SAN BRUNO CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
April 9, 2024
Public Comment
From: Matt Jones
To: Rico Medina; Marty Medina; Tom Hamilton; Michael Salazar; Sandy Alvarez Cc: City Clerk
Subject: 4/9 Council meeting public comment - Items 6(E) and 7 Date: Monday, April 8, 2024 9:47:34 PM
Hello Councilmembers,
The reality of our housing situation dictates that we must take on challenges that prevent us from building housing. This is why I strongly support the following:
Item 6E: amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to streamline permitting processes for items such as Use Permits and Architecture Review.
I have worked for two jurisdictions of greater size (120,000 and 450,000) in the Bay Area that utilize Administrative/Zoning Admin Decisions to great effect. I endorse this model of planning projects because it allows us to focus on bigger projects at the Planning Commission level while still allowing forum for public comment.
One of my greatest frustrations as a planning staff member was the amount of busywork that kept me from doing work that would have a greater impact at improving quality of life in the City. In San Bruno in 2015-17, Administrative decisions were only utilized for a few processes, such as a wireless facility, but rarely if ever for use permits or housing projects. I believe that City staff and the Planning Commission could use this saved time from process improvements and create policies and programs that can help support small businesses, promote good urban design and build and maintain affordable housing and homeless services.
Additionally, I have worked in a community of about 17,000 residents that has an even more restrictive process where single family homes go through a design review committee and even more CEQA review. I think that there is a faction of the community - including a member I spoke to recently - that believes San Bruno to still be a small town with a similar expectation of needing public comment on single family home projects, etc. This person requested that every neighbor should have to sign off on the design of a home before construction. Given the times we are living in, with rising costs of living, we need to maximize our time in public forums by streamlining less important projects.
I think some of this newfound staff time (along with Councilmembers' time) should also be used to explain these changes to the public at large. It will be a shift for the City in identity and mindset. Several community members reached out to me saying that they did not understand what the Director's presentation was trying to convey at the last meeting where we discussed these changes. Please consider conducting more outreach as you roll out these new processes and please be mindful of the audience. We now have more people coming to meetings, which is great, but it means staff is presenting to two very different audiences.
Item 7: ALUCP Override to allow greater density, height, and housing at Tanforan/70 db Noise Contour area
Transit-oriented development is in and malls are out. A well-crafted development that can add jobs, housing, and retail/entertainment would be a much better fit at Tanforan than what is there currently. Capturing value from the proximity to transit and adding density would allow the City to gain revenue, add much-needed housing and help meet the state's ambitious goals for the City.
As the staff report notes, the City would be hard-pressed to find better locations for upzoning an equivalent amount of housing without this ALUCP override.
Moreover, I do not see the noise issues as a concern. The demand for affordable housing in the Bay Area is so great that I personally have resorted to living in places that are not to code because of the rent discount they provide. For many who live on the street and in cars, it is much worse. People would gladly sacrifice a few seconds of conversation outside as a plane passes overhead for an affordable place to live with noise insulated windows.
I would like to commend staff for their time and thoughtful work on crafting this resolution.
This override is long overdue. I was asking about overriding the ALUCP and adding housing at BART back when I worked in the planning department in 2015-17. I'm glad to see this moving forward.
Please let me know if there is anything I or any other pro-housing advocates can do to offer additional support for the City's decision.
Best,
Matt Jones