percent of the total homeless population. The remaining 43 percent are considered sheltered homeless, and live in shelters, transitional housing, motels or institutions.
The vast majority homeless people are single adults (who may be living with another adult, but no children). Still, one-fifth of the sheltered homeless are families. Most were white (60%) and male (60-71 percent). Notably, 72 percent of the unsheltered homeless population has an alcohol and drug problem, while only eight percent of the sheltered population has a similar problem.
Table H-42: Location when Homelessness Occurred
Quantification of Available Homeless Assistance Resources Shelters and homeless assistance programs are the main resources available to homeless residents of San Mateo County. Colma helps to meet the needs of its homeless residents by providing financial support and appropriate referrals to local homeless assistance programs available in San Mateo County, including Shelter Network, the Human Investment Project, North Location County
Living in San Mateo County when became homeless 87%
Hometown in San Mateo County 69%
Source: 2013 San Mateo County Homeless Census and Survey, prepared by the San Mateo Human Services Agency, Center on Homelessness
H-40
Peninsula Food Pantry and Dining Center of Daly City, and the Second Harvest Food Bank. In addition, Colma permits development of a homeless shelter as a permitted use in the Commercial (C) zone.
San Mateo County’s Center on Homeless, a program overseen by the County Human Services Agency, coordinates the provision of homeless services within the County, including those by non-governmental entities. The Center on Homeless provides information to county residents, provides referrals, administers self-sufficiency programs and develops homeless resources.
There are also several specialized shelters for persons with substance abuse problems and mental illnesses, as well as victims of domestic violence and youth.
The nearest large homeless assistance facility is the Community Service Center in Daly City. The Center is a clearinghouse providing motel vouchers, bus tickets and referrals to the County’s transitional shelters. In addition, this facility provides a Home Sharing service which keeps track of those with living quarters to share.
Determination of Unmet Homeless Needs in Colma
As of the 2013 San Mateo Homeless Census, 7 unsheltered homeless people were counted in Colma. Homelessness is a regional issue and consideration of the homeless is important in formulating housing policy.
HOUSING NEEDS FOR EXTREMELY LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
Extremely Low Income (ELI) households earn 30 percent of the area median income or less. In San Mateo County this amounts to an annual income of $33,950 or below for a family of four.
Many ELI households live in rental housing and most likely facing overpayment, overcrowding or substandard housing conditions. Some ELI households are recipients of public assistance such as social security insurance or disability insurance. Housing types available and suitable for ELI households include affordable rentals, secondary dwelling units, emergency shelters, supportive housing and transitional housing.
There are 35 ELI households in Colma according to 2010 CHAS data. More than half of Colma’s ELI households face some kind of housing problem: 100 percent of all ELI renter households, and 20 percent of ELI owner households face overcrowding, overpayment, and/or lack complete kitchen or plumbing facilities.
H-41
Table H-43: Housing Needs for Extremely Low Income (ELI) Households in Colma Household Category
Renter
Households
Owner
Households
Total
Household
s
Total households any income 220 250 470
Total ELI households 15 20 35
ELI households with housing problems 100% 20% 54%
ELI households with cost burden (paying 30% or
more of income) 100% 20% 54%
ELI households with cost burden (paying 50% or
more of income) 100% 0% 43%
Source: HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (2006-2010)
H-42
H-43
H-44
Several sites have development potential, including three parcels located in the Sterling Park neighborhood, two sites located along El Camino Real near the Colma BART Station, and one site located near the intersection of Old Mission Road and El Camino Real. A detailed site inventory describing the development potential of each, as well as site-specific constraints is provided in the following section.
A. STERLING PARK DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
Three separate vacant or underutilized parcels are located within the Sterling Park residential neighborhood. A site analysis has determined that 12 single family detached (SFD) units can be developed on these three parcels, which have a combined total area of 0.91 acre.
There are no governmental or site specific constraints impeding the development of these parcels with single family residences. All parcels are designated for single family residential development with a maximum allowable density of 13 units per acre. Sewer and water infrastructure capacity exists to accommodate the potential housing units. This amount of residential development in Sterling Park is already anticipated in the Colma General Plan.
Table H-44: Sterling Park Single Family Detached Development Potential APN Location Designation
& Zone Acres Dev.
Pot.
Density
Allowed Constraints
008-126-100 C Street
(southside) Residential (R) 0.1 2
13 units/ acre
None, infra-
structure
capacity
exists
008-126-040 B Street
(southside) Residential (R) 0.7 9
008-125-180 B Street
(northside) Residential (R) 0.11 1
Total 0.91 12 units
B. EL CAMINO REAL DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
Two separate parcels are located along El Camino Real, near the Colma BART Station which is located just outside the Town's municipal boundaries. Together, these parcels total 1.13 acres.
The presence of the Colma BART Station is expected to stimulate development of multiple unit residential buildings and mixed use developments in this area. Sewer and water infrastructure capacity exists and can accommodate all potential housing units. Development of existing and projected parcels is already anticipated in the Colma General Plan.
The County adopted the Colma BART Station Area Plan which provides incentives for higher density development and density bonuses for affordable housing on unincorporated land near the BART Station. Additionally, Colma’s Zoning Code provides density bonus incentives for affordable units.
H-45
Sandblaster Property – 7773 El Camino Real
A
0.53 acre parcel on the east side of El Camino Real is bounded by “C” Street to the north and the “D” Street stairs to the south. This parcel is referred to as the ‘Sandblaster Property’ due to its past light industrial use. The parcel currently, contains two billboards. The site is currently designated as residential/commercial.
Site-specific constraints include steep topography along the eastern and northern boundaries of the site. In addition, there may be specific environmental and physical constraints on the site.
Although an in-depth environmental site evaluation has not been completed, it is anticipated that there may be some surface and sub-surface ground contamination on the site as a result of the long-term sandblasting business. However, a development proposal for the site was received in 2007 by the Town Planning Department. The proposal included 13 residential units located above ground floor retail uses with sub-grade parking serving the development, and was deemed appropriate and feasible. The application was not pursued by the applicant.
Rezoning the site to a ‘Planned Development’ land use designation would allow for additional flexibility in the setbacks and other design standards applicable to the project. Planned Development designation allows for a project’s design to respond to site specific conditions, and encourages mixed use and residential development. The Town’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (Subchapter 12 of the Colma Municipal Code) includes concessions and incentives for eligible development projects, subject to approval by the City Council, to facilitate development of affordable units on smaller sites such as the property at 7773 El Camino Real.
H-46
It should be noted that the project plans submitted in 2007 included this site and the two single family residential lots on C Street, mentioned in the Sterling Park Development Potential section, for a total of 15 units.
Bocci Property – 7778 El Camino Real
A 0.6 acre parcel on the west side of El Camino Real was recently reoccupied by a monument making light industrial operation. The parcel is referred to as the ‘Bocci Property’ due to the family name of the historic monument manufacturing company located there.
The parcel is bounded by the entrance to the Colma BART station to the north, the BART right- of-way to the west and south, and El Camino Real to the east. This parcel could be redeveloped with high-density residential or a mixed use development that includes high density residential.
The property is currently designated for commercial use, which allows for multi-family residential.
The 0.6 acre Bocci site at 7778 El Camino Real has a realistic development potential of 24 high density multi-family units.
Site specific constraints on the property include a utility easement serving the adjacent Colma BART Station.
H-47
Site-specific constraints on the parcel include its triangular shape, the close proximity of the BART tracks to the property, and an existing utility easement serving the adjacent Colma BART Station that reduces the buildable area of the property. However, a development proposal was previously submitted to the Town Planning Department, which took into account the site’s constraints. The proposal included 24 high density multifamily dwelling units over ground floor retail and was deemed to be a realistic development proposal. As with the other El Camino Real parcel, rezoning it to a ‘Planned Development’ land use designation would allow for additional flexibility in the setbacks and other design standards applicable to the project. Planned Development designation allows for a project’s design to respond to site specific conditions, and is anticipated to encourage mixed use and residential development. The development proposal has since been withdrawn and a small monument business has leased the property. While the terms of the lease are not known, it is likely that redevelopment of the site with mixed-use (including high-density residential) will not occur while the monument business exists on site.
Given the site’s unusual shape and existing access, it is not recommended that residential development occur on the site while the present structures exist.
Table H-45: El Camino Real Parcels Multi-Family Development Potential APN Location Designation
& Zone Acres Dev.
Pot.
Density
Allowed Constraints
008-127-020
(Sandblaster)
El Camino
Real
Mixed Use -
Residential/
Commercial -
(R/C)
0.53 13 30
units/acre
Topography, possible
ground surface
contamination
008-141-080
(Bocci)
El Camino
Real
Mixed-Use -
Commercial -
(C)
0.6 24 30
units/acre
Utility Easement,
Triangular Shape
Total 1.13 ac 37
units
H-48
C. HOLY CROSS SITE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
An additional 3.32 acre development site is located on the north side of El Camino Real, near its intersection with Mission Road and the southern Town boundary. This site is referred to as the Holy Cross Site, as it is adjacent to the Holy Cross Cemetery and is owned by the Archdiocese of San Francisco. Although the maximum allowable density of 22 units per acre would allow for up to 73 multifamily units, site specific constraints reduce the realistic development potential of the site to approximately 26 dwelling units.
Site-specific constraints include its narrow and triangular shape, site topography and existing structural encumbrances on the site, including a small reservoir providing irrigation water to Holy Cross Cemetery. While the reservoir may be considered a significant constraint, the property owners have entertained the possibility of relocating or eliminating the reservoir should the property be sold for development. The realistic development potential of 26 dwelling units was calculated by evaluating required off-street parking and taking into account the unusual
H-49
and difficult to develop triangular-shaped site. However, it may be possible to get a greater number of units on the site using the flexibility allowed by the Planned Development zoning designation and creative solutions that may include sub-grade parking.
Because the site is unique and has a number of site-specific physical constraints, a rezoning to a Planned Development land use designation would allow for the most development flexibility in setting standards such as height, setbacks, ingress and egress, and landscaping. The Planned Development designation would be accompanied by plans for development, including site plans, floor plans, elevations, landscaping and other site improvements. Sewer and water infrastructure capacity exists and can accommodate all potential housing units. Development of existing and projected parcels is already anticipated in the Colma General Plan.
H-50
Table H-46: Holy Cross Site Multi-Family Development Potential APN Location Designation
& Zone Acres Development
Potential
Density
Allowed Constraints
011-370-220 Mission
Road
Commercial
(C) 3.32 26 MFD 22 units/
acre
Topography,
narrow and
triangular site,
existing
infrastructure
Total 3.32 26 MFD
The Town of Colma will continue to entertain proposals on the various opportunity sites and will work with developers on meeting the Town’s development standards and overall design-related goals. The Planned Development designation allows flexibility in development standards, while not inhibiting the maximum densities allowed by the General Plan. In addition to the single- family residential infill opportunities, the realistic development potential on sites targeted for Planned Development are achievable.
In accordance with Government Code Section 65863(b), the City adopted a No Net Loss Program which was added to the Colma Municipal Code in 2013. This program requires that if any identified sites are developed at lower densities than anticipated, that the incremental loss of housing capacity will be accommodated elsewhere by either identifying other sites that have housing capacity or by rezoning sites within the Town to accommodate the lost capacity. One way to accomplish this is to require a minimum density rather than our standard practice of identifying a maximum density for a specific site.
H-51
GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
As part of the Housing Element process, the Town analyzed its Zoning Code, permitting processes, development standards, and building codes to identify potential constraints for the development of housing. Housing Element proposes specific actions and implementation schedules to remove such impediments, where possible.
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Colma’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance provide for a wide range of allowable residential densities in both residential and commercial districts. General Plan densities typically determine the maximum number of dwelling units allowed on a specific site. The Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the General Plan. Additionally, the Town has a Planned Development designation which permits relaxation of zoning standards. In the past, the Planned Development designation has been used to develop high density residential projects and is the most successful manner of developing the available parcels identified in the previous section, because of their unique site constraints and small size.
As discussed earlier, the Town’s Commercial/Mixed Use and Commercial Land Use Designations sites will accommodate a majority of the housing need for lower income units. The Colma General Plan specifically identifies the Commercial/Mixed Use designation for ground-floor retail/office with residential units above. The mechanism to effectuate a mixed-use development is the rezoning of the property to Planned Development, which maintains the full multi-family allowance in the commercial zone but allows for greater flexibility in development standards to maximize unit yield.
This analysis is based upon two assumptions: that the identified sites allowing mixed-use will be developed with the residential uses and developers will build to the estimated realistic densities for each of these sites. The first of these assumptions is prudent in light of recent trends in the Town and sites near the identified sites. Developments near the identified sites were almost exclusively residential use projects or include a small portion of retail/commercial uses.
Residential projects have been proposed on two of the sites in close proximity to the Colma BART Station, lending credence toward the sites being developed with residential uses. There are several other reasons why the identified sites are likely to develop with the estimated residential capacity during the planning period:
1. Areas designated for mixed-use development have no minimum commercial component requirement, so developers are able to develop 100 percent residential (i.e. there is no vertical mixed use requirement) on mixed use sites.
2. The Town supports housing in the Town’s mixed-use areas by assisting in site assembly.
H-52
3. The majority of mixed-use sites are not prime sites favored by commercial establishments.
4. The sites are located in close proximity to where other new residential development has been built or approved.
Thus, it is reasonable to assume that the identified sites will be developed as residential-use projects, at, or above, the estimated densities.
The zoning ordinance sets forth requirements that can affect the type, appearance and cost of housing to be built within the Town of Colma. The zoning ordinance includes standards for development determining minimum lot size, permitted use(s), minimum setbacks, maximum height limits and minimum parking standards. There is no lot coverage limit or floor area ratio standard for residential zoning districts in Colma. The building envelope allowed on a residentially zoned lot in Colma is determined by setbacks and height limits. There are two residentially zoned districts in Colma, the Residential (R) zone and the Residential – Sterling Park (R-S) zone. The R-zone allows single family dwellings by right (no land use entitlements required) and multi-family dwellings up to six units with approval of a Use Permit provided that the residential density proposed does not exceed that which is specified in the General Plan.
The R-S zone allows single family detached dwellings only.
Development standards in Colma such as setbacks, building height and off-street parking are similar to or less restrictive than those in surrounding communities and would not be considered unreasonable development constraints. For example, the minimum side yard (10 percent of lot width) can be as narrow as 3.33 feet, which is much smaller than the 10 foot setback required by many San Mateo County jurisdictions. Colma allows a minimum lot size of 3,333 square feet, which is significantly smaller than most jurisdictions. In addition, Colma allows residential development on commercially-zoned parcels, which is a far less restrictive land use policy than found elsewhere in the County. The development standards for residential zones are summarized in the table below.
H-53
Current R-S and R Zone Development Standards
Standard R-S Zone R Zone
Front Setback: First Floor 15’/19’ to garage 15’/19’ to garage Second Floor None None
Side Setback: First Floor 3’3”=10% of lot width or 10’
whichever is less
10% of lot width or 10’,
whichever is less
Second Floor None None
Rear Setback: First Floor 15’ 25% of total lot area, not to exceed 25’
Second Floor 25’ 25’
FAR: No restriction. Governed by
setbacks/height limits
No restriction- governed by
setbacks/height limits
Height: 27’ 36’
In 2013, the Town adopted manufactured home design standards for the Town’s two single- family residential zoning districts in compliance with Government Code Section 65852.3(a), and are permitted as single-family dwellings.
The parking standards are set forth in the zoning ordinance by district, and are defined in Section 5.01.080 of the zoning ordinance. These standards are summarized in the table below.
Parking Standards
Residence Type Spaces Required Total Covered Uncovered
Single Family Detached: (Over 4 bdrms., add 0.5
spaces/each addl. bedroom) 2 2
Multiple Units:
Studio 1 .5 1.5
1 Bedroom 1 .5 1.5
2-4 Bedrooms 1 1 2
Over 4 Bedrooms add .5 covered or uncovered for each
additional bedroom
The Zoning Ordinance includes provisions for residential structures existing or approved prior to March 1, 1988. These provisions require only one (1) parking space for each single family dwelling or for a multi-family dwelling having no more than one bedroom and 1.5 covered parking spaces for each multi-family dwelling having two (2) or more bedrooms. If the existing units comply with these provisions, property owners are not required to provide additional parking spaces because of repairs, restoration, remodeling or additions to such units; however, if additional bedrooms are added to an existing single family dwelling, the number off–street
H-54
parking spaces must be increased by 0.5 covered or uncovered spaces for each bedroom exceeding the total, existing and added, of four (4) bedrooms.
The density limits set forth in the Colma General Plan allow 13-30 units per acre in residentially zoned areas, and up to 30 units per acre in the mixed commercial/residential areas. Up to 30 residential units per acre are permitted in certain commercial areas through mixed-use developments, which are established through the Planned Development process. Through the establishment of a Planned Development, standards may vary including those associated with parking, building height, and Floor Area Ratio. Density bonuses are also permitted under specific circumstances.
Although development standards and densities are generally less restrictive than those found in other Peninsula communities, Colma’s high proportion of land uses directly related to the large inventory of cemetery land discussed in the preceding section must be viewed as a constraint to future development of housing in Colma. This constraint is not, however, insurmountable in view of the availability of sites identified in this document. Existing residential development standards, such as setbacks, height limits and parking requirements have not constrained housing development in the Town. In many cases, they are less restrictive than other jurisdictions in San Mateo County, resulting in lower costs to develop housing. The flexibility afforded in the Planned Development process allows residential development to achieve maximum densities while balancing livability and habitability standards.
BUILDING CODES
The California Building Code is used in Colma. The Town’s Building Official verifies that new residences, additions, auxiliary structures, etc., meet all construction and safety standards.
Building permits are required for most construction work. Additionally, building code enforcement helps the Town maintain a safe building stock.
ON- AND OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS
Site improvements are a necessary component of the development process. Improvements can include the laying of sewer, water, and streets for use by a community when that infrastructure is lacking, and these improvements make the development feasible. Due to the built-out nature of the Town, all of the residential and commercial areas in Colma are already served with adequate streets, sidewalks and infrastructure. This includes sidewalks that only usually require modification to the location of curb-cuts.
In areas already served by infrastructure, site improvement requirements vary depending on the existing condition of each project site. Usually, only standard connection laterals are required for most project utilities. The undergrounding of utilities from the nearest pole to the project is required of all projects, and street tree planting may also be required. These costs
H-55
have not shown to be problematic for any developments in the Town when anticipated and known by the developer early in the process.
PERMIT PROCESSING AND PROCEDURES
Building permits must be secured before commencement of any construction, reconstruction, conversion, alteration or addition. Approval of permit applications is based on conformity with the Zoning Ordinance, although the City Council has the power to grant variances from the terms of the Ordinance within the limitations provided by law.
Two ways of developing housing in Colma include the construction of individual single-family residential units on existing lots or the rezoning of larger properties to a Planned Development (PD) zoning designation for provision of multi-family or higher density housing. The Town of Colma does not have a specific multi-family zoning designation, so the Planned Development designation provides opportunities for multi-family housing. The Planned Development entitlement process requires the approval of a Conceptual Development Plan and a Detailed Development Plan and is subject to evaluation under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Construction of single-family residential units does not require discretionary review and is exempt from CEQA evaluation.
The table below identifies various entitlements and the estimated processing time for each.
Because many applications require multiple approvals, many of these approvals run concurrently. Variance and Use Permit requests usually take only two to four months to process. Because Colma has no Planning Commission, decision-making is unusually streamlined.
Amendments and reclassifications to the Zoning Ordinance can be made by the City Council, subject to applicable provisions of state law and typically take four to six months to review.
Procedures for amendments and reclassifications are stated in the Zoning Ordinance.
Entitlement Processing Time and Approving Authority
Type of Permit Typical
Processing Time Approving Authority
Design Review 2-4 months City Council
General Plan Amendment 4-6 months City Council
Zoning Reclassification 4-6 months City Council
Variance to Zoning Regulations 2-4 months City Council
Planned Development Plan 6-8 months City Council
Parcel Map (in conjunction with PD) 6-8 months City Council/Public Works Subdivision Map (in conjunction with PD) 6-8 months City Council/Public Works Negative Declaration 4-6 months City Council
Environmental Impact Report 6-8 months City Council
The Planned Development process can be summarized as follows:
H-56
Once an application for a Planned Development (which consists of a Rezoning and a Use Permit request, at a minimum) is received by the Planning Department, the application is reviewed for completeness and processed as a Conceptual Development Plan. Environmental review is completed during the Conceptual Development Plan phase. All applications are processed concurrently, and entitlements are generally approved within four to six months of application filing. The final step in the approval process is a Detailed Development Plan. The development standards that provide a guideline for a Planned Development are those most closely associated with the General Plan land use designation. For example, the properties targeted for mixed-use along El Camino Real are designated as Commercial/Mixed Use in the Colma General Plan.
Building heights, floor area ratios and setbacks adopted in the Commercial zoning district would be used as a guideline for a Planned Development.
The following is a summary of application fees for Planned Development submittals:
Planned Development Entitlement Application Fees
Entitlement Fee
Establishment of Planned Development $4,880 deposit
Major Use Permit $4,225 deposit
Design Review Permit (Major) $4,190 deposit
While deposits would be due at the time of application submittal, the applicant would receive a refund of any unused monies after completion of the entitlement process.
Single-family residential infill construction does not require land use entitlements, and building permit-related fees vary depending on the project’s valuation. Provided that a proposal meet zoning code regulations, additions to and new construction of single family dwellings do not require review or approval by City Council. As noted above, single family dwellings are not subject to CEQA. Processing for a new single family dwelling would begin with building permit submittal and there are no neighborhood noticing requirements.
Upon submittal of a building permit application for a single family addition or construction of a new single family dwelling, the Building Department routes the plans and application to the other City Departments for review. At that time there would be a detailed review of the proposed construction to determine if the project meets all municipal code regulations. There are no residential design guidelines for single family additions or new construction. During review of the application by the Planning Department, design of the proposed addition or new construction would consider overall mass and bulk of the project in relation to the surrounding neighborhood. While there is no specific design criteria, impacts of the addition on adjacent properties is considered during the plan check of the building permit application. Plan check comments are returned to the Building Department within 10-days of submittal so that comments can be provided to the applicant in a timely manner.
H-57
Building permit plan check and processing in Colma is efficient and timely. Building permits generally are processed in a few days. Building permits for projects that require approval of entitlements cannot be issued until CEQA review is completed and the City Council approves all entitlement applications. In order to expedite the process leading to construction, it is not uncommon for applicants to submit plans for building permit review while simultaneously proceeding through the CEQA and entitlement processes. Depending on the complexity of a project, building permit issuance ranges from a few days to a few weeks.
Fees
The cost of development within the Town of Colma includes planning and building plan check fees; permit fees; utility service fees, recycling fees, and school fees. In addition, the Town of Colma imposes a parkland dedication fee for subdivisions (Quimby fee) and if inclusionary housing is not included (where required) then a housing in-lieu fee may also be imposed. Local governments typically assess many different types of residential development fees. These include planning fees, building permit and related fees, capital facilities fees and development impact fees.
Planning Fees
Planning-related application fees required for development in the Town of Colma fall into two categories: flat fees and deposit against actual costs. Flat fees are charged for processing applications through the Planning Department to develop property. Fees are due and payable upon making application, and are non-refundable. Based upon an analysis of staff hours and comparison with other jurisdictions, the fees set forth do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service. The following table summarizes the flat fees applicable to development:
Type of Permit Fee
Administrative Use Permit $280
Design Review, Minor $325
Sign Permit $382
Sign Review $102
Temporary or Short Term Use Permit $280
Tree Removal Permit $474
Use Permit, Home Occupation $50
Use Permit, Minor $905
Zoning Clearance for Retail Merchandising Unit $184
Deposit-based fees are required for processing major development applications through the Planning Department. The initial deposits shown below are due and payable upon filing an application, and are based on the typical amount of staff time necessary to process similar applications. If additional staff time is necessary to adequately evaluate an application,
H-58
additional deposits will be required. In accordance with the Colma ordinance that established the current Master Fee Schedule, the total amount of deposit-based fees shall not exceed three times the initial deposit, plus reimbursable costs. Any unused deposits are returned to the applicant after a decision on the application has been made by the City Council. Proposed amendments require the same fees as an initial application. The following summarizes the deposit-based fees associated with typical entitlement applications for all types of residential development:
Table H-47: Deposit Against Actual Cost – Land Use Development Processing Fees, Planning Services
Type of Permit Initial Deposit
Design Review, Major $4,190
General Plan Amendment $5,575
Lot Line Adjustment $2,540
Parcel Map $3,950
Planned Development Plan $4,880
Subdivision Map $5,465
Use Permit, Major $4,245
Vacation or abandonment of Public Easement $5,705
Variance to Zoning Regulations $4,720
Zoning Reclassification $5,245
In addition to the above noted planning application fees, staff time associated with environmental review in accordance with CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) review requires a separate deposit, which is due and payable at the time an application is submitted.
As noted above, additional deposits will be required if the amount of staff time to evaluate the proposal exceeds the amount of the initial deposit. Any unused deposits are returned to the applicant after a decision on the environmental document has been made by the City Council.
The total processing fee will not exceed the actual, reasonable cost of providing the service. In addition to the application and CEQA review fees, applicants are required to submit pass- through fees to the San Mateo County Clerk and California Department of Fish and Game, collected by the City after the environmental determination has been approved by the City Council. The following table summarizes the fees associated with environmental review of a proposed development (not specifically residential):
H-59
CEQA Review Fees for Land Use Development Projects – Deposit Against Actual Cost
Application Initial Deposit Pass-through Fees
Categorical Exemption $100 $50-Document handling fee
(Mitigated) Negative Declaration
$4,780 is prepared by Staff;
otherwise 10% of the cost charged
by an outside consultant
$2,181.25 –CA Dept. Fish &
Game fee
$50- Document handling fee
Environmental Impact Report
Consultant cost plus a deposit of
10% of the cost charged by an
outside consultant
$3,029.75 –CA Dept. Fish &
Game fee
$50- Document handling fee
Environmental Document
pursuant to a Certified
Regulatory Program (CRP)
-
$1,030.25 –CA Dept. Fish &
Game fee
$50- Document handling fee
The Town of Colma’s Planning Department is partially funded by application fees and deposits, but the remaining cost of operating the department is subsidized by the Town’s General Fund.
An August 2008 study was conducted which evaluated typical planning and building permit fees to construct a new single-family residence in each San Mateo County jurisdiction. In this study, Colma’s fees fell near the low end of the range, considerably lower than most San Mateo County jurisdictions. Residential planning and building fees are broadly required by all jurisdictions in San Mateo County. In Colma, such fees are noted here as affecting development, but are not viewed as a governmental constraint.
The following tables provide estimated planning, building and impact fees when compared to other jurisdictions within San Mateo County. The fees are based on the following prototypical projects:
▪ One single-family residence: A new home on an empty lot in an existing neighborhood, no significant grading or other complicating factors, 2400 sf and 500 sf garage, two stories, four bedrooms, three bedrooms.
▪ Ninety-Six Units in 16 Buildings on Eight Acres of Land: the project has a total of 145,500 square feet. The construction will be type VN. The building will have no sprinklers and will have HVAC air conditioning.
The 96 unit project will require a zoning change: Planned Development Zoning/ PD Permit, and Tentative Map, High Complexity. The project will generate 72 peak hour trips.
The project will require significant grading work (5,000CY), and type 1 erosion/sediment control.
H-60
The project will include existing public street frontage, and will need $400,000 of frontage improvements (half street reconstruction). The project will also require the construction of new private streets, which will cost an additional $600,000.
The project will require no public landscaping and no traffic signal work.
Units:
Model A: 28 units, 1250 sf + 500 sf garage, 2 stories, 2 bdrm, 2 bth Model B: 34 units, 1500 sf + 500 sf garage, 2 stories, 3 bdrm, 2 bth Model C: 34 units, 1750 sf + 500 sf garage, 2 stories, 3 bdrm, 2.5 bth Table H-48: Single Family Development Fee Survey By Jurisdiction City Entitlement Fees Construction Fees Impact Fees Total Brisbane - $4,211 $11,111 $15,322
Burlingame $1,806 $32,400 $9,062 $43,268
Colma - $6,760 $7,680 $14,439
Daly City - $15,998 $5,074 $21,072
Foster City $2,000 $18,682 - $20,682
Half Moon Bay $12,055 $3,312 $25,032 $40,399
Hillsborough $2,901 $10,699 $4,980 $15,679
Portola Valley $3,640 $19,772 $7,860 $31,092
Redwood City $620 $6,384 $21,531 $28,535
San Mateo $3,500 $26,107 $20,844 $50,451
South San Francisco $670 $9,996 $6,312 $16,978
Woodside $4,380 $16,484 $4,350 $25,214
Source: 21 Elements Fee Survey, 2013/2014
Colma’s fees are generally much less than those of other jurisdictions in the County for the single-family home prototype. The impact fees collected by the Town for the 96-unit Multi- Family prototype are comparable with surveyed jurisdictions.
Generally, the fees collected by the Town are relatively low and are not considered an impediment to development.
H-61
Table H-49: Multi-Family Development Fee Survey by Jurisdiction
Entitlement
Fees
Construction
Fees
Impact
Fees
CEQA
Fees Total Per unit
cost
Brisbane $33,543 $191,358 $302,252 $2,218 $529,371 $5,514.28 Burlingame $58,076 $1,431,000 $531,552 $273,234 $2,020,628 $21,048.21 Colma $22,275 $230,847-
$554,837 $1,429,085 $60,000
$1,742,207
-
$2,066,197
$18,147 -
21,522
Daly City $18,041 $530,861 $487,104 $2,995 $1,036,006 $10,791.73 Foster City $50,000 $560,875 $1,920,000 - $2,530,875 $26,363.28 San Mateo $75,000 $841,502 $1,463,652 $25,000 $2,405,154 $25,053.69 Redwood City $12,500 $689,712 $1,537,620 $5,000* - - Source: 21 Elements Fee Survey, 2013/2014
Notes: Construction Fees- Colma’s costs vary depending on the sewer district. Impact fees- Colma and Foster City listed a school fee, but these were removed for consistency with other jurisdictions. CEQA- Burlingame assumes a higher CEQA cost than the other jurisdictions. Other cities assumed a Negative Declaration or a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Redwood City assumes that a project is downtown; otherwise the CEQA fees are based on cost recovery and can vary dramatically. All EIR related expenses have been separated into their own category.
Building Fees
Colma, in accordance with the Government Code, enforces the latest edition of the California Building Code to ensure the health and safety of residents of newly constructed housing. The Town’s Building Department enforces the building code. Inspections and approvals are completed promptly and do not add unnecessary delays in the construction of new housing.
Fees are assessed for these projects to offset plan check and inspection activities. From time to time, the Town adjusts fees to keep up with inflation. These fees are established in accordance with the Government Code.
Building permit fees for new construction and additions are determined in dollars per square foot based on the occupancy of the use, with the final determination for the occupancy made by the Building Official. Permit fees for alternations, reports and interior changes (tenant improvements) are charged on a sliding scale that is based upon the valuation of the project.
Plan check fee are 65% of the permit fees.
Recycling Fees
In March 2004, the Colma City Council passed an ordinance to meet the goals of the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. The ordinance requires that at least 50 percent of the waste tonnage from any demolition project, including concrete and asphalt, (or 15% where there is no concrete and/or asphalt) be recycled and/or reused, consistent with the Act. Prior to demolition and building permit issuance, applicants must comply with the Town’s Construction Debris and Demolition recycling ordinance and complete a “Recycling and Waste Calculation
H-62
Form”. At the time of building permit issuance, the applicant posts a deposit, at a rate of $50 per ton for the percentage of recycled materials calculated. At the completion of the project, it is the contractor’s responsibility to demonstrate that they have properly recycled the correct amount of waste generated by submitting receipts, weight tags, or other records to the Colma’s building department for verification. If it is demonstrated that the construction debris recycling goals were met, the full amount of the deposit is refunded. If the amount recycled is less than the required amount, the Town of Colma retains the $50.00 for each ton not recycled and/or reused. Since waste diversion is broadly required of all jurisdictions under State law, it is noted here as affecting development, but is not viewed as a constraint.
Public Works Fees
There are also public works fees associated with property development. These fees are charged for processing documents necessary to implement a plan to develop a property. Fees are due and payable upon making application, and are non-refundable. These fees are in addition to any other fees set forth in this schedule.
Typical public works fees include sewer connection fees, water meter and service connection fees and sidewalk and special encroachment permits, and the most prevalent associated with residential construction are summarized below.
Public Works Fees – Town of Colma
Type of Permit Fee
Grading Plan Check Fees
50-2,000 cu. yds $80.00 + $20 per 100 cu. yds.
Grading Plan Checking > 2,000 cu. yds $400 + $2 per 100 cu. yds. (if > 2,000 cu. yds.)
Grading Permit, 50-2,000 cu. yds $130.00 + $20 per 100 cu. yds.
Grading Permit, >2,000 cu. yds $530.00 + $7.50 per 100 cu. yds. (if >2,000 cu. yds.) Improvement Plan Check Fees
Contracts of </= $10,000 5% of contract cost, $100.00 min.
Contracts between $10,000-$100,000 $500.00 plus 3.5% of contract cost Contracts >$100,000 $3,650 plus 2% of contract cost
Street or easement vacation $500.00/first parcel + $200.00/each contiguous parcel Lot Line Adjustment by deed $400.00
Lot Line Adjustment by Parcel Map $200.00 + recording costs Parcel or Final Map Subdividing Property $600.00 + $50.00 /each lot + recording costs
School Fees
In 1987, Assembly Bill 2926 amended the California Government Code to authorize school districts to levy school impact fees on new residential, commercial and industrial development.
There are four school districts that serve Colma: the Bayshore Elementary School District,
H-63
Jefferson Elementary School District, Pacifica Elementary School District and the Brisbane Elementary School District. There is one high school district, the Jefferson Union High School District. School fees are collected to offset costs of rehabilitation and maintenance of school buildings. Fees are collected on all new construction projects in Colma and on residential remodels in Colma that add 500 square feet or more. Residential school development fees for the Bayshore, Jefferson and Pacifica Elementary School Districts and Jefferson Union High School District are $2.97 per square foot.
Parkland Dedication
The Colma City Council adopted Ordinance 641 in 2006 to require dedication of land and/or payment of a parkland dedication fee. The parkland dedication fee applies to projects in Colma that require approval of a tentative map or parcel map for residential uses by one or more dwelling units, but exempts subdivisions containing fewer than 5 parcels and not used for residential purposes. This fee is determined by multiplying 0.003 acres per person in the dwelling unit (which is the same as three acres per 1,000 persons) times the total number of dwelling units in the development times the average number of persons per dwelling unit in the subdivision for which the approval of a map is being sought. The ordinance assumes that the average number of persons in a dwelling unit in the subdivision will be 3.05, which is the average occupancy Based on the 2010 Census and the 2007-2011 American Community Survey.
In subdivisions over 50 lots, or, in the case of a condominium project, stock cooperative or community apartment project, if the subdivision contains more than fifty (50) dwelling units, the developer shall both dedicate land and pay a fee. The purpose of collecting these fees is to provide park and/or recreational land for use by the residents of Colma. The Colma Parkland Dedication Fee ordinance is based on California State enabling legislation, so it is applicable statewide. Therefore, it is not viewed as a constraint to development, as many communities in the area have adopted the same regulations.
Local governments typically assess many different types of residential development fees. These include planning fees, building permit and related fees, capital facilities fees and development impact fees. Residential planning and building fees are broadly required by all jurisdictions in San Mateo County. In Colma, such fees are noted here as affecting development, but are not viewed as a governmental constraint.
Community Health, Safety
and Services Element
CS-1
PURPOSE
Ensuring a community’s safety through protection from geologic, flood, fire and airport related hazards is one of the essential services of local government agencies. Similarly, services for law enforcement and fire protection, emergency preparedness and response are essential for maintaining the health, safety, and welfare of a community (see Figure CS.1). Government Code Section §65302(g) requires each jurisdiction within the State of California to include in its General Plan a Safety Element that addresses the protection of the community from any unreasonable risks associated with various types of hazards. California State law requires that a Safety Element include information on the community’s fire, safety, flooding, and seismic and geological hazards. In addition to the State requirements, this Community Health, Safety and Services Element also addresses police and fire services, aircraft overflight, and hazardous materials and waste, as well as the Town of Colma (Town)’s Hazard Mitigation Plan.
This Community Health, Safety and Services Element provides information about public services related to community safety, including geologic and flooding hazards, law enforcement, hazardous materials and emergency preparedness, fire response, airport hazards, and noise.
Preserving community safety is an essential service of public agencies and a critical priority for maintaining community health and welfare. Recent disaster events in the state, such as the Kincade fire in 2019, Camp Fire in 2018, and the Loma Prieta earthquake in 1989, only highlight the need for a community to be aware of and prepared for disasters. This Element therefore provides for sound emergency preparedness planning and supports the community desire to develop increasing resilience over time. This Element relates San Mateo County safety planning
CS-2
efforts to the Town’s land use decisions and provides detailed information for decision makers to use.
This Community Health, Safety and Services Element establishes goals, policies, and programs to protect the health and safety of Colma residents, businesses, employees and visitors. It addresses the following safety planning and response topics:
• Community Health
• Geologic and Seismic Hazards
• Flooding and Sea Level Rise
• Wildland and Urban Fires
• Hazardous Materials
• Airport Safety
• Law Enforcement
• Fire Protection and Emergency
Medical Services
• Emergency Preparedness and
Disaster Response
• Noise
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS
The Community Health, Safety and Services Element is directly related to all other elements of the General Plan. The planning and policy decision making process for land uses, housing, circulation, and open space must incorporate the policies of this element to reduce the risks of hazards to the public. Development plans must properly account for public safety considerations, while open spaces provide public health and ecological benefits and often incorporate areas of increased hazard risk. This element identifies hazards and hazard mitigation guidelines to assist local decisions related to zoning, subdivisions, and entitlement permits.
CS-3
COMMUNITY HEALTH
Where people live greatly determines their access to resources that enable them to be healthy—such as safe streets, nutritious foods, quality housing, and access to healthcare. A healthy community promotes a positive physical, social, and economic environment that supports the overall well-being of its residents. Planning decisions about land use, mobility, and urban design can have a strong impact on an individual’s transportation choices, housing options, and social interactions. These decisions can improve physical and mental health by providing opportunities for physical activity, providing access to nutritious food, or enabling social interaction with neighbors on a regular basis. Neighborhood conditions can have a profound impact on one’s health and life expectancy.
Colma residents, business owners, and community members enjoy a consistenly high quality of life. The Town is committed to improving quality of life and increasing opportunities for residents to make healthy lifestyle choices. Policies in this section express the Town’s overarching commitment to healthy living and enhancing quality of life. Due to the broad and interdisciplinary nature of health issues, other elements of the General Plan contain goals and polices related to health and quality of life. The Town provides quality recreation opportunities for residents of all ages to enjoy. As residents age, the Town seeks to provide services that will meet the needs of seniors. Due to Colma’s small size, the Town generously supports services and programs offered by outside agencies and non-profits that provide services that can be utilized by town residents. Locations of public facilities in the Town, many of which support community health, are shown in Figure CS.1.
CS-4
CS-5
CS-1-1: Health in All Policies . Prioritize the overall health of Colma residents in Town strategies, programs, daily operations, and practices.
CS-1-2: Partnering and Supporting Non -Profits. Continue to support and partner with other government agencies or non-profits to provide services to residents that cannot be provided by the Town.
CS-1-3: Physical Activity and the Built Environment. Support new developments or infrastructure improvements in existing neighborhoods that enable people to drive less and walk, bike, or take public transit more.
CS-1-4: Diverse Recreational Offerings. Periodically assess recreational opportunities and modify programming to ensure they are appropriate for the community’s cultural and age diversity.
CS-1-5: Age Friendly Cities. Look for opportunities to partner with San Mateo County and other non-profit organizations to support senior well-being in the community.
CS-1-6: Location of Essential Facilities. Avoid locating essential facilities, such as schools, fire, police, utilities, hospit als, and emergency service facilities, in areas subject to geologic and seismic hazards, fire risk, flooding, and hazardous waste, where feasible.
CS-6
GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS
Colma is located in the seismically active San Francisco Bay Area (Bay Area) with one active fault, the San Andreas Fault, located outside the town, and the Serra Fault located within the town, as shown in Figure CS.2. The entire Bay Area is located within the San Andreas Fault Zone. Colma is located approximately less than 2 miles away from the San Andreas Fault, which, in a worst-case scenario, could cause violent or magnitude 9.0 (level 9) earthquakes to hit the town, as shown in Figure CS.3.
Due to its location near the boundary between the North American and Pacific tectonic plates, Colma is exposed to geologic and seismic hazards such as strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction and landslides.
The likelihood, severity, and location of any of these seismically induced hazards occurring in Colma depends upon geology, topography, soil type, weather, and intensity of development.
Steep slopes, the extent of erosion, and the rock composition of a hillside can aid in predicting the probability of slope failure.
In addition to other seismic hazards, portions of the town are subject to liquefaction. Soil liquefaction occurs when wet soil loses its strength and stability and behaves more like a liquid, causing damage to buildings and other structures. The potential for liquefaction depends on the type of soil and the extent that the soils are saturated with ground water. Areas of Colma could be susceptible to liquefaction during a significant earthquake since the town of Colma is situated in an alluvial valley with loose soils. Liquefaction susceptibility is shown on Figure CS.3.
Therefore, the following Goals, Policies, and Program items have been identified to reduce geological risks to the town.
CS-7
CS-8
CS-9
CS-2-1: Geotechnical Studies. Require geotechnical, soils, and foundation reports for proposed projects and subdivisions on sites that have been identified as having moderate or high potential for ground failure, liquefaction, and seismic activity by the Town or by the San Mateo County Seismic and Safety Element.
CS-2.2: Development in Hazardous Areas. Prohibit development, including any land alteration, grading for roads, and structural development, in areas of slope instability, unless the appropriate mitigation measures are taken.
CS-2-3: Unsafe Buildings. Encourage seismic retrofits of existing buildings based on the recommendations of a licensed engineer or architect. Prioritize working with owners of buildings whose loss would impact the greatest number of people and/or particularly vulnerable groups such as seniors, children, or low-income households.
CS-2-4: Water Infrastructure Safety. Collaborate with San Mateo County, California Water Service Company, and the San Francisco Water District to ensure that all water tanks and main water pipelines are capable of withstanding high seismic stress.
CS-2-5: Erosion Prevention. Require new grading or development to prevent erosion on slope and hillside areas by revegetation or use of slope protection material. Require project grading and drainage plans to demonstrate how the project will maintain natural surface drainage and existing vegetation, to the extent feasible.
CS-2.6: Seismic Hazards. Continue to enforce appropriate standards to ensure existing and new development is located, designed, and constructed to minimize the risk of loss of life and property from seismic hazards.
CS-10
FLOOD HAZARDS
Flooding is defined as the condition resulting when an overwhelming amount of water submerges normally dry land masses. Some floods develop slowly when rain continues over a period of days and inundates water systems. Others, such as flash flood conditions, typically occur when a moderate rainfall is followed by a heavy rainstorm. The moderate rainfall saturates the soil allowing minimal additional infiltration. Flood hazards are typically assessed in terms of 100-year or 500-year flood plains (lands submerged during flood events). As defined by the Federal Emergency Management Authority (FEMA), a 100-year flood plain is the land area that has a one in 100 percent chance of being flooded within any given year, while a 500- year flood plain has a 1 in 500 percent chance of being flooded. The Federal Insurance Administration (FIA) administers the National Flood Insurance Program and is the primary agency for flood related disasters and mitigation. The Town of Colma is bisected by Colma Creek, which is part of a watershed drainage basin defined by San Bruno Mountain on the east and the ridge traced by Skyline Boulevard on the west. Colma Creek flows through the center of the town and continues through the city of South San Francisco to the Bay. Colma Creek is part of the San Mateo County Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District. The Colma Creek Flood Control Zone covers approximately 16.3 square miles, including the town of Colma, as well as portions of the cities of Pacifica, Daly City, San Bruno, and South San Francisco. Increased urbanization in the greater San Francisco Bay Area has increased the amount of impervious areas and reduced the amount of groundwater infiltration, thereby resulting in increased levels of water runoff and flooding potential.
STREET AND PROPERTY FLOODING
Flooding has occurred frequently at El Camino Real and F Street, and on El Camino Real at Mission Road. Certain segments of Colma Creek used to overflow, but improvements to the Colma Creek drainage channel have reduced creek flooding. The town of Colma has been designated Flood Zone X, meaning it has been determined by FEMA to be only minimally flood- prone, and therefore is not included on FEMA’s official Flood Zone Maps. The FEMA flood zones in close proximity to the town’s boundaries are depicted on Figure CS.4. To maintain FEMA’s rating, several General Plan policies are provided to ensure that runoff levels do not adversely impact the capacity of Colma Creek.
SEA LEVEL RISE
Although the town of Colma is not directly affected by sea level rise, it is in close proximity to San Francisco Bay and the town could be affected by damage from sea level rise at the Bay to the east, seven miles away, and the Pacific Ocean to the west, eight miles away. Therefore, there could be potential damage to infrastructure in the town of Colma. For example, the South San Francisco sewer treatment plant is subject to inundation as a result of sea level rise, if
CS-11
plans are not made to protect it. In addition, the Bayshore Freeway (Highway 101) and the San Francisco International Airport are subject to flooding and inundation with approximately two to three feet of sea level rise.
CS-12
CS-13
The following Goals, Policies, and Program items have been developed to safeguard the town of Colma from flood hazard risks.
CS-3-1: Participate in Regional Adaptation Efforts. Coordinate with regional agencies , such as the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) and the Bay Area Regional Collaborative (BARC), in adaptation planning.
CS-3-2: Maintain Drainage Facilities. Maintain drainage facilities to accommodate the flow capacity of Colma Creek through Colma to accommodate the storm water runoff from a 100-year storm.
CS-3-3: Foundation Elevation. Continue to require the habitable portions of new structures to have a first-floor elevation that is elevated to or above the projected 100-year water surface to protect structures against potential flood damage.
CS-3-4: Stormwater Detention . Require new developments over one half acre in size to construct on -site storm water de tention facilities which contribute runoff to Colma Creek in order to store the difference in runoff between the 10-year pre-development storm (original natural state) and the 100 -year post -development storm. Any stormwater release should be at the 10-year predevelopment rate.
CS-14
FIRE PREVENTION AND PROTECTION SERVICES AND
EMERGENCY MEDICAL RESPONSE
Fire prevention, protection, and emergency medical response benefit the community in various ways and are priorities in the town. High-quality services keep the community safe, minimizing loss of life and property when an event occurs. Partnerships are important to the provision of quick response and coordinated prevention planning for a small town like Colma.
The town of Colma is within the Colma Fire Protection District (CFPD), which serves Colma and surrounding unincorporated areas, including Broadmoor and unincorporated Colma (the area around the Colma BART station). The CFPD station is located just north of the town on Reiner Street and is supported by 40 paid, on-call fire fighters and three salaried, part-time personnel (Chief, Deputy Fire Marshal, and EMS Captain). The CFPD provides fire suppression and prevention, public education, rescue, hazardous materials (first response), and basic/advanced emergency medical care (see Figure CS.5).
Minimizing fire risks occurs through education, routine inspections, and requiring building renovations and new construction to comply with current fire access and building codes. The Fire Protection services offered by CFPD include both public education programs and building inspection programs. Speakers from the District are available to schools and the public for information on fire prevention and protection. The Town’s Fire Protection Program includes plan check and inspection of new structures and remodels in the town. Plan check by the Fire District assures adequate fire flow levels, general access, turnarounds, and other relevant fire protection measures, as well as ensuring that building sites can be readily identified by street names and address numbers.
Mutual Aid
CFPD has mutual aid agreements with Daly City, San Bruno, Pacifica, South San Francisco, and Brisbane. The Fire District’s mutual aid agreements provide for more rapid response to structural fires in areas within the Fire District, when requested. When additional help is needed by the Colma Fire District or Police Department, the San Mateo County Central and South strike teams, respectively, may be called in. Mutual aid agreements for both the Fire District and the Colma Police Department provide service anywhere in neighboring jurisdictions when that assistance is specifically requested.
The Colma Fire Protection District currently has an average response time of two to four minutes to sites in the town of Colma. The time it takes to respond to an emergency is important because of the critical care period (seven to eight minutes) needed for physical health emergencies, and of the increasing intensity and spread of fire. Mutual aid agreements with other cities and departments ensure that additional fire protection support is available for a greater alarm fire, which seldom occurs. Colma’s fire protection services are evaluated by the
CS-15
Insurance Service Office (ISO), whose ratings establish the fire insurance rates paid by local residents and businesses. ISO rating is partially based on such factors as available water supply, staffing, and equipment. Colma Fire District’s ISO rating is V on a scale of I-X (best to worst), which is an improvement from its previous rating of VI.
Policy CS-4-1: Alternate EOC. Establish an alternative Emergency Operations Center (EOC) to be used in the event the existing EOC is not operational during a fire event.
Policy CS-4-2: Mutual Aid Agreements. Continue to participate in San Mateo County mutual aid agreements related to fire protection.
Policy CS-4-3: Fire Prevention Education. Provide regular public education and fire safety programs to the town’s residents and businesses.
CS-16
FIRE HAZARDS
Fire hazards are classified as urban fire hazards and wildland fire hazards. Urban fire hazards are one of the greatest threats to life and property. These may include building fires, automobile fires, arson, fires related to accidents, rubbish fires, and fires in overgrown and/or unkept vacant lots. Wildland fire hazards occur in non-urban, natural areas and include fires involving uncultivated land, timber, range, brush, and grass lands in undeveloped areas. The town of Colma has a Fire Protection Program through the Colma Fire Protection District (CFPD) to minimize the risks of urban and wildland fires. The town is covered under the San Mateo County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP).
Urban Fire Hazards
Fires in urban areas pose the greatest threat to life and property due to the proximity of people and structures. The types of structures posing the most significant fire hazards in the town have been built prior to 1940 and may have wood frame construction and substandard wiring and heating systems. Other sites of fire concern are unmaintained public utility easements, sites with large amounts of fuel and combustibles storage, and most unmaintained or poorly maintained buildings, regardless of age.
The required peak load water supply is the amount of water necessary to suppress fire in a structure during peak water use periods. Fire flow requirements are expressed in gallons per minute (gpm) and are determined by type of construction and size (square footage). The Town of Colma Fire District and Uniform Fire Code requires that all structures have fire flows of no less than 1,500 gpm and possibly more in non-sprinklered buildings. In order to meet this requirement, the Town and Fire District often requires mitigation in the building construction.
Mitigation may include fire rated walls, automatic sprinkler systems, and other measures which reduce or eliminate potential fire hazards.
Wildland Fire Hazards
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) determines the degree of wildland fire hazard based on the natural setting of the area, the degree of human use of the area, and the level and ability of public services to respond to fires that do occur. CAL FIRE has rated San Bruno Mountain Park and the adjacent undeveloped areas of the town of Colma as areas of moderate fire hazard, see Figure CS.5. However, when considering fire hazard threat to people, CAL FIRE has rated San Bruno Mountain and surrounding areas an extreme fire hazard. The “threat to people” ratings are prioritized as greater threat classes over areas with lesser or no threat class to buildings and wildland. Fires in these greater threat areas usually occur during the summer months, primarily where grass and brush grow the fastest. CAL FIRE responds to wildland fires from a number of stations, depending on their proximity and availability. The closest station to the town of Colma is at 20 Tower Road in the town of Belmont.
CS-17
Undeveloped areas within the town of Colma are not “Wildland Areas” as defined by the California Department of Forestry, but CAL FIRE criteria may be used to identify and evaluate fire hazards in these areas which are Colma Fire Protection District’s responsibility. The Goals and Policies defined below would serve to reduce Wildfire risks to the Town of Colma.
CS-18
CS-19
CS-5-1: Adequate Water Supplies . Require new development projects to document adequate water supplies for fire suppression.
CS-5-2: Removal of Fire Hazards. Ensure the Town’s code enforcement programs promote the removal of fire hazard s such as ( but not limited to) litter, rubbish , overgrown vegetation, and dilapidated or abandoned structures.
CS-5-3: Building Fire Codes. Require that all buildings and facilities comply with local, State, and federal regulatory standards , such as the California Building and Fire Codes as well as other applicable fire safety standards.
CS-5-4: Urban Fire Risks. Work with the Colma Fire Protection District to maintain an ongoing fire inspection program to reduce fire hazards associated with existing buildings and facilities. multifamily development, critical facilities, public assembly facilities, industrial buildings, and nonresidential buildings.
CS-5-5: Interagency Cooperation. Work with the Colma Fire Protection District, San Bruno Mountain Watch, San Mateo County, CAL FIRE, and other agencies to reduce fire risk to San Bruno Mountain and other open space areas.
CS-20
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Hazardous materials are substances that could be a potential threat of injury, illness, or harm to people and animals. The California Code of Regulation defines a hazardous material as a substance that may either (1) cause an increase in serious, irreversible, or incapacitating, illness; or, (2) pose a substantial potential hazard to human health or environment when improperly treated, stored, transported or disposed, or otherwise managed. Hazardous materials may be commonly used in residential, commercial, agricultural, and industrial areas.
Protection from the release of hazardous materials is essential to providing a safe environment for town residents and visitors. Hazardous materials include toxic metals, chemicals, and gasses; flammable and/or explosive liquids and solids; common household cleaners; corrosive materials; infectious substances; pesticides and solvents; and radioactive materials that have the potential to cause harm to the public or the environment. Protection from hazardous materials could include limiting the generation, improper disposal, storage, and transport of hazardous materials.
Some hazardous materials have been known to have severe adverse health effects on people and the environment, often causing injury or death to people. Providing safe living and work conditions and structures is a major goal for the Town of Colma. The pretreatment and disposal of hazardous materials through the sewage system is the predominant form of authorized hazardous waste disposal. Federal and State laws regulate stormwater discharge from certain industrial activities, through the issuance of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination (NPDES) permits. The Town of Colma has adopted disaster response protocols and is committed to the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) in the event of local or large-scale emergency situations.
The Town has also developed and approved a Green Infrastructure Plan that directs the incorporation of green infrastructure in the right of way, to serve as decentralized storm water treatment areas. These programs will reduce the amount of pollutants entering the storm drainage system and curtail illegal disposal of hazardous waste into the system.
HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AND TRANSPORTATION
Hazardous materials storage sites in Colma are regulated by the San Mateo County Department of Environmental Health. San Mateo County (County) issues permits for underground tanks, hazardous waste generators, and hazardous materials users regulated by Health and Safety Code - Chapter 6.5, Section 25500 to Division 20. The County regularly inspects the underground tanks in the town, which are predominantly gasoline storage tanks for service stations and vehicle yards (see Figure CS.6).
CS-21
The California Department of Health Services monitors the transportation of hazardous waste through a manifest system which is used to trace all hazardous waste transported off-site to storage, treatment, or disposal facilities. Most hazardous waste generated in Colma is transported to recycling companies. Hazardous waste generated outside of the town may be transported through the town on Interstate 280 and Highway 82 (El Camino Real). The California Highway Patrol and Caltrans are responsible for controlling transportation of hazardous materials and scene management in the event of a spill on a State or federal highway. The Colma Fire Protection District will typically respond to a local hazardous material spill. The Town’s Police Department may also assist with emergency action. The appropriate procedures to be followed in the event of a hazardous spill are outlined in the San Mateo County Hazardous Waste Management Plan. Upon request by the Colma Fire Protection District, the County’s Hazardous Material (HAZMAT) response team may respond to the incident. The HAZMAT response team is funded through the San Mateo Operational Area Office of Emergency Services.
Figure CS.6, below, shows sites where hazardous materials use to be present (site remediation is complete) or where hazardous materials are still present based on information from the California Geotracker website. The two sites remaining in Colma identified as containing hazardous materials include the closed landfill and the Bocci Memorial’s site adjacent to the BART site.
CS-22
CS-23
The following Goals and Policies are included so the Town may be involved with the management of storing, generating, or handling hazardous materials.
CS-6-1: Hazardous Materials . Collect and maintain a list of locations in the t own where hazardous materials are stored and used.
CS-6-2: Hazardous Waste Management. Support San Mateo County efforts to manage, collect, and inspect sites containing hazardous waste.
CS-6-3: Public Awareness Programs . Promote public awareness of safe and effective hazardous waste use, storage, and disposal.
CS-6-4: Hazardous Waste Travel Routes . Restrict the transport of hazardous materia ls through the town to Highway 280, Junipero Serra Boulevard , and Serramonte Boulevard, to avoid residential areas.
CS-24
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND DISASTER RESPONSE
An emergency is a life-, property-, or environment-threatening incident, particularly one which occurs suddenly or unexpectedly. The resulting damage is determined by the nature of the incident and the response to it. The reaction to an emergency is often the major determinant of the severity of its impact. The Town can minimize threats to public safety by ensuring its capability to adequately respond to potential emergencies.
EMERGENCY PROGRAMS
The Town of Colma, with the aid of San Mateo County, has prepared a Multi-Hazard Functional Plan (MHFP, October 1987), as required by the California Emergency Services Act. The Plan defines the Town’s planned response to emergency situations and assigns emergency tasks to Town personnel, provides operational guidelines, and inventories equipment, supplies, and personnel available for emergency response.
The Town’s Emergency Operations Center is located at the Police Department, across the street from Town Hall on El Camino Real (see Figure CS.7). The center contains emergency supplies and equipment and would serve as a communications and administrative headquarters. In the event this location is not functional, the Emergency Operation Center could be at the Town Hall or at the Community Center on Hillside Boulevard. The Colma Fire District has facilities to function as an operational headquarters for emergency response personnel and equipment.
Their facilities include a generator, fuel tank, kitchen, and sleeping quarters.
Additional emergency resources are available to the Town through the San Mateo Operational Area Emergency Services organization. The San Mateo Operational Area Emergency Services Organization was formed through a joint powers agreement to coordinate interjurisdictional operations and coordinate mutual aid among San Mateo County and the twenty cities in the county.
EVACUATION PLANS AND TRANSPORTATION FAILURES
In the event of an emergency, the Colma Police Department, assisted by the Town’s Public Works Department, would establish evacuation routes and maintain traffic control.
Responsibilities and tasks for evacuation are assigned in the Town’s Multi-hazard Functional Plan. The Circulation Element identifies the major roads which would serve as principal routes for evacuation of people out of hazardous areas and to safety. These routes may also serve as the principal routes for movement of emergency equipment and supplies to the incident scene.
Generally, the major roads to serve as evacuation north/south routes include Hillside Boulevard, El Camino Real/Mission Road, Highway 280, and Junipero Serra Boulevard. East/west routes are generally F Street, Colma Boulevard, Serramonte Boulevard, Collins Avenue, and Lawndale Boulevard. Evacuation route use will depend on the type of emergency or hazard. All residential
CS-25
areas of Colma currently have access to more than one possible evacuation route. Evacuation routes are generally depicted in Figure CS.7.
CS-26
CS-27
The following Goals, Policies, and Program items have been developed to assist the Town of Colma minimize risks from natural and human-made disasters.
CS-7-1: Hazard Mitigation Plan. Implement, maintain and update the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan which is part of the larger County Hazard Mitigation Plan.1 CS-7-2: Emergency Management Plan. Continue to participate with San Mateo County’s mutual aid programs and plans for community emergency preparedness.
CS-7-3: Promote Emergency Preparedness. Utilize multiple information channels to educate residents and businesses of the Town’s emergency operations procedure.
CS-7-4: Collaborative Planning. Improve inter -jurisdictional and interagency cooperation with regard to hazard prevention and emergency response through town participation in and initiation of coordination meetings and exercises.
CS-7-5: Evacuation Routes. Utilize emergency evacuation routes established by the Town and ensure that all residential areas of Colma maintain access to at least two routes for evacuation.
1The Colma Local Hazard Mitigation Plan that was adopted by the Town on September 14, 2016 and approved by Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is included within the Safety Element as Appendix A. The full Countywide plan can be found on the County website:
https://planning.smcgov.org/documents/san-mateo-county-hazard-mitigation-plan-final-draft.
CS-28
LAW ENFORCEMENT
The Colma Police Department includes a total of 33 employees, 19 of which are sworn police personnel. The Department provides dispatch and detective services, community service outreach, and participates in the Daly City/North San Mateo County Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) team. Department staff also frequently participate in countywide law enforcement efforts by taking part in the San Mateo County Gang Task Force, Avoid the 23 (DUI) Task Force, Narcotic Task Force Details, Alcohol Beverage Control Operations, Saturation Traffic Enforcement Program (STEP), and Police Academy as instructors.
The Department is organized into four divisions: Administration, Patrol, Communications, and Grants, which are each described below.
The Police Administration Division Provides planning, direction, and oversight of the Police Department. Staffing for this division includes the Police Chief, a Detective Sergeant, a Detective, and an Administrative Technician III.
The Police Patrol Division Provides front-line uniform response to calls for police services. Police Patrol addresses neighborhood quality-of-life issues and responds to all security-related service needs of the community, including threats to life and property, enforcement of traffic laws, and investigation of crimes against persons and property. The Division’s personnel include one Police Commander, four Police Sergeants, and ten Police Officers. As staffing allows, one officer is assigned to a motorcycle on a part-time basis, and officers work a variety of other ancillary assignments, including Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) and the San Mateo County Gang Task Force.
The Police Communications Division Provides the clerical and record-keeping duties of the Department and all citizen-initiated calls for service. The Division is staffed by one Dispatch Records Supervisor and three Dispatchers.
The Police Grants Division was initiated in FY 2001-02 to comply with State requirements to separately account for certain annual State-provided funds, including the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund for front-line personnel services, officer training costs, and funding of a Community Service Officer (CSO).
The following Goals and Policies are designed to assist the Town in providing responsive police protection services to its residents and businesses.
CS-8-1: Staffing Levels. Maintain sufficient police staffing levels, including sworn officers and volunteer support, necessary to meet current and projected community needs.
CS-29
CS-8-2: Facilities Planning. Develop, maintain, and implement a Police Department Facilities Master Plan that guides the provision of equipment, facilities, training.
CS-8-3: Response Times. Maintain a police response time standard of 10 minutes maximum for all call levels.
CS-8-4: Communication. Encourage and maintain two-way communication with the Colma community to facilitate effective policing.
CS-30
AIRPORT SAFETY
The San Francisco International Airport (SFO) is the sixth busiest airport in the world and is located approximately 3.5 miles southeast of the town. Aircrafts taking off from SFO fly over a
1.2-mile-wide and 5.8-mile-long area that is referred to as the “gap”. The gap stretches over San Bruno, South San Francisco, and Daly City and is directly adjacent to the town of Colma.
In 1970, the State Legislature required the establishment of Airport Land Use Commissions (ALUC) within counties to develop plans for land uses around airports. The purpose of the ALUC is to provide for the orderly long-term growth of airports and their surrounding areas, as well as to protect the people who live near airports and the welfare of the public in general. The San Mateo County ALUC has set safety standards specifying how land near San Francisco Airport can be used based on safety and noise considerations, height restrictions for new construction, and construction standards for buildings.
The San Francisco International Airport has designated transitional surfaces as alternate routes for planes to take-off or land. One of these transitional surfaces extends over the town of Colma. Any development in the transitional zone must be in compliance with ALUC maximum height standards. The structure/building height restrictions under the transitional surfaces for the town are approximately 400 feet above average mean sea level. This height limit will not constrict development in the town of Colma which is roughly at 110 feet above sea level and where the normal commercial height limit is 50 feet (see Figure CS.8).
CS-31
Figure CS.8: Critical Aeronautical Surfaces
Source: Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Francisco International Airport
CS-32
CS-9-1: ALUC Plan. Require development within the Airport Influence Area B , designated in the Airport Land Use Compatibility (ALUC) Plan of t he San Francisco International Airport, to comply with all applicable federal and State laws with respect to land use safety and airspace protection criteria.
CS-9-2: Airport Land Use Commission Review. Require that all future land use actions and/or associated development conforms to the relevant height, aircraft noise, and safety policies and compatibility criteria contained in the most recently adopted version of the ALUC Plan for the environs of San Francisco International Airport.
CS-33
NOISE
Noise is defined as “unwanted sound” and is widely acknowledged as a form of environmental degradation. Ambient noise is the composite of near and far noise sources and is considered the normal, or existing, level of environmental noise at a given location. Whether or not a sound is unwanted depends on when it occurs, the activity of the listener, the characteristics of the sound, and how intrusive it is (i.e., how much louder it is than the ambient noise level).
Over time, people become less aware of and less irritated by sound that is constant. The more a noise exceeds the ambient noise level, the more intrusive and less acceptable the noise is to the community.
Noise is measured by its frequency, intensity, and time-varying character. Frequency is defined as the number of oscillations or vibrations an air particle undergoes in one second. Sound frequency is measured in Hertz (Hz) and sound itself is comprised of a broad range of frequencies.
Intensity is the measurement of the sound energy or pressure. The human ear is sensitive to a wide range of intensity. The sound pressure scale is expressed in decibels.
The time-varying character of sound is also known as noise level. Noise levels throughout the community do not remain constant, but rather fluctuate over both time and duration.
Community noise consists of distant and nearby noise sources. Distant sources may include vehicular traffic, aircraft flyovers, and industrial activities (including construction). Nearby sources may include individual vehicles passing by, trains passing by, and landscaping equipment.
Human Reaction to Environmental Noise
At some point in time, noise pollution affects all people in an urbanized environment. The seriousness of the effect of noise depends on the tolerance of the individual in the community, the types of activities taking place, and the character of the noise.
High levels of noise exposure for extended periods of time can cause a variety of physiological effects. In addition to hearing loss, continual exposure to excessive noise levels may cause symptoms of anxiety and anger and is apt to aggravate psychiatric disorders. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has identified 80 decibels as the highest eight-hour noise exposure threshold to prevent hearing loss. Figure CS.2.9 shows the acceptable community noise levels from typical land uses in a community.
CS-34
Figure CS.9: Typical Community Noise Exposure Levels
CS-35
Present Noise Environment
The town of Colma’s historic character as a town of cemeteries has resulted in a peaceful noise environment in general. As can be seen on the existing noise contours shown in Figure CS.10, the primary source of noise in the Town is generated by all vehicular traffic along its major thoroughfares, such as I-280, El Camino Real and Serramonte, Hillside, Colma, and Junipero Sierra Boulevards. A minor amount of noise is generated from residential and cemetery areas in the Town from the use of equipment, such as lawn equipment motors, air conditioners, construction equipment, and power tools. While the town is located in close proximity to San Francisco International Airport, the airport land use capability criteria and noise contours adopted by the San Mateo County ALUC shows that any impact on the town’s noise environment are within normally acceptable levels.
CS-36
CS-37
Future Noise Environment
As can be seen on the future noise contours diagram shown in Figure CS.11, the primary source of noise in the Town will continue to be noise generated by all vehicular traffic along its major thoroughfares, such as I-280, El Camino Real and Serramonte, Hillside, Colma, and Junipero Sierra Boulevards. Due to additional development in Daly City, South San Francisco and Colma anticipated in the next 20 years, traffic volume is anticipated to increase along town corridors, thereby increasing noise levels. However, during the life of the General Plan, an increase in electric vehicle use is anticipated, which may serve to reduce ambient noise levels.
CS-38
CS-39
The following Goals and Policies are set forth as a guide to help decision making with regard to noise impacts in the town of Colma.
CS-10-1: Colma Municipal Code. Review and modify noise level standards in the Colma Municipal Code, as appropriate, for all land uses.
CS-10-2: Noise Impacts. Consider noise impacts as part of the development review process, particularly for the location of parking, ingress/egress/loading, and trash collection areas relative to surrounding resid ential development and other noise -sensitive land uses.
CS-10-3: Noise Controls. Require an acous tical study to identify inappropriate noise levels where new development may directly result in existing or future noise-sensitive uses being subject to noise levels equal to or greater than 60 CNEL and require mitigation for sensitive uses in compliance with the noise standards listed.
CS-10-4: BART Noise. Allow outdoor noise exposure criteria of 70 Ldn for future development in proximity to BART , recognizing that BART noise is characterized by relatively few loud events.
CS-40
IMPLEMENTATION
Community Safety and Noise
Implementation Programs 2021-2030 2031-2040 Annual Ongoing CS-IP1: Hazards Mitigation.
Monitor and recommend
hazards mitigation as part of
project approval.
X
Implements Policies: CS-2-1, 2-2,2-5, 2-6
Responsible Dept.: Planning, Supporting Dept. Building and Public Works CS-IP2: Flood Control.
Continue to participate in the
review of flood improvement
projects, carried out by San
Mateo County and other
agencies, to reduce flood
hazards throughout the
county and town.
X
Implements Policies: CS-3-1, 3-2
Responsible Dept.: Public Works Supporting Dept. Planning CS-IP3: Wildfire Hazards.
Coordinate with Cal Fire, San
Mateo County, Colma Fire
Protection District, and other
agencies to reduce fire risks
on San Bruno Mountain and
other open space areas.
X
Implements Policies: CS-5-5
Responsible Dept.: Public Works, Supporting Dept. Planning CS-IP4: Local Hazard
Mitigation Plan (LHMP).
Participate with San Mateo
County in updates to the
LHMP and continue annual
reporting. Coordinate with
San Mateo County on required
5-year updates to the LHMP.
X X X X
Implements Policies: CS-7-1
Responsible Dept.: Planning, Supporting Dept. Police
CS-IP5: Emergency Supplies -
To the extent feasible, the
Town shall maintain
emergency supplies for use in
the event of an emergency
X
CS-41
and provide education to
residents and businesses on
recommended supplies to
keep.
Implements Policies: CS-7-3
Responsible Dept.: Administration, Supporting Dept. Recreation CS-IP6: Town Emergency
Preparedness. Work with local
and regional emergency
response agencies and
continue to provide
Community Emergency
Response Teams (CERT)
training and response and
disseminate emergency
preparedness information.
X
Implements Policies: CS-7-3, 7-4
Responsible Dept.: Administration, Supporting Dept. Police CS-IP7: Emergency Exercises.
The Town’s Police Department
and Colma Fire Protection
District, in conjunction with
the County EOC, shall hold
emergency preparedness
exercises. 7.27.3.7.4
X X
Implements Policies: CS-7-2,7-3,7-4
Responsible Dept.: Police, Supporting Dept. Administration CS-IP8: Airport Land Use
Conformance. Proposed land
use policy actions, including
new specific plans, zoning
ordinances, general plan
amendments, and rezoning
involving land development
shall be provided to the local
Airport Land Use Commission.
X
Implements Policies: CS-9-1, 9-2
Responsible Dept.: Planning, Supporting Dept. None
CS-IP9: Noise Attenuation.
Identify and codify, where
possible, noise attenuation
measures to assure that noise
impacts by more intensive
development to adjacent
residential uses are reduced.
X X
CS-42
Implements Policies: CS-10-1, 10-3, 10-4
Responsible Dept.: Planning, Supporting Dept. Building
CS-IP11: Noise Compatibility.
Use the noise contours map to
determine land use
compatibility with known
sources of noise and prohibit
noise-sensitive land uses in
areas incompatible with
existing or anticipated noise
levels.
X
Implements Policies: CS-10-2, 10-3, 10-4
Responsible Dept.: Planning, Supporting Dept. Building
Open Space and
Conservation Element
OSC-1
PURPOSE
The Town of Colma’s (Town) open spaces, greenbelts and scenic natural environment are among the most defining and beloved of the Town’s characteristics. The Open Space and Conservation Element (“OSC Element”) meets State of California requirements for a Conservation Element and Open Space Element of the General Plan (California Government Code §65302(d) and §65302(e)). Just as open space land is a limited and valuable resource that should be conserved whenever possible, conservation considers the impacts of growth and development on natural resources. The Town of Colma has combined these two elements to comprehensively address protection and management of its natural and open space resources.
Open-space land is defined by State statute as any parcel or area of land or water that is essentially unimproved and devoted to open-space use. Conservation goals and policies provide direction regarding the conservation, development and utilization of natural resources in the Town and address a variety of issue areas such as soils, minerals, wildlife and water resources, energy, and air quality.
The Town’s existing open space and conservation features are shown on the Open Space and Conservation Map (Figure OSC.1). Unique to Colma, most of the open land is owned by cemeteries or other landowners and held in reserve for cemetery expansion. Therefore, the Open Space and Conservation Map includes cemetery lands in active use and land held in reserve. Some of these lands may have an interim land use, primarily commercial farming or wholesale plant production. In addition, Colma has a closed landfill at the base of San Bruno Mountain.
OSC-2
The OSC Element identifies areas required for the preservation of land resources, and plant and animal life in the town of Colma. Analysis presented in the Plan sets forth the reasons why certain lands are devoted to open space. Goals and policies in the Plan describe how important natural resources and open space should be utilized and managed. In general, the term “Open Space” is used as a land use designation. “Conservation” is used as a land use principle typically applied to certain scarce or non-renewable resources which are protected from urban development by policies adopted in the General Plan.
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS
The efficacy of a General Plan’s Open Space and Conservation Element is dependent on how it is integrated with the other General Plan elements. Elements that share issues and policy guidance with this Open Space and Conservation Element include Land Use, Mobility, and Community Safety and Services elements.
The Land Use Element seeks to minimize future development in areas with the natural resources identified in the OSC Element; along with areas that may be affected by natural hazards. The Land Use Element encourages the development of vibrant and healthy neighborhoods and community centers, while balancing the availability of water with future development, while the OSC Element establishes policies that protect and conserve water resources, such as Colma Creek. The Land Use and Mobility Elements also include goals and policies that encourage land use patterns that reduce vehicle miles traveled and by planning for transportation networks that encourage other modes of travel rather than the single‐occupant motor vehicle. The Town’s updated Community and Safety Element establishes goals and policies related to future development that minimize the risk of personal injury, loss of life, property damage, and environmental damage associated with natural hazards, also identified in the OSC Element.
OSC-3
OSC-4
OPEN SPACE AND PARKS
Open spaces are a critical part for a healthy quality of life for a community, providing relief from the urban built environment. The open space designation is used in two ways in the Town of Colma General Plan. First, it is used to recognize public parklands that are permanently unavailable for urban development. This category also includes selected sections of Colma Creek and specific tree masses which should be preserved as important parts of the town’s visual setting and recreation opportunities.
Second, the open space designation acknowledges land currently being used for agricultural purposes or other purposes that eventually will be used for active cemetery purposes. Active cemetery lands are also designated as open space. The open space designation also includes the now closed Hillside Landfill and the Cypress Hills Golf Course and related facilities where an urban land use designation would be inappropriate. The Hillside Landfill is currently only useable for temporary uses. As portions of the golf course are converted to cemetery use, a roadway to connect the Cypress Lawn Cemetery Eastside Campus to Sand Hill Road will be constructed to maintain fire access from more than one direction. The Town of Colma’s 1998 General Plan also included the San Francisco City & County Water Line easement in its Open Space Inventory and had contemplated use of the San Francisco Public Utility waterline easement area for a park. However, a well building and access road were constructed in the area, making a shared use unlikely.
EXISTING OPEN SPACE INVENTORY
The town of Colma is a small community recognized for its large expanses of cemetery land.
The major components of the total open space resources in the town (about 76% of the total land area) is land owned by cemeteries and used for memorial parks, agriculture, or general open space. Other major resources that are recognized as open space include Colma Creek, and the land east of Hillside Boulevard at
the base of San Bruno Mountain. Due
to its small size and unique character,
the town does not have land
categorized as open space for public
health and safety, military support or
tribal resources. An inventory of
existing open space resources is
compiled in Table OSC-1 Inventory of
Existing Open Space. Location of
open space resources is shown in
Figure OSC.1.
OSC-5
Table OSC-1 Inventory of Existing Open Space
Existing Open
Space
Open Space for
Natural
Resources
Open Space
for Managed
Production
of Resources
Open
Space for
Outdoor
Recreation
Approximate
Size
Colma Creek X X X 2300 Linear
Feet
Cemetery Lands X 922.2 Acres
Golf Course X 7.7 Acres
Agricultural Lands* X X 185.6 Acres
*Agricultural Lands include areas that are zoned for Cemetery use but are currently utilized for agriculture.
Colma Creek
Colma Creek (Creek) is a small creek that flows from the San Bruno Mountain State and County Park through the communities of Daly City, Colma, South San Francisco, and into San Francisco Bay. The delta area that the Creek once supported was a major stopping point for wildlife and migratory birds and was lined with native riparian plants such as sedge, rush, native grasses, and dogwood.
However, much of the open creek through the town has now been covered by flood control walls or buried underground. While most of the Creek is covered or underground, special care and concern are given to the preservation and protection of Colma Creek at locations where the creek is open. Riparian vegetation at key street crossings should be maintained in order to mitigate erosion and flooding.
Opportunities exist to take advantage of the open sections by adding vegetation, pedestrian walkways, and sitting areas along the edge of the channel. This, in turn, could serve to prevent erosion and to protect stormwater entering the creek from pollution.
Cemetery Lands
Founded as a necropolis, the town of Colma is often called the “City of Souls”, due to its 17 cemeteries, including a pet cemetery. Cemetery lands that have been committed to cemetery use will remain as such, even though some of the cemetery owners have leased their open lands for income while retaining ownership.
Cypress Hills Golf Course
Cypress Hills Golf Course was closed in 2012 and the land will likely be incorporated into the adjacent cemeteries. Currently, only the golf driving range, clubhouse, and parking lot remains from the original Cypress Hills Golf Course.
Colma Creek: from the west
side of El Camino Real along
Woodlawn Memorial Park
OSC-6
Agricultural Lands
Various agricultural uses exist in the town of Colma, mostly consisting of wholesale nursery operations. Open field flower and vegetable plots are commonly under lease from cemetery owners who are holding land that will, one day, be needed for gravesites.
EXISTING PUBLIC PARKS, RECREATION, AND OPEN SPACE
Colma is located on the San Francisco Peninsula within proximity to many outdoor recreational opportunities. The San Francisco Bay and Pacific Ocean are easily accessible by car and offer outstanding scenic and natural outdoor recreational opportunities. San Bruno Mountain State and County Park borders Colma’s eastern boundary. This park offers excellent hiking opportunities and outstanding views of San Francisco and the Central Bay Area. Access to the park from the town does not currently exist and is not planned.
Beginning in the late 1980’s, the Town began an active process of acquiring and improving public recreation properties. The Town’s publicly owned recreation and community facilities currently include the Sterling Park Recreation Center, the Colma Community Center and Historical Park, and Bark Park (Table OSC-2: Town of Colma Community Recreational Facilities).
Table OSC-2: Town of Colma Community Recreational Facilities Facility Name Acres Amenities
Bark Park 0.11 Dog park
Colma Community Center and
Historical Park
2.00 Restored train station, blacksmith shop, and
freight station
Sterling Park Recreation Center 0.33 Picnic area with barbeque pit, half-court basketball court, bocce ball court, playground
Total 2.44
OSC-7
OSC-8
The town’s residents, particularly the Sterling Park area at the northern portion of the town, have historically enjoyed park and recreational facilities provided by San Mateo County or the City of Daly City. In exchange for use of sports fields, the Town of Colma agreed to share costs associated with the development of sports fields at the former T.R. Pollicita Middle School in the City of Daly City. The sports fields accommodate a variety of activities and provide residents of both Colma and Daly City additional recreational opportunities.
Bark Park
Located at D Street and Clark Avenue, Bark Park provides for a fully fenced dog park with features such as a grassy pet area, a water station, garbage cans and waste removal equipment (Figure OSC.2).
Historical Park and Community Center
The Town acquired approximately two acres at the southwest corner of F Street and Hillside Boulevard for a park. The historically significant former Olivet Cemetery office on the site was converted to house the Colma Historical Association museum and offices. The historic Colma Train Station, which was acquired by the Town when the station building was
displaced by the BART extension to Colma, was relocated and restored. The park also includes a restored blacksmith shop and freight station. A vintage caboose or funeral car may also be acquired for the park as part of the historic train station theme.
The Colma Community Center was
constructed to provide additional recreational and community- oriented opportunities to the residents of Colma. The Community Center provides dining facilities for up to 150 people and is used for community events, private parties, meetings, and the Recreation Services Department office. A small lending library is included, as well as a full catering kitchen and a small conference room. The remainder of the site is used for off-street parking and public outdoor areas, picnic areas, open space, gardens, and walkways.
OSC-9
Sterling Park Community Center
In 2002, Sterling Park was expanded and improved to
incorporate additional open lawn areas, a skateboard park, walking paths and a fountain. Utilization of the skateboard park did not meet expectations, and the Town converted
the skateboard park to additional multi use space to the turf area. In 2018, the playground was fully renovated, and adult fitness stations and more picnic tables were added.
The following Goals, Policies, and Program items have been developed to preserve the open spaces in Colma.
OSC-1-1: Open Space Design. Incorporate local cultural and natural features that reflect the town’s unique character and identity.
OSC-1-2: Flexible Open Space Land Uses. Allow for the use of open space and future cemetery lands for commercial nursery, farming, or other uses which provide a community benefit.
OSC-1-3: Sustainable Landscape Practices. Encourage the enhancement of public areas with landscaping practices that minimize water usage.
OSC-1-4: Pedestrian Trails, Bikeways Walkways. Expand and improve pedestrian trails, bikeways, and walkways to connect trails and allow access to open space land and regional trail facilities.
OSC-1-5: Colma Creek Trail. Coordinate with the City of South San Francisco to provide continuous pedestrian access from the Colma BART station along El Camino Real to the southern border of the town.
OSC-2-1: Open Space for Recreation Use. Develop and maintain open spaces and recreation areas that are conveniently located, properly designed, and well- maintained to serve the recreation needs and healthy living of the entire community.
OSC-10
OSC-2-2: Recreation Requirements for New Developments. Require dedication of improved land, or payment of a fee in lieu of, for park and recreation land for all residential uses.
OSC-2-3: Expansion of Recreation Space. Acquire and enhance properties within Colma for recreation and public use if opportunities become available.
OSC-11
CONSERVATION
A desirable and livable community cultivates and manages its natural resources while providing for its population, economic growth, and infrastructure needs. California State law requires that general plans pursue goals, policies, and programs that address the preservation of natural resources in a community. Conservation therefore strives to minimize the impact of future development in areas with natural resources, promote the efficient use of water, and encourages land use development and transportation decisions that affect air quality.
CLIMATE AND AIR QUALITY
The town of Colma’s climate is affected by marine influence due to the winds and water temperatures of the Pacific Ocean. Dominant westerly winds, with frequent fog, prevail throughout the summer. The heavy incidence of fog and wind throughout the summer months limits the range of plants that can be grown in the open. Winter months are usually wet and cold. Ninety percent of the rain occurs between the months of November and April. The average rainfall varies between 20-25 inches per year. Temperatures range from lows in the 30’s (degrees Fahrenheit) to highs approaching the 80’s, primarily in the late summer or fall.
The town has a micro-climate due to being positioned lower in elevation from surrounding urban areas, influenced by Colma Creek drainage, and in the shadow of San Bruno Mountain.
Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change
There is a strong synthesis between land use and transportation planning decisions, and air quality pollutants as well as greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. GHGs play a critical role in determining the Earth’s surface temperature. GHGs trap heat in the Earth’s atmosphere by absorbing heat energy emitted by the Earth’s surface and radiating it back to the surface. This process, known as the greenhouse effect, is responsible for maintaining surface temperatures that are warm enough to sustain life. GHGs occur naturally. However, human activities, particularly fossil-fuel combustion, has led to increased concentrations of GHGs in the atmosphere, intensifying the warming associated with the greenhouse effect. The increased GHGs in the atmosphere are causing the planet to warm at an increasing rate, scientists refer to this phenomenon as “global climate change”. Climate change impacts precipitation patterns, sea levels, ocean temperatures and currents, polar ice cap retention and other climatic conditions.
On a local level, global climate change may impact the San Francisco Bay area, including the Town of Colma with a hotter and drier climate; increased salinity in the San Francisco Bay; decreased air quality; changes in annual precipitation; increased public and private water demand; and rising sea level of up to 24 inches by 2050 and 66 inches by 2100 (compared to 2000 conditions).
The Town of Colma is committed to the reduction of GHG emissions to counteract the impact of Climate Change. In 2013, the Town adopted a Climate Action Plan to achieve compliance with
OSC-12
State mandates and focus on feasible actions the Town can take to reduce GHG emissions by 15% below 2005 levels by 2020. Table OSC-3, the Town of Colma GHG Emissions Inventory, shows the progress in GHG emissions reductions since the Climate Action Plan was adopted in 2013. The data indicates that the Town is on track to meet its goal of 15% reduction in GHG emissions.
Table OSC-3: Town of Colma GHG Emissions Inventory
Sectors 2005 GHG
Emissions
(MTCO2e)
2010 GHG
Emissions
(MTCO2e)
2015 GHG
Emissions
(MTCO2e)
Difference in
GHG
Emissions
(MTCO2e)
Residential 1,518 1,625 1,182 -336
Commercial/Industrial 10,210 8,128 6,903 -3,307
Transportation – Local roads 12,074 11,539 11,114 -960
Transportation – State highways 6,068 5,226 5,900 -168
Transportation – Off-road equipment 2,432 2,468 2,283 -149 Solid Waste – Landfills** 14,726** 12,013** 20,245** +5,519** Solid Waste – Generated Waste 1,318 855 305 -1,011
Water N/A
28 19 N/A
Wastewater N/A 27 34 N/A
Stationary Sources N/A 55 1,667 N/A
Totals*:
Total of 2015 Emissions 29,407 metric tons CO2e
Total of 2005 Baseline Emissions*** 33,620 metric tons CO2e Total Decrease -4,213 metric tons CO2e
Percent Change -12.5%
*Numbers may not add up exactly due to rounding.
**Data associated with two landfills in Colma’s boundaries are for informational purposes only and are excluded from the 2010 emissions inventory. These sites are both closed and are not owned by the Town. ***Total 2005 baseline emissions exclude landfill emissions and exclude previously reported Direct Access natural gas. The Direct Access natural gas consumption was erroneously double-counted in the baseline 2005 inventory.
Air Quality
Ambient air quality standards have been established by State and federal agencies for specific air pollutants, or criteria air pollutants. These criteria air pollutants include:
• Ozone (O3) and Ozone precursors
• Oxides of nitrogen and reactive organic gases (NOx and ROG) • Carbon monoxide (CO)
• Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
• Suspended particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5).
Another group of substances found in ambient air is known as Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) under the Federal Clean Air Act, and Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) under the California Clean
OSC-13
Air Act. Though these contaminants tend to be found in relatively low concentrations in ambient air, they have the potential to result in adverse health problems if exposure occurs over long periods. TACs are a broad class of compounds known to cause cancer risk, and may include, but are not limited to, the criteria air pollutants listed above. TACs are found in ambient air, especially in urban areas, and are caused by industry, agriculture, and commercial operations (e.g., dry cleaners). In cooler weather, smoke from residential wood combustion can be a source of TACs. Wood smoke also contains a significant amount of PM10 and PM2.5. Wood smoke is an irritant and is implicated in worsening asthma and other chronic lung problems. "Sensitive receptors" are another issue to be considered under air quality. These are defined as facilities where population groups, such as children, the elderly, the acutely and chronically ill, are likely to be located. These therefore could include residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, retirement homes, convalescent homes, hospitals, and medical clinics.
Colma is part of the San Francisco Bay Air Basin, as defined by the State Air Resource Board, and is therefore subject to administrative regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). Regional air quality conditions are monitored and analyzed by the BAAQMD to determine if State and federal standards are being achieved not only for criteria air pollutants but also for toxic air contaminants (TACs). Table OSC 2-4: Measured Air Pollutant Concentrations at San Francisco presents air quality measurement data from the nearest operating monitoring station located in the City of San Francisco, for the most recent three full years of data available (2014-2016). As shown in Table OSC-4, ambient concentrations of carbon monoxide, ozone, and nitrogen oxide levels have not exceeded state or federal standards.
Due to wildfires in 2017 and 2018, fine particulate matter (PM2.5) substantially exceeded state and federal standards. However, when adjusted for the wildfires, average PM2.5 levels would have been below state and federal standards as shown by the adjusted figures in Table OSC 2-
4. Based on historical averages, PM2.5 levels are anticipated to remain below state and federal standards into the foreseeable future as automobile emissions decline. Unfortunately, wildfires are anticipated to affect air quality periodically negatively into the future.
OSC-14
Table OSC-4: Measured Air Pollutant Concentrations at San Francisco Pollutant California
Standard
Federal
Standard
Measured Concentrations
by Year
2016 2017 2018
Carbon Monoxide
Maximum 1-hour average (ppm) 20 35 1.7 2.5 1.9
Maximum 8-hour average (ppm) 9 9 1.1 1.4 1.6
Nitrogen Dioxide
Maximum 1-hour average (ppm) 0.18 0.100 0.058 0.073 0.069 Annual Average (ppm) 0.030 0.053 0.011 0.011 0.011
Ozone
Maximum 1-hour average (ppm) 0.090 ---- 0.070 0.087 0.065 Maximum 8-hour average (ppm) 0.070 0.070 0.057 0.054 0.0491 Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
24 Hour (µg/m3) 35 35 19.6 22* 22*
Annual Average (µg/m3) 12 12 7.5 8.4* 8.4*
Sources: Bay Area Air Quality Management District, California Air Resources Board, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency NAAQS.
*Adjustments for 24-hr. PM2.5 readings in 2017 of 49.9 µg/m3 and 177.4 µg/m3 in 2018 based on BAAQMD “Preliminary Analysis of PM2.5 Values with and Without Wildfire Smoke Episodes in 2017 and 2018”, October 2020
Air quality is largely affected by climate and topography, as well as the amount and source of air pollutants in the area. The largest source of air pollution in the town of Colma is vehicular traffic. Traffic along I-280 and local vehicular traffic has a constant effect on the air quality, although the prevailing northwesterly winds disperse the air pollutants. The location of the town, west of San Bruno Mountain also has an effect on local air quality. The mountain protects town of Colma from the influences of pollutants along the U.S. 101 corridor. Upslope and downslope air movements on the west slopes of the mountain help disperse air pollutants along the I-280 corridor.
To reduce future levels of particulate matter, the Town adopted an ordinance regulating wood- burning appliances in 2006. Such appliances must meet the emission requirements of BAAQMD.
As future development takes place in Colma, it is anticipated it they will be similar in nature to what already exists. Industries that produce concentrated amounts of air pollution are not planned in the town. As vehicular traffic increases in the Bay Area, the Town of Colma can mitigate the potential for pollutant concentrations by making timely circulation improvements to facilitate the flow of traffic along major thoroughfares.
Therefore, in order to preserve and improve air quality, reduce GHG impacts, and improve the sustainability of actions taken by the Town, the following Goals, Policies, and Program items have been identified.
OSC-15
OSC-3-1: Transit Oriented Development. Encourage, to the extent feasible, higher density residential development to be located near transit corridors and public transportation.
OSC-3-2: Reduce Energy Consumption. Support measures and education to reduce energy consumption and increase energy efficiency in residential, commercial, and industrial buildings.
OSC-3-3: Energy Efficiency in Municipal Operations. Pursue opportunities to improve energy efficiency and install renewable energy systems, where feasible, in new and existing Town-owned facilities and operations.
OSC-3-4: GHG Reduction. Implement the Climate Action Plan to achieve GHG reduction targets that are consistent with the State Scoping Plan, AB 32, and SB 32 and the Town’s goals.
OSC-3-5: Pedestrian-Scaled Design. Support the use of public/mass transit by encouraging pedestrian-friendly street design and mixed-use development near transit hubs.
WATER
Public Water Supply
Although local groundwater is an important water resource for irrigation purposes, the town of Colma’s potable water source is supplied by the San Francisco Water Company, through the California Water Service Company (Cal Water). The majority of this water is from the Hetch Hetchy watershed (“Hetch Hetchy”), an area located in Yosemite National Park, that is the major source of water for all of San Francisco’s water needs. Spring snowmelt runs down the Tuolumne River and fills Hetch Hetchy, the largest reservoir in the Hetch Hetchy water system.
This surface water in the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir is treated, but not filtered because it is considered high quality due to its softness and low quantity of total dissolved solids (TDS). The majority of the inorganic and organic compounds found in the water can be removed by standard methods of water treatment.
Based on the expected increase in population in the region, the demand for water is expected to increase moderately in the next ten years. Therefore, water conservation is becoming more essential. Although the town of Colma imposes a very small demand on Hetch Hetchy resources, the Town is a part of a regional effort to manage groundwater for drought conditions and emergencies.
OSC-16
Plans for a non-potable reclaimed water system using water from the Daly City treatment plant are currently being considered. However, the cost to convey the water to Colma’s cemeteries is high and funding is not currently available.
Groundwater
The town is within the Colma Creek watershed, which is part of the South Westside Basin, part of a major groundwater basin that extends north into San Francisco (North Westside Basin).
The headwaters of Colma Creek are on the slopes of San Bruno Mountain. The San Mateo Basin watershed drains via Colma Creek into the San Francisco Bay in South San Francisco.
Groundwater is an important water source in Colma, with many of the cemeteries depend on groundwater for irrigation. The groundwater aquifer extends through the City of South San Francisco and northern San Bruno Mountain. The trough is estimated to be two miles wide by nine miles long, lying between San Bruno Mountain and the Santa Cruz Mountains. Most of the wells tapping the aquifer are in the order of 200-600 feet deep and produce 100-600 gallons per minute. A majority of the water from the aquifer is used to supply potable water to the Cities of Daly City and San Bruno. Cal Water, who supplies potable water to the town, also draws from the aquifer to supplement water obtained from other sources.
Water Quality
Water quality is an area of concern in Colma because of the effects of pollution from urban uses on wildlife habitat. Pollutants are picked up by runoff from streets, open areas, and urban lands and collect into larger sources of water, such as Colma Creek and ultimately drain into the San Francisco Bay. The Town takes part in a joint effort to reduce the concentration of pollutants and improve water quality in the Bay by managing stormwater runoff.
The Town complies with the Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP), issued by the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) for its stormwater pollution control measures. Local agencies in San Mateo County are required to reduce surface water drainage pollution runoff and establish control measures in
development projects, which provide specific
guidelines on design measures for runoff of
pollutants of concern, source controls, stormwater
treatment measures, hydromodification
management, and construction site controls. To
address flow-related impacts of stormwater runoff,
the Town also enforces National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permits that are issued
for industrial and construction activities.
The Town of Colma has established preferred best management practices (BMPs) for adoption into a Stormwater Management Plan. These practices include street sweeping, storm drain
OSC-17
stenciling, spill cleanup and annual catch basin maintenance. Additionally, the Town adopted a Green Infrastructure Plan in August 2019 to reduce pollutants that enter the bay. Specifically, the plan targets the reduction of mercury and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
Flooding
Colma Creek flows through Colma in above-ground channels and underground culverts. The creek and drainageway is approximately eight miles long, flowing heaviest during the rainy season from November through April. Even though the rainfall amount in the town is not unusually high, the rainfall that occurs happens over a short period. As urbanization increases in the watershed, the potential for groundwater infiltration decreases while water runoff and the potential for flooding increases.
Historically, flooding has occurred in the south and north end of town at El Camino Real and F Street, and on El Camino at the Mission Street Wye. The San Mateo County Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District has constructed two box culverts that divert the main flow from Colma Creek. One box culvert is in the median of El Camino Real and one is located under the centerline of Old Mission Road. These major capital improvements have eliminated the flooding risk in these areas and are designed for a 50-year event.
The town is not part of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood mapping program. An open space policy provides that on-site runoff, infiltration, and retention facilities be constructed as a part of each new development project in the town of Colma. Adjoining communities are urged to follow this same practice when projects are considered that may influence the Colma Creek drainageway.
The following Goals and Policies are therefore included so that the Town may be more involved with the management of its water quality and stormwater pollution prevention, as well as maintaining the continued environmental health of Colma Creek.
OSC-4-1: Comply with Water Quality Regulations. Continue to comply with all State and federal regulations for water quality.
OSC-4-2: Participation in the San Mateo County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SMCWPPP). Continue to be an active member agency of the SMCWPPP to reduce pollution from being conveyed through the storm water system to the San Francisco Bay.
OSC-4-3: Reclaimed Water. Pursue opportunities to install water recycling infrastructure for Town-owned and cemetery landscape areas.
OSC-18
OSC-4-4: Use of Drought Tolerant and Native Plants. Encourage the use of drought tolerant and native plants in landscaping plans.
OSC-4-5: Green Infrastructure. Incorporate green infrastructure, which relies on natural processes for stormwater treatment/drainage, groundwater recharge and flood control, into street and rights-of-way wherever practicable, including curb cuts, flow- through planters and bioswales that slow stormwater runoff by dispersing it to vegetated areas, harvesting and use of runoff, and promote infiltration and use of bioretention to clean stormwater runoff.
OSC-4-6: Stormwater Runoff. Require large-scale projects (over 0.5 acres) to channel surface and roof runoff to on-site detention facilities to facilitate groundwater recharge, reduce stormwater pollution, and mitigate flooding of Colma Creek.
OSC-4-7: Colma Creek Bank Setback. Protect and enhance areas of Colma Creek for riparian habitat, linear park opportunities, and aesthetic value.
OSC-4-8: Colma Creek Enhancements. Enhance Colma Creek where possible by concrete channel removal, adding landscaping, public pathways, and sitting areas.
OSC-4.-9: Water Quality and Conservation Public Information. Continue to support and coordinate with the Countywide Stormwater Program, Cal Water, and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) on their public outreach and education campaigns to conserve and maintain water quality.
SOIL AND MINERAL RESOURCES
The town of Colma occupies a wide drainage basin centered on Colma Creek. The geologic formation of the area is known as the Colma formation. The formation is weakly to moderately consolidated and consists of friable, well sorted, fine to medium grained sand and local gravel, sandy silt and clay. An alluvial strip, consisting of unconsolidated permeable sand and gravel, exists along Colma Creek.
The State Division of Mines and Geology has not classified or designated any areas in the town as containing regionally significant mineral resources. However, Colma sand is a well-known construction resource. The Hillside Landfill filled a historic sand pit from which material was mined for utility trench backfill.
OSC-19
VEGETATION
The town of Colma’s natural vegetative habitat is scrub, with riparian habitat located primarily along Colma Creek. Due to the town’s existing horticultural practices, memorial parks and developed areas, this habitat has been significantly altered or removed. The vegetative cover of the town now consists primarily of introduced ornamental and native plant materials.
Riparian Vegetation
Riparian vegetation, largely willow and alder, is limited to the banks along open sections of Colma Creek. Riparian vegetation supports a variety of wildlife and enhances the natural setting of the town. These areas are located behind the commercial district west of Mission Road, from the Cypress Lawn Cemetery offices to Collins Avenue, west of City Hall from Serramonte Boulevard north about 800 feet, and in front of Woodlawn and Greenlawn cemeteries adjacent to El Camino Real. The remaining above-ground portions of the creek in the Town of Colma run through a concrete lined channel.
Non-Native Plants
Non-native plant species are prevalent in certain areas of the town and are often so prolific that they are invasive and spread into surrounding ecosystems, displacing native plants. Non-native plants tend to be more aggressive in their growth habits, and are more resistant to diseases, to competitors and to predators. This dominance of non-native plants can have profound effects on the native ecosystem; as native plants are killed off, the animals that depend on those plants also disappear. Often the invading plant is not a food source and may support no life, or worse, contain potent alkaloids that are toxic to native animals.
Invading non-native plants in the town of Colma include German Ivy (Senecio mikanioides), Cape Ivy (Senecio angulatus), Pampas Grass (Cortaderia jubata), Fennel (Foeniculum), Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius), and Gorse (Ulex europaea). Property owners should eliminate any of these plants where they occur. Eradication can be quite difficult, however, since many of these plants break when pulled, and segments that fall to the ground will take root and grow again.
Typically, the root systems of non-native plants must be removed and carefully disposed of, starting at the outer edge of the infestation. In some cases, chemical control can be effective.
Tree Masses
The vegetation that is most clearly recognized in the town is the significant tree masses that exist throughout the town. The majority of these trees were planted by the cemetery owners to act as buffers, windbreaks, and for aesthetic purposes. The cemeteries chose pine, cypress, acacia, palm, and eucalyptus because of their availability and compatibility with the town of Colma’s microclimate. Many of these plantings have naturalized to the town’s environment. Tree masses are particularly prominent in or at the edges of the memorial parks in the town.
OSC-20
Aesthetically, trees play a major role in determining the charming, picturesque quality of the town. They also provide a support system for wildlife nesting and feeding purposes.
Unfortunately, many of these trees are nearing the end of their natural lives or are vulnerable to disease or infestation.
It is important to the Town of Colma to protect existing tree masses when possible.
Consequently, the Town has adopted a tree cutting and removal ordinance. This ordinance has set up guidelines and regulations to protect both trees and views. When trees are removed, they are usually required to be replaced with new trees that will grow to a similar size and form.
As a general rule, a one-to-one replacement is required. Where appropriate, the Town seeks to have new trees planted that will achieve substantial height, and in groupings which will perpetuate the large masses associated with the town’s setting.
Street Trees
Street trees are an important element of landscape plans and are required as a condition of private development. Street trees help define the boundaries of streets and can also act as a moderator to windy conditions. In the town of Colma, they have improved the town’s image, providing a link between cemetery/open space and developed areas, and have improved the pedestrian experience.
Project Landscaping
Project landscaping plays an important role in linking existing open space areas in Colma.
Landscaping softens the visual impacts of structures, acts as a buffer between incompatible uses and brings harmony and consistency to the urban design of the town. This is particularly important where the serenity of cemetery properties must be buffered from roads and urban land uses.
Introduced landscaping is one of the principal devices that can be used to create scenic roadways and entry gateways. Scenic roadways accentuate the green expanses of the memorial parks. Entry gateways call attention to the town boundaries and welcome visitors.
Colma’s varied topography creates a variety of unique microclimate conditions that can vary throughout the town. Special care should be taken to ensure that plant species used in project landscaping are suitable to each site’s specific microclimate. Sun, soil, and particularly wind conditions should be considered in the landscape design and plant selection.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Colma has a diversified wildlife population consisting of small animals. The San Francisco Bay Area is located along the Pacific Flyway, so migratory birds are attracted to the open spaces of San Bruno Mountain and to the memorial parks and cemetery irrigation ponds in the town. It is not uncommon to view wild ducks and geese along with domestic fowl in the various cemetery
OSC-21
lakes along El Camino Real within the town limits. Other bird species seen in the area include vultures, hawks, owls, and a variety of songbirds. Small animals common to the Colma area are snakes, lizards, gophers, squirrels, frogs, mice, and rabbits.
Endangered, Threatened and Sensitive Species
Due to agricultural practices and normal cemetery landscape maintenance, open space land in the town of Colma is characterized as disturbed. There are no areas of undisturbed native habitat within town boundaries. However, there are areas adjacent to the town (particularly San Bruno Mountain) where threatened and endangered species are found and there are areas within the town limits where human-made environments may favor the presence of sensitive species.
Colma abuts San Bruno Mountain State and County Park, known for its colonies of federally listed endangered butterflies. Both the Mission Blue and San Bruno Elfin butterflies are found on the mountain east and south of the town limits. The mountain is also home to the Callipe Silverspot, a federally proposed endangered butterfly and the Bay Checkerspot, a federally listed threatened butterfly. With regard to plant species, two subspecies of Manzanita found on the mountain, San Bruno Mountain Manzanita and Pacific Manzanita, are listed by the State of California as threatened. The California Native Plant Society has identified rare plant species on the mountain, including Coast Rock Cress, Franciscan Wallflower, San Francisco Campion and the sunflower-like Helianthela Castanea.
The town’s tall trees and tree masses are potential nesting sites for sensitive raptors protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. For any new construction projects, a biological investigation should be done whenever tree removal would occur during nesting season (generally February through July) so that active nests can be protected. Ornamental ponds within some of Colma’s cemeteries may be potential habitat for the federally listed threatened Red-legged frog.
Conditions favoring this species include ponds at least two feet deep with moving water and borders of dense, shrubby or emergent riparian vegetation. Although the State and federally listed endangered San Francisco garter snake seeks the Red-legged frog as a food source, there are currently no known populations of the snake in the town. A biological investigation for presence of the frog should be done whenever development would alter a pond as described above. The garter snake may have once been found along Colma Creek when it was a natural creek, but the current culverted condition of the creek is not suitable habitat.
Therefore, in order to reduce risks to any biological resources within the town, the following Goals, Policies and Program items have been identified.
OSC-5-1: Tree Masses. Recognize significant tree masses and other vegetative cover as natural resources to manage and preserve.
OSC-22
OSC-5-2: Tree Removal. Removal of significant trees shall be carefully evaluated by factors such as the age, structure, and health of the tree as part of the tree removal permit process.
OSC-5-3: Sensitive Biological Habitats. Require new development on or near sensitive habitats, such as open creeks, ponds, and other water features, to be subject to an investigation of the presence of the threatened Red-legged frog and endangered San Francisco Garter Snake.
OSC-5-4: Habitat Enhancement. Require new development to minimize the disturbance of natural habitats and vegetation, and revegetation of disturbed habitat with native or non-invasive, naturalized species.
OSC-5-5: Nesting Bird Protection. Require project applicants to retain the services of a qualified biologist(s) to conduct a pre-construction nesting bird survey during the nesting season (February 1 through August 31) prior to all new development that may remove or be in close proximity to any trees or vegetation that may provide suitable nesting habitat for migratory birds or other special-status bird species. If nests are found the qualified biologist(s) shall identify appropriate avoidance measures, and these measures shall be incorporated into the project and implemented accordingly.
OSC-5-6: Regional Open Space Preservation Efforts. Support regional and sub-regional efforts to acquire, develop and maintain open space conservation lands.
OSC-5-7: Soil and Mineral Resources. Encourage the conservation of the town’s existing soil and mineral resources, balanced by consideration of important social values, to protect their longevity and preserve the natural landscape.
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES
The town of Colma is intricately linked to the missionization of California and the development of neighboring San Francisco. Throughout its history, Colma has served a number of different purposes. Its geographical location has made it ideal as a transportation corridor, as ranching and agricultural land, and now as a thriving regional necropolis.
At the time of contact by the Spanish, the Ohlone, or Costanoan group of Native Americans inhabited Colma Although the term Costanoan derives from the Spanish word Cokstaños, or “coast people,” its application as a means of identifying this population is based in linguistics.
Modern descendants of the Costanoan prefer to be known as Ohlone. The name Ohlone derives from the Oljón tribal group that occupied the San Gregorio watershed in San Mateo County.
Subsistence was tied to seasonal availability and included seeds, acorns, nuts, fruits, and bulbs, as well as deer, tule elk, sea mammals, and waterfowl. Shell middens around the San Francisco
OSC-23
Bay also show the reliance on shellfish and marine resources in the region. People used stone tools for hunting and processing, including knives, arrows, spears, net sinkers, anchors, handstones, and millingstones. The Ohlone constructed utilitarian baskets using the twining method with tule and other plant materials. They also constructed out of tule, and houses as structures made of poles covered with brush and/or tule matting.
Today, descendants of the Ohlone live throughout the Bay Area. Several of these Ohlone groups (e.g., Muwekma and Amah) have banded together as modern tribelets to seek federal recognition. Many Ohlone (both individuals and groups) are active in reviving and preserving elements of their traditional culture such as dance, basketry, and song.
Information regarding the location of tribelet habitation areas varies between ethnographic sources. Colma is located between three Costanoan/Ohlone habitation areas: Aramai, Urebure, and Yelamu. The Aramai were located near present-day Pacifica, approximately 3.5 mi. south- southwest from Colma. The Urebure were located near present-day San Bruno, approximately 3 mi. southeast of Colma. The Yelamu resided in the north San Francisco Peninsula within the current city limits of San Francisco. Four village clusters moved between their summer and winter villages. The nearest Yelamu village was located near Fort Funston, approximately 3 mi. northwest of Colma.
While no resources have ever been found in Colma, due to Colma’s location and proximity to a fresh water source, Colma Creek, there is a possibility that resources could exist in Colma.
Several State laws protect archaeological resources including the American Indian Religious Freedom Act and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CEQA requires assessment of the impacts to unique archaeological resources or Native American culturally significant sites, including sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe. If a development project is found to potentially cause damage to a resource, reasonable efforts may be required to preserve the resources, leave it in an undisturbed state, or undertake additional mitigation measures if avoidance is not possible. To protect historic resources, the State has formed the State Historical Resources Commission that conducts the State Historic Resource Inventory.
OSC-6-1: Development Review Process. Require, as part of the development review process, standard conditions of approval or mitigation measures that identify proper measures and protocols to be followed in the event that tribal or cultural resources are discovered on a project site.
OSC-6-2: Tribal Consultation Compliance. Comply with SB 18,AB 52, and other applicable State and federal laws by consulting with local California Native American tribes prior to development decisions or General Plan or Specific Plan amendments. Respect
OSC-24
tribal policies regarding confidentiality of information about tribal resources or sacred sites.
OSC-6-3: On-Site Monitoring and Mitigation. If archaeological resources of Native American origin are identified during project construction, a qualified archaeologist shall consult with the Town to begin Native American consultation procedures. The project proponent shall fund the cost of the qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor (as needed) for analysis and implementation of any necessary mitigation.
OSC-25
IMPLEMENTATION
Open Space and Conservation
Implementation Programs 2021-2030 2031-2040 Annual Ongoing OSC-IP1: As part of project
approval and collected prior to
project occupancy, new
development shall provide fair
share contributions for parks,
trails, and other passive
recreational facilities if not
included in the project.
X
Implements Policies: OSC-2-2, OSC-2-3, Responsible Dept. Planning OSC-IP2: Promote energy
conservation and retrofitting
of existing public and private
buildings and facilities to
improve energy efficiency and
pursue excellence in energy
efficiency in the design and
construction of new buildings
and facilities.
X
Implements Policies: OSC-3-2, OSC-3-3, Responsible Depts. Planning and Building OSC-IP3: Integrate energy
efficiency, conservation, and
other green building practices
into the planning and building
permit processes as
technologies improve and
evolve.
X
X
Implements Policy: OSC-3-2, Responsible Depts. Planning and Building OSC-IP4: Participate in
regional, State, and federal
efforts to reduce GHG
emissions and mitigate the
impacts resulting from climate
change.
X
Implements Policy: OSC-3-4, Responsible Dept. Planning
OSC-26
OSC-IP5: Periodically update
the Town’s Climate Action Plan
to maintain compliance with
GHG reduction targets set
forth by the California Air
Resources Board and assess
and modify existing CAP
implementation programs.
X
X
Implements Policy: OSC-3-4, Responsible Dept. Planning
OSC-IP6: Provide the
community with information
that supports conservation and
resource management.
X
Implements Policies: OSC--3-2, OSC-4-9 Responsible Dept. Planning and Public Works OSC-IP7: The Town of Colma
shall follow all Best
Management Practices (BMPs)
in order to maintain water
quality and to prevent or
reduce non-point source water
pollution.
X
Implements Policies: OSC 4-1, OSC 4-2, OSC 4-5,OSC-4-6, OSC-4-8, Responsible Dept.
Engineering, Supporting Dept. Planning
OSC-IP8: Promote the
conservation and efficient use
of water in new and existing
residences and commercial
buildings and sites.
X
Implements Policies: OSC-4-3, OSC-4-9, Responsible Dept. Planning and Building, Supporting Dept. Engineering
OSC-IP9: Review landscape
and hardscape installations as
part of new development to
ensure compliance with water
conservation requirements in
the Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance.
X
Implements Policies: OSC 4-3,OSC-4-4, Responsible Dept. Planning
OSC-27
OSC-IP10: Review and update
the Town’s Green
Infrastructure Plan every five
years to assess the
applicability of the Countywide
Green Infrastructure (GI)
Guidelines and Standards for
town development projects
and ensure ongoing
compliance with the NPDES
permit.
X
X
Implements Policy: OSC-4-2, OSC-4-5, Responsible Dept. Planning, Supporting Dept.
Engineering
OSC-IP11: Restore Colma
Creek to a more natural state
by removing culverting, where
feasible.
X
Implements Policy: OSC-4-7, OSC 4-8, Responsible Depts. Planning and Public works OSC-IP12: Promote the
establishment of native
vegetation and the removal of
non-native, invasive plants in
Colma Creek and vicinity.
X
Implements Policy: OSC-4-4, OSC-4-8, Responsible Dept. Planning, Supporting Dept.
Engineering
OSC-IP13: Utilize drought-
tolerant landscaping on public
property and streetscapes and
promote the use of drought-
tolerant plantings (especially
native species acclimated to
the town), as well as site and
landscape designs that
minimize water use and runoff.
X
Implements Policy: OSC-4-4, Responsible Depts. Planning and Public Works OSC-IP14: Increase and
manage Colma’s tree canopy
on public and private
properties.
X
Implements Policies: OSC-5-1, OSC-5-2, OSC-5-3, Responsible Dept. Planning
Historical Resources Element
HR-1
INTRODUCTION
California Government Code (Code) allows for the development of optional General Plan Elements (Section §65303(J), including a Historical Resources Element for the identification, protection and management of a community’s sites and structures exhibiting architectural, historical, archaeological and cultural significance. A Historical Resources Element is particularly appropriate for the Town of Colma due to its rich history and large number of historic and cultural resources.
Even though a Historic Resources Element is not a State mandated element, it follows the procedures developed for the Town’s mandatory elements. This Historic Resource Element therefore sets forth a systematic program for the preservation of the Town of Colma’s historic and cultural heritage as reflected in its characteristics that form a distinct and exceptional cultural setting. The inclusion and adoption of a Historic Preservation Element illustrates the integral role that preservation plays in the larger planning process and aids in the assurance that historic and cultural resources will be considered in concert with other key General Plan elements. The inclusive and holistic approach to planning provides a long-range vision that encourages a culturally, socially, environmentally and economically rich town that is able to evolve while retaining tangible links to the past, providing for a better quality of life and a prosperous future.
HR-1
INTRODUCTION
California Government Code (Code) allows for the development of optional General Plan Elements (Section §65303(J), including a Historical Resources Element for the identification, protection and management of a community’s sites and structures exhibiting architectural, historical, archaeological and cultural significance. A Historical Resources Element is particularly appropriate for the Town of Colma due to its rich history and large number of historic and cultural resources.
Even though a Historic Resources Element is not a State mandated element, it follows the procedures developed for the Town’s mandatory elements. This Historic Resource Element therefore sets forth a systematic program for the preservation of the Town of Colma’s historic and cultural heritage as reflected in its characteristics that form a distinct and exceptional cultural setting. The inclusion and adoption of a Historic Preservation Element illustrates the integral role that preservation plays in the larger planning process and aids in the assurance that historic and cultural resources will be considered in concert with other key General Plan elements. The inclusive and holistic approach to planning provides a long-range vision that encourages a culturally, socially, environmentally and economically rich town that is able to evolve while retaining tangible links to the past, providing for a better quality of life and a prosperous future.
HR-2
PAST PRESERVATION EFFORTS
In December of 1992 the Town of Colma commissioned its first Historic Resource Inventory in order to identify historic resources of local, state and national significance. The Inventory identified buildings, structure, sites, objects and districts related to the Town’s rich agricultural history, residential and commercial development and especially that of its unique cemetery landscape. The inventory has encouraged consideration and recognition of historic and cultural resources in the Town of Colma’s subsequent planning decisions.
The private sector has also played an integral role in the preservation of the Town’s heritage. In July of 1993, a group of concerned community members founded the Colma Historical Association with the mission of preserving, protecting and promoting the unique heritage of the Town. The association acts as the impromptu advising body to the Town’s planning office while advocating for and providing guidance on historic preservation related issues. The organization also played an instrumental role in the preservation of the historic “Old Colma (School House) Railroad Station” when it was threatened to be demolished as a result of the construction of Bay Area Transit Administration facilities. The Historical Association now houses their offices in the former Mount Olivet Cemetery building on Hillside Boulevard, and the Old Colma (School House) Railroad Station has been relocated and restored adjacent to the museum. In addition to the museum building and station, there is a blacksmith shop and a freight building.
Passive preservation of the Town’s intangible heritage has also occurred through the continuity of uses and industry that played a large role historically and continues to do so today. The Town of Colma continues to support florists, stonemasons and commercial businesses established in its early days. These types of businesses have continued the legacy of those who came before, and perhaps without even knowing it, have contributed greatly to the preservation of the Town’s intangible heritage.
The Town’s known historic and cultural resources are presented in Figure H.1 – Historic Resources Map, and Appendix B – Historic Resources Evaluation.
HR-3
CONTEXT STATEMENT
The Colma valley has been inhabited for centuries. The Ohlone/Costanonoan tribes took advantage of the natural resources connected to Colma Creek and San Bruno Mountain for sustenance. The El Camino Real was established through the Colma valley in the late 1700’s as a primary traveling route for the Spanish, eventually connecting the Spanish missions.
Development in the Town largely began in the 1850’s and has since accumulated rich and distinct layers of significance. These layers are still visible in the varied land use, spatial organization, biotic resources, architectural forms, and practices which are reflective of the Town’s varied and unique heritage. As the only known necropolis in the United States, the Town of Colma exhibits a rich and diverse array of historic agricultural, commercial, industrial and funerary resources and it is the composite of these resources that imbues the landscape with meaning.
SETTING
The Town of Colma is in the far northern portion of the San Francisco Peninsula, in San Mateo County, along the eastern foothills of the Santa Cruz Mountain Range. In 1850 the Town Colma referred to a section of land extending from the Southern border of San Francisco south to the boarder of the Buri-Buri Rancho (currently Chestnut Avenue/Westborough area) and from the western portion of San Bruno Mountain east to the Pacific Ocean (parts of present-day Daly City and Pacifica). The Town of Colma was incorporated in 1924, primarily to protect cemetery interests. A series of annexations in the twentieth century altered Town’s boundaries so that, today, the Town of Colma is comprised of approximately 1.9 square miles bounded by Daly City on the north, San Bruno Mountain to the east, South San Francisco in the south and Junipero Serra Boulevard on the West. Being both isolated and connected at once, the Town’s position in the San Francisco Peninsula and proximity to the City of San Francisco greatly influenced its development through the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. A rolling landscape made up of rich sandy loam soil and a mild climate with coastal fog and a variety of rich resources made the area that would one day be the Town of Colma both a challenging and appealing one from the very beginning.
EARLY SETTLEMENT
At the time of European contact in the eighteenth century, the Native American population known as the Ohlone—an umbrella term referring to upwards of forty distinct and autonomous small tribes located in the San Francisco Bay Area— had inhabited the Northern California Peninsula, from South San Francisco to Belmont for more than 4000 years. Prior to the arrival of the Spanish, Northern California supported one of the densest populations of Native Americans north of Mexico. The Ohlone tribes were hunter-gatherers, and at the time of European exploration, there were thought to be more than forty permanent Ohlone villages and
HR-4
almost as many temporary villages located along the San Francisco Bay. Yet, the arrival of the Spanish in the eighteenth century led to the loss and displacement of the Ohlone peoples.
Today, the presence of the Ohlone population around the Town of Colma is evidenced by the presence of middens and shell mounds found throughout San Mateo County.
In 1821, more than 15,000 acres of land bounded by South San Francisco, the Pacific Ocean and the San Bruno Mountains became part of the Buri-Buri Land Grant, granted to Jose De la Cruz Sanchez by Jose Castro. For more than two decades the Buri-Buri Rancho served as grazing land and would eventually support a thriving cattle industry. Yet, the discovery of Gold at Sutter’s Mill in 1848 and the rapid migration of new settlers to California spelled the beginning of the end for the Mexican ranchos, most of which were completely dismantled within two decades. The rapid breakup of the Mexican Ranchos was largely a result of the Preemption Act passed by Congress in 1841, which allowed for those squatting on federal lands to purchase up to 160 acres on which to establish a farm. Those newly migrated to California began applying those rights established by the Preemption Act to not only federally owned lands, but also to the California Ranchos. Land disputes ensued as the new immigrants continued to encroach upon the lands of the Rancheros.
The subsequent passage of the Gwin Act in 1851 placed the legal burden of proving the validity of land grants on the Rancheros. If the validity of the land grant was not proven within two years, the land would then pass to public domain. The cost of litigation led to the Rancheros losing the vast majorities of their land. By 1865 the Buri-Buri Rancho was owned by 65 individuals with only 5% remaining in the hands of Jose De La Cruz Sanchez.
AGRICULTURAL CONTEXT
The European Settlement that began in the 1850s established the Town of Colma as an important agricultural epicenter. From its earliest days the Town existed as a crossroads, connecting the cities of the San Francisco Peninsula. Located only eight miles south of San Francisco, the Town of Colma held a strategic location with a rapidly burgeoning market just beyond its borders. As a gateway town, the Town of Colma acted as provider for the growing Bay Area population in many ways and this role was especially visible in the context of agriculture.
The earliest settlers established farms and ranches, many of which were self-sustaining. Among the first to settle the area of the Town were Irish immigrants who cultivated potatoes throughout the 1850s up until 1877, with many of the larger operations employing Chinese Coolies. The relatively short-lived potato industry came to an abrupt end when blight attacked the potato crop and killed all the potatoes before they were harvested. A handful of Irish potato farmers continued to farm the blight-resistant potato varietal known as the Garnet Chili, yet the potato industry never did return to its former proportions. Many of the Irish left the Town of Colma after the failure of the potato industry and sold off their lands to other eager immigrants.
The next wave of immigrant farmers came between 1908-1942, many of whom were of Italian
HR-5
descent. These immigrants produced cabbage, Brussels sprouts, artichokes, beets, turnips and carrots. It was largely in part to the newly immigrated Italians that the agriculture, floriculture and livestock industries flourished.
Floriculture proved to be one of the most successful endeavors; however, it was not without its challenges. The unique microclimate of the Town of Colma, characterized by a dense fog, posed a challenge for even the hardiest of flowers. However, those that were able to withstand the cold and fog thrived. Among the survivors was the Ulrich Brunner Rose which produced large, bright red blossoms. Gardeners soon discovered that, like the Ulrich Brunner Rose, California Violets thrived in the unique climate and distinct soils liked by potatoes and strawberries.
The cultivation of violets remained the mainstay of the Town’s floriculture industry from 1908 to 1942. By 1916, upwards of 450 acres of land were exclusively used for the cultivation of violets with the Lagomarsino family being one of the most prolific producers of violets in the Town of Colma. It was estimated that in 1916, one hundred bunches of violets were taken to and sold in San Francisco every day. Some accounts recall that the popularity of the Town’s violets extended all the way to Kansas and Missouri where they could be found at flower stands.
In addition to the ubiquitous violets, other common flower varieties grown in Town were:
dahlias (Dahlia Variabilis), marigolds (Tagetes) African marigolds (Tagetes Lucida), chrysanthemums (Chrysanthemum Indicum), marguerites (Argyranthemum Frutescens), and strawflowers (Helichrysum Mill). By 1920 roughly 20% of the land in Northern San Mateo County was used for floriculture. The cultivation of ferns also gained popularity in the twentieth century. Florists and Gardeners increasingly began using greenhouses which not only allowed for a more consistent and greater output of flowers, but also allowed for the cultivation of ferns.
In 1936 it was reported that “Colma and San Francisco supplied the entire Pacific Coast with cut ferns, 80% of them coming from Colma.” Floriculture existed largely as a family affair and spanned generations. Notable families involved with floriculture in the Town of Colma and nearby Daly City included; the Podesta, Conci, Raggio, Lagomarsino, Ottoboni, Tealdi, Garibaldi, Pappas and McLennan families.
In 1926 many of the large ranches and dairies, once the predominant presence in the Town of Colma, began to be subdivided to accommodate the increasingly popular “small farms” consisting of 1-2 acres plots. These “small farms” were intended to support vegetable and truck farming, and many raised poultry or grew profitable, high yield crops like berries, tomatoes, artichokes, and other similar crops. Other small farm owners also established hog ranches, as the cool, foggy climate proved conducive to hog raising. The small hog raising operations continued until just after WWII. They were replaced with the subsequent wave of residential and commercial development.
Beginning in the mid-twentieth century the earlier layers of the landscape began to fade.
Between 1924 and the early 1960s the Ottoboni flower beds gave way to residential development where the E St. houses now sit. The Town’s agriculture industry retained a
HR-6
presence in the Town of Colma up until 1971, when the last remaining farm, the Cerruti farm, moved elsewhere. Today, little physical evidence remains of Town’s agricultural heritage. The Lagomarsino farm buildings c.1908/1918, (the most intact example of a family farmstead dating to the agricultural period) and the Ottoboni residence, c.1904, (the only extant resource from the Ottoboni nursery operation) exist as the sole relicts giving a nod to an earlier iteration of the Town.
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
In the mid/late 1850s, when the Town of Colma was served by the Overland Stagecoach route that connected San Francisco to San Jose, commercial activity developed at the intersections of Mission Road (now El Camino Real) and San Pedro Road. At the confluence of the two main roads the Colma Pioneer School House was constructed in 1856 followed by the construction of a nearby railroad depot, known as the “School House Station” in 1863. The School House Station served the San Francisco and San Jose Railroad, or, what later became the Southern Pacific Railroad. As the second stop south of San Francisco, the School House Station commonly featured farmers and teamsters embarking the train on their way to San Francisco.
Not far from the station, an early settler, Joseph Hill, developed a general store that would soon become an impromptu community center providing basic necessities while also housing an extensive bar and a post office. The commercial development spread out from there and a butcher shop, blacksmiths, saloon, and grange hall followed suit; two unsuccessful attempts were made at establishing a shoe factory and a fuse factory.
As a result of Town’s role as a crossroads and waypoint, saloons and roadhouses had a strong presence early on as some of the first commercial businesses. In 1890, six of Town’s twenty businesses were saloons and by 1915, fifteen of the forty-nine businesses were saloons. Many of the saloons and eateries were located along Mission Road, a main thoroughfare. One notable early building was the Brooks and Carey Saloon, established in 1883. Sold in 1929, the saloon became known as Molloy’s and still serves the Town of Colma community today.
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Early Town of Colma was largely characterized by agricultural uses, and then by cemeteries. As a result, residential development lagged behind that of other Bay Area cities. In the aftermath of the 1906 Earthquake many refugees made their way from San Francisco to the Town of Colma where they constructed basic shacks and re-located buildings that they later augmented with new construction; the Pets Rest Cemetery Office at 1905 Hillside Blvd is one of the few examples of residential development constructed during this time. The Lagomarsino farm houses also remain as some of the few remaining residential structures dating to the period from 1908-1918. In 1911, the City of Daly City incorporated, annexing land formerly under the Town’s jurisdiction, including the Town’s Business District, the western sand dunes and a portion of the Town’s hills.
HR-7
Little development took place in the first half of the twentieth century and the development that occurred post-WWII included residences relocated from San Francisco. A number of residences that now line E Street and F Street were moved from the Alemany Boulevard area of San Francisco during the construction of Interstate 280. Today, the Town’s built heritage exhibits a wide variety of architectural styles including examples of Gothic Revival, Richardsonian, Romanesque, Spanish Eclectic, Neo-Byzantine and Art-Moderne.
Residential development exploded in San Francisco and northern San Mateo County beginning in the mid 1940’s due to the demand created by returning WWII Veterans. The Sterling Park residential neighborhood (on the site of the former Rosia Ranch), located in the northern part of the Town of Colma was largely developed during this time. The Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, known informally as the G.I. Bill, was a law that provided a range of benefits for returning World War II veterans (commonly referred to as G.I.s). Benefits included low-cost mortgages, low-interest loans to start a business, cash payments of tuition and living expenses to attend university, high school or vocational education, as well as one year of unemployment compensation. The G.I. Bill allowed servicemen and their families to purchase these recently built homes.
CEMETERY DEVELOPMENT
Between January of 1848 and December 1849, San Francisco’s population increased from 1,000 inhabitants to roughly 20,000 inhabitants and by 1856 that number had more than doubled.
The rapid population growth in San Francisco brought on by the Gold Rush created an impending need for the creation of more cemeteries; by the 1880s San Francisco housed 26 cemeteries (29 total including three established after 1880), many of which had already reached or were about to reach capacity. By this time the burials were largely confined to the area in or very near to Lone Mountain near what was then the edge of San Francisco.
However, as San Francisco’s population grew and expanded west and south into the “Outside Lands” there developed a very politically and emotionally fueled debate over how to reconcile the two opposing land use needs. Ultimately, it was decided that an alternative location would be the preferred solution.
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries it was generally agreed by the cemetery owners, including Masonic and fraternal organizations, religious groups and non-denominational groups, that the Town of Colma’s proximity and ease of access made it a favorable location to relocate existing burials and also house future burials. The reasons for eviction and relocation of San Francisco’s cemeteries had roots in larger cultural and political movements that defined the period. The primary impetus could be found in the ideals of the Rural Cemetery Movement and the recent formalization of urban planning, the latter of which simply fueled the relocation because it allowed for more proactive development and improved infrastructure to those areas which formerly had little value beyond that of burial grounds.
HR-8
The simultaneous popularity of the Rural Cemetery movement further encouraged the relocation of cemeteries out of urban centers to what people deemed a more acceptable distance away. The Rural Cemetery Movement was firmly established in the United States by the 1830’s with the earliest American example being Mount Auburn Cemetery outside of Boston; by 1863 the Rural Cemetery movement had arrived on the west Coast with the establishment of Oakland’s Mountain View Cemetery. It was the Rural Cemetery movement that eventually set the stage for America’s public parks. For hundreds of years burials were often intramural, located within city limits, in a church yard or a commons. However, the rapid urbanization that took place during the 19th and 20th centuries, made the practice of intramural burials unsustainable or at the very least, unappealing. Overcrowding, unsanitary conditions, and an overall morbidity associated
with early cemeteries provided an impetus for a
new kind of cemetery. The Rural Cemetery
movement encouraged the placement of
cemeteries outside of city limits with wide
spacing between burials and an expansive,
park-like landscape. The relocation and
subsequent role that the Town of Colma came
to play as a necropolis can be largely attributed
to the ideas and sentiments that characterized
this movement.
Cemeteries located within cities, including San Francisco, began to be seen as thwarters of progress. The City fathers wanted to utilize the land for its most profitable and highest use.
San Francisco’s residents, land speculators and politicians wanted progress and did not believe that cemeteries had much to offer in that respect. Over several years’ burials were moved further and further to the outskirts of San Francisco, some being exhumed and re-buried up to three times. Many would find their final resting place eight miles outside the City of San Francisco in the Town.
The earliest cemetery developed in the Town of Colma was Holy Cross, constructed on a former potato patch in 1887. Within a little over ten years, six more nineteenth century cemeteries were developed. The Cemeteries were clustered on either side of Mission Road (now El Camino Real and Mission Road to the south) with the eastern portions reaching Hillside Boulevard and those on the west abutting Junipero Serra Boulevard. A listing of cemetery establishment dates can be found in Appendix A – Historic Resources Evaluation.
The early cemeteries reflected mainstream cultural trends, but also represented the diverse and colorful ethnic and religious makeup of the San Francisco Peninsula. Among the Town’s early cemeteries was the Italian Cemetery, established by Societa Italiana di Mutua Beneficenza in 1899. The Italian Cemetery, like other ethnic cemeteries that would succeed it, reflected endemic traditions, visible in the spatial organization, vegetation, and burials. Rather than mirroring any American trend, the Italian cemetery adapted the geometric layout and above
HR-9
ground entombment along with the traditional pruning methods used in the cemeteries of Florence and Genoa. It also employed architectural styles common to Italy, especially that of the Romanesque style.
Besides illustrating cultural heritage and religious
traditions, cemeteries also have a way of
displaying class distinctions and are often telling of
socio-economic history. In addition to the rather
grand, ornate and well-kept cemeteries there was
also a Potters field (named Sunset View),
established c.1907, reserved for those of lesser
means and for orphans, strangers and others. The
term “Potter’s Field” is thought to stem from the
fact that pot makers would dig for clay in areas not
conducive to agriculture and it was, of course, these same lands that were used for the burial of the unfortunate and unknown. Located on the outskirts of towns or in a segregated area these burial sites were often unmarked or denoted by simple wooden grave markers.
The pace of cemetery development in the Town of Colma only accelerated when the San Francisco City Fathers passed Ordinance 25 on March 26, 1900, prohibiting any future burials in the City and County of San Francisco. The San Francisco Mayor, James D Phelan, was as much an advocate for development as he was for the City Beautiful Movement and it was under his tenure that cemeteries in San Francisco were outlawed. At the turn of the century six more cemeteries were established in rather rapid succession.
In 1912 the San Francisco Board of Supervisors
declared intent to evict all cemeteries in their
jurisdiction, and by January of 1914, with the
passage of ordinance 2597, they had sent
removal notices to all cemeteries stating that the
cemeteries were “a public nuisance and a
menace and detriment to health and welfare of
City dwellers.” Subsequent legal battles delayed
the removals. Between 1937 and 1941, all
remaining graves were relocated to the Town.
Since the Town of Colma was considered a safe place to purchase land for cemetery use, five additional cemeteries were established since San Francisco outlawed cemeteries and the Town’s incorporation in 1924.
The worry of further annexation by Daly City or San Francisco combined with the fear that the burial evictions and relocation would continue as a recurrent theme, the Town’s cemetery owners, led by “the Father of Colma,” Mattrup Jensen, chartered “The Associated Cemeteries” and sought incorporation. The Town, then referred to as Lawndale, was incorporated on Aug 5,
HR-10
1924. On November 17, 1941 Lawndale was renamed to the Town of Colma since there was already a city named Lawndale in Southern California.
The seventeen Cemeteries in the Town of Colma
chronicle the American Cemetery Movement and
also embody distinct historical and cultural trends
through the unique spatial organization, grave
markers and architecture. Cypress Lawn
Cemetery, for example, tangibly chronicles the
American Cemetery Movement of the late
nineteenth century to the present, with the
eastern portion exhibiting winding pathways with
intentional views and vistas, a park like landscape
and monumental entry; whereas the western portion is illustrative of the subsequent Memorial Park movement, defined by less ornate and simplified headstones equally spaced over a large lawn-like landscape. Many of the Town’s cemeteries such as Woodlawn, Olivet, Greek Orthodox, Japanese, Greenlawn, Serbian and Pet’s Rest are singular in their significance. Home of Peace cemetery, established in 1888, remains the oldest and largest Jewish cemetery in the west.
The relocation of San Francisco’s cemeteries to the Town not only brought a rich variety of significant funerary architecture including monuments, mausoleums, and the remains of many very significant figures, but also associated practices and uses. The presence of cemeteries brought florists, gardeners, stonecutters, and laborers to the Town of Colma. The traditional use of the Town’s unique landscape has encouraged a strong sense of continuity, both tangible and intangible. Many of the early established funerary-related businesses are still run by descendants of their first proprietors; three generations of Delucchis have and continue to operate a flower shop in the Town of Colma. Bocci and Sons Stone Carvers, although having changed ownership, is still in operation over 150 years later. Donohoe and Carroll monuments, established in 1885, also continues under family ownership. V. Fontana Company has been in continuous operation since 1921.
HR-11
BENEFITS OF PRESERVATION
The loss of historic fabric dilutes the unique character, sense of place and feeling that sets one place apart from another. Preservation of historic buildings, structures, sites and the larger cultural landscape makes sense for a variety of reasons. Cultural resources link the present form of a place to the community’s roots and evolution. Resources may include objects, buildings, structures, districts, trees and landscapes which relate to and evoke the Town’s past.
From an economic perspective, restoration provides skilled jobs for local builders and income for local suppliers and businesses. Heritage tourism provides jobs in the service sector, supports commercial businesses and would encourage visitors to patronize the expanded retail, entertainment and dining sector proposed as part of the Town’s Economic Development Plan.
From an environmental perspective, restoration and reuse of materials reduce the materials going to landfills and also lessen depletion of raw materials such as timber. From a social perspective, preservation of historic neighborhoods contributes to diversity in our community and provides a variety of housing to satisfy a wide range of income levels at different stages of life. Below is a listing of some of the benefits of historic preservation:
CULTURAL AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS
Having many and varied historic resources make the community culturally richer for having the tangible presence of past eras and architectural styles. The Town’s special character can be a powerful tool for the economy as well as community identity that helps attract investment.
When historic buildings and cultural sites are protected and made the focal point of revitalization, property values and tax revenues increase; highly skilled jobs are created; a strong concentration of local businesses is encouraged; and opportunities for heritage tourism are created. In addition, as opposed to new construction, rehabilitation uses a smaller amount of building materials and less energy. Preservation is often the “sustainable option”
SOCIAL BENEFITS
Historic preservation encourages community pride and mutual concern for the local historic building stock and cultural landscapes. It also creates a sense of permanence and well-being. In addition, historic buildings can provide an enhanced understanding of who the community is, where it has been, and where it might be going.
EDUCATIONAL BENEFITS
Historic and cultural resources are also worth preserving based on their utility as an educational force. The Town supports the development of community education programs to promote historic preservation. Such programs create awareness and appreciation of the Town's history.
HR-12
Recognition of historic resources will foster a greater enjoyment of the town and greater support for historic preservation efforts.
The Town of Colma Historical Association seeks to educate citizens about current historic resources and benefits of preservation. Information is disseminated through publications, presentations, walking tours, special events and other media. Technical information relating to the preservation and rehabilitation of historic resources as well as locations or organizations where additional historic data could be obtained can be provided by the Town’s Planning staff and the Colma Historical Association.
The combination of education and recognition can foster individual and community pride for local preservation efforts.
PLANNING BENEFITS
The protection of historic resources has benefits to the Town in its long-term plan. Historic Resources are vital to the community and provide a unique sense of place. Historic resources also provide the context and backdrop for new development.
ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
Historic preservation through the use of rehabilitation and restoration, and the reuse of existing buildings and sites is an intrinsically “green” practice as opposed to demolition.
HR-13
CHALLENGES AND OBSTACLES
The Town’s continuing landscape, defined by a rich array of funerary resources dating from the late nineteenth century until the present, has the exceptional ability to illustrate evolution of cultural trends and practices over time. The unique sense of continuity seen through the Town’s resources is one that is becoming increasingly scarce. A number of challenges exist that threaten the integrity of the Town of Colma’s unique resources and that of its larger cultural landscape:
• Limited guidance available to inform future development efforts and ensure compatibility with existing historic and cultural resources.
• Absence of funding set aside to encourage and enable historic preservation efforts. • Paucity of preservation-related education for private property owners who, in the absence of robust preservation policy, act as the primary stewards of the resources. • Failure to understand the Town of Colma’s historic resources as assets.
HR-14
INCENTIVES FOR PRESERVATION
There are numerous local, state, and federal preservation programs in place to encourage commercial and residential property owners to repair, restore, or rehabilitate historic properties.
Incentives are important to the success of the Town’s historic preservation program. Incentives and funding can be a successful catalyst for revitalization. If financial incentives are in place, the Town can offer an offset to denial of a project when economic hardship threatens the preservation of a historic resource.
In the case of the Town’s cemetery sites, non-profit organizations or mutual benefit associations can be formed to help with the preservation and rehabilitation of cemetery structures and grounds and provide much needed funding. These nonpartisan and nondenominational groups can serve as a neutral party in planning for the cemetery’s preservation and maintenance and can partner on projects with local historic societies and civic groups. Importantly, as a secular organization, a mutual benefit association or nonprofit would be eligible for state and federal funding from which a religious group might be exempt. Such an organization would have the ability to establish a community financial institution or cemetery maintenance district. It should be noted, however, that although a mutual benefit corporation can be non-profit or not-for-profit, it cannot obtain IRS 501(c)(3) non-profit status (exemption from federal income tax) as a charitable organization and is distinct in U.S. law from public- benefit nonprofit corporations and religious corporations. Funds obtained by these organizations can be used for the rehabilitation, acquisition or on-going maintenance of cemetery property.
Listed below is a summary of several preservation incentives and funding opportunities, please also see the Appendix for a more detailed description of the programs listed below and an additional list of non-profit and corporate funding organizations and websites:
FEDERAL INCENTIVES
Federal Tax Credits
A 20% income tax credit program is administered jointly by the U.S. Department of the Interior and Department of the Treasury. The program is available for the rehabilitation of historic, income-producing buildings that are determined by the Secretary of the Interior, through the National Park Service, to be certified historic structures. The State Historic Preservation Offices and the National Park Service review the rehabilitation work to ensure that it complies with the Secretary’s Standards for Rehabilitation. The Internal Revenue Service defines qualified rehabilitation expenses on which the credit may be taken. Owner-occupied residential properties do not qualify for the federal rehabilitation tax credit (but may be eligible for a 10% tax credit). The following information pertains to the 20% federal tax credit for the rehabilitation of historic properties:
HR-15
• The amount of credit available under this program equals 20% of the qualifying expenses of the rehabilitation.
• The tax credit is only available to properties that will be used for a business or other income–producing purpose.
• The building needs to be certified as a historic structure by the National Park Service. • Rehabilitation work has to meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, as determined by the National Park Service.
Preservation Easements
Property owners with buildings listed on the National Register can gain significant tax savings by adding a preservation easement to their historic building. This easement ensures the preservation of a property's significant architectural features while allowing the owner to still occupy and use the building. The property owner authorizes a non-profit organization sustaining the easement the authority to review exterior alterations to the building. The non-profit entity thereby assumes responsibility for protecting the historic and architectural integrity of the property. Easements are recorded on the property deed in perpetuity. Preservation easements limit future owners of a building from demolishing the building or altering it in a way that negatively impacts its architectural features. In this way, Preservation Easements provide for the permanent protection of historic buildings.
Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)
CDBG money can be used to provide loans or grants for qualifying rehabilitation projects, which may involve historic buildings.
Preserve America
Preserve America is a federal initiative that encourages and supports community efforts to preserve cultural and natural heritage. The program includes community and volunteer recognition, grants, and awards, as well as policy direction to federal agencies. Grants focus on economic and educational opportunities related to heritage tourism. Grant amounts range from $20,000 to $250,000 and must be matched one to one. The Preserve America Grants program complements other federal funding, by helping local communities develop resource management strategies and sound business practices for the continued preservation and use of heritage assets. Funding is available in five activity categories: research and documentation; planning; interpretation and education; promotion; and training.
STATE INCENTIVES
The Mills Act
The Mills Act provides for up to 50% reduction in property taxes in exchange for the rehabilitation, preservation, and long-term maintenance of historic buildings. Buildings qualified
HR-16
to apply for the Mills Act include landmarks and all buildings listed individually or as contributors to a district in the National Register of Historic Places. The Mills Act allows the Town of Colma to enter into contracts with private property owners of qualified historic properties to provide a property tax reduction in exchange for the owners agreeing to preserve, rehabilitate and maintain their historic properties. Property taxes under a Mills Act agreement are individually calculated by the County Tax Assessor and can be reduced as much as 50%, an amount that the owner can use to maintain, restore, or rehabilitate a historic building or property. A Mills Act contract is for an initial period of ten years and is automatically renewed each year on its anniversary date. The benefit may be passed on to subsequent owners. The program is available for both residential and income-producing properties. Mills Act historic property contracts usually have provisions for rehabilitating a property with specification for complying with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. This property tax reduction is usually most beneficial to owners who have made recent purchases.
California Historical Building Code (CHBC)
A State-adopted building code, the CHBC provides an alternative for the preservation or rehabilitation of buildings designated as "historic." These regulations are intended to facilitate repair or accommodate a change of occupancy so as to preserve a historic resource's original or restored architectural features, and allows the Town of Colma to approve reasonable alternatives to the standard requirements for historic buildings. Issues addressed by the CHBC include: use and occupancy; means of egress; archaic materials and methods of construction; fire protection; alternative accessibility provisions; mechanical, plumbing, and electrical requirements; and alternative structural regulations. The code allows some non-conforming conditions to remain without modification. The Town of Colma may use the CHBC for qualifying historic resources at the request of the property owner, to meet code requirements for both interior and exterior rehabilitation. Town staff offers assistance to the property owner in applying the CHBC to their individual project.
LOCAL INCENTIVES
Zero or low interest revolving loans
The Town can identify low interest loans for improvement and restoration of designated historic resources through cooperation from private consortiums, banks or revolving funds.
Zoning Incentives
Zoning incentives promote historic preservation by allowing flexibility from some zoning requirements if such flexibility will allow a superior project involving a historic resource.
Examples include flexibility from rigid setback requirements, building height, or lot coverage.
HR-17
GOALS AND POLICIES
HR-1-1: General Plan Consistency. Ensure that future plans, ordinances, and City programs are complimentary to the historic preservation goals and policies contained within the Town’s Historic Resources Element.
HR-1-2: Preservation of Town Resources. Encourage sensitive preservation of all Town owned resources.
HR-1-3: Planning and Development . Include historic preservation principles as an equal component in the planning and development process.
HR-2-1: Preservation Collaboration. Work with the Colma Historical Association as a partner to improve awareness of local preservation.
HR-2-2: Consultation on Projects. Consult with the Colma Historical Association on discretionary review projects involving cultural sites and historic resources in the Town of Colma.
HR-2-3: Public Outreach. Encourage the Colma Historical Association to continue providing resources for residents, businesse s and new applicants wishing to learn more about particular sites or the Town’s history as a whole.
HR-3-1: Public Awareness. Foster awareness, appreciation and celebration of the Town’s unique historic and cultural heritage and educate and encourage preservation of these resources.
HR-3-2: Architectural Merit. Promote awards programs and other forms of public recognition for projects of architectural merit that contribute positively to the community.
HR-18
HR-3-3: Staff Training. Train Town staff to provide technical assistance to property owners concerning the sensitive maintenance, rehabilitation and restoration of historic resources.
HR-4-1: Historic Preservation Awareness. Participate in National Historic Preservation Week and California Archaeology Month.
HR-4-2: Grants. Seek private foundation grants to fund historic preservation projects in the Town.
HR-4-3: CDBG Funding. Explore Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds as a potential funding source for rehabilitation of historic resources.
HR-4-4: Property Owner Incentives. Encourage owners of historic properties to utilize federal and State of California incentives such as Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credits, Mills Act, California State Historical Building Codes, California Cultural and Historical endowments, among others.
HR-4-5: Local History and Public Art. Use local history in public arts projects.
HR-19
IMPLEMENTATION
Historic Implementation Programs 2021-2030 2030-2040 Annual Ongoing HR-IP1 : Apply the U.S. Secretary
of the Interior’s Standards for the
Treatment of Historic Properties to
the rehabilitation and on-going
maintenance of historic structures.
X
Implements Policies: HR-1-2, Responsible Dept.: Planning, Supporting Dept. Building HR-IP2: Adopt a demolition
ordinance that shall require
discretionary review for all
demolitions involving structures
that are 50 years old or older.
X
Implements Policies: HR-1-2, Responsible Dept.: Planning, Supporting Dept. Building HR-IP3: Incorporate community
participation in landmark hearings
by educating the Town’s resident's
and businesses through flyers,
mailouts and other information
sources.
X
Implements Policies: HR-1-2, 1-3 Responsible Dept.: Planning, Supporting Dept. None HR-IP4 Modify the Zoning Code to
establish a separate design review
process for historic or potentially
historic structures.
X
Implements Policies: HR-1-2, Responsible Dept.: Planning, Supporting Dept. None HR-IP5: Utilize the Historic
Building Code in the restoration,
rehabilitation, and adaptive reuse
of the Town of Colma’s historically
significant structures.
X
Implements Policies: HR-1-2, Responsible Dept.: Building, Supporting Dept. Planning HR-IP6: Provide support to
property owners who wish to apply
for designation of their properties
as a California Historical
Landmark, a California Point of
Historical Interest, and/or
X
HR-20
inclusion in the National Register
of Historical Places.
Implements Policies: HR-1-2, HR-4-2, Responsible Dept.: Planning, Supporting Dept. None HR-IP7: Create and maintain a
historic preservation webpage on
the Town’s website that includes
information on the Town’s historic
and cultural resources, resource
listings, white papers or other
helpful and informative resources.
X
Implements Policies: HR-3-1, Responsible Dept.: Planning, Supporting Dept. None HR-IP-8: Create a self -guided tour
map and unique “historic Colma
route” signs along the route of the
self-guided tour to further identify
it.
X
Implements Policies: HR-3-1, Responsible Dept.: Planning, Supporting Dept. None
HR-21
APPENDIX A – DEFINITIONS
Adaptive re-use: a use for a structure or landscape other than its historic use, normally entailing some modification of the structure or landscape.
Building: an enclosed structure with walls and a roof, created to serve some residential, industrial, commercial, agricultural, or other human use.
Character-defining feature: a prominent or distinctive aspect, quality, or characteristic of a historic property that contributes significantly to its physical character. Structures, objects, vegetation, spatial relationships, views, furnishings, decorative details, and materials may be such features.
Cultural landscape: a geographic area, including both cultural and natural resources and the wildlife or domestic animals therein, associated with a historic event, activity, or person or exhibiting other cultural or aesthetic values. There are four general kinds of cultural landscape, not mutually exclusive. The four types are:
1. Designed Landscape – Consciously designed or laid out by a landscape architect, master gardener, architect or horticulturist.
2. Vernacular Landscape – A landscape that evolved through use by the people whose activities or occupancy shaped the landscape.
3. Historic Site – A landscape significant for its association with a historic event, activity or person.
4. Ethnographic Landscape – A landscape containing a variety of natural and cultural resources that the associated people define as a heritage resource.
Cultural resource: an aspect of a cultural system that is valued by or significantly representative of a culture or that contains significant information about a culture. A cultural resource may be a tangible entity or a cultural practice.
Culture: a system of behaviors (including economic, religious, and social), beliefs (values, ideologies), and social arrangements.
Design: the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a historic property.
Documentation: drawings, photographs, writings, and other media that depict cultural and natural resources.
Evaluation: process by which the significance of a property is judged and eligibility for National Register of Historic Places (or other designation) is determined.
HR-22
Feature (historic): (1) a prominent or distinctive aspect, quality, or characteristic of a historic property; (2) a historic property.
Historic character: the sum of all visual aspects, features, materials, and spaces associated with a property's history.
Historic district: a local or national geographically definable area, urban or rural, possessing a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites, landscapes, structures, or objects, united by past events or aesthetically by plan or physical developments. A district may also be composed of individual elements separated geographically but linked by association or history. (See National Register Bulletin 15.)
Historic property: a district, site, structure, or landscape significant in American history, architecture, engineering, archeology, or culture; an umbrella term for all entries in the National Register of Historic Places.
Historic site: the site of a significant event, prehistoric or historic occupation or activity, or structure or landscape whether extant or vanished, where the site itself possesses historical, cultural, or archeological value apart from the value of any existing structure or landscape; see cultural landscape.
Historic significance: the meaning or value ascribed to a structure, landscape, object, or site based on the National Register criteria for evaluation. It normally stems from a combination of association and integrity.
In-kind: in the same manner or with something equal in substance having a similar or identical effect.
Integrity: the authenticity of a property's historic identity, evidenced by the survival of physical characteristics that existed during its historic or prehistoric period; the extent to which a property retains its historic appearance.
Inventory: a list of cultural resources, usually of a given type and/or in a given area.
Material: the physical elements that were combined or deposited to form a property. Historic material or historic fabric is that from a historically significant period, as opposed to material used to maintain or restore a property following its historic period(s).
Protection: action to safeguard a historic property by defending or guarding it from further deterioration, loss, or attack or shielding it from danger or injury.
Preservation: the act or process of applying measures to sustain the existing form, integrity, and material of a historic structure, landscape or object. Work generally focuses upon the ongoing preservation maintenance and repair of historic materials and features, rather than extensive replacement and new work.
HR-23
Reconstruction: the act or process of depicting, by means of new work, the form, features, and detailing of a non-surviving historic structure or landscape, or any part thereof, for the purpose of replicating its appearance at a specific time and in its historic location.
Rehabilitation: the act or process of making a compatible use for a historic structure through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features, which convey its historical, cultural and architectural values.
Repair: action to correct deteriorated, damaged, or faulty materials or features of a structure or landscape.
Restoration: the act or process of accurately depicting the form, features, and character of a historic structure, landscape, or object as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of features from other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features from the restoration period.
Secretary of the Interior Standards: See http://www.nps.gov/history/local- law/arch_stnds_8_2.htm
Setting: the physical environment of a historic property; the character of the place in which the property played its historical role.
State historic preservation officer (SHPO): an official within each state appointed by the governor to administer the state historic preservation program and carry out certain responsibilities relating to federal undertakings within the state.
Structure: a constructed work, usually immovable by nature or design, consciously created to serve some human activity. Examples are buildings of various kinds, monuments, dams, roads, railroad tracks, canals, millraces, bridges, tunnels, locomotives, nautical vessels, stockades, forts and associated earthworks, Indian mounds, ruins, fences, and outdoor sculpture.
HR-24
APPENDIX B – HISTORIC RESOURCE INVENTORY
The 1992 Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) developed as a joint project with the cooperation of the City of Colma, the San Mateo County Historical Association and the San Mateo County Historic Resources Advisory Board. The intent of the HRI was to develop a comprehensive citywide survey of all cultural resources to inform subsequent planning decisions. At that time 58 resources were identified and evaluated based on significance and potential eligibility for the National or State Registers of Historic Places.
However, because the HRI was performed more than twenty years ago, this list can no longer be considered a comprehensive list. The 1992 HRI (below) is useful as a reference, but because it may not include all potentially eligible resources and may not reflect the most current significance evaluation it should not be considered a comprehensive inventory of all significant historic and cultural resources in Colma. One new resource has been added recently to the inventory (Champion Auto Parts on Mission Road) and one resource (Molloy’s) was reclassified based on a more recent evaluation. Figure H.1. shows the location of resources.
A key for the National register status and Significance Criteria is listed below:
HR-25
National Register Status:
3S: Eligible for the National Register
4S8:May become eligible for separate listing in the National Register when other properties, which provide more significant examples of the historical or architectural associations connected to this property are demolished or otherwise lost their architectural integrity. 5S2: Not eligible for the national Register, but of local interest because it is likely to become eligible for separate listing or designation under a local ordinance that has not yet been written.
7: Not Evaluated
National Register Significance Criteria:
A = Representative of Events of Broad Pattern of History B = Associated with Important Persons
C = Architectural Significance
(a) Significant Type, Period, or Method of Construction (b) Work of a Master
(c) High artistic values
HR-26
Historic Resource Inventory
Resource Name Street
Address
Architectural
Style
Construction
Date
Nat’l Reg
Status/
Significance
Criteria
Local
Designation
1. Salem Memorial Park
Office/Chapel
1171 El
Camino Real
Art Moderne and
Exotic Revival 1936-1940/1986
5S2
None
An interesting example of divergent architectural forms drawing from Neo-Babylonian and Roman styles which work together to communicate a contemporary Moderne style representative of the 1930s.
2. City Hall/Civic Building 1198 El
Camino Real Spanish Eclectic 1937 3S; A, C(c)
None
Designed by Resing & McGinness of San Francisco in 1936, the City Hall’s Spanish Eclectic style was actually influenced by the “City Father,” Mattrup Jensen who had been inspired by the Ross, California Town Hall c. 1928.
3. Lagomarsino Farm
Houses/ Residential
1431 -1457
Mission Rd.
Neoclassical
Rowhouses 1908-1918 3S B, C(a)
None
These 6 residences constitute the largest and only remaining concentration of residential housing constructed in Colma between 1906 and 1914.They also exist as the most intact example of the family farmstead from Colma’s agricultural heyday. The farm houses retain integrity as constructed by the New Era building Co. to a remarkable degree.
National Register Status:
3S: Eligible for the National Register
4S8:May become eligible for separate listing in the National Register when other properties, which provide more significant examples of the historical or architectural associations connected to this property are demolished or otherwise lost their architectural integrity. 5S2: Not eligible for the national Register, but of local interest because it is likely to become eligible for separate listing or designation under a local ordinance that has not yet been written.
7: Not Evaluated
National Register Significance Criteria:
A = Representative of Events of Broad Pattern of History B = Associated with Important Persons
C = Architectural Significance
(a) Significant Type, Period, or Method of Construction (b) Work of a Master
(c) High artistic values
HR-27
Resource Name Street
Address
Architectural
Style
Construction
Date
Nat’l Reg
Status/
Significance
Criteria
Local
Designation
4. Holy Cross Cemetery 1595 Mission
Rd. Rural Cemetery 1886
3S
None
Holy Cross was established by the Catholic Church in 1887.The gateway entrance and lodge for Holy Cross Cemetery, designed in the Richardsonian Romanesque style, is the oldest remaining building ensemble of the first cemetery to be established in Colma. Additional monuments and structures contribute to the National Register eligible Holy Cross Cemetery Historic District.
5. Molloy’s Tavern/
Commercial
1655 Mission
Rd. Vernacular 1883
5S2
None
Originally opened as the Brooksville Hotel in 1883, what is now Molloy’s Tavern is the oldest commercial establishment in continuous operation in Colma. The building has been a hostelry, speakeasy, and pub. Due to significant modifications to the building over the years, it is not eligible for National Register designation.
6. Woodlawn Entry/Office 1000 El
Camino Real Romanesque 1904/1948
3S;C(a,c)
None
Designed by SF Architect Thomas Patterson Ross, the Woodlawn Entry and Office combines elements of the late Gothic Revival with those of HH Richardson. The employment of structural concrete as a framework was one of the earlier uses of the new building technology. The Woodlawn office is considered to possess the highest artistic value of any like architectural features in Colma or perhaps the State.
National Register Status:
3S: Eligible for the National Register
4S8:May become eligible for separate listing in the National Register when other properties, which provide more significant examples of the historical or architectural associations connected to this property are demolished or otherwise lost their architectural integrity. 5S2: Not eligible for the national Register, but of local interest because it is likely to become eligible for separate listing or designation under a local ordinance that has not yet been written.
7: Not Evaluated
National Register Significance Criteria:
A = Representative of Events of Broad Pattern of History B = Associated with Important Persons
C = Architectural Significance
(a) Significant Type, Period, or Method of Construction (b) Work of a Master
(c) High artistic values
HR-28
Resource Name Street
Address
Architectural
Style
Construction
Date
Nat’l Reg
Status/
Significance
Criteria
Local
Designation
7. Home of Peace
Cemetery
1299 El
Camino Real Jewish Cemetery 1889
5S2
None
The oldest and largest Jewish Cemetery in the West, Founded by the Emanu-El Congregation in 1850. The original cemetery was located at Vallejo and Gough Streets in San Francisco. The Funerary architecture of this cemetery draws its inspiration from near eastern design.
8. Hills of Eternity
Mausoleum
1301 EL
Camino Real
Moderne; Neo
Byzantine 1934
5S2
None
As one of the two examples of Neo-Byzantine in Colma, the reinforced concrete mausoleum exhibits a marked reference to the Moderne style in the horizontal and vertical grooves and use of chevron moldings. The mausoleum was designed by the architecture firm of Samuel Hyman and Abraham Appleton.
9. Cypress Lawn Cemetery 1370 El
Camino Real
Garden
Cemetery/
Memorial Park
1892
3S
None
Among the last great rural cemeteries built in the 19th Century, Cypress lawn includes 87 family mausoleums and many impressive monuments.
B.J.S Cahill’s Roman Renaissance Community Mausoleum represents the largest collection of art glass in America. This cemetery particularly, provides a visual chronicle of the American Cemetery Movement to the present. Additional monuments and structures contribute to the National Register eligible Cypress Lawn Cemetery Historic District.
National Register Status:
3S: Eligible for the National Register
4S8:May become eligible for separate listing in the National Register when other properties, which provide more significant examples of the historical or architectural associations connected to this property are demolished or otherwise lost their architectural integrity. 5S2: Not eligible for the national Register, but of local interest because it is likely to become eligible for separate listing or designation under a local ordinance that has not yet been written.
7: Not Evaluated
National Register Significance Criteria:
A = Representative of Events of Broad Pattern of History B = Associated with Important Persons
C = Architectural Significance
(a) Significant Type, Period, or Method of Construction (b) Work of a Master
(c) High artistic values
HR-29
Resource Name Street
Address
Architectural
Style
Construction
Date
Nat’l Reg
Status/
Significance
Criteria
Local
Designation
10. Italian Cemetery 540 F St. Traditional Italian
Cemetery 1899
3S
None
Established by the Italian Mutual Benefit Society in 1899, the Italian Cemetery reflects many architectural and funerary features endemic to Italy. Many of the architectural features are a product of ethnic Italian architects from San Francisco.
11. Olivet Cemetery Office 1500 Hillside
Blvd. Mission Revival 1896-1904 3S; A, C(c)
None
The office best represents the contributions of the Abbey Land and Improvement Company to the City of Colma. The Mission Revival office was designed by the Corporation’s Vice President, SF Architect William H Crim. The building has received a number of alterations and additions over time, however it retains its original character.
12. Olivet Memorial
Park/Cemetery
1601 Hillside
Blvd.
Picturesque
Cemetery 1896 4S8
None
Olivet Memorial Park is significant as a model modern cemetery thanks to efforts made by its long-time superintendent, Mattrup Jensen. In years under his leadership Olivet received new concrete crypts and liners; modern crematories; and new standard columbarium and incendiary with “Jensen” front doors. A notable feature of the cemetery is the segregation of cemetery sections based on vocation or interests.
National Register Status:
3S: Eligible for the National Register
4S8:May become eligible for separate listing in the National Register when other properties, which provide more significant examples of the historical or architectural associations connected to this property are demolished or otherwise lost their architectural integrity. 5S2: Not eligible for the national Register, but of local interest because it is likely to become eligible for separate listing or designation under a local ordinance that has not yet been written.
7: Not Evaluated
National Register Significance Criteria:
A = Representative of Events of Broad Pattern of History B = Associated with Important Persons
C = Architectural Significance
(a) Significant Type, Period, or Method of Construction (b) Work of a Master
(c) High artistic values
HR-30
Resource Name Street
Address
Architectural
Style
Construction
Date
Nat’l Reg
Status/
Significance
Criteria
Local
Designation
13. Pet's Rest Office 1905 Hillside
Blvd. Vernacular 1908
5S2
None
One of the few remaining examples of post-1906 earthquake residential buildings remaining in Colma. In 1907 the Colma area became a center for resettlement for San Franciscans affected by the earthquake. This building is representative of that era of buildings in its narrow pent roof, recessed entry with double angled bays. In 1947 the house was purchased to establish the Pet’s Rest Cemetery.
14. Old Colma Railroad
Station
1506 Hillside
Blvd.
Vernacular RR
Depot 1860’s
3S, A,C(c)
None
Estimated to be built in the early 1860’s by the San Francisco and San Jose Railroad, the Old Colma Railroad Station is considered a relic of Colma’s gardening era. For a time, this railroad stop served as the most important stopping place between the city of San Mateo and the City of San Francisco.
15. Filipini Residence 7701 Mission
Street Spanish Eclectic 1934
5S2
None
The single-family residence exists as the best remaining example of the Spanish Eclectic style in Colma, so popular before WII. The residence was constructed in 1934 by Joseph Ragni, a Daly City Contractor who was also responsible for the remodeling of the Bocci and Sons business office at the same time.
National Register Status:
3S: Eligible for the National Register
4S8:May become eligible for separate listing in the National Register when other properties, which provide more significant examples of the historical or architectural associations connected to this property are demolished or otherwise lost their architectural integrity. 5S2: Not eligible for the national Register, but of local interest because it is likely to become eligible for separate listing or designation under a local ordinance that has not yet been written.
7: Not Evaluated
National Register Significance Criteria:
A = Representative of Events of Broad Pattern of History B = Associated with Important Persons
C = Architectural Significance
(a) Significant Type, Period, or Method of Construction (b) Work of a Master
(c) High artistic values
HR-31
Resource Name Street
Address
Architectural
Style
Construction
Date
Nat’l Reg
Status/
Significance
Criteria
Local
Designation
16. E Street Residences 464 -471 E
Street Row house c.1924 –
c.19351
5S2
None
Spanish Eclectic and Arte Moderne in style, these row houses were moved from Alemany Boulevard in San Francisco prior to, or during the construction of Hwy 280. Typically 1 and 2 story residences dating from the 1920s to 1950s. Based on the gradual relocation of San Francisco Row houses to Colma they present an erroneous sense that they were part of the original growth of the City. They do play in important role in explaining the evolution of Colma. (Also see listing below for F Street Residences).
17. Ottoboni Residence 417 F Street Craftsman 1904 3S; A, B None
In 1902 the Ottoboni Family, recently emigrated from Italy, established the first nursery in the area near El Camino Real and F Street, and by doing so initiated what would become a booming flower industry in the area. The Ottoboni home served as the original office for the Pioneer nursery.
18. Pelton "Cheap"
Building 437 F Street Vernacular 18832
5S2
None
A relatively intact example of the “Cheap Dwellings” designed by San Francisco architect, John Pelton in the early 1880s. This house like many of those on E street was moved from Alemany Boulevard in SF. It is one of the few remaining examples of this style to survive.
1 *467,469 and 471 E St. were moved From Alemany Boulevard in San Francisco in the 1960s 2 437 F St was moved from Alemany Boulevard in 1964
National Register Status:
3S: Eligible for the National Register
4S8:May become eligible for separate listing in the National Register when other properties, which provide more significant examples of the historical or architectural associations connected to this property are demolished or otherwise lost their architectural integrity. 5S2: Not eligible for the national Register, but of local interest because it is likely to become eligible for separate listing or designation under a local ordinance that has not yet been written.
7: Not Evaluated
National Register Significance Criteria:
A = Representative of Events of Broad Pattern of History B = Associated with Important Persons
C = Architectural Significance
(a) Significant Type, Period, or Method of Construction (b) Work of a Master
(c) High artistic values
HR-32
Resource Name Street
Address
Architectural
Style
Construction
Date
Nat’l Reg
Status/
Significance
Criteria
Local
Designation
19. F Street Residences
609, 611, 613,
621, and 615
F Street
Row House c.1924 – c.1935
Unknown
None
Spanish Eclectic and Arte Moderne in style, these row houses were moved from Alemany Boulevard in San Francisco prior to/ during the construction of Hwy 280.Typically 1 and 2 story residences dating from the 1920s to 1950s. Based on the gradual relocation of San Francisco Row houses to Colma they present an erroneous sense that they were part of the original growth of the City. They do play in important role in explaining the evolution of Colma. Note: None of the Houses on F Street are included in the historic inventory, so register status is not known.
Likely 5S2, similar to the E Street houses.
20. Japanese Cemetery 1300 Hillside
Blvd. Cemetery 1902
7 None
A small cemetery, unique for its absence of trees and lawn crowded with monuments. It is the final resting place for hundreds of Japanese who were relocated from San Francisco’s Laurel Hill Cemetery in 1940. A number of notable Japanese are buried here including the tomb of Makoto Hagiwara and family who built the Japanese Tea Garden in Golden Gate Park.
National Register Status:
3S: Eligible for the National Register
4S8:May become eligible for separate listing in the National Register when other properties, which provide more significant examples of the historical or architectural associations connected to this property are demolished or otherwise lost their architectural integrity. 5S2: Not eligible for the national Register, but of local interest because it is likely to become eligible for separate listing or designation under a local ordinance that has not yet been written.
7: Not Evaluated
National Register Significance Criteria:
A = Representative of Events of Broad Pattern of History B = Associated with Important Persons
C = Architectural Significance
(a) Significant Type, Period, or Method of Construction (b) Work of a Master
(c) High artistic values
HR-33
Resource Name Street
Address
Architectural
Style
Construction
Date
Nat’l Reg
Status/
Significance
Criteria
Local
Designation
21. Mattrup Jensen
Residence 629 F Street Vernacular w/
Neoclassical 1903/1941 3S; A, B
None
The home of Mattrup Jensen from 1903-1945. The home was designed and built by Mattrup Jensen who was considered the “Father of Modern Colma”. Later he remodeled the house based on ante bellum residences he had seen while traveling in the American South. The residence is representative of Mattrup’s many contributions to the Town of Colma.
22. Bocci Monuments/
Commercial
7778 Mission
St. Vernacular 1904/1934 3S; A, B
None
Bocci & Sons served as one of the first monument shops established in Colma. First constructed in 1904, the building was remodeled in 1934 when local contractor Joseph Ragni built the new office façade. Leopoldo Bocce’s descendants continue to operate the business and it is now among the oldest cemetery related business in continuous operation in Colma.
23. Champion Auto
Parts/Commercial
1685-1687
Mission Rd. Concrete 1958, 1967 3S
None
The former Champion Auto Parts is comprised of two commercial buildings constructed in the late 1950s and early 1960s. The earlier building is a concrete warehouse-style building with a built-up bow-truss roof, parapet walls, glazed aluminum-frame windows, and simple metal doors, and a single metal roll-up warehouse door. The later building is a small concrete structure with a metal canopy. The site is important because of its association with the development of the drag racing culture in Colma in the 1950s and 60s, and with local drag racing pioneer Jim McLennon, a local racing track owner and promoter.
SCH# 2020069005
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
TOWN OF COLMA
2040 General Plan Update
DECEMBER 2021
City of Souls
SCH No. 2020069005
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Attachment C
{THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALY BLANK]
Notice of Availability of a Draft Environmental Impact Report for the
Colma 2040 General Plan Update
SCH No. 2020-069005
SUMMARY:
Notice is hereby given by the Town of Colma, as the Lead Agency pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), that the above -named draft Program Environmental Impact Report (DPEIR) is available for public review and comment.
Comments on the DPEIR will be received for a 50 -day period, commencing on December 6, 2021 and ending at 5:00pm on January 25, 2021, after which a Final PEIR will be prepared containing comments and responses to comments that, together with the DPEIR, will form the Final PEIR. The Final PEIR will be used by the Town of Colma City Council in its consideration of approval of the proposed 2040 General Plan Update, described below.
PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
The proposed 2040 General Plan Update applies to the entire Town of Colma. The Town is bounded by San Bruno Mountain, Lawndale Blvd, Interstate-280, and F Street.
Under State of California law (Government Code §65300 et seq.), every city and county in the State is required to adopt a general plan that functions as the comprehensive and all -encompassing policy document for future growth and development. The purpose of a jurisdiction’s general plan is to function as a “constitution” for land use planning and to provide a basis for sound decisions regarding long -term physical development, for development in the incorporated area, as well in any land outside city boundaries. It also provides the connection between community values, objectives, and decisions on the Town of Colma’s future housing, growth, and development.
California Government Code §65302 requires that a general plan include the following seven elements:
Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Conservation, Open Space, Noise, and Safety. Additional elements may be included as well, at the discretion of a jurisdicti on. All elements have equal weight, and no one element supersedes another. Cities and towns may amend the general plan four times a year (each amendment may include any number of changes), and cities are encouraged to keep the plan current through regular updates. The current Town of Colma General Plan has not been comprehensively updated since it was first adopted on June 16, 1999, by Resolution 99-22. The 2040 Town of Colma General Plan Update updates the Town’s 1999 General Plan Elements: Land Use; Mobil ity (Circulation); Community Health, Safety and Services (Noise and Safety); and Open Space and Conservation. The Housing Element is not currently being updated. Colma is not required to include an environmental justice element because it does not contain any Communities of Concern, as defined by the State of California.
ANTICIPATED SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS:
The DEIR’s analysis of project impacts identified potentially significant impacts on the following:
- Air Quality (Potential impacts range from less than significant to significant) - Cultural and Tribal Resources (Potential impacts are potentially significant) - Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Potential impacts range from less than significant to significant) PUBLIC REVIEW PROCESS:
One purpose of the Cal ifornia Environmental Quality Act is to inform the public of the potential environmental impacts of a project such as the 2040 General Plan Update. The purpose of this notice is to consult with and request comment on the DEIR from interested parties and responsible agencies.
The DEIR is available for review between 9:00am and 4:00pm Monday through Friday at Colma Town Hall, 1198 El Camino Real, California 94014
The DEIR is also available for review or download at the Town of Colma website, www.colma.ca.gov.
Comments on the DEIR may be submitted to:
Town of Colma
Planning Department
ATTN: 2040 General Plan Update DEIR
1198 El Camino Real
Colma, CA 94014
Please include a return address and contact name with your written comments. Comments can also be sent via email with subject line “2040 General Plan Update DEIR” to [email protected].
{THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALY BLANK]
Town of Colma
GE N E R A L PLAN
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
SCH# 202006905
Prepared for:
Town of Colma
1198 EL CAMINO REAL,
COLMA, CA 94014
Prepared by:
550 PILGRIM DRIVE
FOSTER CITY, CA 94404
DECEMBER 2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CSG Consultants, Inc Town of Colma General Plan Update December 2021 Draft Environmental Impact Report
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 Purpose and Scope of the Environmental Impact Report ........................................................................ 1.0-1
1.2 Project Characteristics .................................................................................................................................... 1.0-1
1.3 Project Alternatives Summary ...................................................................................................................... 1.0-5
1.4 Summary of Environmental Impacts ........................................................................................................... 1.0-6
2.0 INTRODUCTION
2.1 Purpose of the EIR ......................................................................................................................................... 2.0-1
2.2 Type of Document .......................................................................................................................................... 2.0-2
2.3 Intended Uses of the EIR ............................................................................................................................... 2.0-3
2.4 Environmental Review Process .................................................................................................................... 2.0-3
2.5 Comments Received on the Notice of Preparation .................................................................................... 2.0-5
2.6 Organization of the EIR ................................................................................................................................. 2.0-6
2.7 Scope of the EIR .............................................................................................................................................. 2.0-7
2.8 Known Responsible and Trustee Agencies ................................................................................................. 2.0-8
2.9 Impact Terminology ....................................................................................................................................... 2.0-9
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.1 Regional Project Location and Setting ......................................................................................................... 3.0-2
3.2 Project Background, Purpose and Objectives ............................................................................................ 3.0-6
3.3 General Pan Framework ................................................................................................................................ 3.0-8
3.4 Intended Uses of the EIR and Approval Process ...................................................................................... 3.0-13
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSUMPTIONS
4.1 Aesthetics ......................................................................................................................................................... 4.1-1
4.2 Air Quality ....................................................................................................................................................... 4.2-1
4.3 Biological Resources ....................................................................................................................................... 4.3-1
4.4 Tribal and Tribal Resources ...........................................................................................................................4.4-1
4.5 Energy .............................................................................................................................................................. 4.5-1
4.6 Geology and Soils ........................................................................................................................................... 4.6-1
4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ........................................................................................................................... 4.7-1
4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials .............................................................................................................. 4.8-1
4.9 Hydrology ........................................................................................................................................................ 4.9-1
4.10 Land Use and Planning .............................................................................................................................. 4.10-1
4.11 Noise ............................................................................................................................................................. 4.11-1
4.12 Population and Housing ............................................................................................................................ 4.12-1
4.13 Public Services and Recreation ................................................................................................................. 4.13-1
4.14 Transportation ............................................................................................................................................. 4.14-1
4.15 Utilities ......................................................................................................................................................... 4.15-1
4.16 Wildfires ....................................................................................................................................................... 4.16-1
5.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS SUMMARY
5.1 Growth Inducing Impacts ............................................................................................................................. 5.0-1
5.2 Agricultural Resources ................................................................................................................................... 5.0-3
5.3 Mineral Resources .......................................................................................................................................... 5.0-4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CSG Consultants, Inc Town of Colma General Plan Update December 2021 Draft Environmental Impact Report
5.4 Cumulative Impacts Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 5.0-5
6.0 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
6.1 CEQA Requirements ...................................................................................................................................... 6.0-1
6.2 Alternatives Under Consideration ............................................................................................................... 6.0-1
6.3 Comparative Analysis .................................................................................................................................... 6.0-5
6.4 Environmentally Superior Alternative ...................................................................................................... 6.0-12
7.0 REPORT PREPARERS
7.1 Town of Colma ................................................................................................................................................ 7.0-1
7.2 Environmental Consulting Team ................................................................................................................. 7.0-1
APPENDICES
Appendix A – Notice of Preparation and Response Letters Appendix B – Notices to Tribes
FIGURES
Figure 3.0-1 Regional Location ........................................................................................................................... 3.0-3 Figure 3.0-2 Project Location ............................................................................................................................... 3.0-5 Figure 4.1-1: Regional Location Map ................................................................................................................ 4.1-2 Figure 4.3-1: Creeks .............................................................................................................................................. 4.3-7 Figure 4.4-1: Soils of the Project Area and Vicinity .......................................................................................... 4.4-4 Figure 4.4-2: Portion of USGS 1892 Topographic quadrangle showing drainages and perennial streams ...... ................................................................................................................................................................................. 4.4-5 Figure 4.4-3: Geologic units of the Project Area and vicinity from Jennings et al. (2010) ........................... 4.4-6 Figure 4.4-4: Portion of Greene et al. (2014) geomorphology map showing Holocene units (Qa, Qya) within the Project Area. ....................................................................................................................................... 4.4-7 Figure 4.4-5: Previously conducted studies within 0.25 mi. of the Project Area ........................................ 4.4-10 Figure 4.4-6: Previously recorded cultural resource density within the Project Area ............................... 4.4-14 Figure 4.6-1: Geology ........................................................................................................................................... 4.6-2 Figure 4.6-2: Fault Lines and Seismic Hazards ................................................................................................. 4.6-4 Figure 4.6-3: Liquefaction Susceptibility ........................................................................................................... 4.6-6 Figure 4.6-4: Landslide Potential ........................................................................................................................ 4.6-8 Figure 4.8-1: Hazardous Sites .............................................................................................................................. 4.8-3 Figure 4.8-2: Airport Influence Area B ............................................................................................................... 4.8-6 Figure 4.8-3: Critical Aeronautical Surfaces ...................................................................................................... 4.8-7 Figure 4.9-1: Flood Hazards ................................................................................................................................ 4.9-3 Figure 4.9-2: Precipitation and Mean Temperature ......................................................................................... 4.9-4 Figure 4.10-1: Existing Land Use ..................................................................................................................... 4.10-3 Figure 4.10-2: Proposed Land Use .................................................................................................................... 4.10-5 Figure 4.10-3: Land Use Strategy .................................................................................................................... 4.10-10 Figure 4.11-1: Noise-Land Use Compatibility Table ...................................................................................... 4.11-4 Figure 4.11-2: Noise Measurement Locations (Ldn) ........................................................................................ 4.11-7 Figure 4.11-3: Present Day Noise Contours .................................................................................................... 4.11-8 Figure 4.11-4: Future Day Noise Projections Plus Project ............................................................................. 4.11-9 Figure 4.13-1: Local Fire and Police Facilities ................................................................................................. 4.13-2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CSG Consultants, Inc Town of Colma General Plan Update December 2021 Draft Environmental Impact Report
Figure 4.13-2: Parks and Recreation Facilities ...................................................................................... 4.13-13 Figure 4.14-1: Roadway Classifications ........................................................................................................... 4.14-2 Figure 4.14-2: Sidewalk Network ..................................................................................................................... 4.14-9 Figure 4.14-3: Multimodal Circulation ........................................................................................................... 4.14-11 Figure 4.15-1: Sewer System .............................................................................................................................. 4.15-3 Figure 6.0-1: Proposed Land Use ............................................................................................................. 6.0-3 Figure 6.0-2: No Project Alternative ................................................................................................................... 6.0-4
TABLES
Table 1.0.1: Summary of Environmental Impacts ............................................................................................ 1.0-5 Table 3.0.1: Existing Land Use Distribution ..................................................................................................... 3.0-4 Table 3.0.2: Land Use Classifications and Density Standards ...................................................................... 3.0-11 Table 3.0.3: 2040 General Plan Buildout .......................................................................................................... 3.0-12 Table 3.0.4 Comparison of Alternatives at Buildout ...................................................................................... 3.0-13 Table 4.0.1: Proposed and Approved Large-Scale Development Projects in Town of Colma ................... 4.0-1 Table 4.2-1: Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin ............... 4.2-4 Table 4.2.2: Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Summary ......................................................................... 4.2-5 Table 4.2.3: CARB Recommendations for Siting New Sensitive Land Uses ............................................ 4.2-6 Table 4.2.4: Existing Town of Colma Regional Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Inventory ...................... 4.2-7 Table 4.2.5: Criteria Air Pollutant Health Effects Summary ......................................................................... 4.2-11 Table 4.2.6: Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants ............................................................ 4.2-12 Table 4.2.7: BAAQMD Regional (Mass Emissions) Criteria Air Pollutant Significance Thresholds ...... 4.2-21 Table 4.2.8: Control Measures from the BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan ............................................... 4.2-27 Table 4.2.9: Comparison of the Change in Population and VMT in the Town of Colma ......................... 4.2-34 Table 4.2.10: Town of Colma Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Forecast .................................................... 4.2-38 Table 4.2.11: BAAQMD Odor Screening Distances ........................................................................................ 4.2-45 Table 4.3.1: Plant and Wildlife Species Potentially in the Planning Area ..................................................... 4.3-2 Table 4.4.1: Previous Cultural Resource Inventory Projects Conducted within 0.25 Mi. of the Planning Area ...................................................................................................................................................................... 4.4-11 Table 4.6.1: Modified Mercalli Intensities and Effects ..................................................................................... 4.6-3 Table 4.7.1: GHG Emissions and Their Relative Global Warming Potential Compared to CO2 ............... 4.7-3 Table 4.7.2: Summary of GHG Emissions Risk to California .......................................................................... 4.7-6 Table 4.7.3: Existing Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory ........................................................................... 4.7-7 Table 4.7.4: List of State GHG Regulations...................................................................................................... 4.7-10 Table 4.7.5, Horizon Year 2040 GHG Emissions Forecast ............................................................................. 4.7-17 Table 4.7.6: Colma Climate Change Action Plan 2030 Consistency Analysis ............................................ 4.7-24 Table 4.8.1: Hazardous Sites ................................................................................................................................ 4.8-4 Table 4.10.1: Existing Land Use ........................................................................................................................ 4.10-2 Table 4.10.2: Proposed Land Use ...................................................................................................................... 4.10-4 Table 4.11-1: Commonly Used Noise Descriptors .......................................................................................... 4.11-2 Table 4.11-2: Noise Measurement Descriptions ..................................................................................... 4.11-6 Table 4.11-3: Typical Construction Noise Levels at Construction Sites .................................................... 4.11-16 Table 4.11-4: General Assessment Guidelines for Construction Noise Impacts ...................................... 4.11-17 Table 4.11-5 Noise Level Increases over Study Area Roadways ................................................................ 4.11-18 Table 4.11-6: Construction Vibration – Building Damage Criteria ............................................................ 4.11-19 Table 4.11-7: Construction Vibration – Human Perception (Annoyance Criteria) .................................. 4.11-20 Table 4.12-1: San Mateo County Population Estimates ................................................................................ 4.12-2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CSG Consultants, Inc Town of Colma General Plan Update December 2021 Draft Environmental Impact Report
Table 4.12-2: Town of Colma Population and Household Growth Projections ......................................... 4.12-3 Table 4.12-3: Town of Colma Estimated Household Income ................................................................. 4.12-3 Table 4.12-4: San Mateo County Projected Employment by Sector ....................................................... 4.12-5 Table 4.13.1: Parks and Recreation Facilities ........................................................................................ 4.13-12 Table 4.14.1 – CMP Analysis Results for SR 82 (El Camino Real) .............................................................. 4.14-18 Table 4.14.2: Existing and Future VMT per Resident and Employee ........................................................ 4.14-23 Table 6.0-1: Comparison of Alternatives at Buildout ............................................................................... 6.0-2 Table 6.0-2: Comparison of Proposed Project Impacts to Alternative Impacts ...................................... 6.0-12
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CSG Consultants, Inc 1.0-1 Town of Colma General Plan Update December 2021 Environmental Impact Report
This section provides an overview of the environmental analysis for the town of Colma 2040 General Plan Update (proposed project). For additional detail regarding specific issues, please consult the appropriate chapter of Sections 4.1 through 4.16. The proposed project was developed in response to policy direction provided by the town Council (City Council). The town of Col ma is the lead agency for this Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR; EIR), under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and as such, is required to evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed project.
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
This PEIR is a program level document that examines the potential impacts resulting from implementing the proposed land use changes and goals and policies under the 2040 GPU. The impact assessment therefore identifies the broader impacts of implementing the 2040 GPU. As a programmatic document, this EIR does not assess any site-specific impacts; therefore any future development that could result from implementing the proposed Project, will be subject to individual , site-specific environmental review, as required by State law.
The 2040 GPU EIR will provide, to the greatest extent possible, an analysis of the potential environmental effects associated with the implementation of the project, pursuant to CEQA. The analysis in this PEIR therefore focuses upon potential environmental impacts that could arise from implementation of the project through development of the land uses within the General Plan Planning Area (Planning Area) as regulated and guided by General Plan policies and action items, through updates to the Zoning Ordinance. As appropriate to an environmental issue area, mitigation measures have been identified in order to minimize significant impacts. Project alternatives, including the No Project alternative, have also been identified. The EIR adopts this approach in order to provide a credible worst -case scenario of the impacts resulting from project implementation.
1.2 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
General Plan Update
The Town of Colma General Plan was adopted in 1999, with the exception of the Housing Element which had been last updated in 20 15. Since 1999, the town of Colma has experienced physical, demographic, and economic changes, resulting in new opportunities and challenges for the town. The existing General Plan is being updated in order to reflect current community sentiment and changes in land use, growth patterns, and demographic and economic conditions. State law does not specify rigid requirements or timing for updating a general plan (other than for the housing element). The currently proposed General Plan update project includes updates to the existing General Plan and an update to the town’s Zoning Code.
The proposed General Plan Update includes five elements : Land use, Mobility (includes Circulation), Community Health, Safety and Services (includes Safety and Noise), Open Space and Conservation, and Historical Resources. The existing Housing element will remain in force through 2023, so it will not be updated as a part of this General Plan Update . The town of Colma does not contain any disadvantaged communities, as designated by the State of California, so an Environmental Justice Element is not required. In addition to the required elements, the General Plan Update includes a Historical Resources Element. The GPU Planning Area boundary includes the area within the town limits; the town’s Sphere
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CSG Consultants, Inc 1.0-2 Town of Colma General Plan Update December 2021 Environmental Impact Report
of Influence (SOI) has the same boundaries as the town itself . The GPU Planning Area encompasses a total of 1.89 square miles. It is anticipated that the proposed General Plan Update will build out to full development capacity by 20 40. The proposed G PU has capacity for 845 residential units and a total population of 2,852 within the Planning Area by 2040.
The proposed General Plan Update consists of the following Elements.
Land Use
The Land Use Element provides the central framework for the General Plan Update and serves as a compass to guide planners, the general public, and decision makers on the desired pattern of development in the town. The land use element describes both existing and future land use activity, the latter of which is designed to achieve the town’s long-range goals for physical development. The land use element provides land use designations for all of the land within the GPU Planning Area based on the existing and expected type of development. The land use designations also specify maximum density and intensity of development that can occur. The Land Use Element also describes several planning areas within the town of Colma that overlay on the standard land use zones.
Land Use Map
The proposed General Plan includes the updated Land Use Map which is a detailed land use plan for the town of Colma , and assigns land use designations to all lands within the Planning Area. Land use designations proposed under the updated General Plan Land Use Map include:
• Cemetery
• Low Density Residential
• Medium Density Residential
• Commercial
• Executive Administrative
• Public and Quasi-Public
• Commercial Overlay
The General Plan also designates the following Planning Areas in the town of Colma:
• Commercial Core
• El Camino Real Corridor
• Hillside Boulevard
• Mission Road
• Sterling Park
Mobility
This Element provides goals, policies, and actions to develop a safe, efficient, and environmentally responsible multimodal transportation in the Town of Colma. This section includes a map of the existing street network, and a series of policies and goals. It contains an evaluation of roadway performance, a description of public transportation access, A description of active transportation infrastructure, and a description of the town’s scenic corridors. Finally, the Mobility Element includes an implementation timeline for each goal.
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CSG Consultants, Inc 1.0-3 Town of Colma General Plan Update December 2021 Environmental Impact Report
Housing
The Housing Element section has not changed from the adopted 2015 Housing Element. It includes an analysis of demographic and housing trends in the Town of Colma, the town’s housing need, and the town’s plan for allowing for sufficient housing construction to meet that need through 2023.
Community Health, Safety and Services
The Community Health, Safety, and Services Element includes information on the town’s fire, safety, flooding, and seismic hazards. It also includes information about police and fire services, aircraft overflight, and hazardous materials and waste. It combines information and strategies from the town’s Hazard Mitigation Plan with additional goals and policies specific to the Safety Element. The Community Health, Safety and Services Element connects information about hazards to available public services and strategies to mitigate those hazards. It addresses the following safety planning and response topics:
• Community Health
• Geologic and Seismic Hazards
• Flooding and Sea Level Rise
• Wildland and Urban Fires
• Law Enforcement
• Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services
• Emergency Preparedness and Disaster Response
• Noise
Open Space and Conservation
The Open Space and Conservation Element meets State of California requirements for a Conservation Element and for an Open Space Element . This element catalogues open space in the Town of Colma, including land actively used by cemeteries and slated for cemetery expansion. It identifies areas in the Town that are important to the preservation of land, plants, and animals. This section identifies six goals and associated policies.
Historical Resources
The Historical Resources Element outlines a plan for the identification, protection, and management of the town’s sites and structures exhibiting architectural, historical, archaeological, and cultural significance. The Historical Resources Element summarizes the history of development in Colma, enumerates the benefits of historical preservation, and describes state and federal incentives available to support historic preservation. This element identifies four goals and associated policies.
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CSG Consultants, Inc 1.0-4 Town of Colma General Plan Update December 2021 Environmental Impact Report
1.3 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES SUMMARY
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project and avoid and/or lessen the environmental effects of the project. The CEQ A Guidelines Section 15126.6(e) also requires that a “no project” alternative be evaluated in an EIR. The alternatives analysis provides a comparative analysis between the project and the selected alternatives. In conjunction with the proposed project, t he EIR qualitatively evaluates the following other land use alternatives, which include:
• Alternative 1 – No Project Alternative
CEQA, through case law, requires that the “no project” alternatives be evaluated so as to allow the Lead Agency to compare the potential impacts of approving the project versus not approving it. Under State CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(e)(2), “the No Project Alternative shall discuss the existing conditions at the time the notice of preparation is published…as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services.”
The No Project analysis discusses both the existing conditions at the time the NOP is published as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved. Therefore under Alternative 1, the town would continue to implement the current (1999) General Plan, with no Climate Action Plan (CAP) in effect and with no changes made to update any of the Land Use, Open Space, Conservation, Noise, Circulation and Historical Resources Elements or the Land Use Map. It assumes that the existing General Plan would continue to guide development in the Planning Area, without directly resulting in new development. In the case of this alternative, the proposed 2040 General Plan Update would not be approved and the existing 1999 Town of Colma General Plan, would continue as the primary guiding document for growth and development within the town.
Buildout of the existing 1999 General Plan or No Project Alternative would result in approximately 680 housing units, a population of 2,310, and a total of 4,315 jobs within the Planning Area, expected to occur by year 2040
• Alternative 2 – Residential Focused Alternative
This alternative provides an increased number of residential units and maintains/decreases future commercial land use development that already exist within the town. This alternative assumes that the Town Center opportunity site would be developed to include 20% more residential units than the proposed General Plan, resulting in 48 additional units. It also assumes that by constructing more residential uses at the site, the available space for commercial uses would be further limited at the site. This alternative also assumes that more residential development could occur elsewhere on El Camino Real, closer to the Colma BART station, and that less residential development may occur at the Town Center site. The Residential Focused Alternative seeks to provide new community amenities, improved local and regional connectivity, as well as enhanced economic activity. Given the large number of jobs in comparison to the town’s population, this alternative could potentially lower the total vehicle miles traveled by providing housing to those that work in the area. This Alternative is based on assumptions of buildout of opportunity sites and sites designated with a commercial overlay within the Planning Area, and assumes a land use density to promote more residential units in the potential mixed-use environment around the town center.
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CSG Consultants, Inc 1.0-5 Town of Colma General Plan Update December 2021 Environmental Impact Report
1.4 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
While Sections 4.1 – 4.16 summarize the GPU’s impacts to each environmental area listed below, Section 5.0 of the EIR, called CEQA required topics, summarizes cumulative impacts in the following areas:
• Aesthetics
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural and Tribal Resources
• Energy
• Geology
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards
• Hydrology
• Land Use
• Noise
• Population and Housing
• Public Services and Recreation
• Transportation
• Utilities
• Wildfires
The GPU’s environmental impacts are also included in Table 6.0-2: Comparison of Proposed Project Impacts Relative to Alternative Impacts. In most categories, the General Plan Update impacts are categorized as Less than Significant. The three impact areas where the environmental impacts are potentially significant are air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and cultural and tribal resources. These are presented below in Table
1.0.1: Summary of Environmental Impacts
Table 1.0.1: Summary of Environmental Impacts
Impact (Level of Impact) Mitigation
Measure Relevant General Plan Policies
Impact 4.1.1: Implementation of the proposed
2040 General Plan Update would not have a
substantial adverse effect on scenic resources
within a state scenic highway. (Less than
Significant)
Policy OSC-3-1 Transit Oriented
Development; Policy M-6-1 Site
Planning; Policy M-6-2 Access to
Scenic Corridors; Policy M-6-3 Visual
Impacts; Policy M-6-4 Paving
Integration; Policy LU-10-7 Landscape
Setback
Impact 4.1.2: Development allowed under the
proposed General Plan Update could degrade
the existing vis ual character or the quality of
public views in the Planning Area. The proposed
General Plan Update would not conflict with
applicable zoning or other regulations governing
(Less than Significant)
Policy LU-1-1 General Plan Land Use
Diagram; Policy LU-1-2 Zoning
Consistency; Policy LU-1-3 Balance
New Development with Existing
Setting; Policy LU-1-5 Clear and
Predictable Development Standards;
Policy LU-10-6 Spanish Mediterranean
Design; Policy LU-12-1 Cemetery and
Agriculture
Impact 4.1.3: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update could increase the amount
of daytime glare and nighttime lighting in
developed portions of the Planning Area and
create new sources in undeveloped areas. (Less
than Significant)
Policy M-6-1 Site Planning; Policy M-
6-2 Lighting; Policy M-6-3 Lighting;
Policy M-6-4 Glare
Impact 4.2.1: Implementation of the proposed
project would not conflict with or obstruct
See Table 4.2.8: Control Measures
from the BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CSG Consultants, Inc 1.0-6 Town of Colma General Plan Update December 2021 Environmental Impact Report
Impact (Level of Impact) Mitigation
Measure Relevant General Plan Policies
implementation of the applicable air quality
plan. (Less than significant)
Plan (and associated policies) on page
4.2-27 to 4.2-33.
Impact 4.2.2: The project would result in a
cumulatively considerable net increase of
criteria pollutants for which the project region is
in non-attainment under applicable federal or
State ambient air quality standard. (Significant
and Unavoidable)
AQ-1 (page 4.2-
36); AQ-2 (page
4.2-36 to 4.2-38);
Policy LU-2-10 Green Building; Policy
LU-3-6 Walkable Neighborhoods;
Policy M-2-1 Reduce Vehicle Miles
Traveled; Policy M-2-2 Other Traffic
Flow Benchmarks; Policy M-2-3 VMT
Transportation Performance Measures;
Policy M-4-4 Transit Oriented
Development; Policy M-4-5
Connections to Homes and Businesses;
Policy M-5-2 Design for All Travel
Modes; Policy M-7-1 TDM Program;
Policy M-7-2 TDM Program for New
Development; Policy M-7-3 Vehicle
Trip Reduction; Policy OSC-3-1
Transit Oriented Development
Impact 4.2.3: The project could expose sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations. (Significant and Unavoidable)
AQ-3 (page. 4.2-
40 to 4.2-42);
AQ-4 (page 4.2-42
to 4.2-43)
Policy LU-6-3 Environmental
Protection; Policy CS-1-1 Health in all
Policies; Policy LU-5-1 Regional
Cooperation; Policy LU-5-2 San Mateo
County Collaboration; Policy M-3-1
Agency Collaboration and
Coordination; Policy M-3-3 Regional
Transportation Planning; Policy M-7-1
TDM Program; Policy M-7-2 TDM
Program for New Development; Policy
M-7-3 Vehicle Trip Reduction
Impact 4.2.4: The project would not result in
other emissions (such as those leading to odors)
adversely affecting a substantial number of
people. (Less than Significant)
Policy M-6-1 Site Planning
Impact 4.3.1: The proposed GPU would not
have a substantial adverse effect through
habitat modification on any species identified as
a candidate, sensitive, or special status species,
or impact riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural communities as identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or US
Fish and Wildlife Service. (Less than
Significant)
Policy OSC-4-7 Colma Creek Bank
Setback; Policy OSC-5-3 Sensitive
Biological habitats; Policy OSC-5-4
Habitat Enhancement
Impact 4.3.2: Development under the proposed
General Plan Update would not have a
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CSG Consultants, Inc 1.0-7 Town of Colma General Plan Update December 2021 Environmental Impact Report
Impact (Level of Impact) Mitigation
Measure Relevant General Plan Policies
substantial adverse effect on state or federally
protected wetlands (including, but not limited
to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means. (No Impact)
Impact 4.3.3: The proposed GPU would not
interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use
of native wildlife nursery sites. (Less than
Significant)
Policy OSC-5-5 Nesting Bird
Protection
Impact 4.3.4: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update would not conflict with
local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance. (No Impact)
Impact 4.3.5: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update would not conflict with
the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan. (No
Impact)
Impact 4.4.1: Future development to implement
the proposed project could potentially cause a
direct substantial adverse change in the
significance of an historical resource as defined
in CEQA Guidelines Section §15064.5
(Significant and Unavoidable)
CUL-1 (page 4.4-
24 to 4.2-25)
Policy LU-13-2 Historic Buildings;
Policy HR-2-1 Preservation
Collaboration; Policy HR-2-2
Consultation on Projects; Policy HR-3-
1 Public Awareness
Impact 4.4.2: Future development to implement
the proposed General Plan Update could result
in the potential disturbance of cultural resources
(i.e. prehistoric archaeological sites, historical
archaeological sites, and isolated artifacts and
features) within the Planning Area. (Significant
and Unavoidable)
CUL-2 (page 4.4-
27)
Policy OSC-6-1 Development Review
Process
Impact 4.4.3: Would the project cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of
a TCR as defined in Public Resources Code
Section §21074 or §5020.1(k) (Significant and
Unavoidable)
CUL-3 (page 4.4-
28)
Policy OSC-6-2 Tribal Consultation
Compliance
Impact 4.4.4: Adoption of the proposed General
Plan Update could result in the potential
disturbance of human remains, including those
CUL-4 (page 4.4-
29 to 4.2-30)
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CSG Consultants, Inc 1.0-8 Town of Colma General Plan Update December 2021 Environmental Impact Report
Impact (Level of Impact) Mitigation
Measure Relevant General Plan Policies
interred outside of cemeteries within the
Planning Area. (Significant and Unavoidable)
Impact 4.5.1: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update would not result in the
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources during project
construction or operation, nor would it conflict
or obstruct a state or local energy efficiency plan
(Less than Significant).
Policy OSC-3-1 Transit Oriented
Development; Policy OSC-3-2 Reduce
Energy Consumption; Policy OSC-3-3
Energy Efficiency in Municipal
Operations; Policy OSC-3-4 GHG
Reduction; Policy OSC-3-5 Pedestrian-
Scaled Design
Impact 4.6.1: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update would expose new
development to seismic hazards, including but
not limited to strong ground shaking or
seismically related to ground failure, including
liquefaction. (Less than Significant)
Policy CS-2-1 Geotechnical Studies;
Policy CS-2-2 Development in
Hazardous Areas; Policy CS-2-3
Unsafe Buildings; Policy CS-2-4 Water
Infrastructure Safety; Policy CS-2-5
Erosion Prevention; Policy CS-2-6
Seismic Hazards
Impact 4.6.2: Land uses and new development
or redevelopment under the proposed General
Plan Update may develop structures on
unstable soil or expose, structures, and
development to the effects of ground settlement
resulting in the risk of loss, injury, or death.
(Less than Significant)
Policy CS-2-1 Geotechnical Studies;
Policy CS-2-2 Development in
Hazardous Areas; Policy CS-2-4 Water
Infrastructure Safety; Policy CS-2-6
Seismic Hazards
Impact 4.6.3: Implementation of the proposed
project would not result in development within
areas subject to landslide. (Less than
Significant)
Policy CS-2-1 Geotechnical Studies;
Policy CS-2-2 Development in
Hazardous Areas; Policy CS-2-5
Erosion Prevention;
Impact 4.6.4: Implementation of the proposed
project would not result in development of
areas of unstable or expansive soils. (No
Impact)
Impact 4.6.5: Implementation of the proposed
project would not impact areas where soils may
be incapable of adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems. (No Impact)
Impact 4.6.6: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update would not promote new
development that could impact areas of unique
paleontological resources or unique geological
resources. (Less than Significant)
Impact 4.7.1: Implementation of the proposed
project would generate GHG emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a
GHG-1 (page 4.7-
22)
See Page 4.7-18 to 4.7-22
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CSG Consultants, Inc 1.0-9 Town of Colma General Plan Update December 2021 Environmental Impact Report
Impact (Level of Impact) Mitigation
Measure Relevant General Plan Policies
significant impact on the environment.
(Significant and Unavoidable)
Impact 4.7.2: Implementation of the proposed
project would not conflict with an applicable
plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted
for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions.
(Less than Significant)
See Table 4.7.6: Colma Climate
Change Action Plan 2030 Consistency
Analysis.
Impact 4.8.1: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update may have the potential to
expose persons to known and unknown
hazardous materials through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous,
materials, as well as accidents involving the
release of hazardous materials. (Less than
Significant)
Policy CS-7-1 Hazard Mitigation Plan;
Policy CS-7-2 Emergency Management
Plan; Policy CS-7-3 Promote
Emergency Preparedness; Policy CS-7-
4 Collaborative Planning; Policy CS-7-
5 Evacuation Routes
Impact 4.8.2: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update has the potential to emit
hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school. (Less than Significant)
Impact 4.8.3: Though the proposed General Plan
Update has the potential to develop a site which
is included on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
§65962.5 these would be required to comply
with State and federal regulations. As a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment (Less than Significant).
Policy CS-2-1 Geotechnical Studies
Impact 4.8.4: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update would not locate people
residing or working within two miles of a
public airport, public use airport, or private
airstrip. (Less than Significant)
Policy CS-9-1 ALUC Plan; Policy CS-
9-2 Airport Land Use Commission
Review
Impact 4.8.5: Future development resulting
from the proposed General Plan Update would
not physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan. (Less than Significant)
Policy CS-7-1 Hazard Mitigation Plan;
Policy CS-7-2 Emergency Management
Plan; Policy CS-7-3 Promote
Emergency Preparedness; Policy CS-7-
4 Collaborative Planning; Policy CS-7-
5 Evacuation Routes
Impact 4.8.6: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update would not expose people
or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury, or death
involving wildland fires. (No Impact)
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CSG Consultants, Inc 1.0-10 Town of Colma General Plan Update December 2021 Environmental Impact Report
Impact (Level of Impact) Mitigation
Measure Relevant General Plan Policies
Impact 4.9.1: Implementation of the proposed
2040 General Plan Update would not violate
any water quality standards during
construction and operation of future
development or otherwise substantially
degrading surface water quality. (Less than
Significant)
Policy OSC-4-1 Comply with Water
Quality Regulations; Policy OSC-4-2
Participation in the San Mateo County
Stormwater Pollution Prevention
Program (SMCWPPP); Policy OSC-4.-9
Water Quality and Conservation Public
Information; Policy LU-2-4 Low
Impact Development
Impact 4.9.2: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update would not decrease
groundwater supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such that the project
may impede sustainable groundwater
management. (Less than Significant)
Policy OSC-4-1 Comply with Water
Quality Regulations; Policy OSC-4-3
Reclaimed Water; Policy OSC-4-5
Green Infrastructure; Policy LU-2-6
Green Infrastructure; Policy LU-2-7
Public Green Infrastructure
Impact 4.9.3 Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update would increase
impervious surfaces and alter drainage
conditions in town, which could result in
increased erosion, on-or-off site siltation,
surface, and polluted runoff, or affect existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems. (Less
than Significant)
Policy OSC-4-6 Stormwater Runoff;
Policy OSC-4-8 Colma Creek
Enhancements; Policy CS-3-2 Maintain
Drainage Facilities; Policy CS-3-4
Stormwater Detention; Policy LU-2-5
Green Infrastructure Plan
Impact 4.9.4: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update would not increase the
risk of tsunami or seiche zones. (No Impact)
Impact 4.9.5: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update would not conflict with or
obstruct implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan. (Less than Significant)
Impact 4.10.1: The proposed General Plan
Update would not physically divide an
established community. (Less than Significant)
Policy LU-1-1 General Plan Land Use
Diagram; Policy LU-1-2 Zoning
Consistency; Policy LU-6-1 New
Incompatible Land Uses; Policy LU-10-
1 Neighborhood and small scale
commercial and service uses; Policy
LU-10-2 El Camino Real Housing;
Policy LU-10-3 Mixed Use and
Nonresidential Development
Impact 4.10.2: The proposed General Plan
Update would not conflict with an applicable
land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted to
avoid or mitigate an environmental effect. (Less
than Significant)
Policy LU-1-1 General Plan Land Use
Diagram; Policy LU-1-2 Zoning
Consistency; Policy LU-2-5 Green
Infrastructure Plan; Policy LU-2-11
Climate Action Plan; Policy LU-5-1
Regional Cooperation; Policy OSC-3-4
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CSG Consultants, Inc 1.0-11 Town of Colma General Plan Update December 2021 Environmental Impact Report
Impact (Level of Impact) Mitigation
Measure Relevant General Plan Policies
GHG Reduction; Policy OSC-6-2 Tribal
Consultation Compliance; Policy CS-3-
1 Participate in Regional Adaptation
Efforts; Policy CS-7-1 Hazard
Mitigation Plan; Policy CS-9-1 ALUC
Plan; Policy CS-9-2 Airport Land Use
Commission Review; Policy M-3-3
Regional Transportation Planning;
Policy HR-1-1 General Plan
Consistency
Impact 4.11.1: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update would not generate
temporary or permanent increases in noise
levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies (Less
than Significant)
Impact 4.11.2: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update would not result in the
generation of excessive groundborne vibration
or groundborne noise levels. (Less than
Significant)
Impact 4.11.3: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update would not expose people
residing or working in the Planning Area to
excessive noise levels associated with airports
(No Impact)
Impact 4.12.1: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update will induce substantial
unplanned population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new homes
and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other
infrastructure). (Less than Significant)
Policy LU-1-1 General Plan Land Use
Diagram; Policy LU-1-2 Zoning
Consistency; Policy LU-1-3 Balance
New Development with Existing
Setting; Policy LU-1-5 Clear and
Predictable Development Standards
Impact 4.12.2: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update would not result in the
displacement of substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
(Less than Significant)
Policy LU-1-1 General Plan Land Use
Diagram; Policy LU-1-3 Balance New
Development with Existing Setting;
Policy LU-3-3 Adequate and
Affordable Housing; Policy LU-4-2
Adequacy to Serve New and Existing
Developments
Impact 4.13.1: Project implementation would
not result in adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or
Policy CS-4-1 Alternate EOC; Policy
CS-4-2 Mutual Aid Agreements; Policy
CS-4-3 Fire Prevention Education;
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CSG Consultants, Inc 1.0-12 Town of Colma General Plan Update December 2021 Environmental Impact Report
Impact (Level of Impact) Mitigation
Measure Relevant General Plan Policies
physically altered fire protection services and
facilities for the town of Colma. (Less than
Significant)
Policy CS-5-1 Adequate Water
Supplies; Policy CS-5-2 Removal of
Fire Hazards; Policy CS-5-3 Building
Fire Codes; Policy CS-5-4 Urban Fire
Risks
Impact 4.13.2: Project implementation would
not result in additional law enforcement
protection services and facilities for the town of
Colma that would have had the potential to
result in physical environmental impacts. (Less
than Significant)
Policy CS-8.1 Staffing Levels; Policy
CS-8.2 Facilities Planning; Policy CS-
8.3 Response Times; Policy CS-8.4
Communication
Impact 4.13.4: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update has the potential to
increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional facilities or could require the
construction of new recreational facilities. Any
such changes would not result in substantial or
increased physical deterioration of existing
facilities or the construction of new facilities
which might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment. (Less than Significant)
Policy OSC-1-2 Flexible Open Space
Land Uses; Policy OSC-1-4 Pedestrian
Trails, Bikeways Walkways; Policy
OSC-1-5 Colma Creek Trail; Policy
OSC-2-1 Open Space for Recreation
Use; Policy OSC-2-2 Recreation
Requirements for New Developments;
Policy OSC-2-3 Expansion of
Recreation Space; Policy OSC-4-7
Colma Creek Bank Setback; Policy
OSC-4-8 Colma Creek Enhancements
Impact 4.14.1: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan Update would not result in
conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities. (Less than Significant)
Policy M-1.2 Capital Improvement
Prioritization; Policy M-2-4 Multi-
Modal Impact Fee; Policy M-3-2 El
Camino Real; Policy M-3-4 Transit
Funding; Policy M-3-5 Transportation
Gaps; Policy M-4-1 Transit Stops;
Policy M-4-2 Reliable Transportation
Services; Policy M-4.3 Consult with
SamTrans; Policy M-4.3 Encourage
Transportation Options; Policy M-4.4
Transit Oriented Development; Policy
M-5-1 Complete Streets; Policy M-5-2
Design for All Travel Modes; Policy
M-5-3 Bicycle Connection
Coordination; Policy M-5-4
Accessibility and Universal Design;
Policy M-5.5 Design of New
Development; Policy M-8-1 Parking
Standards
Impact 4.14.2: General Plan implementation
would not substantially increase hazards due to
a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
Policy M-1-1 Vision Zero; Policy M-1-2
Capital Improvement Prioritization;
Policy M-5-1 Complete Streets; Policy
M-5-2 Design for All Travel Modes;