Att 2 - General Plan Comments and Responses — South San Francisco City Council, October 12, 2022

Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
1 Land acknowledgment (Native American heritage). Front Matter 0 2 Add a new two page spread and the following land acknowledgement: "LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATEMENT
We acknowledge that the City of South San Francisco is located on the unceded ancestral homeland of the Ramaytush Ohlone peoples who are the original inhabitants of the San Francisco Peninsula. We wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the Ancestors, Elders, and relatives of the Ramaytush Community and by affirming their sovereign rights as First People." Make change
2 CHEJ is chapter 12 in plan, Community Resilience is chapter 13. The ToC lists Community Resilience as 12 and CHEJ as 13.

Front Matter 0 5 Update Table of Contents Make change
3 Housing and dining needed along Mission Rd, close to BART station and bus stops. Our Story 1 19 Goal SA-10 has policies that aim to develop the area close to BART station to have mixed uses, including housing and dining. No change recommended.

No change
4 Shops, dining and housing needed along Mission Rd, El Camino, and BART station, where people can shop and dine without needing a car and have access to public transportation for other uses. Trees needed too.

Our Story 1 19 Goal SA-11 calls for the development of mixed use, pedestrianoriented centers in El Camino Real that have residential, commercial, and dining uses. No change recommended.

No change
5 The paragraph near the "1950" mark says "subarea", we are using sub-area in all other places.

Our Story 2 20 Change from "subarea" to "sub-area" Make change 6 Revise text for mobility chapter title consistency: "The Multimodal Mobility Element improves the mobility of people throughout the city. The Mobility Element establishes the transportation framework for active transportation (walking and biking), transit ridership, and auto travel." Our Plan 4 42 Revise as follows: "The Mobility and Access Element improves the mobility of people throughout the city. The Mobility and Access Element establishes the transportation framework for active transportation (walking and biking), transit ridership, and auto travel." Make change
7 Most people that tried to preserve the mountain are now gone - even though there is a need for housing, you can’t keep developing and maintaining the environment. No place for animals to go Our Place 4 60 San Bruno Mountain is a State and County Park protected by the County of San Mateo and other known sites of Indigenous burial grounds are protected. No change recommended.

No change
8 Plan for the future of the mountain (native American burial) - building more houses in the future?
Our Place 4 60 San Bruno Mountain is a State and County Park protected by the County of San Mateo and other known sites of Indigenous burial grounds are protected, see Goals ES-10 and ES-11. No change recommended.

No change
9 Pat Murray noted that she is receiving questions as to why school district properties are included as sites for housing? She asked if this facilitates potential future rezoning for consistency with the General Plan.

Our Place 4 60 The General Plan Land Use Designations and Zoning Districts would allow housing on these sites. No change recommended.

No change
1 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
10 Aligned with the goals for Oyster Point and the OPMVP:
• The policy framework also defines the importance of SSF as a hub for R&D and innovation as well as a worldwide leader in life sciences. Related development to be attractive to emerging technology businesses; open campus spaces to provide open space and outdoor amenities; high quality design to be embedded in development standards.• R&D companies need to contribute to community goals, amenities, parks, and TDM. • The policy framework requires collaboration between the City and property owners to achieve plan goals.• Goal LU-8 defines various policies and measures aiming at achieving attractive pedestrian oriented and human scale streets and civic spaces including sidewalk infrastructure across the City, lighting, street trees, etc. A citywide streetscape masterplan should be developed.• The goal for a transit-oriented community East of 101 includes a policy to implement shared district parking.

Our Place 4 69 No change recommended. No change
11 More pedestrian friendly streets, used to be a walking path. Our Place 4 71 Goals LU-4, LU-8, and MOB-1 includes policies to create walkable and bikeable connections through all neighborhoods. No change recommended.

No change
12 Cultural Arts Center: access to space and resources to gather, create, express and add to the rich history and diverse cultures.

Our Place 4 74 Goal LU-8.1 expands arts and cultural programming in public spaces and would support an arts center. The City is currently undergoing an Arts Master Plan process. No change recommended.

No change
13 Think about things like lighting. Even DT and the new development areas there’s not much light
Our Place 4 74 Add policy: "Policy LU-8.12: Ensure adequate lighting. Ensure all neighborhoods, especially disadvantaged communities, have adequate lighting to support community safety." Make change
2 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
14 The following are not or not fully aligned with the goals for Oyster Point and the OPMVP:• The plan points out the existing lack of connection and cohesion (p. 57) between buildings and plots east of 101 which is aligned with the current view of the OPMVP team. However, the General Plan notes that the issue is linked to a ‘high concentration of large office and R&D buildings built after 2000 that are set far back from the street.’ This statement does not acknowledge that office development and the fees that projects generate has, in many cases, contributed to improvements to the bike and walk network and public amenities and that a root cause regarding the lack of connection and cohesion stems from a lack of a cohesive and holistic mobility plan for the east of 101. Such a plan is being undertaken now and will complement the General plan.

Our Place 5 57 No change recommended No change
15 Update the mini GPLU map on this page Our Place 5 58 Update map Make change 16 Serra Vista school is public land held in trust by the SSFUSD. Medium density housing designated for the entire site is excessive. It does not allow for use of the site as open space or as a linear/city park. Part of this site should be preserved in the G.P. for public use.

Our Place 5 60 Policy PR-4.3 calls for the City and SSFUSD to partner to convert former school sites, like Serra Vista, into park space, childcare facilities, and multifamily housing. No change recommended.

No change
17 More high density and mixed-use zoning throughout the City. Our Place 5 60 The General Plan Land Use Designations increase the amount of high-density and mixed use area throughout the city. No change recommended.

No change
18 More high density! More mixed-use! No more low density! Our Place 5 60 The General Plan Land Use Designations increase the amount of high-density and mixed use area throughout the city. No change recommended.

No change
19 Let's not overbuild; we don't want to be like S.F. Our Place 5 60 No change recommended. No change 20 I Disagree (with comment about overbuilding) SF is underbuilt and SSF is very underbuilt, all residential lands should be mixed-use to create more walkable neighborhoods.

Our Place 5 60 No change recommended. No change
21 More mixed-use housing and commercial zoning so that one can buy some coffee or ice cream by the park.

Our Place 5 60 The General Plan Land Use Designations increase the amount of high-density and mixed use area throughout the city. No change recommended.

No change
22 Philharmonic hall, theater, cinema, jazz club, art museum. Our Place 5 60 Goal LU-1 calls for the complete, mixed use neighborhoods with access to a mix of services and amenities. No change recommended.

No change
23 Less housing development, we are very crowded. Our Place 5 60 No change recommended. No change 3 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
24 More density, especially medium and high density. No more single family zoning, 5-plexes.

Our Place 5 60 The General Plan Land Use Designations increase the amount of higher-density residential and mixed-use areas throughout the city. No change recommended.

No change
25 More housing, more mixed use. Our Place 5 60 The General Plan Land Use Designations increase the amount of high-density and mixed use area throughout the city. No change recommended.

No change
26 Consider increasing density near the BART station Our Place 5 60 From the 1999 General Plan, the Land Use Designations adjacent to the South San Francisco BART Station proposed in this General Plan have changed, allowing increased densities along El Camino Real and Mission Road. No change is recommended.

No change
27 Will El Camino retain zoning height? Our Place 5 60 The El Camino Real area plan includes an allowance for height up to 160' and with the General Plan, the density will remain the same but height would be limited to 85' in the area, consistent with Downtown. No change is recommended.

No change
28 Developing the mountain, these monstrosities, these buildings that really don’t fit here.

Our Place 5 60 The existing parcels adjacent to San Bruno Mountain are designated as Low Density Residential, Open Space, and
Public. The General Plan does not assume land use change here. No change recommended.

No change
29 Proposed mobility network updates not included on General Plan Land Use Map Our Place 5 61 Add Proposed Mobility Network Improvements to map Make change 30 The parcels west of Highway 101 with the East of 101 designation are incorrectly designated
Our Place 5 61 Correct parcel designations to High Density Mixed Use Make change 31 "Linden Neighborhood Center" should be used rather than "Lindenville Neighborhood Center"
Our Place 5 61 Change name: "Linden Neighborhood Center" Make change 4 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
32 We submit this comment in reference to the Draft General Plan and Draft Zoning Text that the Planning Commission is recommending City Council to adopt. We’ve been the property owners of 701 Airport Blvd since the early 70’s. Over the last 50 years, we’ve been privileged to be part of South San Francisco’s evolution into one of the most importantBioTech Centers in the world. We believe in the future of South San Francisco and look forward to another 50 years of positive growth and development. When the City introduced the Downtown Station Plan in 2015, we were encouraged to see a conscious effort promoting intermodal transit, most notably the expansion of the Caltrain station. The studies recognized the Airport Blvd corridor was ripe for increased density, hopefully promoting new and affordable residential development, amenity rich lodging, and first-class businesses. In 2017 we began to explore a redevelopment for our site, only to find that the proposed zoning for Airport between California and Armour did not follow the findings in the Downtown Station Plan. After much discussion with City Staff to try and provide the highest and best use proposal, we considered pursuing an independent GPA/ZTA to achieve the density needed along this stretch of Airport Blvd. Roughly a year later, it was mutually agreed that we should pause our efforts as the city undertook its process for a New General Plan, one that would hopefully afford the appropriate amount of density to encourage redevelopment.

Our Place 5 63 During public engagement after the release of the Preferred Land Use Alternative, the downtown community expressed concern with increased density further north of the existing core in the Downtown Station Area Specific Plan. Based on this feedback, the land use designation in the Public Draft General Plan for the Airport Blvd corridor north of California Ave was changed from Medium Density Mixed Use to Low Density Mixed Use to be more in keeping with adjacent
residential densities to the west.

No change
5 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
32 cont.

While we’ve observed and provided past commentary to see what the New General Plan and Zoning would allow, we’ve reflected on the best use for our site. Our parcel, as well as our neighbors on Airport Blvd are uniquely positioned with amenity rich sites given their proximity to downtown, transit, and pedestrian linkages. These attributes make them prime sites for Medium Density Housing. We’ve also become acutely aware of the dire need for more housing not only to help the city meet their RHNA goals, but also to address the city’s current and future growth. For these reasons, we’ve chosen to pivot our original proposal to a residential project. We recognize the draft zoning presented today affords the site more density than previously existed – but its our opinion that it’s a very conservative increase and still short of the density in the Downtown Station from 2015. With limitations of 60du/ac and a max FAR of 2.5, we don’t believe that these parcels will realize their full potential or encourage property owners to consider redevelopment. In a previous preferred land-use alternative, this block of Airport was contemplated as Medium-Density Mixed Use which provided for up to 120du/ac and max FAR of 3.5 with community benefit. We believe this additional density would promote higher quality residential developments with affordable components, and further, help extend the edge condition separating 101 from the historic residential neighborhoods. With the proposed limitations on density, entitlement challenges, and the increased costs of construction, we worry that these prime blocks of Airport Blvd, all within walking distance of Caltrain and downtown businesses, will languish.

No change
32 cont.

We would welcome a discussion with Planning and City Staff to understand the pivot from Medium-Density Mixed Use to Low-Density Mixed Use, and further, discuss how to maximize and incentivize the development of responsible, highquality, affordable housing and further support the City’s efforts to meet their RHNA goals. We close our comments by showing the existing elevations along Airport Blvd looking back towards Grand Ave. In the distance you see new, highquality development, and in the foreground you see many single and double story buildings – many of which have been long neglected. The dichotomy paints a jarring picture. We would really like to be the catalyst that encourages everyone around us to beautify and improve this stretch of Airport. Greater density, supported by zoning that promotes residential development will be a key component to not only our success, but the success of our neighbors as well. Thank you for your time this evening and we look forward to further conversation and collaboration Our Place 5 63 During public engagement after the release of the Preferred Land Use Alternative, the downtown community expressed concern with increased density further north of the existing core in the Downtown Station Area Specific Plan. Based on this feedback, the land use designation in the Public Draft General Plan for the Airport Blvd corridor north of California Ave was changed from Medium Density Mixed Use to Low Density Mixed Use to be more in keeping with adjacent residential densities to the west.

No change
6 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
33 Desire to preserve industrial uses. Does that mean R&D use will be precluded from the gray zones in the future?
Our Place 5 63 The updated Zoning Code allows Research and Development uses, including biotechnical, with a conditional use permit anda maximum floor area ratio of 0.5 in the Mixed Industrial zoning districts. No change is recommended.

No change
34 Policy enforcement - if I am in zoning area, and a use is grandfathered, but now mixed-use that doesn't’ allow life sciences, how long can life sciences stay in operation?
Our Place 5 63 Zoning Code Section 20.320 Nonconforming Uses, Structures, and Lots permits continuation of uses and continued occupancy and maintenance of structures that were legally established but do not comply with all of the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan. No change recommended.

No change
35 "Linden Neighborhood Center" should be used rather than "Lindenville Neighborhood Center"
Our Place 5 64 Change name: "Linden Neighborhood Center" Make change 36 The description for Mixed Industrial High in the 2nd column is missing an "of" in "wide range uses"
Our Place 5 65 Revise text: "wide range of uses" Make change 37 Change the minimium density for East of 101 Transit Core from 2.0 to 1.0 . Our Place 5 65 The minimum FAR within the East of 101 Transit Core (ETC) land use designation is being reduced from 2.0 to 1.0 to be consistent with proposed Zoning Ordinance Chapter 20.395 Community Benefits Program, which is being established to increase the value of private property by granting additional development capacity in exchange for community benefits. Projects within the ETC designation would continue to be able to develop up to a maximum 8.0 FAR subject to the requirements of the Community Benefits Program regulations.Revised text. "Transit-oriented community with a walkable street pattern and a vibrant mix of high-density multifamily and employment uses with supportive retail, services, and amenities (minimum FAR from 2.0 1.0 up to 8.0 with community benefits; maximum residential densities up to 120 du/ac to 200 du/ac).

Make change
38 There isn't a picture for Industrial Transition Zone LU designation Our Place 5 65 Add picture of Industrial Transition Zone Make change39 Also, residential growth useful for supporting businesses, esp. if residents are paying affordable housing prices
Our Place 5 67 The General Plan and Environmental Impact Report study up to 14,000 new housing units in the City. No change recommended.

No change
7 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
40 If you continue to develop, you need to think about the future and the children Our Place 5 67 No change recommended. No change41 More walkable pavements and safe police-patrolled areas for residents to walk rather than drive from one place to another.

Our Place 5 69 The General Plan addresses creating safe, walkable connections in Goal LU-1 and Policy LU-8.3. No change needed.

No change
42 Strive towards affordable housing; "Over Populations"= build more housing; Survey work/ congregated to reach community goals.

Our Place 5 69 No change recommended. No change
43 I want to know if the City is taking illegal immigrants from the southern border; over 2 million people came over since Biden took office, where are you planning to place them? You need to be transparent and get consent form the current residents before you do such a thing.

Our Place 5 69 No change recommended. No change
44 Is there an urban growth boundary? Our Place 5 69 The City does not have an urban growth boundary. No change recommended.

No change
45 Aligned with the goals for Oyster Point and the OPMVP:

The policy framework emphasizes equitable transit-oriented communities near transit centers and to develop strong pedestrian, shuttle and bicycle connections to and/from transit. Establish safe and convenient road crossings. The SSF ferry terminal is considered a mobility hub.

Our Place 5 69 No change recommended. No change
46 Mixed-use vibrant walkable neighborhoods are A+++ Our Place 5 69 The General Plan encourages the development of complete, mixed-use neighborhoods in Goal LU-1. No change recommended.

No change
47 Stop building these high-rises that no one can afford, plus it takes the beauty of SSF away.

Our Place 5 70 No change recommended. No change
8 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
48 Is there a vision to create a housing community theme as" continuum of care" so that "retired" SSF residents can age in such a community without having to relocate? Thank you! Our Place 5 70 Goal LU-3 contains policies to facilitate aging in place and multi-generational housing. Recommend adding the following age-friendly policies: LU-3.10: Existing home retrofit for age-friendly design.

Make change
49 More housing in residential areas, don't put it all in industrial zones. Our Place 5 70 The General Plan addresses the creation of housing throughout the city in Goal LU-3 and Goal LU-4. No change recommended.

No change
50 Enough of the pricey apartment rentals. Build homes for the low income families. Our Place 5 70 Goal LU-3 supports the creation of more low income, affordable, and diverse housing options. No change recommended.

No change
51 Improve the parks. Repair the streets. Make housing accessible. Please, more affordable housing for all. We need affordable homes and rental units.

Our Place 5 70 Goals MOB-1 and PR-7 address the need to improve parks and repair existing streets. Goal LU-3 supports the creation of more low income, affordable, and diverse housing options. No change recommended.

No change
52 Encourage whole life cycle living. Live through all stages here. Our Place 5 70 Goal LU-3 contains policies to facilitate aging in place and multi-generational housing. Recommend adding the following age-friendly policies: "LU-3.10: Existing home retrofit for age-friendly design.

Simplify the process to retrofit homes so people can stay in their homes safely and comfortably. LU-3-11: Affordable housing for older adults. Support affordable housing opportunities for older adults and their caregivers." Make change
53 Need to make sure there’s enough affordable housing in the Caltrain TOD and adjacent areas.

Our Place 5 70 Goal LU-2 creates equitable transit-oriented communities near transit centers, including SamTrans stops and Caltrain and BART stations, that mix high quality development, affordable housing, community services, and improved mobility options. No change recommended.

No change
9 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
54 Great need for affordable housing to keep families in place. Our Place 5 70 Goal LU-3 supports a diverse range of housing options that create equitable opportunity for people of all ages,
races/ethnicities, abilities, socio-economic status, genders, and family types to live in South San Francisco. No change recommended.

No change
55 Need for a diversity of homes, including micro-units Our Place 5 70 Revise policy: "Policy: LU-3.3 Encourage diversity of housing types and sizes. Encourage a variety of housing types to be developed at a range of densities to equitably serve varying household types, including, but not limited to, single-family attached and detached, accessory dwelling units, studio and microunits, multifamily apartments, townhomes, duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes, and condominiums."
Make change
56 Most new housing construction trends towards rental and not ownership, need for more affordable ownership units and housing longevity Our Place 5 70 Goals LU-3 and CHEJ-7 support a diverse range of housing options, including expanded ownership opportunities. No change recommended.

No change
57 According to inclusionary ideas, it will be important to include housing for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Our Place 5 71 Housing for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities is included in Goal LU-3. No change recommended.

No change
58 The following are not or not fully aligned with the goals for Oyster Point and the OPMVP:• The policy framework emphasizes the need for ‘vehicular infrastructure and improving circulation ‘to accommodate the unique demands for R&D workplaces’. It is not clear why R&D has a unique demand regarding vehicle access and this statement would benefit from a clarification or revision. (p.72) Our Place 5 72 Revise to "Policy LU-5.5: Improve connectivity for R&D workforces. Maintain vehicular infrastructure and improve circulation to accommodate the travel demand of existing and future workplaces."
Make change
10 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
59 Support for expansion of industrial, R&D and office East of 101. The Vision Statement for East of 101 forms a basis for the OPMVP: East of 101 is a wellconnected innovation district with a diverse mix of uses that serves as a model of sustainability, resilience, multimodal mobility, and economic opportunity.

Lifesciences are seen as a main driver to economic growth for the city. They can ‘grow through intensification rather than expanding its geographic area.’ This means that development should be focused north of East Grand Avenue to remain closer to transportation corridors. (Arup is supporting Genentech, alongside other partners including Kilroy Realty, BioMed, ARE, HCP in identifying mobility solutions and communicating the benefit of these solutions for Oyster Point through the development of the Oyster Point Mobility Vision Plan (OPMVP). This Plan will recommend targeted transportation investments including physical infrastructure, TDM, operational and funding strategies to create an Oyster Point that becomes the Bay Area’s most accessible hub of innovation. ) Our Place 5 72 Goal LU-5 aims to ensure South San Francisco remains a hub of innovation. No change recommended.

No change
60 For the industrial land use designations shown in grey on the General Plan land use map, would R&D uses be allowed?
Our Place 5 72 The updated Zoning Code allows Research and Development uses, including biotechnical, with a conditional use permit anda maximum floor area ratio of 0.5 in the Mixed Industrial zoning districts. No change is recommended.

No change
61 Per the General Plan's policy goals, namely LU 5.1 and LU 5.4, the stated goal is to help keep and foster Life Sciences and innovation in South San Francisco. The question I raised in the public comments Zoom session is: What is the city doing to attract and retain early stage Life Science companies in South San Francisco? Most of SSF's policy initiatives around Life Sciences seem to be designed for large companies and campuses. What of the smaller companies? Because we know that these smaller companies seed the growth of future large corporations here in SSF.

Early stage companies need smaller, cheaper space that has good infrastructure (power, water and access to public transport). Industrial condo spaces are the best suited for this sort of conversion from warehouse use to early stage life science use. Condo buildings are particularly useful because they have common amenities, have high power and are by nature smaller and are conducive for future expansion by taking on neighboring units for future growth.

Our Place 5 72 The updated Zoning Code allows Research and Development uses, including biotechnical, with a conditional use permit and a maximum floor area ratio of 0.5 in the Mixed Industrial zoning districts. This topic will be explored further in the Lindenville SpecificPlan. No change is recommended.

No change
11 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
61 cont.

Here is my recommendation: There are vast sections of Lindenville and East of 101 where there are such condo buildings. Regardless of future zoning some or all of these facilities would benefit from an expansion of use to accommodate life science companies (at least up to Bio Safety level 2 (BSL-2) and below; i.e. BSL2 equals low risk contamination, equivalent to the needs of a butcher or a grocer for example). That way landlords or the companies themselves can embark on cheap conversions to plan their entrepreneurial seed in South San Francisco and continue the cycle that Genentech started in the late 70's. Because companies that start here invariably grows here.Here is my fear. If policy priorities are driven solely to attract larger companies, then smaller startups companies are going to look elsewhere for space. We have seen this happen in San Carlos for instance, which has seen a several-fold increase in newer life science companies. Some of this may just be growth overtaking available space. But policy has a place in this if we are to retain talent and entrepreneurs here in SSF. Per the existing General Plan most of the mixed use industrial space accommodates Life Science use, especially in Lindenville. Please do not change that by restricting Life Science use in the new General Plan.

Our Place 5 72 The updated Zoning Code allows Research and Development uses, including biotechnical, with a conditional use permit anda maximum floor area ratio of 0.5 in the Mixed Industrial zoning districts. This topic will be explored further in the Lindenville Specific Plan. No change is recommended.

No change
62 The following are not or not fully aligned with the goals for Oyster Point and the OPMVP:• East of 101, industrial circulation needs to be maintained including vehicular infrastructure to accommodate the needs of industrial land uses including logistics, warehousing. This policy could support an increased focus on vehicular infrastructure improvements over TDM and worsen the already crumbling condition of the area’s roads from increased truck traffic unless there is a cohesive and ongoing plan to regularly repair and make necessary updates to streets. (p. 73).

Our Place 5 73 Amend policy: "Policy LU-6.8: Maintain industrial circulation in Lindenville and East of 101 while expanding active
transportation and TDM. As residential and mixed uses are added to Lindenville and East of 101, maintain vehicular infrastructure and improve circulation to accommodate complete street improvements along with vehicular transportation needs for industrial land uses, including logistics and warehousing land uses, supporting TDM and minimizing conflicts with new uses."
Make change
63 Ground floor retail in m-u locations and how to approve - In past wanted to encourage this type of development, but not always successful b/c not in the right places. Pay attention to where it’s located.

Our Place 5 73 The General Plan Land Use Designations increase the amount of mixed use area throughout the city. Goal LU-7 provides policies on focusing retail and services. No change recommended.

No change
12 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
64 If you build high rises, make first floor areas have shops and cafes and look appealing to be around.

Our Place 5 73 The General Plan Land Use Designations increase the amount of mixed use area throughout the city. Goal LU-7 provides policies on focusing retail and services. No change recommended.

No change
65 More public gathering spaces and benches. Our Place 5 74 Goal LU-8 calls for an increase in the number of plazas and gathering places in the city. No change recommended.

No change
66 Pay attention to the little public realm things that make it more pleasant to walk b/t places
Our Place 5 74 Goal LU-8 provides a policy framework for a network of attractive, pedestrian-oriented streets. No change recommended.

No change
67 The property at the corner of Junipero Serra and Westborough Boulevards is approximately 4 acres of vacant land residing in San Mateo County. The County has zoned this property as single family/residential, however, in the draft General Plan, South San Francisco has designated it as "open space." As South San Francisco workes to finalize their General Plan, we would like Council to consider an alternative designation for this parcel. We believe the highest and best use of this property is multi-family residential; specifically affordable housing. We repectively request that the Council and city staff update the new General Plan to allow for higher density, affordable housing at this location in the future. We understand there will be a great deal of work necessary to develop a plan that will meet the long term needs of the community, but are confident we can do do.

Our Place 6 60 The proposed Open Space land use designation is a continuation of the existing General Plan designation. Any proposed changes to the land use designation should be completed in tandem with a formal planning application to show the extent of the proposed redevelopment of the property. No change recommended.

No change
68 Housing near BART/SamTrans stops, our two high schools, agency service centers (YMCA, SMC Health), and Kaiser Hospital are examples of where strain on existing communities may be lessened. It would help promote public transit, alleviate am/pm traffic congestion at the two high schools, and being in walking distance to pharmacies, medical offices and service agencies.

Our Place 6 60 Goal LU-1 support the creation and enhancement of transit oriented communities that connect residents to daily services and facilities, such as schools and employment centers. The General Plan Land Use map supports the development of housing along transit corridors, such as El Camino Real which has connections to BART and SamTrans. No change recommended.

No change
13 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
69 What feedback have you heard from Westborough residents? What changes are proposed for the western neighborhoods? Our Place 6 98 The General Plan hosted meetings in Westborough and other neighborhoods throughout the City. Summaries of those engagement activities are included on the ShapeSSF.com website. Minimal land use changes are proposed in western neighborhoods, with the focus being on expanding parks and walking trails, allowing mixed use shopping centers, and increasing access to community services. No change recommended.

No change
70 This statement says Sunshine Gardens has access to parks which it currently does not. Please clarify if we mean access to school parks since we currently have a need for public park in this neighborhood. Thank you Our Place 6 103 The vision statement contains the characteristics the community hopes to have in the future. Goals SA-35 and PR-4 describe the policies and actions to improve park access in Sunshine Gardens. No change recommended.

No change
71 Grand Ave is a small and intimate space, doesn’t allow for accommodating huge growth. But it shouldn’t be forgotten. Like a mini Burlingame Avenue. Place to stroll and socialize. Make it a more comfortable, strolling intimate space. Has potential.

Our Place 6 107 No change is recommended. No change
72 There is a lack of gathering spaces in Downtown and there is a need to retrofit old buildings
Our Place 6 107 Goal SA-2 contains strategies to protect and reuse older buildings, and Goal PR-5 has strategies to expand gatherings spaces in Downtown.

No change
73 Really like the ECR concept of three primary nodes, w/improved connections as a pedestrian near and b/t the nodes.

Our Place 6 110 No change is recommended. No change
74 Ensure that housing East of 101 has sufficient infrastructure. Our Place 6 113 Revise policy: "Policy SA-16.4: Adequate public services and utilities in East of 101. Coordinate with the South San Francisco Unified School District, utilities, and public services, including the South San Francisco Fire Department and the South San Francisco Police Department, to ensure public services and utilities can accommodate growth impacts of new development in the East of 101 area."
Make change
75 The following are not or not fully aligned with the goals for Oyster Point and the OPMVP:• Also, Goal SA-18 includes a ‘well-connected and accessible district with highquality transit, walking and biking paths that seamlessly connect East of 101 with Downtown, Lindenville and the rest of the City. However, the listed actions largely represent new roadway connections and roadway projects with a clear lack of transit, bike and pedestrian projects in this list.

Our Place 6 115 The Major Transportation Investments table, p 185, includes a list of new transit, bicycle, and pedestrian investments in East of 101. No change recommended.

No change
14 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
76 Huge physical disconnect between East of 101 and DT still. Feels very dangerous.

And then the biotech area feels very dangerous. A physical blend of the Biotech and rest of the community would help, and if the biotech community did better with being welcoming to the community in general.

Our Place 6 116 Goal SA-18 fosters a well-connected and accessible district with high-quality transit and walking and biking paths that seamlessly connect East of 101 with Downtown, Lindenville and the rest of the City. No change is recommended.

No change
77 As Lindenville develops, make sure it’s comfortable and feels safe given the mix of uses and lack of pedestrian infrastructure right now.

Our Place 6 121 Goal SA-21 fosters safe, comfortable, and accessible pedestrian and bicycle facilities in Lindenville. No change is recommended.

No change
78 Focusing on the map - improvements - Dundee/Clay area. People tend to forget we are here, beneath Kaiser building. The only park that we have is Clay Park. We lease this park so there is no guarantee that we will be able to use long-term. There are no facilities, bathroom, clubhouse, parking etc. so our neighborhood is not being serviced. We are very concerned that the serra vista school has been established for medium density housing and no provision has been dedicated to City Park. That is inadequate insofar as a 22 acre site that could have 440 units, that is going to generate well over 1000 new residents… we don’t have a decent park in our area. Believe that there should be a minimum of 6 acre put aside for a potential park. We understand that the City has housing requirements, Housing Element, etc., but there needs to be a balance between housing, parks and recreation. Serra Vista has beautiful views (much like San Bruno) so would be ideal for a public space. Please designate for a potential park.

Our Place 6 126 Goals SA-38 and PR-4 describe the potential for medium density residential and accessible open space uses on the Serra Vista school site - ensuring park access growth with residential growth. No change recommended.

No change
79 Need a linear park to protect Dundee, and to potent houses beneath the School site (should it be sold to developer) from erosion and flooding. For example backside of Sign Hill has been left as open space to ensure there is no possibility of a land slide. About 20 years ago there was a huge flood on Dundee. Essential to have buffer between new development and existing housing.

Our Place 6 126 Amend policy: "Policy SA-38.1: Explore housing development and open space on Serra Vista school site. Work with the South San Francisco Unified School District to evaluate a medium-density housing development and a publicly accessible open space on the former Serra Vista school site. If the site redevelops, maintain a buffer between new development and existing homes to protect health and safety, preserve open space, and foster urban ecology." Make change
15 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
80 The Westborough neighborhood is disconnected from the rest of South San Francisco; and only safe by vehicle, even though regularly see pedestrians walking on Westborough Blvd, from Junipero Serra to Arroyo Drive, which does not currently support pedestrian walking or bicyling. It would be ideal to improve Westborough Blvd for safe traveling and simultaneously, connect neighborhoods and promote bicycling/walking.

Our Place 6 127 The Active South City Plan includes Class IV (bicycle paths) along Westborough Blvd from El Camino to the City limits. The Active South City Plan also calls for spot improvements at Gellert and Westborough to make the intersection safer for pedestrians and cyclists. General Plan MOB-5 calls for
enhanced access to the trail network throughout the city. No change recommended.

No change
81 Look at areas where the city could acquire property for housing development Our Place 7 136 Housing Element Program CRT-4.1 supports the City working with for-profit and nonprofit housing developers to acquire sites that are either vacant or developed with underutilized, blighted, and/or nonconforming uses for the development of affordable housing. As needed, the City will meet with developers to discuss and identify development opportunities and potential funding sources and work with residential and commercial brokers to identify opportunities. No change recommended.

No change
82 Type of housing, location, density, height of buildings, setbacks, parking requirements, etc. all have a trickle effect on residents and single family homes; and place a great strain on existing communities. We are grateful that Shape SSF provided an avenue to address issues of impacts on Old Town and appreciate comments and concerns being incorporated into the General Plan. There are still concerns as there is not enough information about concept of social housing and whether this implies both public housing and racial/income segregation. There is also not enough information on where very low and low income housing would be built and again, segregation in Old Town area is very concerning (separate issue than gentrification concerns). There exists a current public health issues in Old Town/Downtown area with apartment buildings not being properly maintained and service needs of residents not being met (proper size of trash/recycling containers), with a trickling effect on entire community. Please incorporate discussions of service needs of tenants/owners into housing approvals Our Place 7 136 The Housing Element's Sites Inventory and Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing analysis show the distribution of affordable housing units across the city and describe any specific concentrations of housing in lower resource or disadvantaged areas. The Housing Element also has policies associated with housing issues, including housing preservation and quality. No change recommended.

No change
83 A legend color doesn't match the chart color (Some college or Associate degree) Our Place 8 147 Update legend color to the chart color Make change 16 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
84 those areas in the gray and dark gray, if someone wants to do an incubator, they just need to find a complimentary use, in purple zones it’s more of a redevelopment effort; the landlords aren’t going to be inspecting to get high rates. Ford Blvd. 16000 warehouse, spent $8 million to renovate, ($3.50 square feet for office); we are encouraging folks to lease the whole space and then do own improvements. So with small mom and pops, link them with an architect/ designer so they can pay for their own improvements. Just a matter of how long going to lease
Our Place 8 155 No change recommended. No change
85 how to look at this from a policy perspective, converting economic to policy. S canal; and N canal, $3.75-4.75 a square foot, prices from a conversion, short leases, so takes certain kind of landlord to take risk. But if you start to see those prices inflate, the entire region will be priced out, and will move to retail and commercial, so in the next 2-7 years viable environment for young companies to hatch; and then down the line these companies will move south. These saplings will move to San Carlos and Emeryville if we don’t create the environment where they can grow here in SSF. Need to allow certain amount of flexibility. Having a diversity of uses between life sciences and pure industrial, that becomes a challenge.

Our Place 8 155 No change recommended. No change
86 General plan is phenomenal, very complimentary to the team, how accessible the City staff and team is; well rounded plan, market dynamics are going to dictate a lot of what happens; certain folks just can’t afford to move, but the plan does open opportunities for other uses to happen. We need quick answers so we can respond to owners and developers in real time, which makes City and all of us look like we are working in alignment together! Our Place 8 155 No change recommended. No change
87 History of use in South City - come full circle, where we are now with Life Sciences is incredible.

Our Place 8 155 No change recommended. No change
88 Stop increasing fees Our Place 8 155 No change recommended. No change89 Need more tax breaks for homeowners especially elderly or veterans. Our Place 8 155 No change recommended. No change90 Keep sewer fees low. Our Place 8 155 No change recommended. No change 91 Give residents a break on taxes, the City is getting lots of $. Our Place 8 155 No change recommended. No change 17 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
92 Aligned with the goals for Oyster Point and the OPMVP • The General Plan recognizes that traffic congestion is already a barrier to growth in Oyster Point and that this issue is already being addressed by the City in partnership with Genentech and other businesses.• South San Francisco is well positioned to support continued growth of life sciences as long as transportation capacity and land use is available. ‘Maintaining capacity for growth will become especially important as global investment in biotechnology has led to a boom in real estate development activity for biotechnology labs in competing locations throughout the region and the country.’
Our Place 8 155 No change recommended. No change
93 The Prosperous Economy key ideas sound like good policies and ideas Our Place 8 155 No change recommended. No change 94 May need to get more individuals over to East of 101 to help support retail/restaurant/services businesses at Oyster Point; maybe there’s a role for improving visibility. Though these spaces primarily serve as an amenity for the life science employees.

Our Place 8 155 No change recommended. No change
95 If Oyster Point was fully occupied with on-site workers, then the retail tenants would perform well. Foot traffic is limited for now because of the pandemic’s effects, so this may be a short-term issue more than a long-term one.

Our Place 8 155 No change recommended. No change
96 East of 101 life science employers and employees would be attracted by the placement of retail near the business locations. Most amenities are closed up within individual projects right now, and inaccessible to public.

Our Place 8 155 Goals PE-1 and LU-1 aims to create new East of 101 mixed use neighborhoods that would connect public services, transit, amenities, recreational facilities to employment centers. No change recommended.

No change
97 Need for stronger business partnership, stronger connection with Chamber of Commerce and consideration of a Downtown Business Improvement District.

Our Place 8 156 PE-3 contains policies and actions to support and collaborate with the business community. No change recommended.

No change
98 Are we thinking about including our disabled folks? Our Place 8 157 Revise policy: "Policy PE-6.1: Collaborate on workforce development programs. Work with job training agencies and local employers and unions to implement programs to improve workforce skills, including targeting of resources to residents of color, residents with disabilities, and low-income residents."
Make change
18 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
99 Will this prosperity include individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities, are they included?
Our Place 8 157 Revise policy: "Policy PE-6.1: Collaborate on workforce development programs. Work with job training agencies and local employers and unions to implement programs to improve workforce skills, including targeting of resources to residents of color, residents with disabilities, and low-income residents."
Make change
100 We need to diversify our shopping. Where does one find clothing, children's toys, books in our City? We need to get Barnes & Noble here.

Our Place 8 157 Goal PE-5 ensures the long-term success of South San Francisco’s retail districts and shopping centers. No change recommended.

No change
101 Will the City create job opportunities for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities?
Our Place 8 157 Revise policy: "Policy PE-6.1: Collaborate on workforce development programs. Work with job training agencies and local employers and unions to implement programs to improve workforce skills, including targeting of resources to residents of color, residents with disabilities, and low-income residents." Make change
102 It’s difficult to tenant retail spaces in Oyster Point. What is the City’s role in supporting retail?
Our Place 8 157 Goal PE-5 ensures the long-term success of South San Francisco’s retail districts and shopping centers. No change recommended.

No change
103 Downtown’s retail, restaurants, services are useful for the East of 101 life science employers and employees.

Our Place 8 157 Goal PE-5 ensures the long-term success of South San Francisco’s retail districts and shopping centers, including Downtown. No change recommended.

No change
104 Can the City be more independent in setting its own policy at the local level independent from the state? The essential vs. non-essential business division set by the bureaucrats in Sacramento have killed some local businesses that I patronized in the past. any lessons learned and plans to do better for all? Our Place 8 158 Goals PE-3 and PE-7 include strategies to maintain a healthy business climate and support local entrepreneurs. No change recommended.

No change
105 Replace one fo the two East of 101 photos with the Linden Ave Caltrain Crossing photo.

Our Place 9 175 Replace photo Make change
106 Update the caption under the photo on page 174. Says San Bruno Mountain currently
Our Place 9 175 Update caption Make change
107 Update priority layors map Our Place 9 177 Update map Make change 19 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
108 The following are not or not fully aligned with the goals for Oyster Point and the OPMVP:• Industrial Streets are described together with Neighborhood Streets. However, a speed limit is only defined for Neighborhood Streets (15 – 25 mph). It is suggested that a similar speed limit is defined for Industrial Streets to have a consistent and generally lower speed limit across the entire East of 101 area.

Our Place 9 180 Revise text: "Industrial streets are like neighborhood streets but are designed to serve the needs of manufacturing and goods movement businesses that need access by larger and heavier vehicles. Common vehicles often include vans, single unit trucks, and smaller semi-trucks. Industrial streets may have two vehicle lanes, and occasionally wider lane widths to accommodate larger vehicles. Industrial streets should have speed limits no greater than 25 mph."
Make change
109 Make upper Hillside Blvd. bicycle friendly. It's still too dangerous. Our Place 9 181 The Active South City Plan calls for Class II bike lanes on Hillside Blvd. No change recommended.

No change
110 Update map with new, existing transit data Our Place 9 182 Update map with new existing transit data Make change111 Heavy Truck Traffic via Hillside and Sister Cities Blvd. Our Place 9 183 Hillside/Sister Cities Blvd. is identified as a truck route. Refer to the Active South City Plan for specific recommendations on Hillside / Sister Cities Blvd. No change recommended.

No change
112 Arts & Cultural district: Pedestrian Bridge across the creek. Our Place 9 184 The Mobility and Access Element includes proposed new streets and major transportation investments, including new crossings of Colma Creek. No change recommended.

No change
113 Better public transit, pedestrian and bike connections east of 101 Downtown. Our Place 9 184 The Major Transportation Investments includes a list of new transit, bicycle, and pedestrian investments connecting East of 101, Downtown, and Lindenville. No change recommended.

No change
114 Ensure we have the streets and mobility infrastructure to support the City’s growth - Esp. as the city starts growing toward Lindenville Our Place 9 184 The Major Investments include a series of new street and major transportation investments to support future growth, complementing the Active South City Plan. No change recommended.

No change
115 East of 101 has too few ways to get in and out. Traffic can back up very easily even w/slight problems, and this will get worse as people come back to offices. Not addressed well enough.

Our Place 9 184 The Major Investments include a series of new street and major transportation investments to support future growth, complementing the Active South City Plan. No change recommended.

No change
116 Could you provide an overview of the transportation plans East of 101 to accommodate the planned increase in density?
Our Place 9 184 The Major Investments include a series of new street and major transportation investments to support future growth, complementing the Active South City Plan. No change recommended.

No change
20 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
117 What are the proposed roadways over the water and what’s the timeline for those?
Our Place 9 184 The Major Investments include a series of new street and major transportation investments to support future growth, complementing the Active South City Plan. No change recommended.

No change
118 How would transit-only lanes be added on Oyster Point Boulevard and East Grand Avenue? Would you be widening the road?
Our Place 9 184 The Major Investments include a series of new street and major transportation investments to support future growth, complementing the Active South City Plan, with recommendations for Oyster Point Blvd. and East Grand Ave. No change recommended.

No change
119 Replace with photo of new Caltrain station Our Place 9 184 Replace photo Make change 120 Rows 10 and 11 are duplicated Our Place 9 186 Remove Row 11; renumber other improvements Make change121 Replace photos with best practice infrastructure photos Our Place 9 190 Replace photo Make change 122 Currently the street sections are put in various scales, although there are numeric annotations, this may still cause confusion. I suggest we have their graphic sizes relative to their actual scale.

Our Place 9 192 Adjust the scale of the graphics Make change 123 Add bike bridge photo Our Place 9 194 Add additional photo Make change124 Some laws that prohibit drivers from parking right by the intersections (common issue at Grand and Willow).

Our Place 9 196 Goal MOB-3 proactively manages parking. No change recommended.

No change
125 Please do something about double parking on Grand Ave. Our Place 9 196 No change recommended. No change126 Need’s be demand for transit options, low ridership numbers - demand for people to travel to certain locations (Westborough Square)?
Our Place 9 196 No change recommended. No change
127 OPB off ramps need more signage Our Place 9 196 No change recommended. No change 128 OPB and Airport and Sister Cities lanes are confusing Our Place 9 196 No change recommended. No change 21 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
129 Remove/ relocate power poles so that they are not in the middle of sidewalks. Our Place 9 196 Amend policy: "Policy LU-8.3: Improve pedestrian connections and sidewalks. Improve pedestrian connections and sidewalk infrastructure across the city, especially between residential and commercial areas, keeping in mind mobility needs of children, families, seniors, and people with disabilities. Ensure sidewalks are free and clear of
obstructions, including power poles, meters, and other utilities." Make change
130 Don’t forget that many residents can’t bike or walk to their jobs b/c of different hours, multiple jobs, need to carry equipment. Need to balance.

Our Place 9 196 No change recommended. No change
131 We asked the cops to come and see how fast the cars are coming and make traffic recommendations, like speedbumps, but we haven’t seen anything.

Our Place 9 196 No change recommended No change
132 Shift to reduce single occupancy vehicles, will you prohibit parking lifts? How will parking ratios be affected?
Our Place 9 197 Parking lifts will not be prohibited. The updated Zoning Code includes revised parking ratios. MOB-3 addressed parking. No change is recommended.

No change
133 Considered parking for conversion from Industrial to CGMP environment - same ratio? Current Good Manufacturing Practice - life science - therapeutic manufacturing for local distribution. High tech manufacturing environment.

Our Place 9 197 The updated Zoning Code includes revised parking ratios.

MOB-3 addressed parking. No change is recommended.

No change
134 Stop double parking on Grand. Our Place 9 197 Goal MOB-3 contains strategies to manage traffic and parking issues. No change recommended.

No change
135 The following are not or not fully aligned with the goals for Oyster Point and the OPMVP:• Almost all roads within Oyster Point are dedicated truck roads which means these can be designed for larger vehicles (radii, lane configurations). This includes DNA Way and Gull Drive, streets that should have an active mobility and transit focus. (p. 183) We feel any proposed truck route network in Oyster Point should be subject to a more detailed review and study to limit truck movements to main access/egress corridors upon roads with engineered roadbeds designed to accommodate heavy trucks.

Our Place 9 197 Add policy: "MOB-2.3: Interaction between truck routes and bicycle / pedestrian priority streets. When streets are designated as a truck route and a priority street for bicyclists and pedestrian (either in the General Plan or Active South CityPlan), complete a more detailed review and study to prioritize intersections and street design for active mobility and limit truck movements to the designated truck routes." Make change
22 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
136 Aligned with the goals for Oyster Point and the OPMVP • The plan supports safe travel, considers Caltrain, BART and the ferry terminal as critical hubs, alternative modes of transport that contribute to air quality and reduce the need to devote additional land to transportation uses. • SamTrans and BART ridership should be doubled, ferry ridership increased fourfold and Caltrain achieve a 10-time increase in ridership by 2040. To support this level of growth station and first/last mile improvements are required in particular East of 101. (The OPMVP Project Team notes that ridership projections need to be validated as realistic in order for this and future plans to be workable and useful.)• ‘By building a more multimodal transportation network, South San Francisco can achieve a safe, multimodal, sustainable, livable, and connected city.’ • The plan emphasizes a need for improving East-West connections for transit and active transportation.• For safety improvements, areas within ½ mile of Caltrain, BART or the ferry are prioritized areas for pedestrian and bicycle safety. Complete Streets opportunities are also supported. In Oyster Point Gateway Blvd and Oyster Point Blvd are identified as Complete Streets opportunities. • Neighborhood Streets should have a speed limit of 15 – 25 mph.

Our Place 9 197 No change recommended No change
23 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
137 Aligned with the goals for Oyster Point and the OPMVP • Neighborhood Streets should have a speed limit of 15 – 25 mph. • The plan supports transit signal priority, in-lane bus stops and bus only lanes.

Bus lane projects are proposed for Oyster Point Boulevard and East Grand Avenue. ‘Without bus lanes, bus and shuttle services will experience longer travel times and delays as the corridor develops, resulting in a negative feedback loop that increases operating costs while reducing the usefulness of these services. Bus lanes may be accommodated on Oyster Point Boulevard between US-101 and Gull Drive through a combination of restriping, repurposing medians and turn lanes, and some widening along portions of the corridor (particularly east of Veterans Boulevard where the right-of-way narrows to roughly 85 feet). Like Oyster Point Boulevard, East Grand Avenue will serve as a key gateway to jobs in the East of 101 Area as well as the primary connection to Caltrain. In order to maximize the corridor’s person throughput, a combination of bus lanes, expanded sidewalks, and trail gap closures are needed. Bus lanes would span most of the corridor from the Caltrain station to Haskins Way, including a new westbound bus ramp directly connecting East Grand Avenue to Poletti Way and the Caltrain station. Widened sidewalks and an expanded trail along the north side of East Grand Avenue would serve pedestrians and bicyclists traveling between Caltrain/Downtown and the East of 101 Area.’• Employers TDM programs (first/last mile) should support increased regional transit services.

Our Place 9 197 No change recommended No change
138 GP should encourage complete streets and connecting different modes of transportation, and there should be sound mitigation strategies.

Our Place 9 197 The Mobility Element identifies Complete Street locations (Figure 14) and Goal MOB-2 includes policies to incorporate complete street improvements in all roadway and
development projects. No change recommended.

No change
139 Where is the parking? Our Place 9 197 The General Plan addresses parking in MOB-3. No change recommended.

No change
140 The increased housing around downtown combined with far less parking has stopped SSF residents from shopping and eating in downtown/ Grand Ave.

Our Place 9 197 Goal MOB-3 includes strategies to manage parking issues and the impacts on Downtown. No change recommended.

No change
24 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
141 Improve walk experience on airport Our Place 9 197 Goal MOB-2 emphasizes the need for street improvements in all roadway and development projects that improve the
pedestrian experience and safety. Refer to the Active South City Plan for specific recommendations on Airport Blvd. No change recommended.

No change
142 Protected bike lanes no more parking requirements. Municipal parking permits! Our Place 9 197 Goals MOB-2 and MOB-5 emphasizes the need for street improvements in all roadway projects to improve bicyclist experience and safety. Refer to the Active South City Plan for specific recommendations. Parking is addressed in the Zoning Code update. No change recommended.

No change
143 Install poles with digital schedule screen with live updates at every bus stop. Our Place 9 197 Goal MOB-2 provides low-cost, low-impact travel options and to focus on moving people rather than cars, with implementation actions to implement transit improvements.

No change recommended.

No change
144 If you build bike infrastructure, go all-in. Build protected bike lanes and bike highways
Our Place 9 197 Goal MOB-2 supports the implementation of the Active South City Plan. No change recommended.

No change
145 The shuttle is really important in the community. The disadvantaged communities trust the shuttle service, know it, feel comfortable. Big part of the community.

Our Place 9 197 Goal MOB-2 supports the continued expansion of the free South City Shuttle. No change recommended.

No change
146 Shuttle needs some improvements still. Did improve stops in old town, but signage could still be better in general.

Our Place 9 197 Goal MOB-2 supports the continued expansion of the free South City Shuttle. No change recommended.

No change
147 Will the City be coordinating between private developers and transit agencies? Our Place 9 198 The City does not coordinate between private developers and transit agencies. The City does coordinate with transit agencies (see MOB-4). No change is recommended.

No change
148 Need to improved transit coordination between different providers, and City could look at route planning and any gaps in coverage
Our Place 9 198 Goal MOB-4 includes actions to expand and coordinate transit connections, including first/last mile connections. No change recommended.

No change
149 Signalize stop-controlled intersections on Hillside Our Place 9 198 Goal MOB-5 in the General Plan contains strategies to improve intersections throughout the city. Refer to the Active South City Plan for specific intersection recommendations. No change recommended.

No change
150 Bike racks, good bike racks Our Place 9 198 Policy MOB-5.1 calls for an expansion of low-stress bike network and infrastructure, such as bike racks. No change recommended.

No change
25 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
151 Ped/walking crossing at OPB and sister cities Our Place 9 198 Goal MOB-5 in the General Plan contains strategies to improve pedestrian crossings throughout the city. Refer to the Active South City Plan for specific intersection recommendations. No change recommended.

No change
152 Longer ped countdown times Our Place 9 198 Goal MOB-5 in the General Plan contains strategies to improve pedestrian crossings throughout the city. No change recommended.

No change
153 Bicycle signals at major intersections Our Place 9 198 Goal MOB-5 strives promote active transportation options for people of all ages, abilities, and backgrounds and create neighborhoods with safe, low-stress bicyclist networks, such as adding bicycle signals at specific intersections. No change recommended.

No change
154 Have free shuttle service to new Caltrain Station Our Place 9 198 Goals MOB-2 and MOB-4 and its actions aim to continue collaboration with BART and Caltrain to expand first/last mile transit access in the city. No change recommended.

No change
155 More connectivity to BART and Caltrain Our Place 9 198 Goals MOB-2 and MOB-4 and its actions aim to continue collaboration with BART and Caltrain to expand first/last mile transit access in the city. No change recommended.

No change
156 Emergency access concerns along Hillside Our Place 9 198 No change recommended. No change157 4 way stops on Linden Our Place 9 198 Goal MOB-2 emphasizes the need for street improvements in all streets to improve the pedestrian experience and safety.

Refer to the Active South City Plan for specific recommendations on Linden Ave. No change recommended.

No change
158 Safe Caltrain Station - Ferry service for residents and weekends Our Place 9 198 Goals MOB-2 and MOB-4 and its actions aim to continue collaboration with the transit agencies to expand first/last mile transit access in the city. No change recommended.

No change
159 Easier to drive to BART from west of ECR than take the bus Our Place 9 198 Goals MOB-2 and MOB-4 and its actions aim to continue collaboration with BART and other transit agencies to expand first/last mile transit access in the city. No change recommended.

No change
26 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
160 Bus stops often don't have any booth roof protecting them from the rain. Our Place 9 198 Goal MOB-2 provides low-cost, low-impact travel options and to focus on moving people rather than cars, with implementation actions to implement transit improvements.

No change recommended.

No change
161 Ensure safe bike infrastructure especially regarding trees on streets; put trees between the cars and bike lanes. +1
Our Place 9 198 The Active South City Plan identifies specific bicycle and pedestrian improvements, including their dimensions and elements. Goal MOB-5 reduces barriers to physical activity and improve comfort with the city’s pedestrian and bicycle networks. No change recommended.

No change
162 DT area really impacted by dvpt already. Lack of parking. Inability to even park to pick up food hurts businesses in DT.-Ppl in DT struggle to afford purchases; even new residents are paying $4k -Haven’t really addressed how we’ll achieve the goals we’ve set for DT Our Place 9 198 Goal MOB-3 proactively manages parking. No change recommended.

No change
163 Are there plans for increased ferry service? Our Place 9 198 Goal MOB-4 and its actions aim to continue collaboration with Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) to expand ferry service and other agencies to improve first/last mile access. No change recommended.

No change
164 Free City Wi-Fi by bus stops. Our Place 9 199 No change recommended. No change165 Ability to pay by credit/ debit card on the bus and cash machine that gives change.

Our Place 9 199 The City runs the free South City Shuttle. It does not have authority over payment options for other transit agencies. No change recommended.

No change
166 Idea of having open streets at times so people could get more comfortable with biking, walking, etc.

Our Place 9 199 Add action: "Action MOB-2.1.6: Pilot an open streets program. Create and pilot a car-free, open streets program." Priority: Medium; Responsibility: Engineering Division (PW).

Make change
167 Suggestion for Vision Zero and having less cars on the street Our Place 9 199 Action MOB-1.1.1 calls for the development of a Vision Zero Action Plan. No change recommended.

No change
168 "C" is bolded. Our Place 9 200 Revise: "Action MOB-2.2.1: Implement Safe Routes to Schools program. Collaborate with the South San Francisco Unified School District to implement Safe Routes to Schools programs and improvements, with an emphasis on schools serving equity priority communities." Make change
27 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
169 Action MOB-2.2.2 should be medium priority Our Place 9 200 Revise Action MOB-2.2.2 priority from "High" to "Medium" Make change 170 Both actions under Policy MOB-3.2 should be responsibility of Planning & Engineering
Our Place 9 200 Revise Action MOB-3.2.1 and MOB-3.2.2 primary responsibility from "Engineering Division (PW)" to ""Engineering Division (PW) and Planning Division (ECD)" Make change
171 Sam Trans- More routes into neighborhoods Our Place 9 201 Goal MOB-4 and its actions aim to continue collaboration with SamTrans to expand transit access in the city. No change recommended.

No change
172 ADA compliant bus stops Our Place 9 201 Goal MOB-2 and its actions address ADA accessibility issues within the multimodal network. No change recommended.

No change
173 Municipal e-bike rebates Our Place 9 201 Goal MOB-2 embraces innovations, including for micromobility such as e-bikes and scooters, and seeks to incorporate into projects. The City does not have a rebate program for e-bikes. No change recommended.

No change
174 For Policy MOB 4.1, the priority and responsibility are as follows:

4.1.1: High/Planning
Our Place 9 201 Revise Action MOB-4.1.1 priority from " " to "High" and primary responsibility from " " to "Planning Division (ECD)" Make change
175 For Policy MOB 4.1, the priority and responsibility are as follows:

4.1.2: High/City Manager
Our Place 9 201 Revise Action MOB-4.1.2 priority from " " to "High" and primary responsibility from " " to "City Manager (CM)"
Make change
176 For Policy MOB 4.1, the priority and responsibility are as follows:

4.1.3: Medium/City Manager
Our Place 9 201 Revise Action MOB-4.1.3 priority from " " to "Medium" and primary responsibility from " " to "City Manager (CM)"
Make change
177 For Policy MOB 4.1, the priority and responsibility are as follows:

4.1.4: High/Planning
Our Place 9 201 Revise Action MOB-4.1.4 priority from " " to "High" and primary responsibility from " " to "Planning Division (ECD)" Make change
178 For Action MOB 5.1.1 the responsible part should be Planning and Engineering Our Place 9 201 Revise Action MOB-5.1.1 primary responsibility from "Capital Projects (CM)" to "Engineering Division (PW) and Planning Division (ECD)" Make change
179 For Action MOB 5.1.3, is this really the right responsible part? Does Parks and Rec maintain the city's bike parking?
Our Place 9 201 Revise Action MOB-5.1.3 primary responsibility from "Parks Division (P&R)" to "Engineering Division (PW)"
Make change
28 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
180 The following are not or not fully aligned with the goals for Oyster Point and the OPMVP:• The General Plan includes performance metrics for mode split. These are assumed to be citywide and hence it would be good to include a note that shares could or will need to differ in specific areas. For example, a 43% drive alone mode share could prove to be too high for Oyster Point. At the same time, a higher bike commute share than 1% and also transit shared exceeding 4% should be targeted.

Our Place 9 203 Add text: "Mode split targets are citywide. Specific planning sub-areas, like East of 101, may have different targets to meetspecific planning objectives." Make change
181 Partner with a company that has e-bikes. Promote bike & ped infrastructure - Westborough Blvd. needs improvement
Our Place 9 Goal MOB-2 embraces innovations, including for micromobility such as e-bikes and scooters, and seeks to incorporate into projects. No change recommended.

No change
182 Can we change the wording on the first line to … “promotes public health, physical activity, and use of active transportation”. Exercise has a different connotation than physical activity. Also, listing health first subtly prioritizes public health as the overarching primary goal.

Our Place 10 206 Revise: "South San Francisco has a system of well-connected parks, open spaces, trails, and recreational facilities that serves all residents, employees and visitors and promotes public health, physical activity, and use of active transportation."
Make change
183 Last line: To be honest, the term “people of color” can be interpreted differently by different people. While it can be a useful term, it can also have limitations. I believe the true intent of this goal may be more accurately by changing the phrase to “underserved” or “underrepresented”... or something similar.

Our Place 10 206 Revise: "The City increases enrichment and youth development opportunities and increases participation for underserved children in South San Francisco." Make change
184 Overall, for Chapter 10 I’d say we could probably find more outcomes based measures. What are the critical benefits, such as mental and physical health? Yes, this is mentioned elsewhere in the GP, but it ties specifically to Parks and Rec’s positive impacts on the community. The intro info on Chapter 10 could include info on long term outcomes for the common good - what we invest now reaps long-term benefits for the community, etc., and then tie performance outcome measures to this chapter. What about a measure regarding community education on mental and physical health? Our Place 10 208 Add text: "The Park and Recreation Department plays a fundamental role in creating healthy communities and enhancing our environments. Through parks and open space, recreational amenities, and services, the City supports good health for people of all ages, abilities, ages, ethnicities, and demographic backgrounds. These amenities and services can help to: • Reduce obesity and incidence of chronic disease;• Provide a connection to nature which improves mental health;• Increase access to healthy food options; and• Foster overall wellness and healthful habits." Make change
29 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
185 I specifically use “Park” not open space, because we are looking for amenities that allow recreational use.

Our Place 10 209 No change recommended No change
186 Please stop showing the parking lot in Sunshine Gardens as "park" space. Our Place 10 211 No Sunshine Gardens parks are shown on parking lots. No change187 “internal and private use” sounds a little excluding. P&R also offers free rentals for large community events for local non-profits and organizations with joint-use agreements.

Our Place 10 215 Revise text: "The Rentals Program manages internal and private use of the City’s community centers and picnic sites for meetings, parties, and other events."
Make change
188 Reference to CCMP in yellow section can be updated if CCMPT gets published before GP.

Our Place 10 215 Revise text: "A Child Care Master Plan was published in 2022." Make change 189 Old Town is the most disadvantaged community, with majority of residents comprised of families with multiple young children, compared to other neighborhoods. The needs of community have not been met & children suffer the consequences. Playground at Pine is huge asset & needs upgrade.

Our Place 10 217 Goal PR-7 aims to maintain parks and facilities to meet the needs of the community and Goal PR-5 aims to improve access to parks in Downtown/Old Town. No change recommended.

No change
190 Thank you for recognizing the park need for Sunshine Gardens Our Place 10 217 No change recommended. No change191 There is no access to the Centennial Trail from the Sunshine Gardens neighborhood, please provide access.

Our Place 10 218 The General Plan calls for the expansion of joint-use facilities from Centennial Way Trail to Hillside Boulevard and is included in Goals PR-4 and PR-6. Add joint-use facility to Figure 31.

Make change
192 Open lot on armour and airport Blvd. - possible development, playground, bike & skate park, BBQ areas, etc.

Our Place 10 218 Goal PR-2 strives to identify underutilized sites to improve and create innovative park types that meet the physical and social needs of all residents. No change recommended.

No change
193 1)Tear down Sunshine Garden School; 2) Rebuild on upper field; 3) Create a park of Sunshine Gardens neighborhood on former school site.

Our Place 10 218 Goals SA-35 and PR-4 include policies and actions associated with establishing shared use agreement between the City and SSFUSD. No change recommended.

No change
194 Request re: the printed map - please cross reference with the Parks and Rec.

Masterplan so the maps reflect future/planned parks and park improvements.

Our Place 10 219 Figure 31 builds on and updates the existing and potential park sites. No change recommended.

No change
195 Concern with school enrollment and capacity discussion in GP, notes the schools will be open to universal pre-k which should increase enrollment Our Place 10 220 This comment references the 1999 General Plan. No change recommended.

No change
196 comment on assumptions that the schools will close and City should acquire school property for parks. a committee member notes the school district would have other uses for school property if it were to close Our Place 10 220 This comment references the 1999 General Plan. No change recommended.

No change
30 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
197 If school district does not have use of property, City has right to acquire under the Naylor Act, and GP section would need to be reworded
Our Place 10 220 This comment and the Naylor Act references the 1999 General Plan. No change recommended.

No change
198 No astro turf, it's bad for the environment and too many injuries. Our Place 10 220 No change recommended. No change199 Keep sports fields dog-free. There's plenty of dog parks and other free spaces. Our Place 10 220 No change recommended. No change200 Goal PR1, Policy PR-1.7 Is there a way to go deeper with this policy to call out the need to identify and engage communities across boundaries, including marginalized populations and the silent unheard voices with a more focused intention. Right now the city tends to hear the voices of a few who are intended to represent the voices of those wider underserved groups. Sometimes the handful of those with the best of intentions to represent, are not fully aware and able to speak to all they may appear to represent. The onus is on us to meet those populations where they are and do the work to get the input to truly identify and understand the needs, and match those needs with the services (which is Policy PR-8).

Our Place 10 221 Goal ECS-1 aims to engage all residents, particularly the most marginalized, in City decision-making. PR-1 and PR-7 describe in more detail the application of that framework to Park and Recreation Department activities and services. No change recommended.

No change
201 More outdoor recreation opportunities, especially adult playgrounds and pools. Our Place 10 221 Goals PR-1 and PR-10 include policies to expand the City's recreational services and facilities so that people of all ages can enjoy them, including older adults. No change recommended.

No change
202 Would like to see more City resources going to support individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities - more public programs, more open space designed for this population. Full of Fun is an example, but we need more! Can the City hire experts who specialize in this need? Our Place 10 221 Goal PR-1 includes policies and actions to identify the needs of special needs and underserved populations, including individuals with intellectual and development disabilities, and match residents with facilities, amenities, and programs. No change recommended.

No change
203 Better parks for kids. Our Place 10 221 Goal PR-1 and PR-7 address the need for maintained parks that are accessible to children of all ages. No change recommended.

No change
204 Young adults and adults with developmental and intellectual disabilities need a space to gather, practice life skills and have their families learn from each other.

Our Place 10 221 Goal PR-1 includes policies and actions to identify the needs of special needs and underserved populations, including individuals with intellectual and development disabilities, and match residents with facilities, amenities, and programs. No change recommended.

No change
31 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
205 Require developers to build publicly accessible usable space and buildings that promote community rather than isolation/ impersonal/ anonymous (less large developments).

Our Place 10 222 Goal PR-2, PR-4, and PR-5 address new park and open space associated with future development. No change recommended No change
206 Housing development with access to private and shared outdoor space. Our Place 10 222 Goal PR-2, PR-4, and PR-5 address new park and open space associated with future development. No change recommended No change
207 A park with spaces for recreation or to drink a coffee or eat ice cream with spouses and grandchildren
Our Place 10 222 Goals PR-2 and PR-7 have policies to expand park and recreational amenities to meet the needs of community members. No change recommended.

No change
208 I would like plants, trees, and gardens in the parks Our Place 10 222 Goals PR-2 and PR-7 have policies to expand park and recreational amenities to meet the needs of community members. No change recommended.

No change
209 I would like them to make a beautiful park for the community and for the people with anxiety, like me
Our Place 10 222 Goals PR-2 and PR-7 have policies to expand park and recreational amenities to meet the needs of community members. No change recommended.

No change
210 We would like more parks for the SSF community and there should be more entertainment/recreation for all.

Our Place 10 222 Goals PR-1 and PR-2 strive to create more, equitably distributed parks, facilities, and services for all residents. No change recommended.

No change
211 More open air community spaces and pedestrian friendly paths/walkways. Our Place 10 222 Goal PR-2 increases the availability and connectedness of parks and gathering spaces in all neighborhoods of the city. No change recommended.

No change
212 More recreational spaces for kids in Westborough so they don't have to travel outside the City.

Our Place 10 222 Goals PR-2 and PR-7 have policies to expand park and recreational amenities to meet the needs of community members. No change recommended.

No change
213 A park in Sunshine Gardens please! Our Place 10 222 Goals PR-2, PR-4, and SA-35 contain policies and actions to convert underutilized spaces and to create joint-use agreements in Sunshine gardens into parks, recreation facilities, and community garden spaces. No change
recommended.

No change
214 Goal PR-4, PR-4.3 the last line including “multifamily housing” doesn’t quite relate to P&R. Would make more sense in this particular policy to replace “multifamily housing” with “facilities for recreational opportunities.” Our Place 10 223 Goals PR-4, SA-36, and SA-38 describe the potential for medium density residential and accessible open space uses on former school district sites. No change recommended.

No change
32 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
215 Alta Loma park (Del Monte) used to be property for Acres of Orchids; when sold the property City demanded that developers built single family housing along with a park. The developer bult the par and rebuilt the field at Alto Lomo school.

Example of how to give back to the community, there was an understanding that the field at the school would be used by the community. Curious what happened with the joint use agreement with the school? I don’t see people utilizing this field? Our Place 10 223 The Alta Loma Middle School and fields continue to be part of the Joint Use Agreement with South San Francisco Unified School District. General Plan Goal PR-4 calls for increased collaboration between the City and the South San Francisco Unifed School District. No change recommended.

No change
216 Historically the City Council and School district are adversarial, they need to work with one another for the benefit of the public, especially when it comes to joint use.

Our Place 10 223 PR-4 calls for increased collaboration between the City and the School District. No change recommended.

No change
217 I would like more parks in schools Our Place 10 223 Goal PR-4 has policies meant to expand community access to schools' recreational spaces and to transform former school sites with innovative uses. No change recommended.

No change
218 Please get SSFUSD (School District) to approve joint-use of fields and track so that public can use the open space.

Our Place 10 223 Goal PR-4 calls for the continued collaboration between the City and SSFUSD to expand joint-use access to open spaces and recreational fields. No change recommended.

No change
219 Need for green space, especially in areas where a lot of housing has been built.

Need usable space.

Our Place 10 223 Goal PR-4 contains policies to support the development of new park and open space with new development. The Zoning Code includes specific standards for development. No change recommended.

No change
220 form cleanup crews/volunteers to tackle garbage ridden areas & better advertise events
Our Place 10 223 Goal PR-4 contains policies to partner with volunteer groups to organize park and trail maintenance efforts. No change recommended.

No change
221 Goal PR-5, PR-5-3. Would it be appropriate to include a policy about engaging with the neighborhood residents to determine prioritized needs first? I know the city negotiates this , and it’s a whole process. But maybe hearing from a wider subset of the residents already living in the neighborhood would help give the city informed ideas of what to push for, and build trust and acceptance for the new developments in the area with relevant/wanted community benefits Our Place 10 224 Revise policy: "Policy PR-5.3: Partner with private developers to facilitate community gathering spaces in Downtown.

Work with development projects in Downtown to provide
community gathering spaces and/or publicly accessible private maintained open space as part of a development agreement, memorandum of understanding, or similar legally binding agreement with the City. Work with the property owner to provide arts and recreation services in community spaces. Ensure spaces match the needs of residents, as described in PR-1.7 and PR-1.8." Make change
33 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
222 Need for more seating along walking paths Our Place 10 224 Goal PR-6 has strategies to improve trail and path amenities, such as expanding seating options. No change recommended.

No change
223 We all agree that (or seems like) we want a park in this area Our Place 10 224 Goal PR-5 identifies the need for new parks and gathering spaces in Downtown and strives to create a network of parks in this area. No change recommended.

No change
224 I would like them to fix the garden and the play structures at Cypress Park because they remind me of when I used to take my kids to that park.

Our Place 10 224 Add policy: "PR-5.5 Upgrade park amenities and playgrounds. Continue to renovate existing playgrounds to update play features, add trees, and add new amenities where feasible." Make change
225 Update parks in old town South City. Trees in Linden Park Our Place 10 224 Add policy: "PR-5.5 Upgrade park amenities and playgrounds. Continue to renovate existing playgrounds to update play features, add trees, and add new amenities where feasible." Make change
226 I would like Cypress Park to be updated: full basketball court, rubber floor, scenery/plants, new play structures, tables/picnic area updated Our Place 10 224 Add policy: "PR-5.5 Upgrade park amenities and playgrounds. Continue to renovate existing playgrounds to update play features, add trees, and add new amenities where feasible." Make change
227 add play structures to Cypress Park & full service at Boys and Girls Club Our Place 10 224 Add policy: "PR-5.5 Upgrade park amenities and playgrounds. Continue to renovate existing playgrounds to update play features, add trees, and add new amenities where feasible." Make change
228 add trees! gazebo at Pine/Linden! add play structures to Cypress Park Our Place 10 224 Add policy: "PR-5.5 Upgrade park amenities and playgrounds. Continue to renovate existing playgrounds to update play features, add trees, and add new amenities where feasible." Make change
229 Park and community learning center for Downtown/ Old Town Area Our Place 10 224 Goal PR-5 includes policies and actions to improve and add new parkland and open space in Downtown. Goal ECS-3 includes an action to explore the feasibility of a Community Resource Center in Downtown. No change recommended.

No change
230 More bike and pedestrian access to Orange Park. Our Place 10 224 Goal PR-6 ensure the community has access to safe and reliable pedestrian and bicycle connections to parks and open space. Goal SA-31 calls for pedestrian connection improvements in the Orange Park sub-area. No change recommended.

No change
34 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
231 Appreciates trails and connections between open spaces. Our Place 10 224 Goal PR-6 ensures the community has access to safe and reliable pedestrian and bicycle connections to parks and open space. No change recommended.

No change
232 More parks downtown and in dense future developments. Our Place 10 224 Goal PR-5 calls for improvements to the parks and gathering spaces in Downtown. No change recommended.

No change
233 Encourage the use of amenities and trails along creeks and waterfronts. Our Place 10 224 Goals PR-5, PR-6, and CR-3 call for improvements to trails that run along and connect creeks and waterfronts. No change recommended.

No change
234 Security along the trails, Centennial Trail. Our Place 10 224 PR-6 includes policies and actions to implement the Centennial Way Trail Master Plan, including safety. No change recommended.

No change
235 Community gardens on Centennial trail/walkway. Our Place 10 224 PR-6 includes policies and actions to implement the Centennial Way Trail Master Plan. No change recommended.

No change
236 Park and learning center in Old Town area. Our Place 10 224 Goal PR-5 includes policies and actions to improve and add new parkland and open space in Downtown. Goal ECS-3 includes an action to explore the feasibility of a Community Resource Center in Downtown. No change recommended.

No change
237 Big disconnect w/ the Bayshore path. Our Place 10 225 Goal PR-6 fosters convenient and safe trails and other pedestrian and bicycle connections to the Bay Trail and other trails in the city. No change recommended.

No change
238 Capitalize Centennial Way Trail Our Place 10 225 Revise policy: "Policy PR-6.6: Ensure visability along Centennial Way Trail. Work with developers and property owners facing the Centennial Way Trail and Colma Creek to ensure trails are unimpeded and well-maintained and there are clear sight lines along trails." Make change
239 We love the trails by the bay, but the overgrowth of weeds gives us allergies. Our Place 10 225 Goal PR-7 ensures well-maintained park and recreational facilities. No change recommended.

No change
240 upgrade parks - places where children can play safely Our Place 10 225 PR-7 ensures the community is provided with excellent park and recreational facilities. No change recommended.

No change
35 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
241 Goal PR-11, Policy 11.2. When I read this my first concern was it could lead unintentionally to reducing full time staff size in order to reduce costs. I think including a Policy about maintaining staffing quality control and long-term expertise is important. Ties to Policy PR-7.1. Internal trained expertise. Goal PR-8 same thing.

Our Place 10 225 Edit policy: "Policy PR-7.1: Meet park and facility maintenance staffing targets. Strive to achieve a ratio of 0.75 full time and part time maintenance staff per 10 acres.

Maintain staffing quality control and long-term expertise." Edit policy: "Policy PR-8.1: Meet Recreational Services Program staffing target. Strive to achieve a ratio of 15 full time and part time recreation program staff per 10,000 residents. Maintain staffing quality control and long-term expertise."
Make change
242 Second swimming pool, or even better, water park with pools, hot tubs and saunas.

Our Place 10 225 Goal PR-7 contains policies and actions that aim to modernize existing aquatics facilities and explore the construction of a second pool. No change recommended.

No change
243 Calisthenics workout park and outdoor gym for older teenagers and adults. Our Place 10 225 Goal PR-7 aims to provide high quality and safe park amenities in all of the City's parks and recreational spaces. No change recommended.

No change
244 More benches by green areas where one would read a book outdoors, but not directly under a tree so birds poop on benches.

Our Place 10 225 Goal PR-7 aims to provide high quality and safe park amenities in all of the City's parks and recreational spaces. No change recommended.

No change
245 Restrooms and facilities should have known and committed open and close time, currently closed time is inconsistent and unknown to us.

Our Place 10 225 Goal PR-7 include policies to provide well-maintained and accessible park facilities. No change recommended.

No change
246 Make our parks safe and well-lit for residents. Our Place 10 225 The policies and strategies of Goal PR-7 aim to keep park amenities and facilities safe and well-lit for all park users. No change recommended.

No change
247 Another swimming pool and a mini golden gate park - open and trees, more recreational and bike areas.

Our Place 10 225 Goal PR-7 contains policies and actions that aim to modernize existing aquatics facilities and explore the construction of a second pool. Goal PR-2 has policies that aim to expand park facilities. No change recommended.

No change
248 PR-8.8 Can we include public parks/commonly visited open spaces in the shuttle stops?
Our Place 10 226 Edit policy: "PR-8.8: Connect services through shuttles.

Continue to provide and expand when feasible connections to parks, open spaces, public services, and programming by expanding the South City Shuttle service and the City’s van program for medically frail older adults or by bringing “popup” services to neighborhoods underserved by public facilities, services, and programs." Make change
36 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
249 P 226 extra space before P on Policy PR-8.3 Our Place 10 226 Remove extra space at beginning of policy. Make change 250 P 226 PR 8.10 is missing the - between PR and 8. Our Place 10 226 Edit policy: "Policy PR-8.10: Involve youth in enrichment programs."
Make change
251 PR-8.11 What do we think about adopt a park with businesses/non profit groups (that may not just be made up of residents)
Our Place 10 226 Add policy: "PR-8.12: Explore an adopt the park program.

Explore creation of an adopt a park program with businesses and community-based organizations." Make change
252 For Goal PR-8, Is it appropriate/possible to include a policy incentivizing staff that is trained on ways to engage with the community? My intent here is tying in things like equity training. It could also include language about the desire/priority of retaining quality staff, and incentivizing staff who put in time and effort to go that extra step to. Our city’s staff/people have the biggest impact who can make or break whether the goals in this chapter are achieved. Is there a requirement for equity training/lens for city staff? Our Place 10 226 Goal ECS-2 contains policies that aim to institutionalize equity in departmental operations and programs. Action ECS-2.1.4 creates equity trainings for City staff and commissioners consistent with the vision of the comment. No change recommended.

No change
253 Coding classes for kids. Our Place 10 226 Edit policy: "Policy PR-8.2: Provide varied recreational programming. Provide a variety of programming to ensure all residents have the opportunity to live healthy, active, and social lifestyles, including aquatics, fitness, library programs and events, and technology and innovation."
Make change
254 create outdoor groups/classes (youth to seniors) can learn about the land & how to better care for it
Our Place 10 226 Goals PR-8 contains policies to expand the environmental stewardship programs offered to residents. No change recommended.

No change
255 Goal PR-9 the only discussion of exploring funding is for universal preschool.

Could easily reference Policy PR-11.9… Do we want to include partnering with other organizations and agencies county wide.

Our Place 10 227 Add policy: "Policy PR-9.6: Partner with San Mateo County and other organizations to provide quality childcare and preschool services. Partner with San Mateo County and other local and regional organizations to provide high-provide quality childcare and preschool services to South San Francisco residents and workers." Make change
256 Goal PR-9 the only discussion of exploring funding is for universal preschool.

Could easily reference Policy PR-11.9… Do we want to include partnering with other organizations and agencies county wide.

Our Place 10 227 Edit text: For related policies and implementation actions related to recreational programing and equity, see Goals PR-1 and PR-8. For policies related to funding, see Goal PR-11." Make change
257 P. 227 is missing from the online link provided. Our Place 10 227 No change recommended. No change 37 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
258 I love that we made Goal PR-10 for the vulnerable population of older adults and PR-9 for preschool/early childhood. Is there a need/would we benefit from identifying goals to serve other vulnerable populations? Like services for special needs, underrepresented youth, areas of the city that are not proportionately participating in our programs and services as identified in heat maps of service/program usage? Our Place 10 227 Goal PR-1 seeks to advance distributional equity in the City’s improved parkland, recreational facilities, and services so that all residents can engage in recreational, arts, and educationalopportunities. Policies PR-1.7 and PR-1.8 guide identification of additional underserved groups and match programming with those needs. No change recommended.

No change
259 Create stewardship programs that the citizens can contribute to. Our Place 10 228 Goal PR-8 contains policies calling for the creation of a stewardship program available to residents. No change
recommended.

No change
260 Goal PR-11 Policy PR-11.3 discusses maintenance in the last line. Should this be brought out into it’s own policy? If so, can it include exploring fees for parks and rec programs and services for the areas surrounding the new developments? Our Place 10 229 Add: "Policy PR 11.10: Explore maintenance funding opportunities. Explore new and innovative opportunities to fund park and recreational maintenance and operations." Make change
261 Action 4.2.1 Do we also want to list SG playground? Our Place 10 230 Amend action: "Action PR-4.2.1: Establish Sunshine Gardens Shared use agreement. Establish a partnership with the South San Francisco Unified School District to provide access to Sunshine Gardens Elementary School open space areas and playground."
Make change
262 Overall, for Chapter 10 I’d say we could probably find more outcomes based measures. What are the critical benefits, such as mental and physical health? Yes, this is mentioned elsewhere in the GP, but it ties specifically to Parks and Rec’s positive impacts on the community. The intro info on Chapter 10 could include info on long term outcomes for the common good - what we invest now reaps long-term benefits for the community, etc., and then tie performance outcome measures to this chapter. What about a measure regarding community education on mental and physical health? Our Place 10 Add policy: "PR-7-12. Consider health-related outcomes of park interventions. When planning for new and upgraded park facilities and amenities, consider the health-related outcomes of park interventions in the decision-making process." Make change
38 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
263 Please also consider natural resources, environment and current capacities at schools and resources available (daycare, after school care, etc), while balancing approvals of biotech developments, meeting current community needs, and if adequate amounts are being collected through impact fees Our People 11 245 The Environmental and Cultural Stewardship Element and the Parks & Recreation Element contain goals and policies that aim to equitably provide services and natural resources and work with private property owners to create publically accessible open space. No change recommended.

No change
264 Ensure we get input from ppl directly affected by change, esp. the DT area and lower income residents
Our People 11 245 The General Plan included multiple community meetings in Downtown, including meetings in person and in Spanish. Goal ECS-1 establishes practices for future community engagement. No change recommended.

No change
265 Should consider the impacts the digital landscape can have on the City Our People 11 245 The General Plan includes flexibility in its goals and policies to adapt to changing technologies and innovation. No change recommended.

No change
266 Programs, groups, opportunities geared towards the POC community.

Empowerment for women and seniors
Our People 11 245 Goals ECS-3, PR-1, and PR-10 contain policies to improve the services and programs available for seniors, women, and other underserved groups. No change recommended.

No change
267 There’s a sense that everything is being done for the biotech businesses; DT residents feel left behind and ignored. Need to improve the flow of communication and cross-cultural exposure, participation in community organizations.

Our People 11 245 Goal ECS-1 contains policies to opportunity opportunities for all residents, particularly marginalized groups, to participantin decision-making processes. No change recommended.

No change
268 Need for a one stop shop at City Hall for residents to obtain information on all programs and connect with community groups
Our People 11 245 Goal ECS-1 contains policies and actions to create an online multilingual hub of public resources and services available for all residents. No change recommended.

No change
269 one of the things I notice, I've been here for the past 25 years; seen an increase of cars, especially on sister cities BLVD - increase in traffic/ trucks, which has impacted my allergies. We need more trees; there aren’t more parks, schools being offered in my neighborhood, which is primarily Latinx. I don’t see anything for us that has really changed. There is an inequity, because there are amenities in the more affluent neighborhoods by the mountain.

Our People 11 245 Goals ECS-1, ECS-2, and ECS-3 aim to incorporate equity considerations into future decision making, policies, programs, and procedures. No change recommended.

No change
39 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
270 It may be entirely too late, but I would love to insert a few references in the General Plan (Chapters 11, 12, 13?) related to SSF participating in San Mateo County’s Age Friendly Communities initiative. I wish I had suggested this earlier, similarly to the cross references the GP team inserted around childcare goals.

Most of the tenets of the Age Friendly initiative are already embedded in the GP, but mention of Age Friendly would help focus issues related to seniors. This is not really under the Parks and Recreation banner, it involves almost every sector. We are going to pursue it, there is funding from the County and AARP to help cities formulate a plan, etc. Actual projects identified are very scalable and unique to individual communities. I’m not suggesting a big add or any changes, just slipping it in being an Age Friendly Community as a goal. Happy to discuss.

Our People 11 246 Add Policy: "ECS-3.7: Support age-friendly initiatives. Support policies and programs to create age-friendly environments that nurture health and well-being." Add Action: "ECS-3.7.1: Pursue age-friendly community
designation. Initiate a collaborative, cross-department initiatives to become an age-friendly community in partnership with San Mateo County and the Center for AgeFriendly Excellence." (Priority: "Medium"; Responsibility: "City Manager") Make change
271 Intentional programming for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities
Our People 11 246 Edit policy: "Policy ECS-3.2: Meet community needs for programing and services. In partnership with community members, adapt City programming and services as needed to ensure they meet the community’s needs, based on continued monitoring of demographic, socio-economic characteristics, and intellectual and developmental disabilities and needs."
Make change
272 Goal ECS-5 doesn’t seem to have an equity lens as much as it could, especially in terms of the programs/services it provides or could provide in partnership with SSFUSD. Are there ways to incorporate an equity lens to the intent and expand each of the policies to include targeted efforts that would help improve equity outcomes? Our People 11 247 Edit policy: "Policy ECS-5.1: Develop partnerships for education. Develop formalized partnerships with local
businesses and non-profit organizations to support South San Francisco Unified School District students, particularly disadvantaged communities as identified in the Community Health and Environmental Justice Element and underserved groups." Make change
273 Goal ECS-5 doesn’t seem to have an equity lens as much as it could, especially in terms of the programs/services it provides or could provide in partnership with SSFUSD. Are there ways to incorporate an equity lens to the intent and expand each of the policies to include targeted efforts that would help improve equity outcomes? Our People 11 247 Edit policy: "Policy ECS-5.2: Provide a variety of youth programming. Provide a variety of programming to ensure all children and youth in South San Francisco have educational and recreational opportunities, particularly disadvantaged communities as identified in the Community Health and Environmental Justice Element and underserved groups." Make change
40 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
274 place the free shuttle schedule & route at locations like the libraries and senior centers
Our People 11 248 Goal ECS-7 strives to transform public libraries into centralized hubs for educational and social services, such as having the schedule and route information for the South City Free Shuttle. No change recommended.

No change
275 A facility/ space where families can gather to talk about resources and City opportunities.

Our People 11 248 Goals ECS-1 and ECS-7 call for creating a centralized hub and expanding the public library into a hub for social and
educational services that can better provide navigation of existing City programs and opportunities. No change recommended.

No change
276 Ok, I said in the commission mtg there was a policy on incentivizing language skills for library staff, but looking back I must have just thought of that myself, as I don’t see it in the library section (ECS-7). Can there be a stipend for front facing staff who learn/speak the County targeted languages? Our People 11 248 Add policy: "Policy ECS-3.6: Enhance language accessibility for City programs and services. Enhance language accessibility for all City programs and services and provide opportunities for City staff to enhance language competence." Make change
277 Goal ECS-7.1 Is there a similar goal in this chapter about P&R services, staffing, and facilities?:

Our People 11 248 Goals PR-7 and PR-8 contain policies related to recreational services and maintenance staffing. No change recommended.

No change
278 The community health metric for healthy weight - there are no programs that address this and this is not the only measurement of a healthy resident. There could be a metric that instead tracks increased participation in recreation programs Our People 12 257 The General Plan Update includes several goals, policies, and actions that promote healthy eating and active living, which have a direct impact on healthy weight among SSF residents. For example, Goal CHEJ-2 includes several policies and actions that promote healthy eating, such as utilizing economic development incentives to encourage existing stores to sell healthy foods in disadvantaged communities. Moreover, the Abundant and Accessible Parks and Recreation Element includes several policies and actions to expand opportunities for active living, such as subsidizing recreational services for low-income populations. Within the City’s Abundant and Accessible Parks and Recreation Element, there is already a metric that will track the number of participants per recreational program. No change recommended.

No change
41 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
279 Remove police from mental health crisis intervention Our People 12 265 Goal CHEJ-1 has policies and strategies that aim to improve the mental health crisis response pilot program that focuses on de-escalation, conflict management, and help connecting residents to supportive services. No change recommended.

No change
280 More accessible health clinics Our People 12 265 Goal CHEJ-1 contains policies to support the expansion of different types of health clinics and centers for residents of all ages and backgrounds. No change recommended.

No change
281 Mental health clinics for adolescent people of color Our People 12 265 Goal CHEJ-1 has policies and actions that support the expansion of mental healthcare programs through various partnerships and approaches. No change recommended.

No change
282 All residents have access to clean, drinkable safe water Our People 12 265 Add policy: "Policy CHEJ-5.4: Access to clean drinking water.

Work with water suppliers to ensure all South San Francisco residents have access to clean, safe drinking water." Make change
283 Create/fund community centered models of mental health care Our People 12 265 Goal CHEJ-1 has policies and actions that support the expansion of mental healthcare programs through partnerships and other approaches. No change recommended.

No change
284 As stated in your “Our Place” housing element and “Community Health and Environmental Justice” section, we appreciate your acknowledgment of frontline communities disproportionally bearing the burden of environmental injustices due to discriminatory land use practices and environmental loopholes. However, your draft policy does not define how you intend to protect residents, especially residents in affordable housing, on your brownfield revitalization sites or near toxic sites in the projected flood zone. In Policy CHEJ-4 1-5, toxic sites need to be fully remediated rather than adequately remediated given what research dictates about legacy contaminants and their emergence through flooding. We encourage you to insist that hired consultants and DTSC create remediation strategies that withstand temporary or longstanding surface flooding, erosive tidal or wave energy, and elevated groundwater levels or remove all contaminants before development begins.

Our People 12 267 Goals CHEJ-4 and CR-7 include policies and actions that assist in reducing or avoiding potential impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials. Any development on a contaminated site would be required to comply with mandatory regulations, which would ensure it does not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. For instance, the DTSC, a department of the Cal/EPA, protects California and Californians from exposure to hazardous waste, primarily under the authority of the RCRA and the California Health and Safety Code. The DTSC programs include dealing with aftermath clean-ups of improper hazardous waste management, evaluation of samples taken from sites, enforcement of regulations regarding use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials, and encouragement of pollution prevention. No change recommended.

No change
42 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
285 With all new construction going on, increased cars/traffic by 5-6 times of the past.

Developing really bad allergies - traffic (trucks going back and forth) affecting people physically. Taken into consideration when doing all this development.

Our People 13 266 Goal CHEJ-3 aims to improve the air quality and health of residents living along highly capacity roadways and near industrial uses. No change recommended.

No change
286 Could health care access be included as a metric? Mental health was not been included as a measurement
Our People 13 275 San Mateo County Health provides health care access and health outcomes data at: https://www.smcalltogetherbetter.org/No change recommended.

No change
287 Page that hyperlinks to is no longer available Our People 13 285 Update link to "https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-
11/Reg_Report-SUM-CCCA4-2018-005_SanFranciscoBayArea_ADA.pdf" Make change
288 Update source text for earthquake map from 2014 to 2021. Our People 13 289 Update source text for earthquake map from 2014 to 2021. Make change 289 Earthquake map using older data Our People 13 289 Replace map with updated seismic hazards data provided by the State.

Make change
290 Add note describing data Our People 13 292 Add note below the page 292 source text: "Note: The regulatory data shown on the maps were obtained from California Geological Survey (2021), which includes Active Fault Traces, Earthquake Fault Zones, Liquefaction Zones, and Earthquake-Induced Landslide Zones." Link:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/index.html?map=regulatorymaps Make change
291 Update title for Figure 43: Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation Our People 13 293 Edit title to: "Figure 43: Earthquake Geological Hazard Zones of Required Investigation."
Make change
292 Tsunami map using older data Our People 13 296 Replace map with updated tsunami hazards data provided by the State of California.

Make change
293 We commend your efforts to create a resilient community that protects existing and future development and people from sea level rise and flooding. We support nature based solutions and green infrastructure to mitigate climate change impacts like you have suggested in GOAL CR-2: 1-3.

Our People 13 303 No change recommended. No change
294 The network of social services needs to be prioritized on a regular basis, not just during disasters, and make sure the City's most at residents don't fall through the cracks Our People 13 303 Goal CR-1 contains policies and actions to help organizations and residents with disaster planning assistance and supplies. No change recommended.

No change
295 Effects of flood zoning. Our Place 13 303 Goal CR-2 provides policies and actions to protect the residents and businesses from sea level rise and flooding. No change recommended.

No change
43 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
296 In your Community Resilience section, you mention rising seas and flooding as environmental risks to your community. We are happy to see that you used the current gold standard on SLR projections from the Ocean Protection Council (OPC). We recommend that your planning and development decisions are based off SLR projections to the years 2070 and 2100 using the medium-high risk aversion column on the OPC chart.

Our People 13 303 Amend policy: "Policy CR-2.1: Use best available sea level rise projections. Use the best available science for sea level rise projections from the State and regional efforts in accordance with the State of California Sea Level Rise Guidance. Define the lifespan of development for temporary structures,
residential or commercial structures, and critical infrastructure. Identify the range of sea level rise projections for the site and evaluate the potential impacts based on the project type and risk tolerances." Make change
297 In your Community Resilience section, you mention rising seas and flooding as environmental risks to your community. We are happy to see that you used the current gold standard on SLR projections from the Ocean Protection Council (OPC). We recommend that your planning and development decisions are based off SLR projections to the years 2070 and 2100 using the medium-high risk aversion column on the OPC chart.

Our People 13 303 Amend policy: "Policy CR-2.5: Require floodproofing for new development in sea level rise inundation zones. Require new development to account for sea level rise in all project applications. This includes: • Identifying areas of a parcel subject to flooding by type of flooding, including inundation, creek, and groundwater and by the potential depth of flooding.• Raising base floor elevation above the Federal Emergency Management Agency Base Flood Elevation to include sea level rise projections expected for the lifetime of the project.• Locating mechanical equipment, such as boilers, chillers, and air handlers for ventilation on the roof to ensure operation during flooding.• As needed, implement additional adaptation measures or pathways based on the sea level rise projections, project type,and risk tolerance." Make change
298 In addition, to develop accurate flood inundation zones in your community, we recommend detailed mapping of shallow groundwater aquifers overlayed with SLR to predict where potential hotspots of emergent groundwater flooding could occur.

Our People 13 303 Policy CR-2.5 requires floodproofing for new development in sea level rise inundation zones, including the identification of different flood types like groundwater. No change recommended.

No change
299 Design Standards for new building development should include solar, green spaces, pervious materials and reflective or light-colored roof.

Our
Environment
14 328 Goals CP-3 and CP-4 contain policies and actions meant to create sustainable, high-performing new and existing buildings. No change recommended.

No change
44 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
300 “The area southwest of Colma Creek is underlain by a portion of the San Mateo Groundwater Basin, which stretches from Daly City to Menlo Park.” We don’t find this to be consistent with Bulletin 118 basin descriptions. There is a Santa Clara-San Mateo Groundwater Basin to the south of SSF, but it does not underlie the city or areas southwest of Colma Creek.

Our
Environment
15 346 Remove first sentence of paragraph 3 “The area southwest of Colma Creek is underlain by a portion of the San Mateo Groundwater Basin, which stretches from Daly City to Menlo Park.” Make change
301 Goal ES-9 Can we add a little language to emphasize the difference between conservation and preservation (since the two are often misconstrued)? Our
Environment
15 349 Add section:
"Preservation and Conservation
Historic preservation generally means to pause or understand a resource only from a certain point in time, effectively protecting it from change or evolution. Conservation is about managing change. It is planning based on the inherited culture and cultural artifacts of a place, structure or object. It means assessment, interpretation, conservation, documentation and, most certainly, strategic management." Make change
302 How is it possible to continue to keep a good climate while over developing - lot of animals (coyotes) hit by cars. Natural habitat has been destroyed - makes no sense if you keep natural environments but also develop Our
Environment
15 353 The General Plan seeks to balance new development with habitat protection. No change recommended.

No change
303 Goal ES-1: Can we include a policy/action supporting more community education? Possible topics could include the impact of resident actions onclimate/environment, native plants, preserving water, etc.? Our
Environment
15 353 Goals PR-8 contains policies to expand the environmental stewardship programs offered to residents. Policy ES-4.6 aims to support education about the urban forest. Policy CP-4.4 aims to educate residents and businesses on energy and water incentives. No change recommended.

No change
304 Where will water come from for new units? Our
Environment
15 353 Goals ES-5, ES-8, and CP-8 relate to water use and sustainable practices. The Environmental Impact Report analyzes the impact of new growth on water supply. No change recommended.

No change
305 Install owl boxes on the mountain to help rid mice and rodents. Our Environment
15 353 Goal ES-1 addresses strategies to enhance habitat quality. No change recommended.

No change
306 More open space with new development, what about environmental protection of these open spaces e.g. Oyster Point?
Our
Environment
15 353 Goals ES-1 and ES-2 protect urban ecology and habitat through design and development standards. No change recommended.

No change
307 More coyotes and mountain lions in residential neighborhoods because they are losing their habitat. Protect the Mountain habitat.

Our
Environment
15 353 Goal ES-1 has policies and strategies to strengthen all types of wildlife habitats and corridors present in the city. No change recommended.

No change
45 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
308 To provide some community science data, as part of Frogwatch we know there are Pacific Tree Frogs and possible other varieties of frogs at Oyster Point between the trail and the UPS/truck loading buildings. They come around February to August, during vernal pool season; I have recordings after sunset where you can hear them. You can also see bats hunting bugs at the trail lamp post near there at night. I do not know if the truck loading there is effecting the frog and bat population. A separate conglomerate of frogs can also be heard by the Wendy's restaurant creek area along Gateway Blvd. Thanks, no reply necessary Our
Environment
15 353 Goals ES-1 and ES-2 protect urban ecology and habitat through design and development standards. No change recommended.

No change
309 who is protecting the environment? The animals are coming down from the mountain because they are losing the habitat. What are we going to leave for our children? I am very interested in what is being proposed for the climate action plan, I mean really you need to leave more land untouched.

Our
Environment
15 353 The Environmental and Cultural Stewardship Element contains goals that aim to preserve natural habitats and support healthy ecosystems within the city. No change recommended.

No change
310 leave the Bay Trail for the bio-tech to clean up. we should be cleaning up the canals like before
Our Place 15 354 Goal ES-3 supports a transformed Colma Creek. Goal SA-16 contains strategies to collaborate with developers in the East of 101 area to maintain parks and open spaces. No change recommended.

No change
311 Trees like ginkgo along busy corridor/ they are great for pollution Our Environment
15 354 Goal ES-4 describes a vision for an abundant, robust urban forest. No change recommended.

No change
312 Trees - how do you plant trees? Not enough water to plan & maintain them? Area had a lot of trees, and helped out. No one is doing anything about it. How do you preserve environment without having trees? Our
Environment
15 354 Goal ES-4 contains strategies to maintain the City's existing trees and plan accordingly for future trees. No change
recommended.

No change
313 Goal ES-1: Can we add an easy win for P&R by adding a policy on tree canopy assessment every 5 years and maintaining a tree inventory? These are time consuming efforts Parks does that help with this goal (and maybe including it in GP will support future budget inclusion efforts.)
Our
Environment
15 354 Add policy: "Policy ES-4.8: Maintain and update the tree inventory. Maintain and regularly update the City's tree inventory every five years." Make change
314 More tree canopy. Our
Environment
15 354 Goal ES-4 describes a vision for an abundant, robust urban forest. Goal PR-7 and CHEJ-3 include strategies to expand the existing tree canopy in disadvantaged communities. No change recommended.

No change
46 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
315 Please consider tree canopies throughout South San Francisco. Forested areas and trees planted along our city streets promote healthy living, happiness and is good for our environment. South San Francisco lacks designated trails with trees that encourage and support outdoor activity and discourages use of vehicles. Currently, SSF residents have the need to drive outside of city limits to find tree-aligned walking trails that provide shade, provide clean air that keep pollutants at a distance. Tree canopy along Centennial Trail would be ideal, as it is an existing trail that connects from SSF BART to San Bruno BART, serving dual purpose.

Our
Environment
15 354 Goal ES-4 describes a vision for an abundant, robust urban forest. Goal PR-7 and CHEJ-3 include strategies to expand the existing tree canopy in disadvantaged communities. No change recommended.

No change
316 Enhance Colma creek so that it is an environmental asset - i.e. clean up and vegetate where possible.

Our
Environment
15 354 Goal ES-3 calls for the transformation of Colma Creek into an environmental asset. No change recommended.

No change
317 Naturalize Colma Creek Our
Environment
15 354 Goal ES-3 calls for the transformation of Colma Creek into an environmental asset. No change recommended.

No change
318 Goal ES-4: Can we add something about adding an environmental or tree preservation survey as part of development project requirements? Our
Environment
15 354 Add policy: "Policy ES-4.10: Require tree survey with project applications. Require applicants to provide an existing tree survey as part of a project applications." Make change
319 More large trees. Our
Environment
15 354 Goal ES-4 describes a vision for an abundant, robust urban forest. No change recommended.

No change
320 In your Environmental and Cultural Stewardship section, we support the goals to create an abundant and robust urban forest and landscape design that promotes enhanced habitat, reduced water use, and protects biodiversity. We would add in Goal ES-4 that native, climate adapted trees should be used for new tree canopies and to replace existing trees at the end of their lifespan. In addition, we would add in Goal ES-5 that all new and renovated landscapes of any size are created using regenerative landscape design and maintenance practices.

Our
Environment
15 354 Add: "Policy ES-4.9: Choose native, climate-adaptive trees.

Continue to choose species that are better suited to the local,changing climate." Add: "Policy ES-5.10: Use regenerative design practices.

Restore the environment and encourage long-term sustainability, increased biodiversity, and enhanced resilience." Make change
47 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
321 We encourage your city to include the following policies in its Final General Plan:
• Limit the use of pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers throughout the city by fostering healthy soil practices, which includes organic carbon amendments (e.g., compost and mulch) on all non-turf planting areas.• Utilize automatic, self-adjusting irrigation controllers (smart irrigation systems) on all irrigation systems with three or more valves or landscaped areas of 1,000 sq. ft. or more.• Limit ornamental turf areas to no more than 25% of the total landscaped area on new or redeveloped landscape areas.• Convert all green waste generated in residential or municipal facilities into organic carbon soil amendments (e.g., via grasscycling, mulching, or composting). Application of locally generated soil amendments will be required on all cityowned land. The city will encourage its use on privatelyowned landscapes by offering it for free or minimal cost to private companies and Homeowners Associations.• Plantings on new and retrofitted landscapes must be grouped based on hydrozones (plants of similar water needs) to minimize water waste and runoff. • Encourage soil health and carbon sequestration by promoting and educating the public about the benefits of organic carbon soil amendments that improve water retention and maximize atmospheric carbon sequestration in local landscapes.

Our
Environment
15 354 Goal ES-5 includes policies and actions related to: pesticides, planting palettes, turf areas, and landscaping. Action ES-5.3.3 updates landscape design standards for new development.

Goal CP-7 includes policies related to carbon sequestration and compost application. No change recommended.

No change
322 Rooftop and pollinator gardens. Our
Environment
15 355 Goal ES-5 includes strategies to create pollinator habitats and enhance habitat quality. No change recommended.

No change
323 Trail Building and Cultural Education markers. Our
Environment
15 357 Goal ES-9 contains policies and strategies to identify and protect historic resources and to expand the educational markers. No change recommended.

No change
324 Performance metric of environment stewardship programs… is there a way to measure outcome rather than activity of “increase”?
Our
Environment
15 361 No change recommended. No change
325 Please take into consideration the balance between current community service needs, safety, and quality of life for residents when considering housing, as well as importance of preserving Old Town/Downtown's historical significance and overall value to South San Francisco. Please consider designating Old Town area as historical.

Our
Environment
15 361 Goal ES-9 contains policies and strategies to identify and protect historic resources and to identify and establish historic districts. No change recommended.

No change
48 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan
Public Draft General Plan Comment and Response Summary
Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
326 The potential issues I see with Program EIRs re: cultural resources and the General Plan were demonstrated in a recent project. The Program EIR did not identify any cultural resources, because it did not include any evaluation, which makes sense because it is a Program EIR. So, the limited analysis relied on the CHRIS letter report that there are no identified resources within the project area. Based on that, the finding was LTS with no mitigation. But the CHRIS letter did provide a caveat that there are several age-eligible buildings that should be evaluated, which is not described in the approach to analysis, but in the appendix. So, the Initial Study repeated the statement that there are no known historical resources, that there is no new or more severe effect and therefore no substantial adverse change. But there was no analysis to support that. I think in this case it was ok because the building in question appeared to be on the cusp of age-eligible. But, that is the concern I was trying to articulate with the General Plan earlier - that subsequent Environmental Documents for projects will rely on the findings of the Program EIR without sufficient analysis unless there is a finding of LTS with a more instructive mitigation measure. Or maybe it will not be so much a problem with the policies of the GP implemented? I am just thinking with the land use changes proposed in areas like Lindenville, that we will see more projects where this may be an issue that we see more of.

Our
Environment
15 364 Add action: "Action ES-9.5.1: Historic evaluation. Update project planning application requirements to require the historic evaluation of existing structures that are at least 50years old." Priority: "High"; Responsibility: "Planning Division (ECD)".

Make change
327 Unfinished sentence: "The Noise Element is designed to provide polices that will guide development in a manner that protects the residents and employees of South San Francisco from exposure to unacceptable noise and vibration levels and make the city a healthier place for all. Through identification, preservation, and education initiatives." Our
Environment
16 365 Remove the unfinished sentence at the end: "Through identification, preservation, and education initiatives." Make change
328 Roadway and Railroad Noise Exposure Map is missing Our Environment
16 365 Add new map from EIR Make change
329 Unclear how the City plans to implement actions toward reaching those goals - but necessary and exciting!
Our Plan to
Get There
17 386 Chapter 17 provides a detailed implementation matrix for the General Plan. No change recommended.

No change
330 What does affordable housing mean? It’s offensive when people say this, because workers can’t afford these homes for $1.2 million. Affordability is only for one group of people. Seems like groups ask questions and want to engage, but at the end of the day, seems like development will do what it wants. There is nothing for us. I see beautiful things you are presenting, but I don’t think you are looking at the whole area and that you are treating neighborhoods differently.

General No change recommended. No change
49 Comment Plan Section Chapter Page
Number
Response Action to be Taken
331 Re: the General Plan: can you highlight what is new in this plan (in contrast to the last cycle's GP)?
General This is a comprehensive update to the 1999 General Plan. No change recommended.

No change
332 Will a presentation be made with the school district on the Plan? General No change recommended. No change 333 Boys and girls club on Hillside needs remodel General The City of South San Francisco does not have jurisdiction over The Boys and Girls Clubs of America, a non-profit organization, to coordinate a building remodel. No change recommended.

No change
334 Better youth program for Boys and Girls Club General The City of South San Francisco does not have jurisdiction over The Boys and Girls Clubs of America, a non-profit organization, to coordinate a building remodel. No change recommended.

No change
335 It will be nice to have someone in the building division who can answer questions competently and friendly, too.

General No change recommended No change
336 How do we encourage more community engagement of all residents? This idea requires everyone to come together, not just outreach to certain communities General No change recommended No change
337 I would like to see more people protecting schools, more school safety General The South San Francisco Unified School District addresses safety considerations at school sites. No change recommended.

No change
338 We can do better with the infrastructure throughout the City, but little comments received for Westborough (under represented in outreach meetings, not as active as other neighborhoods) General No change recommended. No change
339 Costco moved their gas pumps closer to the creek- I would like to see the City review EIRs more closely.

General No change recommended. No change
340 More City-wide cleanups, not just by the biotech Bay trails. General No change recommended. No change341 Get message out to the community General No change recommended No change 342 Will the Executive Summary be delivered directly to residents or if there will be other outreach to make the community aware of its availability on the website? General The Executive Summary is being handed out at all in person events and is available on the shapessf.com website. No change recommended.

No change
343 Appreciation for the project website General No change recommended. No change344 There could be an outreach event such as a Day in the Park to showcase programs and services offered by the City and agencies
General The City and General Plan team conducted two in-person engagement activities in March and May that showcased City programs and services. No change recommended.

No change
345 A dashboard could be included on the website to show implementation and performance in an easy manner
General The ShapeSSF.com website includes metrics and targets to track long-term performance. No change recommended.

No change
346 Printed versions of the documents should be available General Printed versions of the document were available at General Plan events, the Planning Department, Library, and City Hall. No change recommended.

No change
50 | Shape SSF: 2040 General Plan

South San Francisco City CouncilOctober 12, 2022

South San Francisco City Council
October 12, 2022