South San Francisco, CA June 21, 2022 by Allie Saults, ESC Correspondent
Recently the Planning Commission approved a 292-unit apartment building to be constructed near Highway 101 in South San Francisco. It will replace an industrial facility that is currently in place. The vote was unanimous with the Planning Commission and its next stop is the City Council to sign off.
The new 8-story building will encompass a 1.6-acre lot at 40 Airport Blvd., adjacent to the highway, the Caltrain tracks, La Quinta hotel and Denny’s restaurant. The lot was deemed industrial but has been designated residential. The developer will also add an additional $630,000 above the regular fees to help address necessary changes to Airport Blvd.
The building will feature:
- 300,000 square feet of structure that wraps around a courtyard at the center
- Multi-level parking lot with 308 parking spots
- 33,000 square feet of amenity space to include a coworking room, resident cafe and rooftop lounge
- Smaller units – studios and one-bedroom apartments ranging in price from $2,400 – $3,000
A total of:
- 57 studio apartments
- 32 one-bedroom apartments
- 122 two-bedroom apartments
- 59 three-bedroom apartments
- 22 four-bedroom apartments
Due to the smaller-sized units, the developer will have a decreased subsidy to produce affordable units that fall in line with the city’s inclusionary zoning requirements. (The city rules state that 10% of units available with rents affordable to residents earning 80% or less of the county median income)
This comes out to:
- Studio apartments being offered at or below $2,558
- One-bedroom apartments offered at $2,741
- Two-bedroom apartments offered at $3,290
5% of those units need to be even more affordable for residents that earn less than half of the median income.
Those rents would come out to:
- Studio – $1,598
- One Bedroom – $1,713
- Two Bedroom – $2,056
We have families that are sharing housing due to the high costs, would these ‘affordable’ units benefit them?
Parking is another issue brought up in the developments of this new construction. With urging from local officials, projects will offer less and less parking in order to encourage residents in the area to use public transit.
With this development, parking spaces will not be included and will come for an additional cost. Those who reside in subsidized units will have a free parking space.
Ryan McNamara, vice president of development for Blake Griggs, the Danville-based developer for the project said, “By unbundling and adding that cost of owning a car, it disincentivizes people to have a car if they don’t need one, it encourages them to take public transit,” he said, “It’s a trend that has been pushed for, for a long time, by the sustainable community.”
It should be noted that another residential project has been approved across the way – a 480-unit apartment development that will be replacing industrial buildings. Mayor Nagales has asked that future projects reduce parking in lieu of more affordable units.
Wow, another building squeezed between the RAILROAD TRACKS and HIGHWAY 101…who in their right mind would want to live there! Oh yeah, wait till South City talks about constructing a tunnel from 101 Oyster Point to Produce Avenue so THEY can build more housing on top of the tunnel. THESE people in power are CRAZY STUPID. WHERE IS ALL the WATER, POWER, ETC coming from? California is in a severe drought, yet South City still is building. I know and suggest no water for city hall, city hall annex, police & fire departments and all other city buildings. If your house is burning, well, good luck, cause there is no water to put it out. ALSO, in another note, if you need money to PAVE ALL STREETS in South City, stop all tax incentives given to business EAST of Highway 101, and make them pay their fair share. Paving certain streets this summer is great, but there are so many potholes leading up to those streets, is it really going to make a difference?
These are more parking spaces than probably any other housing development, and I’m very surprised as this city is pushing transit use. This is near a transit corridor, so why all the parking? Oh, yes, it’s really not “affordable housing” when only 5% is deemed “affordable housing.”
Well as our city government continues to destroy what is left of the soul of SSF by approving every development put in front of them, there are a couple of details worthy of note.
First, their “crocodile tears” about satisfying RHNA numbers because of the big, bad state government is just third rate acting. This city government continues to extend wholesale invitations to locate industry in SSF and in so doing saddles our community with an obligation to provide housing, relative to job creation, whether the workforce chooses to live in SSF or not. This creates further development, more congestion, strains infrastructure and negatively impacts existing residents’ quality of life.
This same city government will tout the benefits of additional tax revenues and impact fees but are hard pressed, or downright refuse, to explain to residents the specific benefits these additional monies provide and whether those benefits are limited to a select few or directed at the community as a whole. This would allow existing residents to judge whether the impact to their quality of life is worth the negative impact of over development. Answering questions has proven not to be our city officials’ forte.
And, last but not least, the “bastion of alternative realities,” our SSF city government led by “Dreamer in Chief” Nagales seem to think car ownership is a thing of the past. As an example, the above mentioned project will provide 308 parking spaces for housing units totaling 598 bedrooms. This is done with the understanding that the cost of vehicle ownership, including paying for a parking space, will encourage people to use public transit. Only problem is, encouragement does not guarantee success and any miscalculation will find residents of this development utilizing taxpayer built, maintained and owned public streets for any parking needs. The “for profit” developer, profits again by not providing adequate parking.
Add to this, the generous offer to reduce parking at future projects at someone else’s expense by friend to all developers, Nagales, and what could possibly go wrong? I suggest plenty and when it does, our city government will be nowhere to be found.
And 5% affordable housing?? This is not for the SSF residents whose median income cannot afford the monthly rentals.
Maybe it’s time to think “recall” before we’re so congested (no one mentions infrastructure and drought as they appease and kiss the behinds of the State) that we will be one huge gridlock of a city.