Economic and Community Development Department
City of South San Francisco
June 14, 2024
UPDATED OBJECTIVE
DESIGN STANDARDS AND
STREETSCAPE AND
PUBLIC REALM STANDARDS
Submitted by
To the City of South San Francisco,
Urban Field is pleased to submit this proposal to provide urban design and planning services in support of the South San Francisco Objective Design Building and Streetscape / Public Realm Standards Update. Urban Field is a collective of urban designers that practice a holistic approach to urban design. We address a wide range of scales from crafting streetscapes and small spaces to designing complete neighborhoods and downtowns. For this proposal we have partnered with Lexington Planning and Miller Planning Associates who bring extensive experience in Zoning and Objective Design Standard writing and implementation.
Within a single block of Grand Avenue, a citizen can experience 100+ years of different architectural expressions and evolving building typologies. Comprised of small, narrow parcel development, Grand Avenue expresses a cadence of time, styles, massing and materials that changes in a matter of steps. This historic standard in many ways still defines South San Francisco’s identity and can often be lost in new development. We are excited to work with the City to craft new standards that facilitate a greater harmony between the historic and modern urban fabric.
We enjoy working with communities of this scale. We are most excited about our work when it reflects the conversations of the community, and finds the creative common ground that enables development to move foward while also respecting the past.
We appreciate this opportunity to offer our services.
Kind Regards,
Urban Field El Cerrito, LLC
Ryan Call, Partner
Primary Representative
for the Proposal
6774 Kenilworth Avenue
El Cerrito, CA 94530
510.260.4306
[email protected]
urbanfieldstudio.com
Ryan Call AIA / Urban Field Studio Partner / El Cerrito Office 1 City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards 03 02
01 Required Services, Approach to Work
Executive Summary
Description of Proposer’s Firm and Staff
Proposers Staff Team
Fees and Charges
References and Completed Reports
p.5
p.3
p.19
p.21
p.27
p.29
04 05
06 CONTENTS
City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Proposal Overview
Urban Field will provide a combination of Community
Engagement Services and Urban Design services
in crafting the necessary updates for the existing
Objective Design Standards and the new Public
Realm and Streetscape Standards. These combined
services can build trust with the community and
generate a locally sourced design direction.
South San Francisco is fortunate to retain a rich and
diverse fabric of architectural eras and landmark
buildings. The city has also been fortunate to attract
both residential and commercial growth. There is
however a chasm between the scale, charm and
visual interest in the historic architecture, and the
significant shift in scale, mass and homogeneity of
recent residential development in the downtown. As
a pedestrian, these two experiences are drastically
different. The historic fabric reflects the collective
community, informed by a multitude of architectural
moments, and the new development reflects a single
building with a singular idea (see example diagrams
on page 6).
We can learn alot from the historic fabric.
Respecting the scale of parcels, and number of
different building facades defining the streetscape
offer a more interesting experience than an overly
fussy single block building of a particular style. Much of South San Francisco’s charm is in the diversity of
it’s buildings.
Equally important is how the public realm supports
this rich environment. Our team’s public realm design
experience draws upon the talents of UF partner
John Bela, who has helped shape the design of
streets, bike-ways, plazas and parks across multiple
cities in the US. His work is known for its analytical
design methodology, sensitivity to place and public
realm activation.
Working with the community, public and private
stakeholders, and staff, we can find the right balance
in how new development relates and respects
existing development character and scale, while
also allowing architects to bring distinctive and
innovative expressions to the City.
Summary Experience Serving Cities
Our combined consultant team of Urban Field Studio,
Lexington Planning and Miller Planning Associates
will bring it’s experience working on Objective Design
Standards, Area Plans and Zoning Ordinance Updates
with multiple jurisdictions including:
Objective Design Standards:
• City of Larkspur
• City of Emeryville
• City of Palo Alto
• City of San Leandro
• City of Union City
Zoning Ordinance Update:
• City of West Sacramento Zoning Ordinance
Modernization project
• City of Albany (No More) Parking Ordinance
• City of Dixon Zoning Code and Map Update
• City of Newark comp. Zoning Ord. Update
• City of San Carlos Zoning Ordinance Update
• City of Palo Alto:
» Housing Element Rezoning Ordinance
» Comp. Plan Housing Implementation
» Retail Protection Ordinance
Area and Vision Plans:
• City of Albany San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan
• City of Milpitas Metro Specific Plan
• City of Dublin Downtown Plan
• Dublin SCS Community Outreach and Vision
• Brentwood Innovation Center Vision Plan
Scope Overview
Our scope aligns is organized along the following
subsections as detailed in the RFP:
Task 1 Project Kick Off and Management
Task 2 Data Gathering and Review
Task 3 Community Outreach and Engagement
Task 4 Objective Design Standards Update
Task 5 Streetscape and Public Realm Standards
Task 6 Review and Adoption
UF will be lead the public outreach and design
of the standards. Lexington Planning and Miller
Planning Associates will help write and structure the
integration of the new standards into South San
Francisco’s existing zoning codes.
SECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
3 City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards Grand and Linden Avenues circa 1928
A fine grain historic development pattern still survives on Grand Avenue from Maple Avenue to Linden Avenue Airport Avenue reflects a larger scale development pattern with fewer buildings greater design homogeneity.
Grand and Linden Avenues today
City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards 4 Four Buildings across approx. 650’
Fourteen Buildings across approx. 650’
Task 1
Project Management / Primary Contact
• UF will host in a on-site Team Kick off meeting
• UF hosts one virtual weekly check-in meeting each week with additional consultants attending on a as-needed basis. 80 meetings are assumed based on a .75 utilization of a 2 year schedule.
• Meeting Agendas / Google Docs Master File
• Project Schedule and Community Engagement Strategy Memo • Invoice Progress Reports over course of project
1.1 Meetings: (1) Kickoff + (80) Weekly Meetings
1.1 Deliverables
Task 1.1: Project Kick-off and Management
The UF consultant team will conduct a project kick-off
meeting with SSF City Staff to discuss project goals, key issues, expectations, project milestones, schedule, community engagement strategy and deliverables. UF proposes a hybrid meeting in which the UF team (Ryan, Jane, and John) will be in-person with City Staff, with Zoom as an option for those who must attend remotely.
Meeting agendas will be maintained on a on-going Google Docs file accessible by the consultant team and City with links to completed deliverables, supporting documents, prior agendas and project progress. UF is open to other file management systems if preferred by the City.
Check-in meetings will be held weekly by UF team lead Ryan Call.
Other team members will be brought in based on the agenda for the check-in meeting. Meetings are assumed to be 1 hour long and held via zoom, or other virtual meeting software.
Our team will prepare the Community Engagement Memo
outlining Meetings and Events, and a Communications Plan developed with staff to clarify the necessary deliverables, tone, and coordinated graphic needs of the effort.
The UF team will provide with invoices a monthly progress report memo providing an overview of all services rendered for the invoice, status of remaining fee and a summary of completed deliverables.
Ryan Call will be the primary contact for the City, and will conduct project management for the duration of the project.
Three examples of residential
windows in South San Francisco.
With each generation, different
ideas about color, style, form and
materiality, add aesthetic diversity
to the city. Standards can inform
architectural quality and scale
while also allowing new ideas about
architecture to be expressed.
SECTION 2: APPROACH & SCOPE
5 City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards Task 2
Data Gathering & Review
Task 2.1: Background Research
The UF team will work with the City to evaluate the administration and success of existing objective design standards in meeting the City’s objective to achieve more articulated buildings and public realm. This includes, but may not be limited to:
• Organization: general standards codified in the Zoning Ordinance vs. design standards in area plans
• Applicability: standards that apply citywide vs. certain zoning districts or plan areas
• Topics: massing, facade length and articulation standards in Section 20.310.004 can be augmented to address ornamentation • Implementation: outcomes based on any recent projects that have used objective standards, how exceptions are currently permitted, and the relationship to State Density Bonus Law waivers and concessions
• Character areas: based on design guidelines and standards from area plans and Section 20.310.004, and site visits, characterize the various areas of the city, including desired transitions east of 101
Based on the analysis above and the findings from community outreach activities and decision-maker input, prepare options/ recommendations for approaches for Task 4, including gaps in regulations that can better support building articulation and architectural details.
UF will also research three example Public Realm / Street Scape Standards by other municipalities to serve as case studies in preparation of the formation of SSF Public Realm standards.
UF prepare a summary Standards Update Strategy Memo that outlines the approach to modifying and expanding the existing standards to meet the City’s objectives.
Task 2.2: City Tour
UF will work with City Staff to develop a tour of the
City’s recent and historic developments to better
understand where both significant transformation
is possible, and where minor interventions are better
suited. The City tour will be attended by Ryan Call
and John Bela.
• 4 hours plus travel time will be budgeted for two UF
team members to attend the walking tour.
• Background research will be discussed over the
regular weekly check in meetings.
• Summary Background Research Memo
• Case Study Report featuring (3) Example Public
Realm Standards
• City Tour Agenda and Map
Meetings: (1) Site Tour + Regular Weekly Mtgs.
Deliverables
South San Francisco’s long
history provides a wide diversity
of architectural typologies and
expressions to draw from. The
standards design will need
measures to respond to a variety
of parcel sizes, topography, and
urban context.
City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards 6 Task 3
Community Outreach & Engagement
Approach:
Change is always challenging for communities,
especially those with a long history like South
San Francisco. It may also be challenging to ask
the community to not only re-consider recently
completed ODS, but also simultaneously consider a
second subject matter, the Public Realm.
Our team recommends the City consider an approach
where the umbrella topic is the Public Realm /
Streetscape Standards, and the updates of the
Building Standards are a detail in service of the
Public Realm Objectives. While the task of competing
those two tasks may be equal in terms of time
and documentation, the Public Realm Standards,
as a entirely new topic, will generate greater
excitement and participation than revisiting a
recently completed ODS effort. The Updated Building
Standards supporting the development of more
contextual architectural will contribute to a more
pleasing public realm.
To inform how we engage the larger community on
these topics, we recommend creating a contextual
knowledge of community sensitivities through
stakeholder engagement, and high level historical
research regarding how the City developed. Mapping
both of these areas will hep us formulate better
questions, and provide us a stronger context when
we hear from the community.
To productively engage the community, we
recommend using both workshop and pop-up events.
The pop-up event can be useful in generating
feedback and participation in workshops, as well
create support for City Leadership to lean on in the
approval process.
The Community Engagement Process is incremental,
and can provide consensus through a transparent
process where concerns are heard, trade-offs are
discussed, and win-win opportunities are agreed
upon. Ultimately, the ODS must work for a both the
community, and the developers that shape it.
Scope:
Jane Lin of the UF team will lead the development
and implementation of Task 3. Through Jane’s
extensive public sector experience, she has led
community outreach efforts for Development
Standards, Urban Design Plans, and Specific Plans.
Ryan Call, and John Bela, will support Jane in this
role. Building off of the Community Outreach and
Engagement Strategy developed in Task 1 we
anticipate the following scope:
Task 3.1: Focused Stakeholder Outreach (may include
Bike, Traffic, Parks, Arts commissions, as well as
architects, developers, or landowners).
Our team will work with City Staff to identify up to
key stakeholders to interview throughout the design
process. Depending on the needs of the City, we
can provide flexibility in the number of stakeholders
in a meeting, and if we interview stakeholders more
than once for incremental feedback. We recommend
budgeting 15 one hour virtual meetings that may be
assigned throughout the process depending on how
the City and Team see best fit during the process.
These could include various Commissions, Developers,
Parks, etc.
Task 3.2: Historic Context
Ryan will work with City Staff to obtain historic
aerial photography, photos, and key parcel maps of
subdivisions. We anticipate this can be done with
coordination calls and a site visit. This work will be
important in documenting how the City has changed
over the years, the character of that growth. These
topics can open new conversations and in some
cases inform perceptions about the City’s identifying
characteristics.
Task 3.3: Community Workshop and Pop-Up Event
We anticipate two General Community workshops
and one Pop-up Event. UF will host sessions to
gather input from residents, businesses, and
other stakeholders, ensuring the standards reflect
community needs and preferences.
The first General Community Workshop will be
focused as a listening session where we can discuss
SSF’s Public Realm and Architecture, what works, and
where aspirations are. This event will followed by
a Pop-Up Event at a local farmers market exploring
SECTION 2: APPROACH & SCOPE
7 City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards Feedback through the outreach process can inform a
localized approach to design and validate trade-offs.
similar themes. The second General Community
Workshop will all the community to provide feedback
on design direction.
Task 3.4: Website Content and Online Survey
Using the materials generated through the outreach
and design process, we will provide the City
condensed versions in either pdf or jpeg format to be
posted to the City provided website. Our team will
prepare a online survey that can be issued between
the two public workshops.
Task 3.5: Joint Planning and City Council Session
We recommend two meetings for the Council
and Planning Commission. The first is a listening
workshop where we can discuss their thoughts
regarding recent development trends in the City,
and what their aspirations might be. The second
workshop will cover the draft of the Updated Building
and Public Realm Standards. This will allow the
Planning Commission and City Council a chance to
course correct the team if needed and have greater
ownership of the process and end product.
Task 3.1:
• 3 City Coordination Meetings to map out
stakeholder participants and interview prep.
• 15 one hour virtual meetings for focused
stakeholders.
Task 3.2:
• One site visit to library, or City archives.
Background research will be discussed over the
regular weekly check in meetings.
Task 3.3:
• 2 Community Works shops with three consultant
team staff
• One Pop-Up event with two consultant team staff
Task 3.4:
• 2 Meetings with City Staff to develop Online
Survey content
Task 3.5:
• 2 Joint Planning Commission and City Council
Study Sessions
Task 3.1:
• Finalized Community Engagement Strategy with
allocations for 10 interviews.
Task 3.2:
• Summary Pdf documenting aerials by date and
historic imagery for use in community outreach
and ODS.
Task 3.3:
• Materials needed for 3 Community Workshop
facilitations. Photos, notes, and analysis of
information gathered to be included in the
Engagement Summary.
Task 3.4:
• One digital survey will be developed through
Survey Monkey to generate feedback on ODS
design concepts and approach.
Task 3.5:
• Materials needed for two Joint Workshop
facilitations. Photos, notes, and analysis of
information gathered to be included in the
Engagement Summary.
Meetings:
Deliverables:
City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards 8 Task 4
Objective Design Standards Update
Approach:
Styles and Ornamentation. A search in the Digital
Public Library of America for “Arts and Crafts
Architecture” produces a return of 4,466 results.
For every period of architecture or style, there can
be countless variations, of which their success is
measured subjectively. How do we choose which
specific flourishes are native, or relevant to South
San Francisco? Will these standards unintentionally
result in homogeneity for the sake of efficient
entitlements? Are the standardized details
proportional to the overall massing of the building?
Will these facsimiles de-value the original structures? These are questions that will be asked of our team
and City Staff, as happened in cities around the bay
area where these standards have been proposed.
In preparation for this RFP, UF walked Grand Avenue
from Laurel Avenue to Gateway Boulevard. We
observed buildings of different styles, periods,
narrow and wide proportions, historic, distinctive,
and some generic. Some buildings may be both
treasured and despised depending whom you
ask! The environment is distinctive, authentic, and
irreplaceable. Most importantly, it is also human
scaled.
While we can provide specific architectural details,
they will become dated, and will require constant
updating (Imagine if we were stuck with the ideas
of the early 1990’s for 30 years). There is however
an alternative. Standards can be developed that
speak to proportion, scale, idea diversity and where
fine grain detail must be applied. Standards can
be developed requiring materials to express mass
and not be used like wall paper. Standards can be
developed so a facade is not one idea an entire
block long, but instead reflective of the original
small parcel development. Standards requiring the
preservation of historic facades can also be studied.
As experienced in our short walk, the hands of
many generations have shaped the distinctive feel
South San Francisco has today. The Standards can
ensure that new development is both innovative and
respectful of the existing context.
This recently built building in Berkeley expressed
two distinct facades and preserved the ground level
facades of the buildings it replaced. As a result, its
scale is compatible with the neighboring small parcel
historic developments.
Addressing proportion and scale in standards will
require the architecture to be more crafted while still allowing innovation and original detailing.
SECTION 2: APPROACH & SCOPE
9 City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards Refining Standards with Respect to Effective
Regulation. We will refine and augment the existing
single and multifamily residential and mixed-use
objective standards to enable more articulated
buildings that engage the public realm. Where
possible, the Objective standards that address
general urban design principles should apply
citywide. In neighborhoods and zoning districts with
specific character features or design preferences,
focused standards can support architectural form
and details, such as roof forms, building entries, and
materials.
Too many standards or standards that are repeated
with slight variations across districts/geographic
locations can result in regulations that are difficult
to administer. This targeted approach will streamline
administration for City staff and decision-makers
and clarify expectations for community members
and applicants. The standards should find a balance
between continuing to allow for financially feasible
housing projects, while adding design standards
that enable well-articulated and context-sensitive
housing for residents and community members.
Code/Plan Amendments. As part of Task 2 our team
will review adopted area plan policy documents and
objective standards in Section 20.310.004: MultiFamily Residential and Residential Mixed-Use Design to understand the current basis for regulating design
through both guidelines and standards and discuss
with staff what is working and not working with
the current framework and regulations. Informing
Task 4, Community outreach activities will help
identify design preferences. Although the objective
standards are relatively new, we will evaluate any
proposals designed in response to the recent
standards. We will also review examples of preferred
design to see how the current standards relate
to such design. Together, these findings will help
identify gaps in the current set of regulations that
could improve project design.
The set of methods used to refine and create
new objective standards will depend on the level
of prescriptiveness vs. flexibility desired. Certain
objectives lend themselves to set measurable
dimensions (e.g., maximum facade length), while
other objectives can be met with a more flexible
approach where applicants can choose from a menu
of options for compliance.
Checklists. To facilitate staff’s review of projects
subject to objective standards, our scope of work
includes preparation of a checklist that summarizes
locations in the Zoning Ordinance and other adopted
policies where objective standards are located. The
checklist would be used by applicants to understand
where they need to look to find the regulations that
pertain to their projects.
We do not recommend including the specific
objective standards in a checklist for several reasons:
(1) it becomes out of date quickly as the code is
updated; (2) code requirements may get missed,
especially those from other departments (e.g., Public
Works, C.3 requirements); (3) the checklist would be
dozens of pages long and therefore more onerous
for staff to review and complete; and (4) not having
a detailed checklist places the onus on the applicant
to determine the relevant objective standards and
then allows City staff to review the applicant’s
determinations and identify any gaps.
How to Address Density Bonus Law Waivers. State
Density Bonus Law is an incentive for projects
that help achieve state housing goals, but can
be frustrating for jurisdictions that have spent
time fine-tuning standards based on local goals.
Instead of trying to guess at every permutation
that might result from waivers and concessions, this
project will focus on developing design regulations
based on community priorities, understanding
that some projects will be able to modify them in
return for delivering affordable and senior housing.
It is important for the City to express its design
preferences as objective standards to guide the
conversation with applicants about project design
and architectural details.
City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards 10 Task 4
Objective Design Standards Update continued
Scope:
Task 4.1: Conceptualize New Standards
Our team will begin the design process of the new
and modified standards after the initial listening
sessions outlined in Task 3.1 and 3.3. This process will encompass:
• Identifying distinct districts and their
distinguishing characteristics
• Prepare a design narrative for each district that
define the aesthetic parameters to building
facades the City is looking to achieve.
• Defining the conceptual approach to objectively
mandate more articulated and distinctive building
facade designs including massing, proportions
of facade elements, fenestration and grade level
storefront design, parapet design, design variety
for larger buildings, materiality.
The materials in Task 4.1 will be presented along with
Task 5 materials in the second community workshop.
Task 4.2: Implementation of New Standards
Working closely with Miller Planning Associates and
Lexington Planning our team will then incorporate
the 4.1 design narratives into the City’s ODS based on
the following:
• Prepare redline changes and new or modified
standards for Section 20.310.004 and/or a standalone document. Refine existing and add new objective standards to complement existing
standards, guidelines, and adopted policy goals.
• Distinguish applicability, as appropriate: by
use (i.e.,100% residential vs. mixed use), zoning
district, and/or location (e.g., East of 101,
Downtown, adjacent to freeway/railroad).
• Prepare diagrams and annotated graphics to
illustrate written standards.
• Develop a design standards checklist to assist
applicants and City staff with requirements for
multifamily and mixed-use residential projects.
Rather than repeat adopted standards verbatim,
this checklist would be the form of one or
more handouts (not subject to adoption) that
would cross-reference where to find objective
standards in the Zoning Ordinance or other
locations.
• An administrative draft will be prepared for
staff review. An initial public review draft will
be prepared for Planning Commission and City
Council review. A second public review draft will
be prepared for adoption hearings and a final
draft for publication.
Standards for the City of Larkspur were designed to work both for flat and steep lots.
SECTION 2: APPROACH & SCOPE
11 City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards Task 4.1:
• We recommend an additional 6 meetings with City
Staff in addition to the Weekly check-in and Task
3 meetings.
Task 4.2:
• We recommend an additional 8 meetings with City
Staff in addition to the Weekly check-in and Task
3 meetings. Due to the detailed nature of Task
4.2, this will require vetting with multiple agencies
within the City.
Task 4.1:
• Map outlining Design Standard Districts
• Design Standard District Design Narratives
• Draft Design Standards to be integrated into City
Standards in Task 4.2
Task 4.2: (Presumes access to original, editable
indesign files used to create existing ODS document)
• Section 20.310.004 Redlines and areas of
expansions and distinguished applicability.
• Finalized Diagrams communicating revised and
new Single and Multi-Family Design Standards
• Design Standards Checklist
• An Administrative Draft of the Standards
Meetings:
Deliverables:
Standards were carefully tailored for each district for the City of Larkspur respecting the existing scale of
buildings and parcels in their respective areas.
City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards 12 Task 5
Streetscape & Public Realm Standards
Approach:
South San Francisco is transforming its urban
landscape to support a more vibrant, accessible, and
connected community. This transformation aligns
with the city’s General Plan and Active South City
Plan, which advocate for multi-modal transportation
systems and improved public spaces. The General
Plan emphasizes enhancing the transportation
network to reduce congestion, improve air quality,
and promote active transportation. It highlights
the need for integrated streetscapes that cater
to pedestrians, cyclists, and transit users, creating
a seamless public realm that connects buildings,
services, and amenities.
South San Francisco Streetscape & Public Realm
Standards will create a cohesive, inviting, and
functional public realm, fostering a complete network
of public and publicly accessible spaces, including
streets, sidewalks, plazas, walkways, public transit
areas, trails, and parks. In a walkable community, the
public realm provides continuous connections among
buildings, services, and amenities, supporting multimodal transportation and vibrant urban life.
Complete Streets Policy
Adopted in 2012, the Complete Streets Policy
commits South San Francisco to creating and
maintaining streets that serve all users, including
pedestrians, bicyclists, persons with disabilities,
motorists, and public transportation users. Complete
streets are designed and operated to enable
safe use and mobility for all, rethinking street
classification to prioritize multimodal transportation.
Example projects include the Grand Boulevard
Project on El Camino and the Linden Avenue Complete
Streets project.
Integrating streetscape and building design
guidelines
Recognizing that a user’s experience with the
built environment and public realm go hand-inhand, this effort presents the unique opportunity to integrate the design of the building form and
public realm. Streetscape guidelines defined in
isolation of proposed building massing and setback
considerations miss the opportunity to create a
cohesive environment that integrates the pedestrian
experience from eye-level which includes ground
floor and public space characteristics.
Objective
Develop Streetscape & Public Realm Standards
that integrate urban design with the public realm,
enhancing user experience and supporting diverse
transportation modes in South San Francisco.
Goals
• Capture Design Cohesion: Harmonize the visual
and functional elements of buildings and
streetscapes.
• Clarify and Streamline: Define clear requirements
for streetscape improvements in development
proposals.
• Enhance User Experience: Promote a cohesive
streetscape character reflecting the unique
areas of South San Francisco.
• Support Planning Goals: Align with the General
Plan and Active South City Plan to enhance
transportation and public spaces.
Recent investments such as these Grand Avenue
streetscapes improvements can help accentuate the
identity of a district within the City.
SECTION 2: APPROACH & SCOPE
13 City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards The Urban Field Team’s Streetscape & Public Realm
Standards will address:
1. Pedestrian-Scale Lighting
• Objective: Enhance safety, visibility, and
ambiance.
• Design Principles: Use fixtures that provide
adequate illumination without contributing to
light pollution. Incorporate pedestrian-scale
lights at intervals that support walkability and
visibility.
2. Landscaping
• Objective: Support urban ecology and aesthetics.
• Design Principles: Utilize native and droughttolerant plants to reduce maintenance and water use. Design landscaping to create buffers
between pedestrian paths and vehicular traffic,
incorporating rain gardens and bioswales for
stormwater management.
3. Sidewalks
• Objective: Ensure accessibility and enhance the
pedestrian experience.
• Design Principles: Define minimum sidewalk
widths to accommodate pedestrian traffic
and amenities. Use materials that are durable
and aesthetically pleasing, with options for
decorative pavements in key areas. Consider the
integration of tree pits and green infrastructure
to support environmental goals.
Stormwater Management
• Objective: Incorporate sustainable water
management practices.
• Design Principles: Design features like permeable
pavements, green gutters, and stormwater
planters to manage runoff and support
sustainability. Align with the city’s goals for
environmental resilience and reduced flooding
risks.
Accessible Paths
• Objective: Provide equitable access for all users.
• Design Principles: Ensure paths comply with
ADA standards and are free of obstacles.
Design routes to connect key destinations and
amenities, ensuring clear and legible connections.
Street Amenities
• Objective: Enhance comfort and functionality.
• Design Principles: Place amenities such as
benches, bike racks, and trash receptacles
strategically to support pedestrian comfort
and encourage cycling. Design amenities to be
durable, attractive, and easy to maintain.
Optional Task - Curbside Management
• Objective: Optimize the use of curb space for
various activities.
• Design Principles: Develop strategies for
managing loading zones, ride-sharing drop-offs,
and parking. Design curbside areas to be flexible,
accommodating different uses throughout the
day while minimizing conflicts between users.
Areas that may have less pedestrian activity could
represent opportunities for better stormwater
management features.
City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards 14 Scope:
Task 5.1: Precedent and Best Practice Research:
• Research recent streetscape and public realm
standards from across the US and synthesize
best practices. Explore how these standards have
been integrated into urban design standards and
into the municipal code.
• Assemble precedent images of best practices
regarding streetscape and public realm elements
such as paving, planting, lighting, seating.
Task 5.2: Desktop and Field Research on South City
Streets to expand existing street classification
• Using the General Plan Transportation Chapter
and Active South City as starting points, expand
on the LOS classification of street type by
integrating pedestrian movement data from
Strava Metro and Replica to develop holistic
street types
• Conduct field research to ground truth holistic
street types
Task 5.3: Development of Draft Standards
• Administrative Draft: Create an initial draft
outlining the standards, integrating design
principles from the Active South City and national
next practices.
• Public Draft: Refine the draft based on feedback
from internal stakeholders and prepare it for
public review.
• Final Draft: Incorporate public feedback, finalize
the standards, and prepare for formal adoption.
Task 5.4: Community Engagement (see Task 3.3)
Task 5.5: Approval Process
• Review by City Officials: Present drafts to city
planning and engineering departments for review
and input.
• Public Hearing: Conduct a formal public hearing
to discuss the standards and gather additional
feedback.
• Adoption: Finalize and adopt the standards
through the city’s formal legislative process.
Task 5.6: Integration into ODS
Standards Implementation: Integrate the standards
into the city’s Objective Design Standards and create
updated Citywide Design Standards.
Task 5
Streetscape & Public Realm Standards Continued
Task 5.1:
• Best Practice Research in form of 11x17
presentation
Task 5.2:
• Strava Metro and Replica Pedestrian Movement
Analysis
Task 5.3:
• Initial, Public, and Final Drafts of the Streetscape
and Public Realm Standards
Task 5.5:
• Summary Presentation of Streetscape and Public
Realm Standards
Task 5.6:
• Integrated Public Realm and Streetscape
Standards
Meetings:
Deliverables:
Task 5.1:
• 2 meetings with City Staff in addition to the
Weekly check-in and Task 3 meetings.
Task 5.2:
• 1 meeting with City Staff in addition to the Weekly
check-in and Task 3 meetings.
Task 5.3: Draft Standards
• 4 meetings with City Staff in addition to the
Weekly check-in and Task 3 meetings.
Task 5.4:
• See Task 3
Task 5.5:
• 6 meetings with City Staff, additional
departments, in addition to the Weekly check-in
and Task 3 meetings.
Task 5.6:
• 2 meetings with City Staff, additional
departments, in addition to the Weekly check-in
and Task 3 meetings. This task will span into Task
SECTION 2: APPROACH & SCOPE
15 City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards Walking Activity Heat Map (Strava Metro)
Biking Activity Heat Map (Strava Metro)
City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards 16 Approach
In Task 6 we will assemble the collective materials
from the previous tasks into the Final Objective
Design Standards and Streetscape & Public Realm
Standards. We will work with staff to determine the
best format to implement (discussed in more detail
below), and distill a significant amount of process
into a clear and concise presentations highlighting
the overarching strategies, practical application, and
the personal touches that came from the Community
and Stakeholder Outreach process. Our team places
a great value in presenting how the ideas were
sourced and refined through the community process,
it is an essential path to adoption.
Final Code / Plan Amendments.
Once we have crafted the content in Tasks 4 and 5,
the next step is finalizing their format, and strategy
for integration. Section 20.310.004 contains primarily
objective standards, while area plans contain both
objective standards and subjective guidelines. The
outcome of the assignment may be codified in
different ways:
• A stand-alone document that establishes
design standards for residential and mixed-use
residential projects. If adopted by resolution,
the document could be more easily amended
from time to time. This option could also allow
for more detailed diagrams or photographs in
an integrated booklet. Cross-references to this
booklet in the zoning ordinance would help
ensure that these standards do not get missed
by applicants or future staff members.
• Amendments to Section 20.310.004 to refine and
augment existing standards. In this alternative,
objective design standards would remain within
the Zoning Ordinance alongside the development
standards and other regulations applicable to the
project site. The City may consider amending area
plans only if necessary, retaining them as written,
since they will continue to pertain to 100% nonresidential projects and can continue to be enforced for residential and residential mixed
use projects that are not subject to the Housing
Accountability Act. Alternatively, the objective
Task 6
Review and Adoption
standards contained in the area plans could be
integrated into the Zoning Ordinance, and the
subjective guidelines would remain in the area
plans for use on projects that are not subject to
the Housing Accountability Act.
Through the project, we will work with staff to
develop an approach that best fits within the City’s
regulatory framework.
CEQA Review. The scope of zoning revisions
anticipated represent implementation of adopted
plans and policy. Therefore, the revisions are
expected to be categorically exempt under CEQA
and/or addressed by the CEQA documents prepared
for the General Plan and area plans. The project does
not propose to increase development beyond what
was analyzed in the General Plan or area plans. As
a result, the scope of work does not include CEQA
review.
How does the community see its public realm? What
are the opportunities in their perspective?
SECTION 2: APPROACH & SCOPE
17 City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards • Planning Commission Hearings (2)
• City Council Hearings (2)
• (2) Meeting presentations (draft and final) (with
slight revisions to tailor to PC and CC audiences)
• Additional data, graphics, and other support, as
needed
• Final Objective Design Standards and Streetscape
& Public Realm Standards
Task 6 Meetings:
Task 6 Deliverables:
Scope
Public Hearings.
Prepare materials for and make formal presentations
at up to two Planning Commission and two City
Council public hearings to support adoption of the
Objective Design Standards and Streetscape & Public
Realm Standards.
Final Objective Design Standards and Streetscape &
Public Realm Standards.
Based on City Council action, prepare the final
Objective Design Standards and Streetscape & Public
Realm Standards.
Similar at a glance, deeply varied in the details. The interest rests in the collective, rather than a single building.
City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards 18 Urban Field is an urban design collaborative
founded by Jane Lin and Heidi Sokolowsky in 2014.
The practice has grown and evolved into a team
of five partners, each with specialized expertise,
based in the San Francisco Bay Area. We are a
small practice with global expertise. We offer
personal and professional service to our clients
and the communities we work with. Our mission is
to transform urban landscapes by uniting urban
design expertise, advocacy for the public realm,
and innovative development strategies. We envision
inclusive and sustainable cities that connect lives
and uplift communities.
Our team is led by Ryan Call, an architect who
specializes in urban design, and planning a variety
of residential and commercial building typologies.
Ryan will be the primary representative for the
purposes of this RFP and is authorized to bind the
contract. UF Partner John Bela, a landscape architect
who specializes in public realm strategy and public
space design innovation, will lead the Public Realm
and Street Standards development. Founder Jane
Lin, an architect, planner, and educator will lead
the community engagement, and public private
partnerships efforts.
PRIME CONSULTANT
Urban Field, LLC
Ryan Call, AIA, Partner, Primary Representative
for the Proposal
Jane Lin, AIA, Partner
John Bela, ASLA, Partner
Donna Mena, Designer
6774 Kenilworth Avenue
El Cerrito, CA 94530
510.260.4306
[email protected]
urbanfieldstudio.com
Services: Urban Design, Architectural Design,
Landscape Architecture, Community Engagement,
Project Strategy
Urban Field’s team is SF Bay Area based
SECTION 3: FIRM DESCRIPTION
19 City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards urbanfieldstudio.com
Oakley Library Feasibility
Study
CLIENT
City of Oakley
YEAR COMPLETED
2023
CONTACT
Joshua McMurray
City Manager
Oakley, CA
[email protected]
TEAM
Urban Field Studio (Prime)
Economic & Planning Systems,
Inc.
HKIT Architects
The City of Oakley, CA wanted to build a new library within their central Civic campus. The study started with an exploration of selling a nearby city-owned lot to help fund the new library. Urban Field Studio worked with EPS to test the feasibility of housing to fund library construction for the two properties to study how much residual land value could be captured from the housing site to contribute to funding a new library. The study included economic and physical feasibility testing of a range of housing types from single-family homes to apartments and a conceptual plan of a library in collaboration with HKIT Architects.Site testing included conceptual renderings of a design that connected the library to an existing city park and referenced the design of existing buildings on the Civic campus. This three month project ended with a presentation to Oakley City Council on December 2023.
PREFERRED CONCEPT LIBRARY PLAN - WITHOUT NOTES 12/21/2023 Preferred Option without Flex Rooms:
24,950 gsf
Preferred Option With Flex Rooms:
27,900 gsf
Downtown Vision Plan: Dublin CA
SCS Parcel Vision and Community Outreach: Dublin CA
Oakley Library Feasibility Study: Oakley, CA
San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan: Albany, CA Housing Element Site Tests: Palo Alto, CA Milpitas Metro Specific Plan: Milpitas, CA
City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards 20 Urban Field is organized to provide the City of South
San Francisco flexibility, a wide range of expertise,
and a hands-on approach to design development and
production. In support, UF Partners John Bela and
Jane Lin will lead their respective roles Our proposed
staffing structure starts with Ryan Call, who will act
as the primary point of contact for the City and
Principal-in-Charge for all assignments. Donna Mena
and Courtney Ferris are versatile designers who
will assist with diagrams, community engagement
exhibits under the direction of the three UF partners.
Martha Miller, Principal and Owner of Miller Planning
Associates is a skilled land use planner and project
manager specializing in zoning regulations and
development standards. In her role supporting and
organizational framework approach and the drafting
of objective standards, Martha will bring her in-depth
understanding of how to translate community vision
into a usable set of development regulations that
achieve results to the project.
Jean Eisberg, Owner and Principal of Lexington
Planning, will collaborate with Martha and Urban Field
to evaluate existing standards and organization,
and refine and augment standards in a way that
anticipates how standards will be implemented by
project sponsors. Jean lends deep experience on
both sides of the table, implementing State Density
Bonus Law and State streamlining bills through her
entitlement assistance work, and preparing objective
standards on behalf of jurisdictions.
Martha Miller
Planning
Associates
Principal / Owner
Martha Miller
STAFFING TAILORED TO YOUR PROJECT NEEDS
UF Partner
Public Realm
Activation, Design
and Analysis,
Landscape
Architecture
Lexington
Planning
Principal / Owner
Partner
Master Planning,
Retail Planning,
Site Testing,
Conceptual
Architecture
Landscape
Architecture,
Graphic Design
UF Partner
Urban Design/
Architecture /
Planning
Community
Engagement
Urban Design,
Architecture,
Community
Engagement
John Bela
Jean Eisberg
Ryan Call
Donna Mena
Jane Lin
Courtney Ferris
Principal in Charge UF Design /
Production Support
UF Supporting Partners
PROJECT STAFFING
Planning Subconsultants
SECTION 4: PROJECT STAFFING
21 City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards
RYAN CALL
Urban Field Studio
Partner, AIA
[email protected]
With over 20 years of experience in planning and architectural design, Ryan has developed a particular expertise in master planning mixed-use urban communities with a focus on vibrant retail districts and public spaces. His primary interest lies in the strategic aspects of the design and development process where he has assisted both developers and municipalities in the entitlements process. His presentation expertise has proven key to the success of many projects, especially during the critical public process and approvals phases.
DESIGN GUIDELINES and OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
City of Larkspur Objective Design Standards, Larkspur, CA City of Palo Alto Site Testing of Development Standards, Palo Alto, CA Green Tree Mixed-Use Retail and Residential Standards, Vacaville, CA Richland Road Retail Standards, Auburn, AL
Latimer Square PUD Design Guidelines, Bloomington Indiana City of Arcata, Site Testing Design Standards, Arcata, CA
PUBLIC OUTREACH AND EDUCATION
Downtown Dublin Vision, Dublin, CA
SCS Property Public Outreach, Dublin, CA
Latimer Square Public Workshop and Charrette, Bloomington, IN Telegraph Avenue Public Workshop and Charrette, Berkeley, CA Harold Way Workshop and Charette, Berkeley, CA
MIXED-USE MASTER PLANS
San Jose State University Master Plan, San Jose, CA
University of Chicago Washington Park Innovation District, Chicago, Il Downtown Dublin Vision, City of Dublin, CA*
Dublin SCS Properties, City of Dublin, CA*
NewPark Mall Mixed-Use Specific Plan, Newark, CA
Mueller Aldrich Street District, Austin, TX*
University of Chicago 53rd Street District Mixed-Use Master Plan* Project Elevate, Elk Grove, CA*
University Town Center East, Sarasota, Florida*
PRIVATE SECTOR ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS Austin Energy Headquarters, Austin, TX*
Hillsdale Shopping Center North Block, San Mateo, CA*
Stonestown Galleria Anchor Redevelopment, San Francisco, CA* HSC Mervyns Department Store Reconfiguration, San Mateo, CA* HSC South Block Facade Improvements + ATT Shell Design* Tucson Mall Anchor Redevelopment, Tucson, CA*
Eastridge Shopping Center, San Jose, CA*
PROFESSIONAL AWARDS
AIA California Urban Design Award for Downtown Dublin
ICSC Gold Award for Hillsdale Shopping Center - San Mateo ULI Apgar Award for 2015
EDUCATION
Washington State University,
2001
Bachelor of Architecture
Syracuse University Firenze,
2000
Study Abroad - Urban Design
CERTIFICATIONS
Licensed Architect in California
and Indiana
Accreditation by NCARB
ASSOCIATIONS
American Institute of Architects
Urban Land Institute Full Member
*Projects completed while Ryan
was the Director of Urban Design
at ELS Architecture and Urban
Design in Berkeley, CA.
City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards 22
JOHN BELA
Urban Field Studio
Partner, ASLA
[email protected]
John is an urban designer and landscape architect with two decades of experience leading multidisciplinary teams to design and deliver complex masterplan frameworks, award-winning public realm strategy, and innovative streetscapes and public spaces. A former Partner at Gehl and co-founder of Rebar, he works with communities, municipalities, and private sector partners to create diverse, equitable, and resilient places.
John is skilled at leading user experience and ethnographic research and applying research insights and spatial data to inform strategic planning and innovative design. John possesses excellent design, leadership, facilitation, collaboration, and public speaking skills.
SELECT PROJECTS
SF Downtown Public Realm Action Plan, San Francisco, CA North Bayshore Neighborhood Masterplan, Mountain View, CA Castro Street Plaza and strEATs pilot, Mountain View, CA Rivian Normal Campus Masterplan, Normal, IL
UCSD Southern Gateway Masterplan, San Diego, CA
The Future of Stephen Avenue, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Places for People Downtown Public Realm Strategy, Vancouver, BC, Canada
Civic Center Public Realm Strategy + Public Space Plan San Francisco, CA Re-imagine 9th Street, Louisville, KY
Pittsburgh Public Realm Action Plan, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Monon Boulevard Urban Strategy and Public Realm Design, Carmel, Indiana
India Basin Masterplan, San Francisco, CA
La Placita, Mission District, San Francisco
TEACHING
Understanding the human scale through seating design and fabrication, Spring 2022, UC Berkeley College of Environmental Design Distrito Purisima-Alameda, Monterrey, Mexico, UD Studio, UT Austin, 2016 Wynwood Miami, Urban Design Studio, University of Arkansas, 2014 Landscape Architecture Final Studio, UC Berkeley, 2013
PROFESSIONAL AWARDS
Monon Boulevard, 2022 ULI Americas Award for Excellence Finalist The Future of Stephen Avenue, Award of Excellence, Canadian Society of Landscape Architects (CSLA)
India Basin, 2017 Best of Design Award for Urban Design, The Architects Newspaper
India Basin, Award of Merit in the Urban Design category, AIA California Council Design Awards
COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES
Executive Director, Park(ing) Day Network
Co-founder of Rebar Art and Design Studio, the creators of Park(ing) Day
EDUCATION
Masters of Landscape
Architecture & Environmental
Planning University of California,
Berkeley, 2005
Bachelor of Science Biology and
Biochemistry, Cum Laude, Sigma
Xi University of Massachusetts,
Amherst, 1995
Sculpture, Performance
The School of the Art Institute of
Chicago, IL, 1994
CERTIFICATIONS
John is a Registered Landscape
Architect with the State of
California,
US. License No. 5678
ASSOCIATIONS
American Society of
Landscape Architects
Urban Land Institute, Associate
Member
SPUR Member
RECENT PUBLICATIONS
‘Pandemic-era Street Spaces:
Parklets, Patios, and the Future
of the Public Realm’
ArchDaily, 9/29/2021
‘Learning from Copenhagen:
A Focus on Everyday Life’,
ArchDaily, 12/15/2021
‘San Francisco Bicycle Culture,
Transforming Market Street’
Bicycle Urbanism. Re-mobility
and Transforming cities. a+u:
Architecture and Urbanism
2021:01
SECTION 4: PROJECT STAFFING
23 City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards
JANE LIN
Urban Field Studio
Founding Partner, AIA
[email protected]
Jane is a licensed architect and urban designer with twenty years of experience working with municipalities and agencies in the San Francisco Bay Area and beyond. Her work includes urban design for streetscape improvements, transit area planning, revitalizing mixeduse districts, and supporting housing policy. Jane is a lecturer at UC Berkeley and teaches architecture to school aged students (K-12).
It is important to Jane that large groups of non-designers become empowered with creative communication skills because they are the key to making our communities better.
SELECT PROJECTS
North Hollywood Station Guide for Development, Metro Joint Development*
Universal City/Studio City Station Mobility Hub Community Engagement* Milpitas Metro Specific Plan, City of Milpitas*
Irvington Station Area Plan and Station Plan, City of Fremont and BART* San Jose State Campus Master Plan*
Downtown Dublin Vision, City of Dublin*
Alisal District Identity Plan, City of Salinas*
Union City Station District Plan, City of Union City
Coliseum Development Study, City of Oakland CA
San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan, City of Albany*
Diamond Bar General Plan Update, City of Diamond Bar
Urban Design Consulting, City of Anaheim
Old Town Newark Specific Plan, City of Newark*
Emeryville Objective Design Standards, City of Emeryville San Leandro Multi-Family Design Standards, City of San Leandro* Berkeley Middle Housing Studies, City of Berkeley, CA
Site Feasibility Testing, Port of Redwood City
ENGAGEMENT AND OUTREACH
* Projects with extensive engagement and outreach
TEACHING | Lecturer, UC Berkeley
ED 201 Master of Urban Design Studio
CP140 Urban Design and Placemaking
CP 208 Masters of City Planning Urban Design Studio
RDEV 230 Public Private Partnerships, Masters of Real Estate (MRED+D)
COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES
ULI Urban Plan Curriculum Contributor and Piedmont High School Champion
ULI TAP Chair for the City of St. Helena and Panelist for the City of Dublin Panel Discussion Organizer for the San Francisco Urban Film Fest Piedmont Unified School District Facilities Steering Committee Piedmont Arts Fund Chair and Piedmont Makers Board Member Piedmont Racial Equity Campaign, Committee Member
Piedmont Housing Committee, Appointed Member
Piedmont Mountain Biking Team Coach
EDUCATION
University of California, Berkeley
Master of City Planning with
Concentration in Land Use, 2005
University of California, Berkeley
Master of Science in
Architecture with Concentration
in Building
Science, 2005
University of California, Berkeley
Bachelor of Arts in Architecture,
1999
CERTIFICATIONS
Licensed Architect in California
LEED AP - ND Leadership in
Energy and Environmental
Design
Accredited Professional with a
Specialty in Neighborhood
Design
ASSOCIATIONS
National League of Cities and ULI,
Rose Center for Public
Leadership,
Faculty Advisor to the City of
Tucson
ULI Member PPP Council
AIA East Bay Member
SPUR Member
SCUP Member
PROFESSIONAL AWARDS
Artist-In-Residence Educator
with
LEAP Arts in Education
Eisner Prize in City Planning, UC
Berkeley
City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards 24 [email protected] | 626-616-9303
Education
Master of City and Regional
Planning
California Polytechnic University,
San Luis Obispo
Bachelor of Science in Industrial
Engineering
Purdue University
Certifications & Affiliations
American Institute of Certified
Planners
American Planning Association,
California Central Coast San Luis
Obispo Subsection Director (2015 -
2017)
Cal Poly City and Regional
Planning Advisory Council
(CiRPAC), Chair (2019-2021)
Previous Work Experience
Lisa Wise Consulting, Inc
RRM Design Group
Dyett & Bhatia, Urban and
Regional Planners
San Luis Obispo County
Department of Planning and
Building
Martha Miller, AICP
Principal and Owner, Miller Planning Associates LLC
Martha is a skilled land use planner and project manager specializing in community planning, development regulations, and community engagement.
With 20 years of experience working in private firms and for public agencies, Martha brings an in-depth understanding of how to translate community vision into a usable set of plans, policies, and regulations that achieve results.
Martha’s approach is marked by carefully assessing each client’s needs and resources, and bringing best practices from form-based, performance-based, and Euclidean applications.
Relevant Project Experience
San Leandro Objective Development Standards for Housing West Sacramento Zoning Ordinance Modernization Project (ZOMP!) Dixon Zoning Code and Map Update
Hermosa Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Assessment and Update (ZONE IN Hermosa)
Santa Barbara New Zoning Ordinance
Norma Triangle (West Hollywood) Neighborhood Overlay District and Design Guidelines
Goleta New Zoning Ordinance and Coastal Implementation Plan Hayward Industrial District Regulations Update
Morro Bay Comprehensive Zoning Code and Coastal Implementation Plan Update
Newark Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance Update
Honolulu Transit Oriented Development Land Use Ordinance Amendments
Tahoe Region Local Planning Implementation
Town of Mammoth Lakes Commercial Districts Development Standards Placer County Area Plan and Implementing Ordinance
Porterville Development Code Update
Princeton (San Mateo County) General Plan, Zoning, and Local Coastal Plan Update (Plan Princeton)
San Carlos Zoning Ordinance Update
San Gabriel “Greening the Code” Zoning Amendments
South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance Update
SECTION 4: PROJECT STAFFING
25 City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards
EDUCATION
Master of City and
Regional Planning,
University of
California, Berkeley
Bachelor of Arts,
History and Asian
Studies, Dartmouth
College
WORK HISTORY
Principal, Lexington
Planning LLC • 2014
– Present
Principal Planner,
Urban Planning
Partners • Oakland,
CA, 2013 – 2014
Senior Associate,
Dyett & Bhatia • San
Francisco, CA, 2007
– 2013
Project Assistant, City
of Oakland
Redevelopment
Agency • Oakland,
CA, 2006 – 2007
Jean Eisberg, AICP ∙ Principal
Jean has nearly 20 years of experience in the public, private, and non-profit planning and urban policy sectors. She has extensive experience as a project manager, facilitating complex multi-stakeholder planning assignments for municipal clients, private developers, and institutions. Her work focuses on area plans, housing policy, zoning ordinances, and development project review and entitlement. She has helped to entitle 1,600 housing units and 1.4 million square feet of commercial and industrial/R&D development. Jean is a recurring guest lecturer at the University of California, Berkeley and San Jose State University.
Area Plans
City of Albany San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan (2023 NorCal APA Award) City of Newark Old Town Newark Specific Plan (w/ Rhoades Planning Group) (2024 NorCal APA Award)
City & County of Honolulu Downtown & Kalihi Neighborhood TOD Plans City of Palo Alto North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan (consulting planner) City of Milpitas Milpitas Metro Specific Plan (w/ Urban Field Studio) City of San Diego Commercial/Imperial Corridor Master Plan City of San Diego Southeastern & Encanto Neighborhoods Community Plans Zoning Ordinances & Design Guidelines
City of Albany Economic Development Ordinance
City of Emeryville Objective Development & Design Standards City of Emeryville Design Guidelines; Parking, Benefits, and Sign Ordinance City of Hayward Industrial District Regulations (w/ RRM Design Group) City of Palo Alto Objective Design Standards
City of Palo Alto Retail Protection Ordinance
City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Housing Implementation City of San Leandro Objective Design Standards (w/ Miller Planning Assoc.) Contract Planning & Entitlement Assistance
Rhoades Planning Group Development Entitlement Applications (various) City of Albany UC Village Mixed Use (175 senior housing units, 45,000 sq. ft. retail) City of Foster City Foster Square (420 senior housing units, 30,000 sq. ft. retail) City of Lafayette Woodbury Highlands (99 housing units), The Brant (66 units) General Plans and Housing Elements
City of Carlsbad Housing Element
City of Emeryville General Plan and EIR
City of Lodi General Plan and Housing Element
City of Palo Alto Housing Element (consulting planner)
EDUCATION
City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards 26
FEES AND CHARGES
Task Description Cost ($)
1 Project Management / Primary Contract / Weekly Meetings 7,000 Team Kick Off Meeting / Setup for File Management / Weekly Meetings 4,000 Community Engagement Strategy 3,000
2 Existing Conditions 30,000
2.1A Planning Doc Review and Summary 20,000
2.1B 3 innovative example Case Studies - Best Practices 3,000
2.2 Site Tour / Research / Maps 7,000
3 Community Outreach 50,000
3.1 15 One Hour Stakeholder Interviews (during task 4 and 5) 10,000
3.2 High Level Historic Context Study 4,000
3.3 2 Community Workshops and One Community Pop-Up (during task 4 and 5) 23,000
3.4 Online Survey Content 2,000
3.5 (2) Joint City Council / Planning Commission Workshops 11,000 4 Single Family and Multi-Family Objective Design Standards 60,000
4.1 Conceptualize New Single Family and Multi-Family Objective Design Standards 40,000
4.2 Refine New Single Family and Multi-Family Objective Design Standards 20,000 5 Streetscape and Public Realm Objective Design Standards 60,000
5.1-5.3 Development of Draft Streetscape and Public Realm Objective Design Standards 40,000
5.4-5.6 Refine Streetscape and Public Realm Objective Design Standardsig 20,000 6 Review and Adoption 23,000
6.1 Final Code and Plan Amendments - Structural Integration with Existing Codesi 5,000
6.2 Initial Round of Planning Commission and City Council Meetingsi 9,000
6.3 Second Round of Planning Commission and City Council Meetings 9,000 T Total Project Costs 230,000*
*Items additional to the scope included historical context study, additional stakeholder and city council meetings, Innovative Case Studies for both building and streetscape / public realm standards (Task 2.1B and Task 5.2). For purposes of Quality Control and thorough design work, Urban Field Principals play a significant role in the production of the standards exhibits, writing, and presentations.
SECTION 5: FEES AND CHARGES
27 City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards
RATE SCHEDULE
(Rates effective through 12/31/2024)
Charges for Services:
Charges for basic and additional services shall be based on the following rates and are subject to revision annually:
Principal-In-Charge: $245.00 per hour
Consulting Principal: $210.00 per hour
Urban Designer I: $195.00 per hour
Urban Designer II: $150.00 per hour
Consultant’s Time: 1.15 times consultant’s charges
Automobile Travel: Prevailing IRS allowance
Reimbursable Expenses/
Reproduction Costs: 1.15 times charge
All other costs: Direct reimbursement
Reimbursable Expenses:
Reimbursable Expenses are in addition to the compensation for basic and additional services and include actual expenditures made by Urban Field Studio or its professional consultants in the interest of the Project for the expenses listed in the following subparagraphs:
1. Expense of transportation, including rental car insurance (loss damage waiver/ collision damage waiver and liability coverage), and living when traveling in connection with the Project; conference call services, and fees paid for securing approval of authorities having jurisdiction over the project.
2. Expense of reproductions including computer plotting, postage, overnight priority mail and handling of Drawings and Specifications.
3. If authorized in advance by the Owner, expense of overtime work requiring higher than regular rates and expense of renderings or models for the Owner's use.
URBAN FIELD STUDIO 510.207.9537 Page 1
1423 Broadway [email protected]
Oakland, CA 94612 www.urbanfieldstudio.com
HOURLY BILLING RATES
General Notes:
1. Plans, Diagrams, Guidelines and Standards will be delivered to the City of South San Francisco in both pdf and Indesign format.
2. The costs for the regular check-in meetings outlined in Task 1 are built into the subsequent tasks.
3. Travel expenses will be considered a reimbursable expense.
4. Due to the dynamic nature of the work represented here, we may allocate funds not used in certain tasks to other tasks.
5. All meetings with the exception of the Kick-Off, Site Tour, Community Workshops, Pop-Up, and Task 6 City Council Meetings are assumed to be Zoom Meetings additional in-person meetings will require additional time and expense.
6. Invoices will be submitted monthly and are due upon receipt. Invoices more than 60 days overdue will be subject to a handling charge of 1.5 percent per month. If the Owner fails to make payment when due, the Architect may, at its option, upon seven days written notice to the Owner, suspend performance of services.
Architect’s services may be terminated by either party upon seven days’ written notice. In the event of termination that is not the fault of the Architect, the Architect shall be compensated for services performed and expenses incurred prior to termination.
RATE SCHEDULE
(Rates effective through 12/31/2024)
Charges for Services:
Charges for basic and additional services shall be based on the following rates and are subject to revision annually:
Principal-In-Charge: $245.00 per hour
Consulting Principal: $210.00 per hour
Urban Designer I: $195.00 per hour
Urban Designer II: $150.00 per hour
Consultant’s Time: 1.15 times consultant’s charges
Automobile Travel: Prevailing IRS allowance
Reimbursable Expenses/
Reproduction Costs: 1.15 times charge
All other costs: Direct reimbursement
Reimbursable Expenses:
Reimbursable Expenses are in addition to the compensation for basic and additional services and include actual expenditures made by Urban Field Studio or its professional consultants in the interest of the Project for the expenses listed in the following subparagraphs:
1. Expense of transportation, including rental car insurance (loss damage waiver/ collision damage waiver and liability coverage), and living when traveling in connection with the Project; conference call services, and fees paid for securing approval of authorities having jurisdiction over the project.
2. Expense of reproductions including computer plotting, postage, overnight priority mail and handling of Drawings and Specifications.
3. If authorized in advance by the Owner, expense of overtime work requiring higher than regular rates and expense of renderings or models for the Owner's use.
URBAN FIELD STUDIO 510.207.9537 Page 1
1423 Broadway [email protected]
Oakland, CA 94612 www.urbanfieldstudio.com
City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards 28
LINKS AND REFERENCES FOR SIMILAR WORK
BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN STANDARDS: MULTI-FAMILY AND RESIDENTIAL MIXED-USE DISTRICTS Residential Window Trim or Recesses
Windows for residential uses are required to have trim a least three inches wide and one-half inch in depth or be recessed at least two inches from the surrounding exterior wall plane in order to create shadow lines and visual interest.
Window trim and recesses help to
define windows and create shadow
lines and visual cues along the
facade.
Recessed
window with
no trim
Window with
trim
This document provides a framework for how to approach proj frontages, parking design and location, and neighborhood conn Zoning District Development Standards
The second step is to identify the project’s applicable zoning di any development standards that are applicable to that specific Zoning Ordinance includes district regulations that establish t envelope and density. This includes development standards su setbacks, building height, lot coverage, residential density, and ratio (FAR) that shape the massing of the building.
Regulatory Framework and Site Contex
The first step in approaching project design is to refer to the Ci General Plan and any applicable area or specific plans to under policy direction for the site location, and neighborhood context how the project will complement nearby uses and how the pro can relate to adjacent amenities, such as transit stops or parks buildings, including their entrances, uses, and orientations.
Project: San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan
Team Members: Jean Eisberg / Jane Lin
Year Completed: 2022
Reference: Jeff Bond
Community Development Director
[email protected]
510.528.5769
1000 San Pablo Avenue
Albany, CA 94706
Project: Union City ODS
Team Members: UF / Lex / M.Miller
Year Completed: 2023
Reference: Carmela Campbell
Community Development Director
[email protected]
510.675.5316
34009 Alvarado-Niles Rd
Union City, CA 94587
Project: City of Larkspur ODDS
Team Members: Ryan Call (w/EMC & ELS)
Year Completed: 2023
Reference: Elise Semonian
Community Development Director
[email protected]
415.927.6713
400 Magnolia Ave.
Larkspur, CA 94939
Project: City of Palo Alto ODDS and Site
Testing
Team Members: Jean Eisberg / Jane Lin
Year Completed: 2023
Reference: Jonathan Lait / Director
[email protected]
650.329.2679
285 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 100,
Palo Alto, CA 94301
BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN STANDARDS: MULTI-FAMILY AND RESIDENTIAL MIXED-USE DISTRICTS B Residential Window Trim or Recesses
Windows for residential uses are required to have trim a least three inches wide and one-half inch in depth or be recessed at least two inches from the surrounding exterior wall plane in order to create shadow lines and visual interest.
Plan S
For resi
provide
demons
recesse
the min
standar
Window trim and recesses help to
define windows and create shadow
lines and visual cues along the
facade.
Recessed
window with
no trim
Window with
trim
BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN STANDARDS: MULTI-FAMILY AND
Approach to Designing
This document provides a framework for how to approach project frontages, parking design and location, and neighborhood connect Zoning District Development Standards
The second step is to identify the project’s applicable zoning distric any development standards that are applicable to that specific dist Zoning Ordinance includes district regulations that establish the b envelope and density. This includes development standards such a setbacks, building height, lot coverage, residential density, and floo ratio (FAR) that shape the massing of the building.
Regulatory Framework and Site Context
The first step in approaching project design is to refer to the City’s General Plan and any applicable area or specific plans to understan policy direction for the site location, and neighborhood context. Als how the project will complement nearby uses and how the propose can relate to adjacent amenities, such as transit stops or parks, or buildings, including their entrances, uses, and orientations.
Link!
Link!
Link!
Link!
SECTION 6: PROJECT LINKS
29 City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards REF. FOR PUBLIC REALM DESIGN / OUTREACH
Project: Downtown Dublin Vision
Team Members: Ryan Call / Jane Lin
Year Completed: 2023
Reference: Hazel Wetherford
Asst. Community Development Director
[email protected]
925.452.2158
100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568
Project: Castro Street Pedestrian Plaza
Team Members: John Bela (while Project
Director at Gehl)
Year Completed: 2021
Reference: Aruna Bodduna,
Public Works Department Lead
[email protected]
(650) 903-6311
500 Castro St #2, Mountain View, CA
Project: Monon Boulevard
Team Members: John Bela (while
Project Director at Gehl)
Year Completed: 2019
Reference: Honorable James Brainard
Former Mayor
317.571.2401
Project: Milpitas Metro Specific Plan
Team Members: Jane Lin
Year Completed: 2023
Reference: Ned Thomas
City Manager
[email protected]
408.586.3059
455 E Calaveras Blvd,
Milpitas, CA 95035
Link!
City of South San Francisco / Objective Design Building and Streetscape, Public Realm Standards 30