Letter to Editor: NO to PUC Proposed Development of High Rises in Sunshine Gardens Congested Area

South San Francisco, CA   May 1, 2018  by Cindy Marcopulos, SSF Resident

We, on the Peninsula, are being forced to build more high density housing units by the State.  (Resist Irresponsible Development 4/27/2018) However, we are now in a seven-year drought, recognizing we’re a drought State, and the average family of four  uses 360 gallons of water per day (ref: www.kqed.org/lowdown/11525).  Gov. Brown is selling our water supply to Southern California with its 900-plus golf courses, and has built cities on desert land, to build the peripheral canal — again.
Gov. Brown and the state legislators are dictating how much should be built in our cities, yet the State of California is purposefully, and rightly so, going against Federal deportation laws and cannabis laws. So, why should we adhere to laws that will destroy our quality of life?
Here in South San Francisco, on the commonly referred to  “PUC Site” of 5.9 acres, we have four developers vying to build an 8 -15 story and up to 847 units (times how many people times how many vehicles) at the El Camino Real/Chestnut corridor right next door  to our new Civic Campus that will be two stories high, and across the street from our “beloved old 60-year neighbor” car wash that will be 173 units.  This development does not fit this area and will bring more traffic, more congestion and a loss of quality of life for all South City residents.
The city is using a 2011 General Plan, outdated by seven years,  and although the City holds title to the property, it is hiding behind this inane state law as it invites more and more corporations into our quaint city of 65,000 residents.  The biotech corporations have run out two prospective developers offering 1200 residential units at Oyster Point, an area with ample open space and million dollar views, the perfect location for this high density development.
I suggest we join together and join forces, the cities that are being pushed up against the wall and losing the ambiance of the cities we know and love,  to combat any development that is so high density it will destroy what little quality of life we can preserve.
I am not against residential development, but this development of up to  847 units and up to 15-stories does not fit in this area that adjoins other established neighborhoods. Build it on the east side where the biotechs are saying NIMBY!
Cynthia Marcopulos
South San Francisco, CA
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
5 years ago

If you people would quit voting for Liberals, none of this would be happening. You do it over and over again and wonder why this keeps happening. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Name a city, state or country that is successfully running under left wing rule without this nonsense happening. You can’t. You get what you deserve. Fools.

your neighbor
your neighbor
5 years ago
Reply to  Cindy

excuse me Cindy, but the city manager and some on the council are the right wing. Maybe you’re a Russian troll. In any event, our city is changing and not in a good way, in part because of who the city council hired: a Republican from one the most corrupt states in the union, Louisiana as city manager.

john Tuvo
5 years ago

That was a great letter,Cyndi. Now, the council has made its decision, thus we still need to keep a watchful eye on this process and make sure our infrastructure is bolstered by funds from the developers. One question I have is did the state really have the power to take control the PUC site? Could we have prevented the council of selling this property. Could lawyers prevented the state from wrestling control and decision making from the council if it did not decide who the developer was going to be last evening.
This is real education for me and for all of us. Personally I am would have liked to see a more European style development with a piazza or town square, with mass transit going into the area. Other battles will be coming down the road, though. Looks like the CPLSA( sic) had a lot to do with the prevention of residences being built east of 101.

Peggy Deras
Peggy Deras
5 years ago

Great Letter Cynthia!