APPENDIX
Workshop #2 Live Poll Results
Question #1: Did you attend the first workshop for the East Side
Innovation District Vision
Plan held on March 24th? Responses
a. Yes 34
b. No 38
Question #2: Age Responses
a. 18 and under 0
b. 19-25 0
c. 26-45 19
d. 46-64 40
e. 65 and over 13
Question: 3: Race and Ethnicity: (may select more than one) (Multiple
choice) Responses
a. White 53
b. Black 0
c. Asian 9
d. Native Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander 0
e. American Indian/Alaska
Native 0
f. Hispanic or LatinX 4
g. Other 8
0 0
19
40 13
0 10 20 30 40 50
34
38
32 34 36 38 40
53 0
9 0
0 4
8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Question #4: Which of the following describes why you decided to come to tonight’s workshop?
(Select all that apply to
you) Responses
a. I live in San Carlos 49 b. I work in San Carlos 12 c. I own a business or
property in the Plan Area 16 d. I want to know more
about this vision plan
process 20
e. I want to help inform future development on the
East Side 19
f. Other 5
Website Feedback Form Comments (received between 6/25/21 and 7/9/21)
Proposed Circulation Strategies
Multi-Modal Streets
Transitional Shared Streets
Non-Vehicular Connections
Transit Network Enhancements
District Parking
Questions? Comments? Please share your feedback on these strategies below:
Did you attend Workshop 2 on June 9th Great job including extensive non-vehicular streets. Make sure these seamlessly
interconnect with the rest of the city No
We need more road and road space with all of the construction to build more housing and business offices.... NOT MORE BIKE LANES THAT BICYCLISTS DONT PAY ANY ROAD USE FEES AND CAUSE SLOW DOWN OR ACCIDENTS BECAUSE THEY THINK NO PROBLEMS FOR RUBBING STOP LIGHTS OR STOP SIGNS AND WEAVING NEAR CARS.. It's a disgrace!!! you already have your minds made up and so does city hall..
Yes
Bike lanes great, but enable sufficient parking so that people do not move car parking
into residential area No
49
12
16
20
19
5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
1. Multi-modal streets should be combined with green streets where possible.
2. Transitional shared streets could be problematic with large trucks interacting with passenger cars and pedestrian / bikers. I'm currently very uncomfortable when I find myself occasionally driving down some of the east-west streets with lots of truck use to get between Old County and Industrial.
3. Non-vehicular pedestrian or bike connections are good if they are attractively landscaped and connect the office developments to Caltrain smoothly so they will encourage commuters to walk or bike the "last mile" from the train station to work. I'm not sure how much use north-south paths will get without a specific destination at each end.
4. Transit network enhancements are good. The more, the better.
5. District parking with shared public parking garages is good, and deleting surface parking is also good. Without public garages, all new developments will require on-site parking which increases development cost, and encourages auto use (especially if the parking is free).
Yes
In regards to protecting quality of life for the low-income housing unit on East San Carlos Avenue. It is located on 907 East San Carlos Ave, and many children live in the apartment complex. We experience high volume of cutthrough traffic, including large freight trucks, speeding vehicles (sometimes up to 45 mph), shuttle services that come through many times per hour (pre-pandemic), and back-up of traffic while cars wait to turn onto Industrial Avenue. The zoning there is Mixed Usage, yet the apartment complex is the only residential unit on the entirety of the strip on the East Side, and often feels like the forgotten member in community discussions for the innovation district. Many residents in this humble community have felt neglected by the overall development in the neighborhood, as hundreds of vehicles race through this street and bikers, including speeding e-scooters come through, hotel guests walk by the units late at night (often intoxicated), and the street is not included in beautfication efforts.
Overall, the plan for more green space and better quality of life is excellent, but please don't forget about 907 East San Carlos Avenue, a MidPen low-income housing structure, we are one of the few dedicated low-income housing units in the city.
Sometimes protecting rights for low income housing isn't just about building more, it's continuing to preserve what already exists.
No
In prior meetings there was mention of making Montgomery St. a cul-de-sac to prevent
cut through traffic. When will this happen? Yes
The single family neighborhood needs the streets to be partially cut de sac'ed to prevent the 10,000 new vehicles from cutting through. This needs to be done now before any additional construction starts.
Yes
I am a business and property owner on Terminal. I was not able to attend live workshop but watched after on website. I did attend the initial meeting for property owners a few months back. There appears to be a great amount of people involved outside of plan area, those who live in the small area of residential who are voicing the greatest opinions... With all due respect they live between the 101, train tracks and El Camino, in addition to a small airport. I do not believe anyone with residential property in East Side area will ever be satisfied with commercial property, traffic, etc. Unfortunately for them they need to move to the "other side of the tracks" if they want what it sounds like they are asking. I own a home in San Mateo between the freeway, train tracks, El Camino so I totally get where they are coming from but I also understand that none of
No
those arteries will change so it is what it is. I will need to move neighborhoods to get away from it if I don't accept it.
That being said, I will say that I do periodically drive down Hall to Cherry to cross on Industrial northbound during high traffic times NOT to cut through traffic but for safety reasons. I use the light at Cherry to safely and more easily get to northbound lane to get onto the 101. The traffic light makes for a safer way to get across the street. Maybe if a traffic light was put in at Terminal it would help..? This would be a light separation between residential and commercial areas.
The complainers also talked about Holly a lot. Maybe there could be some traffic flow revamp of 101 exiting traffic to use Harbor and Brittan rather than Holly. Since these are more commercial streets maybe this is a way to make them happy. I can say that I have occasionally exited on Harbor and driven down Industrial to get to Terminal a few times. This does not help northbound but could help southbound travelers.
None of the above helps with the site area but it does address those who seem to be most vocal. I will say that it sounds like the City of San Carlos is trying to plan
accordingly and thoughtfully which is a good thing. Not sure how you are going to do it but good luck.
"New connections that break down the size of blocks..." Love it. That's one current flaw with this area that stands out and this really resonates with me. I love the idea (in an earlier slide) of using the old existing train tracks as one potential avenue for making a new connections.
Active frontages - also great. One concern I have is that the diversity of businesses is great. As a resident while I don't use most of the business, part of that is almost certainly because of how the frontages are setup in this area. So many of these businesses really discourage people, but encourage cars. They will just have cars parked on the side walks, or ugly 3 car strip-mall-esq parking "lots" at the front of the building that discourage people from walking around, looking in, and engaging people and store front. If future development requirements can fix that, I think it would go a long way in making the current buisnesses bring more vitality to the community. I'd also add, that I suspect the property owners have little motivation to make these updates, and finding ways to encourage them would be amazing. I worry the property owners see more value in doing nothing and accepting they get currently, than improving what they have which comes with big financial investments and the risk of losing existing tenants.
Last point on frontages. I'll give some examples. 985 E. San Carlos Ave. (check it out on Google maps). That business I think a Japanese furniture import business) took an ugly building and really made it nice. The problem they still have is that the front effectively kills the sidewalk and the ability for human beings to use it, and at least in the Google Map image you can't see what they do. I have been by many times when the garage doors are open and you can see all of this remarkable work being done. I want to see what they're doing and the community to see it. That makes people talk about it, and be proud of their neighborhood. Also, look further east to 973. Those ugly
No
rounded metal buildings. I wonder if they used to be more associated with the airport, the military, or something. Either way, they are ugly, but put some paint on those, add some windows to the front and you have some really unique and interesting structures that most people don't see anywhere. That's one good example of what I mentioned previously: motivating owners to fix their existing spaces. These ones in particular, are unique, and I'd love for them to remain, but do so in a way that makes them more accessible or interesting for everyone and not strictly functional for the folks work inside. Other buildings in the area are ripe for removal and don't have this opportunity, but let's encourage ones like this to keep what makes them interesting and unique.
Same topic and one more building... 577 Old County. I looked at some "history o' San Carlos" books and if I'm not mistaken, that building was there 100+ years ago. Wow! In Europe that's a newborn building, but here that's something unique and something to hold onto. The current building (in my opinion) is really sad, even though someone may be using it well. How can we encourage keeping those buildings around and making sure that their next incarnation brings them more into the community (e.g. no parking lot, no 1970s/80s stucco)?
What planning is being done for to mitigate the increased transit/cars for the existing residents/families? Safety for my family is a top concern and I am concerned that there is NO planning going into this while the green space plan seems to cut through the residential areas, there is not one plan for residential areas for traffic. Can you please share more information about what the plan is to ensure safety for existing areas and to mitigate this issues for families?
Make sure that the buildings include enough parking for their employees because many people will drive.
Caltrain does not stop in san carlos with the bullet train, so many people do not want to take the local train.
Yes
Sufficient parking is key, not sure if that can be accomplished with multi-modal streets. No
Parking is top priority. No
Stop allowing businesses to occupy structures that don't have sufficient parking for themselves, their business vehicles, and their customers. The City allows a business with more than 50 employees to occupy a location with just 8 parking spots. Why would the City allow that?
I agree with making cul-de-sacs but don't want to give up sidewalk or street space for trees. You can easily see how the sidewalks and streets get torn up when you put trees within a few feet of them. This causes residents to pay to maintain these areas even though they are on City Property.
Stop making residents pay for the Cities Sidewalk Maintenance requirements on an individual basis.
No
See comments re: making Industrial the main north-south thoroughfare, making a transit center where the hotel cluster is proposed for parking and shuttles to the downtown area... will help with traffic on Holly as well as into downtown.
Yes
Less cars and less vehicular roads at the dense areas. No Great ideas, but space is always a limiting factor. Old County is a pretty narrow two
lane road, and the improvements to Industrial are nice but have taken away from the width of roads and cycling lanes. I agree that there should be “relief valve” streets to cut to either side of Old County or Industrial, but definitely not in residential areas.
Yes
See earlier comments requesting full traffic studies, not abbreviated studies as
Planning allowed for 777 Industrial. Yes
When is this project starting? This looks great No
As a east san carlos resident, I am worried about businesses/commercial parking on my residential streets, which I already see today, especially because I live on Hall street which gets parking from next street over businesses parking on the residential street and ignoring the 2 hour residential parking limitations. I also worry about the safety of the residential streets for small children if there's going to be a lot of through traffic that will be utilizing the residential streets in order to get on Hwy 101. A few suggestions/requests:
1) A lot of east san carlos streets don't have a smooth ramp up/down at the end of the curb, so that if someone is in a wheelchair or pushing a stroller, there's a drop down at the end of each street, instead of a gradual ramp up/down when you are crossing the street. I'd really like to see those streets like Hall, Cherry, Montgomery, McCue, etc get all the end curbs updated so that it's accessibility friendly and stroller friendly.
2) I'd like to make sure that we encourage some no-car zones as part of the district planning, especially close to the residential streets.
No
Proposed Open Space & Environment Strategies
Green Streets
Community Open Space Network
Pulgas Creek Restoration
Questions? Comments? Please share your feedback on these strategies below:
Did you attend Workshop 2 on June 9th Need stronger commitment and more contiguous greenspace and park space for
community use - eg central sports field and city pool complex connected to
bike/pedestrian thoroughfares separate from streets. Connect to west-side San Carlos.
No
Yes, tree plantings, bike paths
Can the open space network with green space (e.g. trees, low water plants, be linked to El Camino, drawing pedestrians and cyclists into each area?
Swimming pool at central open space? Concept including seating and play spaces similar to the Bay Meadows/San Mateo revision should be considered as they were well done. Opportunity to integrate retail business (restaurants, etc.) nearby.
No
Art space would be welcome too. Way to create, as well as observe art.
Can you share information on building height restrictions on Industrial between McCue and Hall Street?
When will we receive information on blocking cut through traffic between McCue and Hall Streets? Particularly Montgomery Street.
Will Flood Mitigation efforts trigger a reassessment from FEMA on flood zoning? The flood zone mapping should be reevaluated.
Yes
1. Maximize the number and quality of green streets to include green stormwater infrastructure and lots of plants and trees to soften the feel of the district and improve street safety and multi-modal use.
2. Yes restore and green Pulgas Creek.
3. Adding Community Open Space is a nice goal, but be sure it is a viable effort. Will the new workers in the district use those spaces at lunchtime or drive to Laurel Street for lunch? And how much use will they get in the morning and evening when workers are scrambling to make their commute connections or driving to and from the district?
It's doubtful that people from other areas of the city will be inclined to go to the district to enjoy these spaces unless there are special events scheduled..
Yes
I think the landscape buffer in the middle of Old County near Holly street was poorly designed. It prevents access to the left hand turn lane heading Northbound on Old County during peak times. It also makes it dangerous to exit the parking lot to Laureola park due to lack of visibility.
Please provide more information on how flood mitigation plans will impact flood zoning especially for the single family homes between San Carlos Ave and Hall streets.
More restaurant options needed on the east side.
Yes
The big issue is opening a walkway through the Corporation yard into the residential neighborhood. The connection should be along Old County Road. Everything else presented is fine.
Yes
Need more trees on Old County Road & Industrial Road and through out the entire
East Side.. Yes
I would support a version of the open space/environment and the mixed use plans, but not the circulation plan. I live in East SC and have young children who would benefit greatly in later years from a discovery path leading to Laureola Park. Ideally, there would be a safe (carless) path they could use to get to restaurants and small shops in East SC (of the sort that we have on Laurel Street). I would want any plan to avoid increasing traffic to Holly Street (or, even better, to relieve it), which we never feel completely safe crossing or walking along because the sidewalks are narrow and not well maintained (for strollers, tricycles, and scooters), and there is no barrier to the street, on which the cars drive way too fast.
No
Love the notion of using the creek as a place to mitigate flooding and at the same time making it a pleasant green space. That said, I barely know the creek exists to my excitement for it admittedly comes from a place of ignorance.
My concern with the creek plan is that it's right next to these large parcels where we
No
expect life science buildings/companies to dominate. At night, these spaces become dead and there will be no "eyes on" the creek. So on the evenings and weekends will the creek be a nice pleasant place to stroll, or will it become a large homeless
encampment because no one is actually there using the space throughout the day and evening?
Love the connecting of spaces and the proposal for central open spaces. However, to beat the same drum, my concern is what is driving people to these locations? Are people going to ride to an empty open space in the middle of a life sciences campus? If they work there, they might, but otherwise no. The current proposal reminds me a bit of San Jose and the Guadalupe Creek designs in downtown SJ. The path there is great, but it works when there are people to use it. Only in the last decade has SJ
emphasized building homes nearby that help automatically bring people to that creek and make it a more used vibrant space. If people are at Pulgas Creek just during work hours, then folks won't feel safe there during the off hours. That applies to the trails, the creek, the proposed open spaces, and the idea of a transitioning the city-owned parcel to something more publicly available.
"Generous setbacks." What exactly does that mean? Moving builds away from the street is generally something community members demand, but they frequently have the opposite consequences of what they intend to accomplish. We can't let setbacks create dead and uninteresting spaces. Your photos show trails and greenery in these setbacks, but is that just the ugly edge of a parking lot next to a commercial space that nobody is really going to use or appreciate? I would really like more definition around what you mean by "setbacks" and to speak openly about what it is and the
ramifications. Again, community organizers always say to push the buildings back, but they actually don't recognize the impact it may have on the space. It just feels right to say "keep those buildings away!" I didn't get a clear understanding from your
presentation.
Promenade of Industrial: I suspect that requires that buildings be closer to the street, and that there be people who want to park ON Industrial to go into and out of
businesses and not just park in some lot off to the side. If the street is a "promenade" it needs to encourage people to be on it, not just drive through it. That is actually the definition of a promenade, "a place for strolling." So let's be sure people WANT to stroll there.
Rail - love the idea of using that for connectivity. It's a great unique connector that could be super interesting.
Recommendation - for these nice paths that connect parts of the area... Make sure there are visible landmarks/points of interest at the ends (and even along the way) that serve as destinations and beacons. Ideally they could be seen from the other end of the path. Preferably do not make these some obscure ugly small abstract art that no one understands (e.g. the "O" in the center of the San Carlos train station). What if there was a large statue under the trees to pay homage to the Ohlone Native Americans? That's just a thought, though it could be anything. It could be a unique building that grasps our attention at the end of a path too.
I believe that you should look at connecting green space walkway/paths on the El Camino side/parking lot by caltrain and connecting at the underpass near arroyo instead of having everything go through the East Side to minimize the impact on the existing residential neighborhoods. In addition, creating paths to connect the new development to Burton Park and downtown is also essential which is likely shortest distance through the Arroyo underpass. Not all commuting workers will take
caltrain/samtrans, so planning for the entire city to be impacted and ensure planning is comprehensive so that the East Side families are not the only ones that have the impact is important especially since the entire city will benefit from the businesses here.
In addition, improving Loreola park is important, but right now Loreola is a family park, not a green space for tech workers. If you plan to change the park to be a green space for tech workers, then what improvements will be you making for families? It seems like the plan is to take away the existing family park to provide a green space to biotech workers. Please be sure to clarify this.
Yes
Love the green streets proposal. No
Tree canopy is top priority. No
green streets #1 priority No
Stop allowing Toxic and Cancer Causing substances to be emitted into our air. Our backyards are adjacent to many companies that use paints, primers, adhesives, and other substances that we have to smell all day long at times. Many companies have systems to protect their workers but they just put the fumes into the atmosphere above their buildings then it comes to us. I have to come indoors and not enjoy my yard when one of the nearby paint shops is doing its spraying. I've had the Bay Area Air Quality Control Board out more than a dozen times since Chris Valley refuses to protect us and they say there is nothing they will do about it. They say businesses have equipment to protect the workers is all that is required and we are out of luck. We are unable to use our property worth close to $2,000,000 because we don't want to be exposed to cancer. Trusting the prevailing wind direction and Speed to protect us is a terrible way to treat people.
No
I like these ideas. My only question would be how are they prioritized against other
opportunities? No
Old County Rd might be better as a boulevard ... use Industrial to take North-South
traffic congestion away from the downtown area. Yes
Flood mitigation at Pulgas Creek seems important. Your pictures are encouraging to
anticipate this concept No
Less cars and vehicles. Car free district and open space. The corporation yard looks good but as a public space such as a roller skating rink. E-shuttles. E-trollys. Narrow park like streets for the transportation, glass tops to see the sky and trees.
No
An open space along Brittan near the creek would be a lovely idea. Adding the
possibility of an amphitheater for concerts would make this a great destination for all of those in our area, and a source of revenue. I love all of the ideas proposed here, but the one issue I have is space. Traffic along Holly to Brittan is already bad, and so is traffic on Old County and Industrial during peak hours.
Yes
(1) Require full Level of Service traffic analysis for all new development. Please pay closer attention to sea level rise from the bay and high tides and the inability of the San Carlos Climate and Mitigation Plan to address that. Require developers to submit a full Level of Service (LOS) traffic analysis and Transportation Demand Management Plan instead of the ABBREVIATED traffic assessment that Planning allowed for the developers at 777 Industrial in June. (See agenda packet and minutes.)
(2) Require studies of storm water outflow from Puglas and other creeks into the bay to anticipate flooding from sea level rise. Redwood City and Redwood Shores have levee plans, but San Carlos does not. At June Planning and City Council meetings, City Manager Jeff Maltbie, basically said levees were the county's problem, but that San Carlos would live up to its obligations. It doesn't have any legal "obligations" in that regard so that statement is basically meaningless. It is up to the City to zone in such a way that limits or mitigates the effects of high density building in flood zones that the State and County's own climate experts predict will be underwater in 20 or less years.
San Carlos is adding millions of square feet of tall buildings, then will look to the county, state, FEMA or Army Corp of Engineers to protect that commercial infrastructure with levees and other measures when those buildings start sinking into the landfill or start having seasonal flooding. Ultimately, taxpayers will be on the hook to pay for these foreseeable climate impacts and possible disasters. That financial risk should be transferred to the billionaire investors who are undertaking this unprecedented transformation of a very small area of infill land in a flood zone and in a highly
populated area near a major freeway and an airport. This is especially relevant to San Carlos east side "innovation" because of the concentration of biotech and life science development. These buildings will contain toxic, hazardous and biological waste and materials. A catastrophic flood or power outage could lead to evacuations that could be temporary or permanent.
(3) Pay closer attention to decaying and aging water pumping stations at the entry to Smith Slough to be sure there are adequate flood mitigations, including not allowing below grade basements subject to sea water intrusion and being sure there are water detention wells and other flood proofing measure for below ground infrastructure. Does San Carlos need new pumping equipment? The City Council and planning budgeted for back up generators for the pumping stations at a June 7, planning meeting. (See June 7, Planning Commission agenda packet--The City of San Carlos Capital Improvement Program FYs 2021-2023.) Lisa Porras agreed to follow up and let the public know if the new generators were for sewage pumps, storm drain pumps or both. Perhaps that can be added to this report. The adequacy of pumping stations is a crucial part of the east side innovation plan.
(4) Pay more attention to the multitude of wildlife that use Pulgas and other San Carlos creeks (deer, raccoon, skunk, mountain lions, etc.). Be sure that pumping stations and inlets into Smith Slough are safe for wildlife. In recent years, both a sea lion and a norther fur seal got into Pulgas creek and a creek bordering Redwood City during storms or high tides. (See google.) Salmon occasionally enter the creeks as well.
Although the creeks look dry for much of the year, many areas have standing water 5- 10 inches deep where wildlife congregate (near 1785 San Carlos avenue). Water levels can reach 10-15 feet during atmospheric rivers and topple huge Redwood trees along the banks.
(5) Require developers to contribute to an annual climate and flood mitigation and management fund so that costs are not unfairly transferred to taxpayers, residential
Yes
and other property owners along the creeks. Construction in the east side area near the bay will act as choke point for water rushing down from the hills into the creeks
(especially Pulgas) then into the bay. Upstream property owners must pay the costs of maintaining their creek banks, so downstream commercial property owners may be subject to litigation if their actions restrict storm water runoff into the bay and cause flooding or creek bank damage upstream. It is prohibitively expensive when Redwood or other large trees topple and heavy equipment operators have to bring cranes to clear them during floods. Multiple photos of creek flooding and toppled trees have been submitted to the City over the years. In one case, a downed Redwood tree pulled up and ruptured a PG&E gas line and could not be shut off for 10 hours. (See multiple emails to Public Works from residents on Carmelita Drive that cover a 15 year period.) Creekside property owners and other San Carlos residents ask that the City establish a fund to pay for these foreseeable climate incidents so that residents do not have to resort to litigation to cover the costs of property damage caused by commercial developers and permitted by City Planners.
(6) Specifically address the negative environmental effects of adding over 8,000 plus jobs in this 1/2 square mile area when there is insufficient housing now. This is
exacerbating an already severe job/ housing imbalance. Traffic gridlock and emissions already negatively affect our quality of life and air quality. In addition, the buildings will use an inordinate amount of natural resources, such as water and electricity. Most of these life science buildings will also use NATURAL GAS--a significant public safety hazard in a flood plain. Public transit use is at all times low and is predicted to remain low post-covid. Yet, the City is allowing even fewer parking spaces at these commercial hubs. For example, see final approvals and exemptions Planning granted for 777 Industrial in June 2021. It is a planned biotech company with over 600 employees, but was allowed to decrease parking spaces by 41 spaces so they now have less than 200 onsite parking spaces. That building has 23 toxic retention wells under the building for monitoring toxic contamination from a former tenant who is now long out of business.
The City and developer had difficulty gaining the cooperation of the company currently monitoring those toxic wells. (See the minutes and video of that meeting on the Planning Department website.) Parking will spill over into local streets and
neighborhoods or there will be more and more employee drop off rom Lyft and Uber. If the City is planning to re-zone parts of the east side (near Holly and along El Camino) to allow for taller, more high density housing for thousands of new employees that will make the foreseeable risks of ground subsistence and sea level rise even worse.
Please consider what is environmentally sound for San Carlos. It is one of the most sensitive environmental locations on the Peninsula because of its close proximity to the bay, its proximity to San Andreas fault (1 mile), its four creeks, steep slopes subject to wildfire on 50% of the City, documented landslide on the shoulder of Alameda de las Pulgas near St. Charles school (2017--See June 7 Planning meeting video and budget regarding withdrawal of $300K in FEMA funds to repair that landslide) There is a shortage of environmentally suitable locations for high density buildings in San Carlos.
Please don't overdevelop San Carlos as planned. It will put it at high risk for the most foreseeable environmental disasters in modern times. Let the sinking SF Millennium Towers and the recent (June 2021) successful lawsuit by Burlingame against SFO and SF for ground subsistence from heavy buildings guide the decisions.
(7) Require much more detailed air quality studies showing how the polluted air expelled from tall exhaust stacks on the biotech buildings will be dispersed and
demonstrate their air flow pattern in relationship to other nearby buildings. What is the speed of the exhaust fans (45 or more MPH?) Where are the air sensors? At 777 Industrial, air quality sensors were allowed 300 feet away from the building, despite multiple discharge exhaust stacks on the roof. Air sensors should be required on rooftops and near the perimeter where members of the public will be walking or biking and inhaling this air. Hopefully, these remarks will be a part of the permanent record and the public will know that environmentalist and everyday residents raised the warnings. Thank you for considering these critical issues. Our futures and the
environment depend on the decisions San Carlos government officials, city managers, city planners, staff and EDAC makes now. What will your legacy be? Profit at what cost?
This looks amazing, would also love to see some restaurants that are walkable for the East Side residents. Also an area like Town and County in Palo Alto
https://tandcvillage.com/
No
I am a East San Carlos resident and I am excited about the upcoming changes to beautify east san carlos. I think greenery will be one key component, and I like the ideas around bringing in more trails, setbacks, open space, and planting trees, etc. A few other suggestions:
1) Expand Laureola playground. The playground itself is relatively small right now with only a few slides and swings, I'd love to see those playgrounds get expanded in size so it is a bigger more robust playground for children.
2) Plant trees along the residential streets past E. San Carlos, so this would mean planting trees on E. San Carlos, Montgomery, Cherry, and Hall streets.
3) Rename "Industrial Road", because it's not really going to be industrial in the sense of manufacturing, and instead give it a more appropriate name to the area or just change it to a more pleasant name.
Thank you!
No
For the businesses closes to the residential streets like Hall street, please enforce them to standards of curb appeal. For example, the "Automation Transmission" sign located on corner of Hall and Old County Road is such an eyesore (rusted and huge sign), and it is next to a barren plot of land that is not maintained and is overgrown with weeds most of the year. It is such an eyesore for the residents that live on Hall street and makes the area look so unattractive.
No
Proposed Mix of Uses Strategies
District Subareas
Activity Hubs
Questions? Comments? Please share your feedback on these strategies below
Did you attend Workshop 2 on June 9th Focus active ground floor along non-vehicular thoroughfares to promote non-motorized
transportation and promenade. No
Support small businesses in transition area. This area can support open space and activity areas, through restaurants and activity shops. Support industrial arts/mixed use buildings. Blend open space into area to encourage people to frequent and enjoy area.
Connect with downtown Laurel St. More trees!!
No
Both approaches can work together. The general thrust for the district seems
reasonable, but what impact will large office / R&D / Biotech development have on the rest of the city? It will drastically upset our existing jobs/housing balance with far too many new jobs and far too few new homes to accommodate those new workers. Staff says the revision of the existing Housing Element will solve the housing problem, but I have been following the Housing Element workshops and they do not account for the real impact of the potential Bio-Tech surge in San Carlos. 2M SF of new R&D could result in between 7,000 and 13,000 new jobs which statistically could require between 4,500 to 8,500 new homes, yet the RHNA goal is only for 2,800 new homes. And adjacent cities also will not have enough homes to meet the need. This means far more long distance commuting and increased traffic in San Carlos (especially for bio-tech workers who generally need to be in labs to do their work and will not be able to work from home).
Yes
Please, please continue the designation of the Gateway #2 through until Bransten street at least. Right now you have one large area just north of Bransten designated as
#1 Large Parcel. I really do not want to see a large building overshadowing and overlooking the single family homes on Montgomery, Cherry and Hall streets. Build more restaurants here.
I really do not want to see any more hotels being built.
Yes
The Corp yard was just moved 15-20 years ago, what a waste of money to move it
again. Yes
Mixed use is great, and is what we need. HOWEVER, what I don't see here is how the mixed-use actually creates a thriving INTEGRATED community. Item #1 = large parcels for life sciences. In the evening and on the weekends, this becomes a dead space that will be dark and scary and no one will want to be there. How do we make this a useful space that people in the community will WANT to use when the workers are gone? While the parcels are large, can the buildings there be broken up a bit to be at the scale of a human? That doesn't mean they need to be short, but they don't need to be uniform blocks either.
How can these areas have a useful purpose at night? The only thing I can think of is if residential space is closer than is what's proposed. Maybe that's to the south (Brittan), but that does not appear to be part of this discussion. Spaces need people to be interesting, and this plan shows photoshopped pictures of people, but I don't see the plan to actually have people populate this area regularly, and that's what will make it thrive.
No
What is a "discovery path?" I do NOT want a "discovery path" going through my neighborhood. Why would you have this cutting up the existing neighborhood and not plan for safety for our neighborhood? You cannot use our neighborhood when you want to show something and then tell us you are not planning outside of your area, but you are. Please plan more strategically and thoughtfully for the families in the
neighborhood.
Yes
Food is #1, child care #2 priority. No
Food is #1 priority, childcare #2. No
I live on Hall Street and experienced the free underground utility upgrade San Carlos gifted the Industrial Road and Old County Road businesses. This left the residential area with the blight. When and if the City rezones Terminal Way to allow for condos or housing it would be proper to underground the utilities for the entire East Side
residential area. This would allow for a better less derelict look for our neighborhood.
I already left a few pages of general feedback when the Vision Plan was first announced however I missed a few things.
I didn't mention that the City ignores the East Side since the last plan was completed, The East Side Disconnect plan. Since the work was completed the City has been unwilling or unable to maintain the infrastructure they left behind.
There is many years of debris built up in the gutters and along the sidewalks that never gets cleaned. The City refuses to enforce the ordinance requiring a certain amount of clear space on sidewalks and along the streets to keep the vegetation away from bicycles, pedestrians, and vehicles. The city doesn't take consideration as to the crown of the street when cutting back vegetation. The crown of the street on East San Carlos is approximately 6" therefore the vegetation needs to be cut back at east 12" to keep from scraping the paint off box trucks, shuttles, and tall vehicles. There is one tall bush that has been scraping vehicles for years and the City refuses to take care of the issue.
The City still refuses to install simple cones and perhaps paint the curbs at the ends of
No
the streets where the Disconnect plan installed curbed areas on Old County with landscaping to keep vehicles from hitting them. 18 months ago they were informed of this issue and they still have refused to act. It would cost far less than the amount of money they have caused vehicle owners to spend on repairs to vehicles from their ill conceived attempt at providing planting along the street. Considering the cost to repair just one vehicle that took a 6" chunk of concrete out of a curb the City could have paid for cones all along this Stretch of Old County as well as painted them a bright reflective orange. The City has no problem spending money on the West Side to do the Exact Same Thing. One of the curbed areas is blackened and rounded over because its been hit so many times.
Installing the Grade Separation for the Railroad intersections at Howard and Holly did more to disassociate the Greater East Side from the West than any other single move the City has made.
I guarantee the City will not maintain the infrastructure they incorporate in the new vision plan. They are unwilling or unable to simply stop the abandoned vehicles and dumpsters from occupying a majority of the parking on the 3 blocks of Terminal and Bransten. There are vehicles that haven't moved in over a year and the dumpsters are in the street 365 days a year.
Hello, how will the design protect those of us who live on Hall Street adjacent to Terminal Way? How will the developer secure our privacy. Will the building be so high that it will obstruct the sunlight? Thank you.
Yes
Instead of a Hotel Cluster (#5) - use that space as a transit center for parking and connection to shuttles (day and evening) to go to downtown. During the San Carlos Art
& Wine festivals in recent years, PAMF opened up some garage space for parking and allowed shuttles to pick up and drop off there and it made a huge difference in terms of keeping traffic out of the downtown area as well as eliminated the need to drive around for extended periods of time searching for parking.
Yes
This is good. No
Again, all of the ideas presented are great. The East Side is due for a refreshing and it is such a large space for potential great uses. However, at what cost? With all of these biotech buildings going up (old Kelley Moore site and the other on the corner of Industrial and Brittan), I don’t see a lot of the open space and community space ideas happening unless there was a corporate buy in to add open spaces for the community.
At the end of the day, I see a lot of traffic for the residents in the East Side area, and less open spaces and pathways. Even if we do have these open spaces and pathways, they inevitably will be inhabited by people displaced from homes or the mentally ill, which will not make it a safe space for residents or broader community members. I reference other cities like Portland, where a new bridge was constructed across the Willamette River, and on either side there was a biking/walking path paved from as far south as the Sellwood district (about 5-10mi). Unfortunately, it is all inhabited by the aforementioned population and it is not safe to walk. I’ve had someone threaten me because I was “in their space” jogging in the middle of the path with their tent set up on the side. So it’s not just the execution and manufacturing of this, but also the upkeep to maintain the vision that is being proposed here.
Yes
It was alarming to lean at the last meeting that it was not feasible to plant more trees in some areas near walkways because sea water has already infiltrated the water table and would not support trees. In light of the recent collapse of the seaside condos in Florida and the loss of life, it would seem even more pressing to avoid building
infrastructure into flood zones and infill where ground water its already contaminated by rising salt water from the bay.
Yes
What about a gym either a YMCA or PJCC or something nice that has a swimming
pool? No
I love the idea of activity hubs and utilizing the space for the community, for families, and to bring in greenery and open space to gather together, however I suspect that brings in less revenue to the city.
If we were to go the District Subarena route, I believe there should be strict
enforcement of certain curb appeal for the businesses. For example, the "Automatic Transmission" car repair company at corner of Old County Road and Hall street is really lacking on curb appeal, given it is a huge rusty sign next to a plot of land that is weed filled and abandoned. There should be strict enforcement of curb appeal in order to keep businesses accountable.
No
