HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 2018-08-08 @6:000
o
c�L1F0R���
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
AGENDA REVIEW
None.
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
CITY COUNCIL
OF THE
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, California 94083
Meeting to be held at:
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
33 ARROYO DRIVE
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 8, 2018
6:00 p.m.
TIME:
6:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Councilmembers Addiego, Garbarino* and
Gupta, Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto and Mayor
Normandy.
ABSENT: None.
*Councilman Garbarino recused himself from the meeting at 6:20 p.m.
and re- entered the meeting at 6:34 p.m.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - comments are limited to items on the Special Meeting Agenda.
None.
ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS
1. Presentation regarding update on the City of South San Francisco's FEMA Flood Zone Map.
(Eunejune Kim, Director of Public Works)
Director of Public Works Kim provided a PowerPoint presentation regarding the Revised FEMA Flood
Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS). His presentation explained that FEMA was changing the 100 -year flood
plain boundaries established in the City as part of the FEMA National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
By participating in the program, the City ensures the community is eligible for future flood - related
financial assistance, flood improvement grants and loans from federal agencies and that property owners
in the flood plain are assured the ability to purchase flood insurance. Such policies cannot be canceled
for repeat losses. As a participating community in FEMA's NFIP, the City has adopted and administers a
flood plain ordinance to minimize public risk by regulating building permits in flood zones.
Director Kim continued advising that in 2015, FEMA updated its Bay Area Mapping Model based on a
new Coastal Flood Model that takes into consideration wave, weather and time. Together with San
Bruno, the City challenged that model as conservative with an overestimation of the flood zone areas. In
2016, working with a consultant, the City appealed FEMA's modeling to no avail. Accordingly, FEMA's
maps will become final in spring 2019. In 2020, newly mapped property owners with federally backed
mortgages will need to obtain flood insurance. The City's new flood insurance rate maps result in an
approximate 50% reduction in parcels located in delineated flood zone areas. It will retain 687 parcels
already in the flood plain while adding 187 new parcels and removing 854 parcels. Of the 187 newly
added parcels, 36 are single - family residences primarily in the Francisco Terrace Neighborhood, 101 are
commercial including warehouses, parking lots and businesses. They are primarily in the Lindenville
neighborhood west of 101. Six (6) are local government and 44 are vacant land parcels or undeveloped
underwater marshland. Director Kim explained next steps included arranging a community outreach
meeting to engage FEMA with the affected property owners in the new flood zones.
Mayor Normandy invited public comment.
San Bruno resident Robert Riechel addressed Council. He advised his home would be included in the
new flood plan map. He called on FEMA to sit down with the cities of South San Francisco and San
Bruno to review and discuss the findings of the City's consultant who differed with FEMA on future
flood projections. Mr. Riechel quoted Hon. U.S. Congresswoman Jackie Speier's February 16, 2018
letter to FEMA in which she wrote: "[I]t is deeply troubling that an entirely different rationale was
offered without adequate notice to either community or a chance to adjust their presentation based upon
this line of reasoning. In fact it makes sense that someone might want to study river rain flow in
combination with the actions of the bay. However, my staff reports that FEMA didn't offer data during
their presentation to support its own assertions." Mr. Riechel closed his comments by reiterating his
request that FEMA hold -off finalizing and publishing its existing map until it meets with the cities of San
Bruno and South San Francisco.
Councilman Garbarino recounted the history of the City's dispute with FEMA. He noted that while he
didn't live in a flood zone area, he knew people that did and were being overburdened by the requirement
of purchasing flood insurance. He further opined that living in a flood zone most likely decreased the
value of the impacted property. He encouraged staff to try to bring FEMA to the table again. He
understood there was flooding in South San Francisco, but didn't believe the new maps were fair.
Director Kim advised there would be additional opportunities for challenging the determination upon
finalization of the maps. For example, the Letter of Map Revision Process or Elevation Certificate could
be utilized.
Councilman Gupta queried the significant difference between the old and new flood maps.
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 8, 2018
MINUTES PAGE 2
Director Kim responded that the model formulation and underlying assumptions were changed.
Councilman Gupta commented on the significant impact to affected property owners. He stated that if
the maps stand, he would like to better understand FEMA's assumptions.
Councilman Addiego was interested in means to assist single family residences included in the 187 new
impacted properties. He noted that some Peninsula communities have mitigated the impact with creative
solutions. For example, Measure P in Foster City increased the levy. A few years prior, in the City of San
Mateo, a citywide bond measure facilitated blocking water from the estuary to prevent flood problems.
He queried whether there was anything the City of South San Francisco could do along these lines to save
residents from this burden.
Director Kim advised that the Public Works Department had been addressing flood improvements for the
Francisco Terrace Neighborhood including installing backfill preventers and bolting down the manholes.
At tonight's regular meeting the Council would consider a Francisco Terrace crosswalk/overland release
path that is currently stalled because bids came in too high. The release path was designed to work in
conjunction with the backflow prevention and the tightening of the storm drain system in Francisco
Terrace. This would significantly improve the flood resistance of the neighborhood. He further hoped to
work with the consultant to remodel the area and possibly go back to FEMA for a Letter of Map
Revision.
Mayor Pro Tern Matsumoto discussed the significant flooding that occurred in the City a few years back.
She noted deep water required Fire Department personnel to use boats to rescue residents. One of the
major issues with the excess water involved lawn fertilizer from the California Golf and Country Club,
which was also involved in mudslides that physically impacted Ponderosa and Brentwood homes. She
believed the Club should be involved in flood control discussions.
Michael Barber of Supervisor Dave Pine's Office addressed Council. Mr. Barber was engaged in the
FEMA Map Process and had worked with the City's Public Works Department to advocate before
FEMA. He addressed FEMA's convoluted mapping process and offered kudos to South San Francisco
and San Bruno for appealing the map. He stated the Supervisor's Office would continue to work with the
City on the issue through the Colma Creek Advisory Committee. He encouraged the City to pursue a
Letter of Map Revisions for any improvements.
In response to a question from Mayor Pro Tern Matsumoto, Mr. Barber confirmed that he would continue
to be a point person on the issue as he had been since 2014.
2. Study Session - Update Regarding the Traffic Circle in Avalon Neighborhood (Richard Cho,
Principal Engineer)
6:20 p.m.: Councilman Garbarino recused himself from this discussion due to the proximity of his
residence to the structure at issue
Principal Engineer Cho introduced the Study Session regarding the Traffic Circle in the Avalon
Neighborhood. He provided a PowerPoint presentation on the issue. He advised that at a community
meeting held in November 2017 the conceptual design of the traffic circle was presented to the
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 8, 2018
MINUTES PAGE 3
neighborhood. The design was finalized in January 2018 and the pilot traffic circle was installed in
February 2018. The objectives for installing the circle were to increase stop sign compliance and to slow
vehicular movements through the intersection. Community concerns regarding the circle and voiced at a
recent meeting included vehicles not yielding to allow pedestrian crossings, loss of street parking and
limited stop sign compliance. There was also concern over trajectory of the vehicles as they crossed the
intersection. Residents were scared that if the vehicles lost control they would crash into front yards. A
big concern was the unpleasing aesthetics of the circle. As the pilot is now complete, there are now two
options: 1) remove the traffic circle; or 2) replace it with a smaller, more attractive circle. Principal Cho
then presented a slide depicting an option including a landscaped circle with dome shaped mountable
edges. The crosswalks would be marked in advance of the circle resulting in more potential parking loss.
In response to a question from Mayor Normandy, Principal Cho stated that staff would need to study
whether the stop signs could be removed if the traffic circle remains.
Councilman Addiego stated that roundabouts have some merit since they move traffic in a tremendous
fashion. He believed there were some intersections in the City where roundabouts would be viable.
However he believed the City should walk -away from this particular pilot.
Mayor Pro Tern Matsumoto noted that attractive examples of roundabouts could be found in the City of
Berkeley.
Councilman Gupta stated concern for the impact of roundabouts on pedestrians and bicyclists.
Councilman Addiego stated that over 200 residents recently attended a Brentwood and Avalon
Community Meeting and the majority expressed frustration with the roundabout. He further stated that a
moderate to heavily trafficked area where a roundabout could work is around Hillside Blvd. at Lincoln.
Principal Cho responded that the grading in the area of Hillside Blvd. might not be optimal for a
roundabout installation.
Councilman Addiego believed a roundabout in the area of Hillside Blvd. that he mentioned could handle
the 35 mph speed limit on the street.
Director Kim advised that at the Avalon Brentwood Community Meeting it was made clear by the
residents that both pedestrians and drivers were confused by the roundabout and larger vehicles had
difficulty navigating the design.
Mayor Pro Tern Matsumoto supported the neighborhood in its desire to remove the roundabout.
Councilman Gupta appreciated the roundabout as a traffic calming measure but did not believe it was
appropriate at the impacted intersection in the Avalon Neighborhood.
Mayor Normandy summarized Council's directive to remove the pilot traffic circle and look at alternative
solutions or concepts for the neighborhood.
6 :34p.m.: Councilman Garbarino rejoined the meeting.
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 8, 2018
MINUTES PAGE 4
3. Report regarding General Plan Update Overview and Process. (Mike Futrell, City Manager and
Sailesh Mehra, Chief Planner)
City Manager Futrell introduced the staff report and provided a brief overview of the upcoming General
Plan revision process. He advised that the current Plan is 19 years old. It is recommended that cities
revise their plan every 20 years. Mr. Futrell presented the concept of the General Plan Community
Advisory Committee, or GPCAC. He noted that in the United States, when a city revisits its general plan
it is common practice to have a community committee of various individuals that would provide advice
and work day -to -day with staff on the issue. Staff recommended an 11 member GPCAC. The proposed
membership included (2) members of the City Council, a member of the Planning Commission, a
member of the Parks and Recreation Commission, five (5) residents from across the City, including one
(1) from each of the recently adopted electoral districts, and two (2) members from the business
community. Staff believed anything larger than 11 members would become unwieldy. The General Plan
Update Process would be managed by the City Manager's Office. The principal actors would be the
Economic and Community Development Department, but the process would involve all departments.
Staff work would be coordinated through the City Manager's office and specifically led by Assistant City
Manager Lee.
Mr. Futrell stated that per the proposed timeline, staff recommended that Council select the consultant
this year and have the GPCAC appointed and operating by November. That would permit a January
kickoff. He invited Council's comments and direction relative to the timing of the Plan but also, more
specifically, the need for an Advisory Committee.
Councilman Gupta queried the process for retaining a consultant and suggested that Council be included
in the retention.
Mr. Futrell advised the consultant selection would come to Council for approval. He would consult the
City Attorney regarding how to include Council in the selection process prior to approval.
Mayor Pro Tern Matsumoto disagreed with Councilman Gupta regarding the Council's involvement in
the selection process. She believed the GPCAC could handle this process working with staff and make a
recommendation to Council for approval.
City Manager Futrell believed the GPCAC could be involved with interviewing the consultants.
Mayor Pro Tern Matsumoto stressed the importance of transportation. She noted the importance of
bringing businesses that had hired traffic consultants into the fold on this process. She further queried
why the update process was being coordinated through the City Manager's Office and not by the Planning
Division. She didn't believe the Assistant City Manager had experience with a General Plan Update.
City Manager Futrell responded that the Assistant City Manager would coordinate the update due to its
impact on every department. He further advised the Council that Assistant City Manager Lee has a
Master's Degree in Urban Planning from New York University.
Councilman Addiego agreed with Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto that the General Plan should come out of
Economic & Community Development. He also didn't want to micromanage what should be an open
process undertaken by the GPCAC. He wasn't sure that it was necessary to have two (2) members of the
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 8, 2018
MINUTES PAGE 5
City Council on this panel. He stated the Planning Commission could certainly have two (2) and the
Parks and Recreation Commission could have two (2). He thought it would be interesting if the
Councilmembers could appoint a single individual from the electoral district in which they respectively
reside.
After further Council discussion on this topic, City Manager Futrell confirmed Council's
recommendation for the GPCAC to have no City Council membership. Planning Commission
membership would be increased from one (1) to two (2) members. He also confirmed the suggestion that
each district community representative would be an individual appointed by the sitting councilmembers.
Effectively each Councilmember would pick someone in the community that represented his or her views
and the views of the neighborhoods as opposed to going through the interview process that would be
undertaken for some of the other members. The City Manager advised he would use this input to craft a
resolution to propose to Council in September.
Mayor Normandy requested clarification about proposed Parks and Recreation Commission membership
on the GPCAC.
Mr. Futrell confirmed that one (1) Parks and Recreation Commission representative was recommended
for the GPCAC.
Recess 6:57 p.m.
Meeting resumed: 7:35 p.m.
4. Report regarding a resolution approving a Back to Business (B2B) Program and authorizing the
City Manager, or his designee, to implement and administer the B2B Program to facilitate the
timely inspection of damaged structures in the event of a major disaster. (Phil Perry, Chief
Building Official)
4a. Resolution No. 122 -2018 approving a Back to Business (B2B) Program and authorizing
the City Manager, or his designee, to implement and administer the B2B Program to
facilitate the timely inspection of damaged structures in the event of a major disaster.
Chief Building Official Perry presented the staff report recommending that Council adopt a resolution
approving a B2B Program and authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to implement and
administer the B2B Program to facilitate the timely inspection of damaged structures in the event of a
major disaster. He presented a PowerPoint presentation explaining the proposed partnership between the
City and local business community that would pre - certify private architects and engineers for post disaster
situations. The ultimate purpose of the program was to expedite the process of getting businesses back up
and running after a disaster. The B2B program puts the City in a proactive stance to permit rapid
economic recovery after a flood, fire, earthquake, etc.
In response to a question from Mayor Pro Tern Matsumoto, Chief Perry advised that after a disaster, a
local business owner could find ACT20 certified professionals.
Councilman Addiego commented that he believed this proposal to be a great program focused on safety
and the need to get businesses back up and running after a disaster.
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 8, 2018
MINUTES PAGE 6
Motion — Councilman Garbarino /Second — Councilman Addiego: to approve Resolution No. 122 -2018.
Unanimously approved by roll call vote.
ADJOURNMENT
Being no further business, Mayor Normandy adjourned the meeting at 7: 49 p.m.
ubCKri elli, Ci Clerk
City of South San Francisco
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
Approved:
(3,)56
Liza Normandy, Mayor
City of South San Francisco
AUGUST 8, 2018
PAGE 7