As progress slows, Fish Market development surfaces resident worries

Nearby resident Andrew Lomano, who even started a petition opposing the development, said he would rather see the site become a more robust public area, with open space as well as a thriving retail area for residents to gather.

“This is not the place for [260] apartments,” he said. “This is a retail spot that needs to be preserved.”

Currently, the plan calls for a 1-acre public park and a commercial area, which Austin O’Such, who works for Windy Hill on the project, said will hopefully become a café. The developer also plans to build a dock or preserve the current one.

Susan Manheimer, local resident and former San Mateo police chief, said she was pleased with how the developers made changes to the original plan as a result of community feedback, including lowering the number of stories and incorporating more public space.

“Any time you have a development going in, the community wants to mitigate the impact and enhance the amenities and for now, I’ve thought it was a very good process and [the developers] were very responsive,” she said. “For a lot of the neighborhoods on the lagoon that were opposed to it … I think it was as much emotional about the Fish Market and its history as much as wanting to keep it low density.”

But with a lack of movement on the project thus far, she said she hopes developers aren’t going to revert back to higher buildings and fewer public amenities.

The last few years has seen increased state level policies meant to streamline development and prevent jurisdictions from unnecessarily blocking housing, particularly in light of a statewide affordability crisis. Just this year, Senate Bill 131 and Assembly Bill 130 became law, which among other provisions, exempts most residential and mixed-use infill developments from the California Environmental Quality. Even more recently, Senate Bill 79 was signed into law, which also upzones areas that are within a quarter- to half-mile radius of a major transit stop. Nine-story developments are now allowed if they are adjacent to any Caltrain or BART stop, seven stories if they fall within a quarter-mile and six stories between a quarter- to half-mile. For smaller cities, the radius is confined to an eighth- to quarter-mile radius.

City staff said that upon preliminary review, the project does not fall within the half-mile radius that would qualify for SB 79 zoning changes.

Councilmember Danielle Cwirko-Godycki said there are still concerns around traffic mitigation, including the potential need for a traffic light near the site, though she was glad to see some of the community’s feedback taken into account with the updated proposal.

“I always support community engagement, and I think the community should always speak up,” she said. “It’s important to continue having dialogue.”

O’Such said there are always those who oppose projects and those who support them, and the firm has received plenty of positive feedback on it.

The city has also seen an influx of development projects since it passed Measure T in November, which increased height and density limits in several areas, including near Caltrain stops. A new development project recently proposed near the Hillsdale station would demolish the mall and add about 1,400 housing units, in addition to several commercial buildings. Another one, on Concar Drive, would add almost 900 homes to the city’s housing stock, replacing much of the current retail shopping area and parking lot.

As part of its state-mandated housing goals, or Regional Housing Needs Allocation, the city needs to approve a little more than 7,000 housing units between 2023-21. O’Such said with a generally tough lending climate, the project could change, but it’s unclear how that will look, adding that “it’s possible” the size or design could change from the current version, though plans to retain public spaces remain.

“It’s been harder and harder to get these developments to pencil,” O’Such said. “We don’t really know at this point in time what’s going to work. It’s just a lot of moving pieces.”

Many developments have seen delays over the last couple years due to tougher lending conditions, and many have asked for two-year entitlement extensions. In some cases, cities have updated their entitlement-extension policies to accommodate the financing challenges or reduced impact fees in certain cases. He added that one of the ways to help make the project viable would be for a reduction in city fees. Such fees typically fund city-specific services and programs, ranging from parks and infrastructure to affordable housing and child care.

“The city has been good at helping us with that, but we really need some help as far as fee reduction,” he said. “Fees across the board are high, and it's expensive to build in the Bay Area.”