San Mateo seeking general plan input

Months of community meetings preceded the unveiling of potential study areas this summer, but the proposed areas pegged for study were a cause of concern for those fearing the consequences of sweeping land use policy changes, particularly as the North Central neighborhood was identified for study while other neighborhoods were not. In response, officials identified opportunities for the city to take on concurrent transportation and infrastructure studies and pledged to work with the Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center to expand outreach to communities and individuals who have yet to participate in the long-range planning process.

Malissa Natene, director of initiatives and services for the Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center, or PCRC, said the nonprofit has helped the city gather feedback in the past from communities of color and those who don’t attend meetings at City Hall. In the last few months since the nonprofit began working with city officials and the urban planning firm PlaceWorks to gather more input, she said the nonprofit has largely applied the same approach it has used in the past to reach the communities that have been hard to reach, noting that in many cases these individuals care about the future of the city but don’t understand how they can participate or don’t know if their feedback will be valued.

Reaching out

Natene said PCRC has leveraged its existing relationships with faith-based organizations, parent groups, business districts, community centers and other community-based organizations to hold meetings across the city and spread the word about the General Plan update. She said they have so far been able to reach the parts of the city’s Latino, African American, Pacific Islander and Asian populations, among others, to inform them about what the city is trying to accomplish and highlight ways they can participate.

Though PCRC aims to spread the word and collect feedback in these meetings, Natene said they are also hoping to identify community members who are invested in the update process and can keep their peers engaged as it continues to take shape.

“We want to encourage more civil participation with community members,” she said. “But sometimes they don’t have all the tools, so we want to help them get the tools so they feel confident.”

Natene noted some they have spoken with in recent months have said more urgent concerns such as housing instability, access to schools and having enough money to put food on the table have prevented them from participating in a long-range planning process. So PCRC has invested time in understanding what their primary concerns are and illustrating how their input into a General Plan update process may be able to address those challenges in the long run, she said.

Gentrification of neighborhoods with empty lots and the availability of open spaces where families can spend time are also among their biggest priorities, noted Natene, who added that some have wondered whether their feedback will really be considered. Though she believes there are many opportunities for community input, Natene noted that sometimes grassroots efforts are required to reach those who don’t know or aren’t able to make it to City Hall to provide feedback.

“Not everyone frequents the city website so … sometimes we have to knock on doors, sometimes we have to show up,” she said. “We go to where they are because we want to meet them halfway.”

High turnout

Community Development Director Kohar Kojayan credited PCRC’s efforts in engaging its network with the high turnout logged at a Nov. 16 workshop held at the Martin Luther King Community Center, which she said drew more than 70 people. With a diverse subset of the city’s population in attendance, the workshop allowed residents of different generations as well as Spanish-speaking individuals to learn about the planning effort and provide feedback in the same session, noted Kojayan.

She said residents who attended the workshop were able to use three-dimensional pieces representing residential and commercial buildings as well as open space to show where they would like to see different land uses considered for the city. Kojayan said the city has also held pop-up events at the College of San Mateo’s farmers’ market and at the Fieldwork taproom in Bay Meadows this fall in an effort to meet community members where they are to hear their thoughts on the General Plan update process. An ice cream social held with youth at the Mid-Peninsula Boys & Girls Club and conversations with their parents when they came to pick up their children afterwards was also successful in gathering feedback, noted Kojayan, who added the types of activities residents would like to see in the city as well as transportation improvements are among the priorities that have risen to the surface in those conversations.

For those who can’t make it to the fall events, city officials recently launched an online mapping tool allowing individuals to place markers on locations within the 10 study areas where they would like to see housing, office space, commercial buildings and transportation improvements, among other uses, said Kojayan.

She said the information gathered through workshops, pop-up events and through the online tool will inform three draft alternatives proposed for each of the 10 study areas. Kojayan said officials will also use updated projections on the city’s housing and jobs growth to inform the draft alternatives, which officials are hoping will be available in February or March alongside analyses of each option’s effect on traffic, greenhouse gas emissions, flood zone sustainability, among other factors.

Kojayan said the release of the draft alternatives will be followed by another effort to gather input on the options, both in meetings with several community groups and in public forums such as meetings of the General Plan subcommittee, a technical advisory committee, the city’s Planning Commission and the City Council.

“There will be a wide variety of opportunities for the community to participate,” she said.

Councilwoman Amourence Lee was encouraged to see a full house at the Nov. 16 workshop at the Martin Luther King Community Center, noting the event drew homeowners, renters, seniors and families with young children, among others. Previously president of the Home Association of North Central San Mateo, Lee was joined by several neighborhood residents in expressing concerns earlier this fall about the proposed study areas and their potential to concentrate changes imagined for the city on a neighborhood that has faced systematic disinvestment.

By focusing on expanding communication about the update process through partnerships with nonprofits like PCRC, city staff has worked to ensure the process is as inclusive and fair as possible, which she felt was on display at the Nov. 16 workshop representing several generations and languages, noted Lee.

“For me, there was very clear evidence of the outreach efforts working and the participants really reflecting the diversity of our community,” she said. “I think we’re absolutely on the right track.”

Visit app.maptionnaire.com/en/7412 before Jan. 22 to weigh in on alternative land uses for the 10 study areas identified for San Mateo’s General Plan update.

anna@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 106