Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 2012-01-31 SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES �! _ CITY COUNCIL v10 ,..� OF THE 9 o u CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, California 94083 CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM 400 GRAND AVENUE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO TUESDAY, JANUARY 31, 2012 7:00 P.M. 1. Call to Order. Time: 7:00 p.m. 2. Roll Call. Present: Councilmembers Addiego, Matsumoto, and Mullin, Vice Mayor Gonzalez and Mayor Garbarino Absent: None. 3. Agenda Review. No changes. 4. Public Comments — comments are limited to items on the Special Meeting Agenda. None. 5. Update on efforts to develop a countywide Single Use Bag Ordinance Assistant to the City Manager Susan Kennedy went over the latest updates regarding then Countywide Single Use l3ag Ordinance. She noted 15 cities including South San Francisco had been contacted; most had been generally supportive but cognizant of each cities independent issues. Each city was asked to inform the County if they would be participating by the end of February. Each city would be able to adopt an ordinance of their own, or could piggy back on the County's with the County taking the lead. Council was being asked for direction on whether or not to move ahead witli the ordinance. Councilmember Mullin asked if the County would be covering tlic cost of the EIR rather than being a shared cost. The Councilmember also asked if the countywide would be adopted by the Board of Supervisors ( "BOS ") and adopted by each City or would it be under an umbrella of the 1305. Ms. Kennedy stated the county would cover the lion's share of the LIR. Dean Peterson also felt comfortable saying the County would cover the LIR costs. The ordinance could bc adopted by reference and he would like to see it adopted by region, typical of the tobacco retail license ordinance. Councilmcmber Mullin referenced information he had beard about how a similar ordinance was adopted in Alameda County. Mr. Peterson explained the main difference as being that it was adopted by the Waste Board and went into effect for all the cities whereas San Mateo County has separate waste boards. Vice Mayor Gonzalez sought to clarify if the City went ahead with its own ordinance would it have to modify it to match the County's once theirs was finished. Mr. Peterson stated that would be up to the City but is an option. City Attorney Mattas stated cities are given the option to opt. in and be covered by the LIR, if chosen not to opt in, the City would bc on its own with a Negative Declaration. He further noted under CEQUA an EIR offers better defensibility than a Negative Declaration would. Mayor Garbarino asked why the record keeping was so stringent. Mr. Peterson responded it was necessary to ensure a level playing field between the bigger and smaller stores. Councilwoman Matsumoto had several questions and comments: why had some cities not chosen to participate; what could some of the unanticipated costs be and would those costs be based on population? Her concerns were that South San Francisco was large in population, but lacked big box stores. She also voiced concern about potential challenges to the ordinance, feeling that smaller cities had perhaps slid by because they were not big fish. What. would happen if the plastic industry hit. back? Mr. Peterson noted the 3 non participants and Atherton, Hillsborough and Woodside. Atherton and Hillsborough have no retail and a reason was not given for Woodside. He had budgeted $100,000 for the next year for the LIR and outreach, potential costs could be part of the outreach component and felt confident the EIR would be taken care of solely by the County. Figures regarding the LIR would be known soon as the RFP's would go out later this week and negotiated by the end of February. Councilman Addicgo noted a formula implemented that should shield the City and felt it was a good investment. Attorney Mattas noted cities big and small have been sued. Suits are not in direct relation to size of city. There had been opportunity for compromise but didn't make it through. Mr. Peterson clarified the date as on or before Dec 31, 2014. He felt January 31, 2013 would be a doable date and then it would be a matter of allowing businesses to use their current stock of bags. Councilwoman Matsumoto asked what costs were associated with moving ahead sooner, before the County. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 31, 2012 MINUTES PAGE 2 Attorney Mattis stated the cost of completion for the neg. dec. If there was no challenge, there would be no additional costs and Council would later amend to match up with the county. He advised it was wise to ride with the county and noted if it was desire to move faster, what would be the advantage. Vice Mayor Gonzalez felt it was wiser if all cities had the same ordinance in an effort to achieve fairness. Councilman Mullin asked Mr. Peterson if there was a value or practical benefits from cities banning together on this. Mr. Peterson felt in order to have something accepted better, it should be countywide. Residents will not wonder why and cause people to shop in other cities. As far as staff, it makes more sense to have one ability to train, and resource -wise, it's better too. Councilwoman Matsumoto worried what would happen if other cities decided not to go along and expressed her desire for the City to move ahead on our own. Councilman Addicgo understood the possibility of unraveling might be great, but feels Attorney Mattis outlined a plant to move ahead. She mentioned the volunteer program that was already in the works and looking for a mandatory ordinance in early 2012. That allowed us for noticing and letting people go through their inventory. As a council, she would like to have our businesses put on notice and requested a quarterly report of the county's progress included in Friday packets. Attorney Mattis stated staff anticipated the neg. dec. to be ready in approximately 30 days and laid out a scenario for the City moving forward on its own and opting in with the county's EIR, then modifying ordinance to be identical with the County's. Mayor Garbarino agreed with the process outlined by Attorney Mattis. Attorney Mottos reiterated opting in would cover the City with the County's EIR and the neg. dec. was something that was being done by City staff for the City. The County believed they had the money to cover the costs and had a good reservoir or knowledge. If Council wished to opt in, a formal motion was required. Motion - Councilman Addiego /Second - Councilwoman Matsumoto: to join the County EIR process and continue to move forward with the City of South San Francisco's Negative Declaration. Unanimously approved by voice vole. 6. Study Session: San Bruno /South San Francisco Community -Based Transportation Plan Representatives were: San Mateo County Transit District Program Manager Ronny Kraft, City /County Association of Governments ( "C /CAG ") Technical Advisory Committee Member Jean Higaki, and San Mateo County Transit District Manager Corinne Goodrich. Ms. Kraft gave power point presentation detailing the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's ( "MTC ") Community -Based Transportation Planning Program. The main goal of the plan was to work with the community to identify transportation needs and potential solutions. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 31, 2012 MINUTES PAGE 3 Ms. Kraft gave details regarding outreach efforts, results and possible solutions. SamTrans and C /CAG would each be playing a role in the plan and implementation, with SamTrans including the recommended improvements into their planning efforts and C /CAG providing support planning, funding and implementation efforts. A study plan was put together to study the transportation needs of low income communities, four (4) of which arc in San Mateo County. Outreach was conducted during April to June, 2011 and included two (2) community meetings one each in South San Francisco and San Bruno and a bilingual survey. Meetings were modestly attended and served as a good source of information. 400 surveys were returned and yielded information regarding trips that responders found difficult to make and what forms of transportation would help them get around. Councilwoman Matsumoto wondered what the make -up of those who attended the workshops was. Ms. Kraft responded that it was primarily residents in attendance. Councilman Mullin agreed and noted some staff was there as well. Vice Mayor Gonzalez noted the San Bruno workshop was better attended than one held in South San Francisco. Ms. Goodrich added the attendees were a broad mix. Ms. Kraft continued there were 25 overarching transportation needs and potential solutions identified that were grouped into two (2) tiers. Councilman Mullin asked if there was a correlation between the information gathered by the survey and the workshops. Ms. Kraft responded there was. Most reported trouble with medical trips in San Francisco, Redwood City and San Mateo, getting to work in downtown San Francisco, issues with access to the South San Francisco Caltrain station, pedestrian amenities and safety. San Bruno in particular had a lot of issues concerning bike riders. Councilman Matsumoto asked about the demographic of those with Caltrain issues; were they mid - management or service workers. The Councilwoman noted the City's riders couldn't afford the daily fees and instead would pay the shorter ticket fares. Ms. Kraft stated that information was not gathered and Ms. Goodrich agreed that fare price was an issue, noting that MTC was now looking at the affordability. Councilmember Mullin has previously heard about how "savvy" the ridcrs of Caltrain were hailing from the Silicon Valley, but noted the importance of being cognizant that the service is for a whole demographic. Samtrans is usually aware of that, but it needs to be that way for all. Councilman Addiego recalled a spike in mass transit when spare the air would have a free ridership day and imagined there would be much success if SamTrans would do the same. He agreed that BART and Caltrain were pricey. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 31, 2012 MINUTES PAGE 4 Ms. Kraft went on to give the nine (9) Transportation strategics: 1) Improve transit stop amenities and safety, 2) Improve the affordability of public transit for low- income users, 3) Improve bicycle amenities. 4) Provide free /low cost bikes, 5) Improve pedestrian amenities. 6) Increase public access to information about transportation options. 7) Increase SamTrans bus service. 8) Improve connectivity of existing transit service, and 9) Improve access to the South San Francisco Catrain station. Mayor Garbarino asked if the European model for bike racks /sharing had been looked into, where a person could pick up /drop off bikes at stations throughout the city. Ms. Kraft stated it had, but they included monthly fees being too high and needing a credit card, which proved too costly for low- income users. Bike capacity on public transportation is also an ongoing issue. Caltrain had the capacity for bikes but SamTrans had very limited bike space. SamTrans was looking at adding storage for three (3) bikes on the front but so far has laces constraints in terms of CHP. Mayor Garbarino asked if public amenities would include roundabouts. Ms. Kraft said that was possible. Vice Mayor Gonzalez asked if Sam Trans still had special event buses. He also mentioned there was no service from Grand to Oyster Point, which would be needed as the ferry terminal was soon to be completed. Regarding the special events buses Ms. Goodrich responded they were no more because they equated to a charter bus. Councilwoman Matsumoto expressed concern over the bilingual outreach needing to be provided to the growing Asian community and suggested materials be done in calligraphy as well. She added that she was pleased to see City Planner Susy Kalkin's comments included in the plan, and Rich Napier said staff would be able to look at the plan in greater detail, and be able to make changes /recommendations after a detailed review. She would be voting to support it at the C /CAG meeting. She also asked if there would be funding opportunities through MTC. Ms. Higaki noted the Lifeline Program was available for many sources of funding related to a variety of transportation issues. City Planner Kalkin was asked to share her opinion and stated she had felt comfortable with the plan and was glad her comments were included as well. Associate Civil Engineer Tracy Scramaglia was also asked to weigh in. Ms. Scramaglia noted that she had come into the project a little later, but was pleased to see the bike and pedestrian improvements. She also felt getting bikes on buses was a major issue and would look at the grants offered through the Lifeline Program to help with various projects such as addressing the lack of reflectivity seen in many of the cyclists throughout South San Francisco. It was noted that grant applications would be due on February 17. Councilwoman Matsumoto wondered if there would be impact from open enrollment for schools to SamTrans bus service. Nearly 1/3 of service is school children. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 31, 2012 MINUTES PAGE 5 Ms. Goodrich noted there already was with an increase in demand. Whether or not SamTrans can provide is questionable. Councilman Mullin wondered if ridership was aging, he asked out of concern for the seating needed for elderly and disabled. Ms. Goodrich stated there was a senior mobility ambassador program that was very popular. It's helpful because it is true that a lot of seniors have never learned to ride the bus. Councilwoman Matsumoto agreed that the process could be intimidating to many seniors and liked the program for the very reason that it gets them using the bus rather than calling Ready Wheels, which is more expensive and tax payer subsidized. Mayor Garbarino asked if a BART stations was the only place to purchase a BART ticket. Susan Kennedy responded it was, the days of retail outlets were long gone. Clipper tickets were available at Walgreens. 7. Adjournment. Being no further comments or questions, Mayor Garbarino adjourned the meeting at 8:27 p.m. Submitted: Approved: ab—d • if / A Anna M. Brown, Deputy City Clerk Ric lard A. Garbarin•, Mayor City of South San Francisco City of South San Francisco SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 31, 2012 MINUTES PAGE 6