Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-04-27 e-packetSPECIAL 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 CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY ROOM 33 ARROYO DRIVE WEDNESDAY, APRIL 27, 2005 6:30 P.M. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 54956 of the Government Code of the State of California, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco will hold a Special Meeting on Wednesday, the 27th day of April 2005, at 6:30 p.m., in the Municipal Services Building, Community Room, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, California. Purpose of the meeting: 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call o 6:30 pm 4. 7:00 pm 5. Public Comments - comments are limited to items on the Special Meeting Agenda Tour of Police Department - Equipment Public Hearing: Joint City Council/Redevelopment Agency public heating regarding proposed amendments to the redevelopment plans for the Downtown/Central, E1 Camino corridor, Gateway and U.S. Steel/Shearwater redevelopment project areas to: fiscally merge the four project areas, add territory to the Downtown/Central Project Area, and extend the time limit for the exercise of eminent domain within the Downtown/Central Project Area and the original E1 Camino Corridor Project Area (approve resolutions, and waive reading and introduce an ordinance) 6. Adjournment SP. AGENDA ITEM #5 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: April 27, 2005 Honorable Mayor and City Council/Redevelopment Agency Board Mart3, Van Duyn, Assistant City Manager JOINT CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING FISCAL MERGER, PLAN AMENDMENTS AND PROPOSED FIVE YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council: 1) Hold a joint public hearing on the (A) proposed Fiscal Merger and Plan Amendments for the Downtown/Central, El Camino Corridor, Gateway and U.S. Steel/Shearwater Redgvelopment Project Areas to: fiscally merge the four existing Project Areas, add territory to the Downtown/Central Project Area, and extend the time limit to exercise eminent domain for nonresidential property within the Downtown/Central Project Area and the original El Camino Corridor Project Area and (B) the proposed Implementation Plan for the four Project Areas; 2) Close the Public Hearing, and continue the joint Agency/City Council meeting to May llth; 3) Direct staff to prepare written findings in response to written objections to the proposed Fiscal Merger and Plan Amendments received from property owners and affected taxing entities at or prior to the hearing. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The City of South San Francisco (City) and the South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency (Agency) are considering Redevelopment Plan Amendments for, and a Fiscal Merger of, the four existing Redevelopment Projects: Downtown/Central, E1 Camino Corridor, Gateway, and Shearwater. Following is a summary of the proposed benefits of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. The proposed Plan Amendments will: Fiscally merge the four South San Francisco Redevelopment Project Areas. Combine current individual cumulative tax increment collection caps of the existing Project Areas. Combine current individual outstanding bonded indebtedness caps of the existing ' Project Areas. Staff Report Subject: Page 2 Fiscal Merger and Plan Amendments These caps will be combined without increasing the total tax increment revenues allocated to the Agency or the total amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness the Agency can have at any given time. · Extend by twelve years the time limit within which the Agency may exercise eminent domain authority to acquire nonresidential property in the Downtown/Central Project Area and the original E1 Camino Corridor Project Area. · Add Oyster Point Marina (Added Area) to the Downtown/Central Project Area. · No other fiscal or time limits will be amended. Each of the existing Project Areas will continue to be governed by its own Redevelopment Plan with its respective set of redevelopment goals, and time and other fiscal limits. The Redevelopment Program for each existing Project Area will not be modified. The Fiscal Merger will allow the Agency to: · Alleviate the physical and economic blight conditions present in the Added Area. · Combine financial resources and facilitate efforts to better implement the Agency's Redevelopment Program, which will accelerate the alleviation of adverse conditions in the four Project Area& · Provide flexibility to combine and focus revenues from different Project Areas on the needs of a particular Project Area. · Over time, adjust focus on various Project Areas so that the community's overall redevelopment needs can be addressed in a more efficient and effective manner. The following summarizes the process that the Redevelopment Agency, City Council and Planning Commission have undertaken to date with regard to the proposed Plan Amendments: On March 10, 2004, the City Council of the City of South S an Francisco ("City Council") adopted Resolution No.25-2004, which designated a Survey Area for the purpose of amending the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area to add territory. On April 15, 2004, the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco ("Planning Commission") adopted the Preliminary Plan for the Added Area in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33324 by Resolution No. 2633, which established the boundaries of the proposed Added Area. By Resolution No. 06-2004, adopted on May 12, 2004, the Redevelopment Agency accepted the Preliminary Plan and directed staff to prepare amendments to add the Added Area to the Downtown/Central Project Area and' to fiscally merge the Downtown/Central, Gateway, and U.S. Steel/Shearwater Project Areas. The Agency subsequently resolved that the Fiscal Merger should also include the E1 Camino Corridor Project Area in the summer of 2004. Staff Report Subject: Fiscal Merger and Plan Amendments Page 3 The Redevelopment Agency adopted Resolution No. 13-2004 on December 8' 2004, approving the Preliminary Report for the proposed Fiscal Merger and Plan Amendment to add territory to the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area, and authorizing transmittal of the Preliminary Report to affected taxing entities. On March 9, 2005, the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council adopted Resolutions (i) accepting the Report to Council on the Proposed Redevelopment Fiscal Merger Plan Amendments, (ii) adopting findings that (a) a Project Area Committee is not required because the proposed amendments do not authorize use of condemnation for residential properties and do not provide for public projects that will cause substantial displacement, and (b) adequate Environmental Review has been previously completed, and (iii) consenting to a joint public hearing on the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger, and (iv) transmitting the Report to Council to the Planning Commission and City Council. Redevelopment Agency staff held several meetings to consult with representatives of the affected taxing entities. Agency staff held a meeting with Project Area residents, property owners, businesses and community organizations on March 29, 2005 to continue with the consultation process. The meetings with taxing entities were informative and positively received. The taxing entity representatives in attendance asked specific questions regarding the nature of new statutory pass through payments that would be generated by the Plan Amendments and were generally supportive of the City's proposed Amendments and Fiscal Merger. Both the Unified School District and Community College District have asked for clarification regarding existing pass-through agreements and the County of San Mateo requested detailed information regarding the Agency's Housing Fund and affordable housing accomplishmentS. The staff response to the County is included in the Supplement to City Council transmitted with this StaffReport. Agency staffcontinue to discuss the College District's request. The community meeting was also well received with approximately 25 persons attending mostly expressing fears about the Agency taking their property through eminent domain and others regarding zoning issues. Staff assured attendees that the Agency currently has no plans requiring the use of its eminent domain authority. One objection letter was received from an owner/resident of the mobile home park, whose concerns are not related to the proposed Plan Amendments and staff responded in writing providing referrals to appropriate agencies that may be of assistance. Further information regarding the consultations with community members and taxing entities is included in the Report to Council previously provided to the City Council and in the Supplement Report to Council transmitted with this staff report. On April 7, 2005, the City Planning Commission adopted a resolution finding that the proposed Plan Amendments are consistent with the City's General Plan. The Redevelopment Agency has prepared: (i) an amendment to the redevelopment plan for the Downtown/Central Project Area to add the Oyster Point Marina and Business Park to the Project Area, (ii) amendments to the redevelopment plans for the original E1 Camino Corridor Project Area and the Downtown/Central Project Area to extend the time period within which the Agency will have authority to acquire nonresidential property by eminent domain within such Project Areas, and (iii) amendments to the redevelopment plans for the Downtown/Central Project Area, the E1 Camino Corridor Project Area, the U.S. Steel/Shearwater Project Area and the Gateway Project Area to effectuate a fiscal merger. The text of the proposed Amendments is incorporated into Ordinances that are attached as exhibits to this staff report, organized by Project Area. Staff Report Subject: Fiscal Merger and Plan Amendments Page 4 Report to the Council and Supplement The Report to the City Council ("REPORT") distributed at the March 9, 2005 City Council meeting, was prepared pursuant to the provisions of Section 33352 of the Community Redevelopment Law (CRL). Among other information, the Report includes: a proposed Five Year Agency Implementation Plan; summary of consultations with affected taxing entities; documentation of remaining blight; and a summary of the Controller's Report. A Supplement to the "REPORT" has been prepared which includes the Planning Commission's report and recommendations on the proposed amendments, a summary of the consultations with community organizations, residents and property owners, and further consultations with affected taxing entities. The "REPORT" was distributed to all taxing entities and has been available in .the City Clerk's office for review by the community. The Agency has published a notice of this hearing and has sent all required notices to the affected taxing entities and to residents, property owners and businesses located in the four Project Areas. Copies of the notices are included in the Supplement. The Supplement contains the following information: · The Planning Commission Staff Report and recommendation in favor of adoption of the Plan Amendments, including a copy of the April 7, 2005 resolution of the Planning Commission. · A summary of the community meeting, copies of the community meeting and joint public hearing notices, a list of attendees, a written letter submitted to the Agency, and the Agency's response. · Summary of additional meetings with taxing entities that requested further discussion of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. · Copies of the City Council and Agency resolutions adopted on March 9, 2005, which include the findings described above. Implementation Plan The proposed Implementation Plan transmitted with this StaffReport provides a plan for Agency activity in the four Project Areas for the five-year period fi.om 2004/05 through 2008/09.. The Implementation Plan sets forth: 1. Agency accomplishments during the previous five years in each of the Project Areas. 2. Specific goals and objectives for housing and nonhousing activities for the next five years. 3. Specific programs and expenditures for housing and nonhousing activities for the next five years. 4. An explanation of how the goals, objectives, programs and expenditures will assist in the elimination of blight and in meeting affordable housing obligations. 5. Additional information related to the provision of affordable housing. Staffrecommends that the Agency and City Council receive comments on the proposed Implementation Plan during this evening's public hearing, and that the Agency consider adoption of a resolution approving the Implementation Plan on May 25th following the City Council adoption of the ordinances approving the Fiscal Merger Plan Amendments. Staff Report Subject: Fiscal Merger and Plan Amendments Page 5 CONCLUSION Approval of the proposed Plan Amendments will bring to close a one year process to add territory to the Downtown/Central Project Area and to Fiscally Merge the four Redevelopment Project Areas. If written objections to the proposed Fiscal Merger and Plan Amendments are received from property owners or taxing entities, the City Council is required to adopt written findings in response to such objections no sooner than one week following the commencement of the public hearing. Staff recommends that after all public testimony is taken, that the Agency and City Council close the public hearing and continue the joint meeting to May 1 l, 2005 in order to consider findings in response to such objections. At the May 11, 2005 Joint Meeting, staff recommends the following actions: 1. City Council considers and adopts findings in response to objections. 2. Agency adopts resolutions approving each of the four Plan Amendments and recommending adoption of the Ordinances. 3. City Council waives reading, introduces the four Ordinances and schedules a second reading for May 25, 2005. At the May 25, 2005 Joint Meeting, staff recommends the following actions: 1. Agency adopts resolution regarding use of 20% funds outside Project Areas 2. Agency adopts resolution approving the Implememation Plan 3. City Council waives second reading and adopts the four ordinances 4. City Council adopts resolution regarding use of 20% funds outside Project Areas For this evening's meeting, it is recommended that the Redevelopment Agency and City Council open the public hearing, take testimony regarding the proposed Fiscal Merger, Plan Amendments, and Implementation Plan, close the hearing, continue the joint meeting to May 11, 2005, and direct staff to prepare written findings in response to written objections to the proposed amendments received from property owners and affected taxing entities at or prior to the hearing. By: ~(___~ Assistant City Manager City Manager Staff Report Subject: Fiscal Merger and Plan Amendments Page Attachments: Resolution approving Five Year Implementation Plan FY 2004-05 through FY 2008-09 (pg. 1-3) Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area, Resolution, Ordinance, Amendment, Map and Legal Description (pg. 4 - 26) E1 Camino Corridor Redevelopment Project Area, Resolution, Ordinance, Amendment (pg. 27 - 42) U.S. Steel/Shearwater Redevelopment Project Area, Resolution, Ordinance, Amendment (pg. 43 - 57) Gateway Redevelopment Project Area, Resolution, Ordinance, Amendment (pg. 58-72) Supplement to the Report to Council (pg. 73 - 152) Report to Council with Appendix H, Implementation Plan Resolution For Five Year Implementation Plan For FisCal Years 2004-05 through 2008-09 (Implementation Plan is attached as Appendix H to the Report To Council) · RESOLUTION NO. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A NEW FIVE-YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR THE DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL PROJECT AREA, THE El, CAMINO CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA, THE GATEWAY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND THE U.S.' STEEL/SHF_ARWATER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA FOR FISCAL YEARS 2004/05 THROUGH 2008/09 WHEREAS, pursuant to California Community Redevelopment Law, each redevelopment agency administering a redevelopment plan must adopt a five-year implementation plan setting forth specific redevelopment agency goals and objectives, outlining specific projects and expenditures for the coming five years, and explaining how the stated goals, objectives, projects and expenditures will eliminate blight and meet the affordable housing needs of the community; and WHEREAS, the Report to Council ("Report to Council") prepared in connection with the proposed fiscal merger of the Downtown/Central Project Area, the E1 Camino Corridor Redevelopment Project Area, the Gateway Redevelopment ProjeCt Area and the U.S. Steel/Shearwater Redevelopment Project Area (cOllectively, the "Project Areas") and the proposed addition of territory to the Downtown/Central Project Area includes a proposed Five-Year Implementation Plan for the Project Areas for fiscal years 2004/05 through 2008/09 (the "Implementation Plan"); and WHEREAS, in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33490, the adoption of an implementation plan does not constitute a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act, and therefore, no environmental analysis was. required or prepared for the Implementation Plan; and WHEREAS, following publication of notice as required by law, the Agency held a public hearing on April 27, 2005 to receive public comment on the proposed Implementation Plan; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED :by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco that the Implementation Plan included in the Report to Council as Appendix H, a copy of which is on file with the City Clerk, is hereby accepted and adopted as the Implementation Plan to be used by the Agency for fiscal years 2004/05 through 2008/09. 000002 I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco'at a meeting held on the __ day of ,2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: Clerk S:kCurrent Reso's\4-27-05five.year.implemcntation.plan.res.DOC 000003 Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area Resolution Ordinance a. Exhibit A: Amendment i. Exhibit 1: Map and Legal Description 000004 .RESOLUTION NO. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, CITY O1~ SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DOW2YrOWN/CENTRAL PROJECT AREA TO ADD NEW TERRITORY, EXTEND TIME LIMITS FOR EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS, AND FISCAI.I~Y MERGE THE DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL PROJECT AREA ~vVITH THE EL CAMINO CORRIDOR PROJECT AREA, THE GATEWAY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA, AND THE U.S. STEEl/SHEARWATER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco ("City Council") approved and adopted the Redevelopment Plan '("Redevelopment Plan") for the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area") by Ordinance No. 1056-89 adopted on July 12, 1989; and WHEREAS, on November 9, 1994, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1152-94 to amend the Redevelopment Plan by amending certain time limitations in accordance with AB 1290; and WHEREAS, in March 2004, the City Council adopted-Ordinance No. 1337-2004 extending certain time limitations in accordance with SB 1045; and WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco ("Agency") is vested with responsibility to carry out the Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, the Agency desires to again amend the Redevelopment Plan in order to (i) add territory to the Project Area, (ii) extend the time limits for the use of eminent domain proceedings to acquire nonresidential property in the Project Area, and (iii) effectuate the fiscal merger of the Project Area with the Gateway Redevelopment Project Area, the E1 Camino Corridor Redevelopment Project Area and the U.S. Steel/Shearwater Redevelopment Project Area in order to pool tax increment revenue from the four project areas and establish a unified bonded indebtedness limit for the four project areas while retaining the separate identity of each project area for other purposes; and WHEREAS, the Agency has prepared a proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan (the "Amendment"), a copy of which is on file with the Agency Secretary and the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, adoption of the Amendment is necessary to provide the Agency, the City and the South San Francisco community with additional financial and legal 000005. resources to expand and complete the redevelopment program in the Project Area through activities such as development of public improvements, revitalization of commercial and industrial areas, land assembly and disposition for redevelopment, provision of financial and other assistance to property owners for redevelopment of their property, .and the provision of assistance in the development, preservation, acquisition and rehabilitation of affordable housing; and WHEREAS, as set forth in City Council Resolution ~ and Agency Resolution , each. adopted on March 9, 2005, the City Council and the Agency have each determined that establishment of a Project Area Committee is not required beCause the Amendment does not authorize use of eminent domain for property on which persons reside and does not provide for the development of public projects that will cause displacement of a substantial number of low- and moderate-income households; and WHEREAS, as set forth in City Council Resolution __ and Agency Resolution __, the City Council and the Agency have each determined that (i) the fiscal merger is exempt t~om CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section .15061Co)(3), and (ii) the potential environmental effects of the Amendment have been analyzed in previously certified Environmental Impact Reports, and no new projects are proposed, no new impacts have been identified, there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the prior E[Rs were certified, and there is no new information that was unavailable at the time the prior EIRs were certified; and' WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission (the "Planning Commission") has reviewed the Amendment, has found that the Amendment conforms to the City's General Plan and has recommended the approval and adoption of the Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Agency has prepared and reviewed a Report to Council in compliance with the requirements of Community Redevelopment Law (Health & Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) and a Supplement to such Report, which Report and Supplement are on file with the City Clerk and the Agency Secretary; and WHEREAS, pursuant to notice duly given, a full and fair public hearing has been held on the Amendment, and the Agency has considered all written and all oral comments and testimony relating thereto and has been fully advised thereon; and WHEREAS, the Agency has taken all other actions required by law in connection with the preparation and consideration of the Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Redevelopment Agency as follows: Section 1. The Amendment, the Report to Council, the Supplement and all related documents, correspondence and transmittals, copies of which are on file in the office of the Agency Secretary and the City Clerk, are hereby approved. .... 0000 6 ..... 0 Section 2. The Agency hereby recommends approval and adoption of the Amendment by the City Council. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco at a meeting held on the __ day of ,2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: Clerk S :\Current Reso's\4-27-05downtown. central.pro.area.res.DOC OO00O7 ORDINANCE NO. 2005- AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL RF. DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA TO ADD NEW TERRITORY, EXTEND TIME LIMITS FOR EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS AND FISCALLY MERGE THE DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL PROJECT AREA, THE EL CAM~O CORRIDOR RbTDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA, ~ GATEWAY REDEVF. LOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND TIlE U.S. STEEL/SHEARWATER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco ("City Council") approved and adopted the Redevelopment Plan ("Redevelopment Plan") for the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area") by Ordinance No. 1056~89 adopted on July 12, 1989; and WHEREAS, on November 9, 1994, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1152-94 to amend the RedeveloPment Plan by amending certain time limitations in aCcordance with AB 1290; and WHEREAS, in March 2004, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1337-2004 extending certain time limitations in accordance with SB 1045; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received from the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco (the "Agency") a proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan (the "Amendment"), a copy of which is attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the Amendment provides for (i) the addition of certain territory to the Project Area as described in Exhibit 1 to the Amendment (the "Added Area"), (ii) the extension of time limits for the use of eminent domain proceedings to acquire nonresidential property, (iii) the fiscal merger of the Project Area with the E1 Camino Corridor Redevelopment Project Area, the Gateway Redevelopment Project Area and the U.S. Steel/Shearwater Redevelopment Project Area in order to pool tax increment revenue from the four project areas and establish a unified bonded indebtedness limit for the four project areas while retaining the separate identity of each project area for other purposes; and WHEREAS, adoption of the Amendment is necessary to provide the Agency, the City and the South San Francisco community with additional financial and legal resources to expand and complete the redevelopment program in the Project Area through activities such as development of public improvements, revitalization of commercial and 000008 industrial areas, land assembly and disposition for redevelopment, provision of financial and other assistance to property owners for redevelopment of their property, and the provision of assistance in the development, preservation, acquisition and rehabilitation of affordable housing; and WHEREAS, as set forth in City Council Resolution __ and Agency Resolution , each adopted on March 9, 2005, the City COuncil and the Agency have each determined that establishment of a Project Area Committee is not required because the Amendment does not authorize use of eminent domain for property on which persons reside and does not provide for the development of public projects that will cause displacement of a substantial number of low- and moderate-income households; and WHEREAS, as set forth in City Council Resolution __ and Agency Resolution __, the City Council and the Agency have each determined that (i) the fiscal merger is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section' 15061(b)(3), and (ii) the potential environmental effects of the Amendment have been analyzed in previously certified Environmental Impact Reports, and no new projects, are proposed, no new impacts have been identified, there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the prior EIRs were certified, and there is no new information that was unavailable at the time the prior EIRs were certified; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission (the "Planning Commission") has reviewed the Amendment, has found that the Amendment conforms to the City's General Plan and has recommended the approval and adoption of the Amendment; and 'WHEREAS, the City Council and the Agency conducted a joint public hearing on May 27, 2005, concerning adoption of the Amendment; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was published in a newspaper of general circulation in San Mateo County once per week for four weeks prior to the date of the hearing, and a copy of such notice and affidavit of publication are on file with the City Clerk and Secretary of the Agency; and · WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing together with a statement concerning acquisition of property by the Agency was sent by first class mail to the last known address of each assessee of each parcel of land in the existing Project Area and the Added Area, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll for the County of San Mateo; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was sent by fa'st class mail to all residents and businesses within the existing Project Area and the Added Area; WHEREAS, notice of the public heating was sent by certified mall, return receipt requested to the governing body of each taxing agency that receives taxes from property in the existing Project Area and the Added Area; and WHEREAS, the Agency has prepared a Report to Council in compliance with the requirements of Community Redevelopment Law (Health & Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) and a Supplement to such Report, which Report and Supplement are on file with the 000009 bo Co d. The Added Area is a blighted area, the redevelopment of which is necessary to effectuate the public purposes of the Community Redevelopment Law, and the inclusion of the Added Area is consistent with the goals and objectives of the existing redevelopment project. This finding is based on the following, which are detailed in Section II of the Report to Council: Significant earthquake, flooding, environmental and development hazards exist in the Added Area. o The Added Area is characterized by a lack of adequate public improvements and utilities. The Added Area includes buildings in deteriorated condition which are potentially hazardous. · The Added Area is characterized by soil conditions and environmental hazards that may prevent or substantially hinder the economically viable reuse of land. The blighted conditions in the existing Project Area and the Added Area are so prevalent and so substantial that they cause a reduction of or lack of proper utilization of the area to such an extent that they constitute a serious physical and economic burden on the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private enterprise or governmental action, or both, without redevelopment. This finding is based in part on the facts that governmental action available to the City without redevelopment would be insufficient to cause any significant correction of the blighting conditions, and that the nature and cost of the improvements necessary to eradicate such blight are beyond the capacity of the City and private enterprise acting alone or in concert without redevelopment. The Amendment will facilitate the redevelopment of the Added Area and the existing Project Area in conformity with the Community Redevelopment Law and in the interests of the public peace, health, ~afety and welfare. This finding is supported by the fact that redevelopment of the existing Project Area and the Added Area as contemplated by the Redevelopment Plan as amended by the Amendment will implement the objectives of the Community Redevelopment Law by aiding in the elimination and correction of the conditions of blight in the existing Project Area and the Added Area; providing for planning, development, redesign, clearance, reconstmction or rehabilitation of properties which need improvement; providing affordable housing, including housing for low- and moderate-income persons; providing additional employment opportunities; facilitating private investment; and providing for more beneficial use of under-utilized land. eo The adoption and carrying out of the Amendment is economically sound and feasible. This finding is based in part on the fact that under the Redevelopment. Plan, as proposed to be amended, the Agency will be authorized to seek and utilize a variety of potential financing resources, including tax increments and that no public redevelopment activity will be undertaken unless the Agency can demonstrate that it has adequate revenue to finance the activity. The Report to Council further documents the economic feasibility of the Amendment and related undertakings. The Amendment is consistent with the General Plan of the City including, without limitation the Housing Element of the General Plan, which substantially complies with the requirements of Article 10.6 (commencing with Section 65580) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code. This finding is based upon the report of the Planning Commission that the Amendment conforms to the General Plan of the City of South San Francisco. The carrying out of the Amendment will promote the public peace, health, safety and welfare of the City and will effectuate the purposes and policies of the Community Redevelopment Law. This finding is based on the fact that redevelopment as contemplated by the Redevelopment Plan, as amended by the Amendment, will benefit the existing Project Area and the Added Area by correcting conditions of blight and by coordinating public and private actions to stimulate development, contribute toward needed public improvements and improve the social, economic, and physical conditions of the existing Project Area and the Added Area. The condemnation of nonresidential real property as provided for in the Redevelopment Plan as amended by the Amendment, is necessary to the execution of'the Redevelopment Plan, and adequate provisions have been made for payment for property to be acquired as provided by law. This finding is based upon the need to ensure that the provisions of the Redevelopment plan as amended by the Amendment will be carried out and the need to prevent the recurrence of blight. The Agency has a feasible method and plan for the relocation of families and persons who may be temporarily or permanently displaced from housing facilities in the existing Project Area or the Added Area. This finding is based upon the fact that the City Council and the Agency recognize that the provisions of Government Code Section 7260 et seq. would apply in the event of relocation resulting from the Agency's implementation of the Redevelopment Plan as amended by the Amendment. The City Council finds and determines that the provision of relocation assistance according to the Agency's adopted Relocation Guidelines and applicable law constitutes a feasible relocation method. 00001 There are, or will be provided within the Added Area, the existing Project Area or in other areas not generally less desirable with regard to public utilities and public and commercial facilities and at rents or prices within the financial means of the families and persons who may be displaced from the existing Project Area or the Added Area, decent, safe, and sanitary dwellings equal in number to the number of and available to such displaced families and persons and reasonably accessible to their places of employment. This finding is based in part on the fact that no person or family will be required by the Agency to move from any dwelling unit in the Existing Project Area or the Added Area until suitable replacement housing is available according to law. Families and persons shall not be displaced prior to adoption of a relocation plan pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33411 and 33411.1. Dwelling units housing persons and families of low or moderate income shall not be removed or destroyed prior to the adoption of a replacement housing plan pursuant to Health and Safety Code Sections 33334.5, 33413 and 33413.5. This finding is based in part on the fact that the Agency shall displace no families or persons nor remove or destroy dwelling units housing persons and families-of low or moderate incomes unless and until relocation assistance as required by law is provided. All noncontiguous areas of the Project Area, as amended to include the Added Area are either blighted or necessary for effective redevelopment, and are not included for the purpose of obtaining the allocation of taxes from the area pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 without other substantial justification for their inclusion. This finding is based in part upon the fact that the boundaries of the Added Area were chosen to -be added to the existing Project Area as a unified and consistent whole to include lands that are underutilized because of blighting influences or that are affected by th~ existence of blighting influences and conditions that significantly contribute to blight conditions as reflected in the Report to Council, and whose inclusion is necessary to accomplish the objectives and benefits of the Amendment. Inclusion of any lands, buildings, or improvements which are not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare is necessary for the effective redevelopment of the area of which they are a part, and any such areas included are necessary for effective redevelopment and are not included for the purpose of obtaining the allocation of tax increment revenues from such areas pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 without other substantial justification for their inclusion. This finding is based in part upon the fact that the inclusion of lands, buildings or improvements within the Added Area is necessary in order to (i) eliminate underutilized, stagnant and unproductive conditions of land; (ii) eliminate deteriorated structures; Cfi-i) eliminate inadequate or deteriorated public improvements, facilities and utilities; (iv) provide affordable 000013 po housing, including housing for low-and moderate-income persons; and (v) provide employment opportunities. The elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the existing Project Area and the Added Area could not be reasonably expected to be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone without the aid and assistance of the Agency. This finding is based upon the existence of blighting influences, including the lack of adequate public improvements and facilities, structural deficiencies, dilapidation and deterioration, factors that hinder economically viable use, and the inability of individual developers to economically remove these blighting influences without public assistance to acquire and assemble sites for development as detailed in the record including the Report to Council. The lack of private investment incentive, and the .cost of requiring individuals (through assessments or otherwise) to eradicate or significantly alleviate such blighting conditions, and the inadequacy of other governmental programs and financing mechanisms to eradicate or significantly eliminate such blighting conditions, make elimination of blight in the existing Project Area and the Added Area infeasible without the aid and assistance of the Agency under the Amendment and the Community Redevelopment Act. The Added Area is predominantly urbanized, as defined in Subdivision Co) of Section 33320.1 of the Health and Safety Code. This finding is based on the fact as set forth in the Report to Council that 97% of the Added Area has been developed for urban uses and is an integral part of an area developed for urban uses which is surrounded or substantially surrounded by parcels which have been or are developed for urban uses. ~ The time limitations and the limitation on taxes that may be allocated to the Agency as set forth in the Redevelopment Plan as amended by the Amendment are reasonablY related to the proposed projects to be implemented in the existing Project Area and the Added Area and to the ability of the Agency to eliminate blight within the existing Project Area and the Added Area. This finding is supported by the fact that · redevelopment depends in large part, upon private market forces beyond the control of the Agency, and shorter limitations would impair the Agency's ability to be flexible and respond to market conditions as and when appropriate and would impair the Agency's ability to maintain development standards and controls over a period of time sufficient to assure area stabilization. In addition, shorter time limitations would limit the revenue sources and financing capacity necessary to carry out proposed projects in the existing Project Area and the Added Area. The fiscal merger of the Project Area and the City's three other project areas for the purpose of pooling tax increment revenue is authorized by, consistent with, and will serve the legislative policies of, Health and Safety Code Section 33485 et seq., in that such fiscal merger will result in 000014 substantial benefit to the public and will contribute to the revitalization of blighted areas through the increased economic vitality of such areas and through increased and improved housing and economic oppommities in or near such areas. Section 3. The City Council is satisfied that if any occupants of the existing Project Area or the Added Area are displaced, permanent housing facilities will be available within three years from the time of such displacement, and that pending the development of such facilities, there will be available to any such displaced occupants adequate temporary housing facilities at rents comparable to those in the community at the time of their displacement. Section 4. The City Council is satisfied that all written objections received before or at the noticed public hearing have been responded to in writing In addition, written findings have been adopted in response to each written objection of an affected property owner or taxing entity which has been filed with the City Clerk either before or at the noticed public hearing. Following consideration by the City Council, all written and oral objections to the Amendment are hereby, overruled. The reasons for overruling all written objections are more fully set forth in the Findings. Section 5. The Redevelopment Plan as originally adopted and previously amended is hereby further amended as set forth in the proposed Amendment attached hereto as Exhibit A and as so amended is hereby designated as the official redevelopment plan for the existing Project Area and the Added Area. Section 6. In order to implement and facilitate the effectuation of the Amendment hereby approved, it may be necessary for the City Council to take certain actions, and accordingly, this City Council hereby: (a) pledges its cooperation in helping to carry out the Redevelopment Plan as amended; Co) requests the various officials, departments, boards and agencies of the City having administrative responsibilities in the Project Area, including the Added Area likewise to cooperate to such end and to exercise their respective functions and powers in a manner consistent with the redevelopment of the existing Project Area and the Added Area in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan as amended; (c) stands ready to consider and take appropriate action upon proposals and measures designed to effectuate the Redevelopment Plan as amended; (d) declares its intention to undertake and complete any proceedings necessary to be carded out by the City under the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan as amended; and (e) may elect to provide, but. is not committed to provide, financial assistance in support of implementation of the Redevelopment Plan as amended. Section 7.. In accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33372, the City Clerk is hereby directed to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Agency, whereupon the Agency is vested with the responsibility for carrying out the Redevelopment Plan as amended by th~ Amendment. Section 8. In accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33373, the City Clerk is hereby directed to record with the San Mateo County Recorder a description 000015 of the land within the Added Area and a statement that proceedings for the redevelopment of the Added Area have been instituted under the Community Redevelopment Law. The Agency is hereby directed to effectuate recordation in accordance with Government Code Section 27295, if applicable, Section 9. In accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33374, the Building Department of the City is hereby directed for a period of two years after adoption of this Ordinance to advise all applicants for building permits within the Added Area that the site for which a buildi.'ng permit is sought for the construction of buildings or for other improvements is within a redevelopment project area. Section 10. In 'accordance with Health and Safety Code Sections 33457 and 33375, the City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit within thirty days of adoption of this Ordinance, a copy of the description and statement recorded pursuant tO Section 8 of this Ordinance, a copy of this Ordinance, and a map or plat indicating the boundaries of the Added Area to the auditor and tax assessor of San Mateo County, to the officer or officers performing the functions of auditor or assessor for any taxing agencies which in levying or collecting taxes do not use the County assessment roll or do not collect taxes through the County, to the governing body of each of the taxing agencies which levies taxes upon any property in the Added Area, and to the State Board of Equalization. Section 11. If any part of this Ordinance or the Amendment is held to'be invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance or of the Amendment, and the City Council hereby declares it would have passed the remainder of this Ordinance or approved the remainder of the Amendment without such invalid part. Section 12. Pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 36933, a summary of this Ordinance shall be prepared by the City Attorney. At least five (5) days prior to the Council meeting at which this Ordinance is scheduled to be adopted, the City Clerk shall (i) publish the Summary, and (ii) post in the City Clerk's Office a certified copy of this Ordinance. Within fifteen (15) days after the adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall (a) publish the summary, and Co) post in the City Clerk's Office a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance along with the names of those City Council members voting for and against this Ordinance. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its adoption. 00001'6 Introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of South San Francisco, held the 27th day of Apr/l, 2005. Adopted as an Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting of the City Council held the day of May, 2005 by the following vote: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: As Mayor of the City of South San Francisco, I do hereby approve the foregoing Ordinance this ~ day of ,2005. Mayor S:\Current Ord's\4-27-05downtown.central.ord. DOC 000017 Exhibit A AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL REDEVELOPMENT PRoJEcT TO ADD TERRITORY, EXTEND EMINENT DOMAIN AUTHORITY AND FISCALLY MERGE PROJECT AREAS SECTION 1. A_MF. NDMENT OF REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. The Redevelopment Plan for the South San Francisco Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project, adopted by Ordinance 1056-89 on July 12, 1989 and subsequently amended (as so amended, the "Downtown Plan" or the "Plan") is hereby amended as set forth in this amendment (this "Amendment"), effective as of the effective date of the ordinance adopting this Amendment. SECTION 2. ' FISCAL MERGER Part V.F [Section 506] is hereby added to the Downtown Plan to read as follows: F. [Section 506] Fiscal Merger 1. Findings. The fiscal merger of the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area ("Downtown/Central Project Area") and the City's three other project areas for the purpose of pooling tax increment revenue is authorized by, consistent with, and will serve the legislative policies of, Health and Safety Code Section 33485 et seq., in that such fiscal merger will result in substantial benefit to the public and will contribute to the revitalization of blighted areas through the increased economic vitality of such areas and through increased and improved housing and economic opportunities in or near such areas. 2. Fiscal Merger of Project Areas. Pursuant to, and for the purpose of pooling tax increment revenue as described in Health and Safety Code Section 33485 et seq., the Downtown/Central Project Area (as amended) is hereby fiscally merged with the following project areas: a. The project area (the "El Camino Project Area") established and described in the Redevelopment Plan for the E1 Camino Corridor Area Project adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 1132-93 (as subsequently amended and restated by Ordinance No. 1270-2000, the "El Camino Plan"). b. The project area (the "Shearwater Project Area") established and described in the Redevelopment Plan for the South San Francisco U.S. 000018' Steel Plant Site, adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 996-86 (as subsequently amended, the "Shearwater Plan"). c. The project area (the "Gateway Project Area") established and described in the Redevelopment Plan for the South San Francisco Gateway Redevelopment Project, adopted by .the City Council by Ordinance No. 867-81 (as subsequently amended, the ,Gateway Plan"). The E1 Camino Project Area, the Downtown/Central Project Area, the Shearwater Project Area and the Gateway Project Area are each referred to herein as a "constituent project area." Except as otherwise stated herein, each reference in this Amendment to a constituent project area shall mean such project area as originally established and as such project area may have been amended to add territory. This section authorizes the taxes attributable to each constituent project area which are allocated to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670(b) to be allocated for redevelopment in any of the constituent project areas for the purpose of paying the principal of, and interest on, indebtedness incurred by the Agency to finance or refinance, in whole or in part, the redevelopment project in any of the constituent project areas; except that any such taxes attributable to a particular constituent project area shall first be used to pay indebtedness in compliance with the terms of any bond resolution or othei agreement pledging such taxes from that particular constituent project area which resolution or other agreement was adopted or approved by the Agency prior to the fiscal merger of the constituent project areas. Except as otherwise noted in this Section, tax increment revenue attributable to each constituent project area may be used for any lawful purpose in any of the constituent project areas. 3. Bonded Indebtedness Limit. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in Section 503 of the Plan, in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33334.1, 'the amount of bonded indebtedness to be repaid in whole or in part from the combined allocation of taxes to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 from all of the constituent project areas (with the exception of the Added Area defined in Section 200 below) which in the aggregate can be outstanding at any one time shall not exceed $232,650,000 in principal amount, except by amendment of this plan and the redevelopment plans for the other constituent project areas..With respect to the Added Area, the foregoing limitation on outstanding bonded indebtedness shall be $15,000,000. 4. Allocation of Tax Increment. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in Section 502 of the Plan, the taxes attributable to the 00O019 constituent project areas that may be and are so a~located to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670(b) after the effective date of tl~s Amendment shall not exceed a cumulative total equal to the sum of the individual limits on the allocation of taxes to the Agency as set forth in the redevelopment plans for each constituent project area, except by amendment of th~s Plan and the redevelopment plans for the other constituent project areas. The foregoing limitation on the allocation of taxes to the Agency shall not apply to the Added Area because the Added Area is not subject to a limitation on the allocation of taxes to the Agency. SECTION 3. ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY 3.1. The third paragraph of Part III. C [Section 308] of the Plan is hereby replaced in its entirety with the following: The Agency must commence eminent domain proceedings with respect to any property which it intends to acquire by such means within twelve years of the effective date of this Amendment. This time limit for commencement of eminent domain proceedings may be extended only by amendment of the Plan. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Section 308, the Agency will not exercise the power of eminent domain to acquire property on which persons reside. SECTION 4. ADDED AREA Part II [Section 200] is amended to add the following: The Project Area is amended to add the real property (the "Added Area") described on the map and legal description shown and described in Exhibit 1 attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 5. DURATION OF THIS PLAN PART VIII is amended to add the following: The following applies to the Added Area: Except for any other authority in excess of the following limits that may from time to time be granted by statute (which authority shall be deemed to be incorporated into the provisions of the Plan by this reference and shall supersede the following limits): 1. The time limit with respect to the Added Area on the establishment of loans, advances, and indebtedness shall be the date which is 20 years from the O0OO2O date of adoption of the ordinance mending the Plan to add the Added Area, unless the Plan is further amended as permitted by law. Loans, advances, or indebtedness may be repaid over a period of time beyond this time limit, subject to the provisions of paragraph 3 below. This limit shall not prevent the Agency from incurring debt to be paid from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund or from establishing debt to fulfill the Agency' s housing obligations under Health and Safety Code Section 33413. This limit shall not preventthe Agency from refinancing, refunding, or restructuring indebtedness after the time limit if the indebtedness is not increased.and the time during which the indebtedness is to be repaid is not extended beyond the time limit set forth in paragraph 3 below. 2. The effectiveness of the Plan with respect [o the Added Area (including, without limitation, the effectiveness of the Agency's land use controls for the Added Area) shall terminate on the date which is 30 years from the date of adoption of the ordinance amending the Plan to add the Added Area. After expiration of this time limit on the effectiveness of the Plan with respect to the Added Area, the Agency shall have no authority to act pursuant to the Plan with respect to the Added Area, except to pay previously incurred indebtedness, to enforce existing covenants, contracts, or other obligations, and to complete any unfulfilled obligations under Health and Safety Code Section 33413. 3. The Agency shall not pay indebtedness or receive property taxes pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 with respect to the Added Area after the date which is 45 years from the date of adoption of the ordinance amending the Plan to add the Added Area. SECTION 6. EFFECT OF AMENDMENT All provisions of the Plan not specifically amended or repealed in this Amendment shall continue in full force and effect. SECTION 7. SEVERAB[L1TY If any provision of this Amendment or the application thereof to any person or, circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this Amendment, including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, provisions of this Amendment are severable. The City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase hereof irrespective of the fact that any 'one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be held unconstitutional, invalid, or unenforceable. 00002 [SECTION 8. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE The ordinance adopting this Amendment. shall be published once, with the names of those City Councilmembers voting for or against it, in the San Mateo Times, a newspaper of general circulation in the City of South San Francisco, as required by law, and shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its adoption.] 00002.2 Exhibit 1 MAP AND LEGAL DESCRItrrION OF ADDED AREA (Attach map and legal description of property to be added to Project Area.). 000023 I'1'1 X . 3 6 su~ve~/"Area ,OYSTER '~_O--~I~T.' M/~!NA .'PARK EXHIBIT I OYSTER POINT MARINA. PROJECT AREA REAL PROPERTY IN THE crrY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CAUFORNLA, A PORTION OF THE LANDS SHOWN ON THE MAP RECORDED IN VOLUME 55 OF PARCEL MAPS AT PAGE 61 IN THE RECORDS OF SAiD COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING ON THE GENERAL NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL MAP ON THE. NORTHERLY LINE OF LOT7 IN SEC'rlON 23 IN TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 5 WEST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN AT THE MONUMENT THE CENTER OF OYSTER POINT BOULEVARD AS SHOWN ON THE MAP RECORDED IN VOLUME 52 OF PARCEL MAPS AT PAGE 58 IN THE RECORDS OF SAID COUNTYAT ZONE I!i COORDINATES ON THE CALIFORNIA STATE PLANE COOR[NNATE SYSTEM OF 1983 OF NORTH 2069905.~, EAST 60t6269.49; 1) THENCE S 89" 28' 33" E ALONG YHE NORTHERLY ENES OF LOTS 3 THROUGH 7 FOR 2945.93 FEET; 2) THENCE S 0° 31' 27" WALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 3 FOR 1313.22 FEET; 3) THENCE N 89° 32' 13" WALONG THE SOUTHERLY MNES OF LOTS 3 THROUGH 7 FOR 32.15.06 FEET; 4) '.THENCE N 22° 42' 47" E FOR 52.49FEET; 5) '.THENCE N 56°42' 47'' E FOR 13.78 FEET; 6) .THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT AND CONCAVE TO' THE WEST, HAVING A 'RADIUS OF 610.22 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1° 24' 30" FOR AN ARC LENGTH OF 15.00 FEET, SAID CURVE~ HAVING A CHORD BEARING OF N 4° 3~ 35" E FOR 15.00 FEET; 7). THENCE RADIAL TO SAIDCURVE N 86" 6' 40" W FOR 55.00 FEET; 8). THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, CONCAVE TO THE WEST AND RADLAL TO' · 'THE PREVIOUS CURVE, HAVING A RADIUS OF 555.22 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 17° 27' 45" FOR AN ARC LENGTH OF 169.22 FEET, SAID CURVE' HAVING A CP{ORD BEARING OF N 4° 5[7 32" W FOR 168.56 FEET; · 9) THENCE RADIAL TO SAID CURVE 76' 25' 35" W FOR 25.00 FEET; 10) THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, CONCAVE TO THE WEST AND RADIAL TO THE PREVIOUS CURVE, HAV1NG A RADIUS OF 530.22 FEET AND A CENTRAL 'ANGLE OF 41' 38' 32" FORAN ARC LENGTH OF 385.36'FEET, SAID CURVE HAVING.. A CHORD BEARING OF N 34" 23' 41" W FOR 376,93 FEET; 1 I) THENCE FROM A TANGENT'BEARING N 49~ 4F23" E ALONG A CURVE TO THE ~, CONCAVE TO THE SOUi'H, HAVING A RADIUS OF 195.18 FEET. AND A CENTRAL. ANGLE OF 6° 11' 23" FOR AN ARC LENGTH OF '21.09 FE.ET, SAID CURVE HAVING A CHORD BEARING OF N 52" 55' 5" E FOR 21,08 FEET; 12) THENCE N 56° 0' 46"E FOR 56.44 FEET; 13) THENCE N 0" 31' 27" E FOR 35,68 FEET; 1;4.) THENCE N 88' 58' 41" E FOR 7.96 FEET; 15) THENCE N 55° 2~ E~.3" E FOR 197.34 FEET; 16) THENCE N 41° 29' 57" E FOR 168.64 FEET; 17) THENCE N 35° 2i' 27'' E FOR 93.01 FEET; 18) THENCE N 46° 35' 27'' E FOR 208.33 FEET; 19) THENCE 'FROM A TANGENT BEARING S 75° 11'47' W ALONG A CUR~E TO THE LEFT, CONCAVE TO THE SOUTH, HAVING A RADIUS OF 204.99 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF.26° 38' 25' FOR AN ARC LENGTH OF 95.31 FEET, SAID' CURVE HAVING A CHORD BEARING OF S 6I; 52' 34'; W FOR 94.46 FEET; · · 20) THENCE N 0°'31' 27" E FOR 277.31 FEET TO SAID NORTHERLY ENE OF LOT 7; 000025 '"EXHIBIT .21~ THENCE ALONG SAiD LINE $ 8~° ~ ~3" E FOR 81.92 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES IN'THIS DESCRIPTION ARE IN AMERICAN SURVEY FEET ON THE CALIFORNIA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSI--/:M 1983, ZONE III. TO CONVERT TO GROUND DISTANCES MULTIPLY BY 1.00007. THE AREA OF THIS PARCEL IS 97.07 ACRES MORE OR LESS. DESCRIPTION PREPARED BY: m ~ P. MOORE, LS. 4~9181 LICENSE EXPIRES 12/30/O4 2oo4 000026 El Camino Corridor Redevelopment Project Area 1. Resolution 2. Ordinance a. Exhibit A: Amendmem 000027 RESOLUTION NO. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE EL CAMINO CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA TO EXTEND TIME LIMITS FOR EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS IN THE ORIGINAL EL CAMINO CORRIDOR PROJECT AREA AND TO FISCAI.LY MERGE THE EL CAMINO CORRIDOR PROJECT AREA WITH THE DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL PROJECT AREA, THE GATEWAY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA, AND THE U.S. STEEL/SHEARWATER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco ("City Council") approved and adopted the Redevelopment Plan (the "B'kCamino Plan") for the E1 Camino Corridor Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project Area") by Ordinance NO. 1132-93 adopted on June 9, 1993; and WHEREAS, on' November 9, 1994, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1150-94 which amended the El Camino Plan by amending certain time limitations in accordance with AB 1290;· and . WHEREASi on June 28, 2000, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1270- 2000 which added territory to the Project Area and adopted the Amended and Restated Plan for the. Project Area (hereafter the "Redevelopment Plan"); and WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Plan was further amended in March 2004 by adoption of Ordinance 1337-2004 extending certain time limitations in accordance with SB 1045; and ,, WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South. San Francisco (Agency") is vested with responsibility to carry out the Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, the Agency desires to again amend the Redevelopment Plan in order to (i) extend the time limits for the use of eminent domain proceedings to acquire nonresidential property in the original Project Area, and (ii) effectuate the fiscal merger of the Project Area with the Gateway Redevelopment Project Area, the Downtown/Central Redevelopment .Proje.et Ar. ca and the U.S. Steel/Shearwater Redevelopment Project Area in order to pool tax increment revenue from the four project areas and establish a unified bonded indebtedness limit for the four project areas while retaining .the separate identity of each project area for other purposes; and flNNNg~ Agency h_~.,, prepared a proposed amendment to the WHEREAS, the ,'Amendment ), a copy of which is on file with the Agency RedeveloPment Plan (the - Secretary and the City Clerk; and. wHEREAS, adoption of the Amendment is necessarY to provide the Agency, the City and the South San Francisco community with additional financial and legal resources to expand and complete the redevelOpment program in the Project Area through activities such as development of public improvements, revitalization of commercial and industrial areas, land 'assembly and disposition for redevelopment, provision of financial and other assistance to property owners for redevelopment of thek property, and the provision of assistance in the development, preservation, acquisition and rehabili~tion of affordable housing; and WHEREAS, as set forth in City Council Resolution and Agency Resolution ___, each adopted on March 9, 2005, the City Council ~ the Agency have each determined that establishment of a Project Area Committee is not required because the Amendment does not authorize use of eminent domain for property on which persons reside and does not provide for the development of public projects that will cause displacement of a substantial number of low- and moderate-income households; and WHEREAS, as set forth in City Council Resolution __ and Agency Resolution ave each determined that (i) the fiscal merger is the city council and the .. ; e es Seeaon 1506 0,)(3), and the exempt from CEQA pursuant to t;~q.~ ~amu~ . . ' potential environmental effects of the Amendment have been analyzed in previously certified Environmental Impac~ Reports, and no new. projects are proposed, no new impacts have been identified, there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the prior EIRs were certified, and there is no new information that was unavailable at the time the prior EIRs were certified; and WHEREAS, 'the City PI_arming Commission (the "Planning Commission") has reviewed the Amendment, has found that the Amendment conforms to the City's General Plan and has recommended the approval and adoption of the Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Agency has prepared and reviewed a Report to Council in compliance with the requirements of CommunitY Redevelopment Law (Health & Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) and a Supplement to such Report, which Report and Supplement are on file with the City Clerk and the Agency Secretary; and · 1 'yen, a full and fair public hearing has been ,m_mu~AS nursuant to nolace du y g~ · -- - --'-en and all oral comments vv ~"-~"~ ' ~' the A ency has consicterect an and testimony relating mere~o m,~, -,~ b WHEREAS, the Agency has taken all other actions required by law in connection with the preparation and consideration of the Amendment. O0O029 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Redevelopment Agency as follows: Section 1. The Amendment, the Report to Council, the Supplement and all related documents, correspondence and transmittals, copies of which are on file in the office of the Agency Secretary and the City Clerk, are hereby approved. Section 2. The Agency hereby recommends approval and adoption of the Amendment by the City Council. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco at a meeting held on the __ day of ,2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: Clerk S:\Current Reso's\4-27-05E1 Camlno.¢orridor.pro.res. DOC 000030 ORDINANCE NO. 2005- CITY COUNCIL, CiTY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE EL CAMINO CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA TO FISCAI~Y MERGE THE EL CAMINO CORRIDOR PROJECT AREA WITH THE DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL PROJECT AREA, TI-IE GATEWAY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA, AND THE U.S. STEEL/SHEARWATER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco ("City Council") approved and adopted the Redevelopment Plan (the "El Camino Plan") for the E1 Camino Corridor Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project Area") by Ordinance No. 1132-93 adopted on June 9, 1993; and WHEREAS, on November 9, 1994, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1150-94 which amended the E1 Camino Plan by amending certain time limitations in accordance with AB 1290; and WHEREAS, on June 28, 2000, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1270- 2000 which added territory to the Project Area and adopted the Amended and Restated Plan for the Project Area (hereafter the "Redevelopment Plan"); and WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Plan was further amended in March 2004 by adoption of Ordinance 1337-2004 extending certain time limitations in accordance with SB 1045; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received from the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco (the "Agency") a proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan (the "Amendment"), a Copy of which is attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the Amendment provides f(~r (i) the extension of time limits for the use of eminent domain proceedings to acquire nonresidential property in the original Project Area, and (ii) the fiscal merger of the Project Area with the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area, the Gateway Project Area and the U.S, Steel/Shearwater Redevelopment Project Area in order to pool tax increment revenue from the four project areas and establish a unified bonded indebtedness limit for the four project areas while retaining the separate identity of each project area for other purposes; and WHEREAS, adoption of the Amendment is necessary to provide the Agency, the City and the South San Francisco community with additional financial and legal resources to expand and complete the redevelopment program in the Project Area through activities such as development of public improvements, revitalization of commercial and 000031 industrial areas, land assembly and disposition for redevelopment, provision of financial and other assistance to property owners for redevelopment of their property, and the provision of assistance in the development, preservation, acquisition and rehabilitation of affordable housing; and WHEREAS, as set forth in City Council Resolution 23-2005 and Agency Resolution 04-2005, each adopted on March 9, 2005, the City Council and the Agency have each determined that establishment of a Project Area Committee is not required because the Amendment does not aUthorize use of eminent domain for property on which persons reside and does not provide for the development of public projects that will cause displacement of a substantial number of low- and moderate-income households; and WHEREAS, as set forth in City Council Resolution 23-2005 and Agency Resolution 04-2005, the City Council and the Agency have each determined that (i) the fiscal merger is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061Co)(3), and (ii) the potential environmental effects of the Amendment have been analyzed in · previously certified Environmental Impact Reports, and no new projects are proposed, no new impacts have been identified, there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the prior EIRs were certified, and there is no new information that was unavailable at the time the prior EIRs were certified; and .WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission (the "Planning Commission") has reviewed the Amendment, has found that the Amendment conforms to the City's General Plan and has recommended the approval and adoption of the Amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council and the Agency conducted a joint public hearing on May 27, 2005, concerning adoption of the Amendment; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was published in a newspaper of general circulation in San Mateo County once per week for four weeks prior to the date of the hearing, and a copy of such notice and affidavit of publication are on file with the City Clerk and Secretary of the Agency; and ' WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing together with a statement concerning acquisition of property by the Agency was sent by fn:st class mail to the last known address of each assessee of each parcel of land in the Project Area, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll for the County of San Mateo; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was sent by first class mail to all residents and businesses within the Project Area; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was sent by certified mail, return receipt requested to the governing body of each taxing agency that receives taxes from property in the Project Area; and WHEREAS, the Agency has prepared a Report to Council in compliance with the requirements of Community Redevelopment Law (Health & Safety Code Section 33000 et Seq.) and a Supplement to such Report, which Report and Supplement are on file with the 000032 City Clerk and the Agency Secretary, and are hereby incorporated herein by reference; and WI~REAS, the City Council has evaluated the Agency's RePort to Council, the Supplement, and the report and recommendations of the Planning Commission, has provided an opportunity for all persons to be heard, and has received and considered all evidence and testimony for and against the adoption of the Amendment, and the City Council has, by Resolution No. , adopted written findings ("Findings") in response to each written objection received from an affected property owner or taxing entity; and WHEREAS, the Agency and the City Council have complied with all requirements of Community Redevelopment Law in connection with the consideration and adoption of the Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIl. OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO DOES ORDAIN AS FOIJ.OWS: Section 1. Purpose and Intent. The purpose and intent of the City Council with respect to the Amendment are: (i) to fiscally merge the City's four project areas in order to pool tax increment revenue from the four project areas and establish a unified bonded indebtedness limit for the four project areas while retaining the separate identity of each project area for other purposes, (ii) to extend the time limitation for acquisition of nonresidential property in the original Project Area, and (iii) to accomplish to the greatest extent possible (a) the elimination of blight in the Project Area, and Co) the expansion and completion of the redevelopment program in the Project Area through the development of public improvements, the revitalization of commercial and industrial properties, land assembly and disposition for redevelopment, the provision of financial and other assistance to property owners for redevelopment of their property, the development, preservation, acquisition and rehabilitation of affordable housing, the expansion of employment opportunities, and the promotion of private sector investment in the Project Area. Section 2. Findings and Determinations. In aCcordance with Health and Safety Code Sections 33354.6(a), 33367 and 33457.1, and based upon the evidence contained in the Report to Council, the Findings and other documents prepared in connection with the Amendment adoption procesS, and the evidence presented at the public hearing, the City Council hereby finds and determines that: ao bo The Project Area continues to be characterized by blighting conditions as documented Section II of the Report to Council prepared for the Amendment and in the Reports to Council prepared in connection with the original adoption of the E1 Camino Plan and the Redevelopment Plan. The blighted conditions in the Project Area are so prevalent and so substantial that they cause a reduction of or lack of proper utilization of the area to such an extent that they constitute a serious physical and economic burden on the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be 000033 eo reversed or alleviated by private enterprise or governmental action, or both, without redevelopment. This finding is based' in part on the facts that governmental action available to the City without redevelopment would be insufficient to cause any significant correction of the blighting conditions, and that the nature and cost of the improvements necessary to eradicate such blight are beyond the capacity of the City and private . enterprise acting alone or in concert without redevelopment. The Amendment will facilitate the redevelopment of the Project Area in conformity with the Community Redevelopment Law and in the interests of the public peace, health, safety and welfare. This finding is supported by the fact that redevelopment of the Project Area as contemplated by the Redevelopment Plan as amended by the Amendment will implement the objectives of the Community Redevelopment Law by aiding in the elimination and correction of the conditions of blight in the Project Area; providing for' planning, development, redesign, clearance, reconstruction or rehabilitation of properties which need improvement; providing affordable housing, including housing for low- and moderate-income persons; providing additional employment opportunities; facilitating private investment; and providing for more beneficial use of under-utilized land. The adoption and carrying out of the Amendment is economically sound and feasiblei This finding, is based in part on the fact that under the Redevelopment Plan, as proposed to be amended, the Agency will be authorized to seek and utilize a variety of potential f'mancing resources, including tax increments and that no public redevelopment activity will be undertaken unless the Agency can demonstrate that it has adequate revenue to finance the activity. The Report to Council further documents the economic feasibility of the Amendment and related undertaldngs. The Amendment is consistent with the General Plan of the City including, without limitation the Housing Element of the General Plan, which substantially complies with the requirements of Article 10.6 (commencing with Section 65580) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code. This finding is based upon the report of the Planning Commission that the Amendment conforms to the General Plan of the City of South San Francisco. The carrying out of the Amendment will promote the public peace, health, safety and welfare of the City and will effectuate the purposes and policies of the Community Redevelopment Law. This finding is based on the fact that redevelopment as contemplated by the .Redevelopment Plan, as amended by the 'Amendment, will benefit the Project Area by correcting conditions of blight and 'by coordinating public and private actions to stimulate development, contribute toward needed public improvements 000034 ho and improve the social, economic, and physical conditions of the Project Area. The Agency has a feasible method and plan for the relocation of famihes and persons who may be temporarily or permanently displaced from housing facilities in the Project Area. This finding is based upon the fact that the City Council and the Agency recognize that the provisions of Government Code Section 7260 et seq. wot~ld apply in the event of relocation resulting from the Agency's implementation of the Redevelopment Plan as amended by the Amendment. The City Council finds and determines that the provision of relocation assistance according to the Agency's adopted Relocation Guidelines and applicable law constitutes a feasible relocation method. There are, or will be provided within the Project Area or in other areas not generally less desirable with regard to public utilities and public and commercial facilities and at rents or prices within the financial means of the families and persons who may be displaced from the Project Area, decent, safe, and sanitary dwellings equal in number to the number of and available to such displaced families and persons and reasonably accessible to their places of employment. This finding is based in part on the fact that no person or family will be .required by the Agency to move from any dwelling unit in the Project Area until suitable replacement housing is available according to law. Families and persons shall not be displaced prior to adoption of a relocation plan pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33411 and 33411.1. Dwelling units housing persons and families of low or moderate income shall not be removed'or destroyed prior to the adoption of a replacement housing plan pursuant to Health and Safety Code Sections 33334.5, 33413 and 33413.5. This finding is based in part on the fact that the Agency shall displace no families or persons nor remove or destroy dwelling units housing persons and families of low or moderate incomes unless and until relocation assistance as required by law is provided. The elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the Project Area could not be reasonably expected to be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone without the aid and assistance of the Agency. This finding is based upon the existence of blighting influences, including the lack of adequate public improvements and facilities, structural deficiencies, dilapidation and deterioration, factors that hinder economically viable use, and the inability of individual developers to economically remove these blighting influences without public assistance to acquire and assemble sites for development as detailed in the record including the Report to Council. The lack of private investment incentive, and the cost of requiring individuals (through assessments or otherwise) to eradicate or significantly alleviate such blighting conditions, and the inadequacy of other 000035 governmental programs and financing mechanisms'to eradicate or significantly eliminate such blighting conditions, make elimination of blight in the Project Area infeasible without the aid and assistance of the AgencY under the Amendment and the Community Redevelopment Act. The time limitations and the limitation on taxes that may be allocated to the Agency as set forth in the Redevelopment Plan as amended by the Amendment are reasonably related to the proposed projects to be implemented in the Project Area and to the ability of the Agency to eliminate blight within the Project Area. This finding is supported by the fact that redevelopment depends in large part, upon private market forces beyond the control of the Agency, and shorter limitations would impair the Agency's ability to be flexible and respond to market conditions as and when appropriate and would impair the Agency's ability to maintain development standards and controls over a period of time sufficient to assure area stabilization. In addition, shorter time limitations would limit the revenue sources and financing capacity necessary to carry out proposed projects in the Project Area. The fiscal merger of the Project Area and the City's three other project areas for the purpose of pooling tax increment revenue is authorized by, consistent with, and will serve the legislative policies of, Health and Safety Code Section 33485 et seq., in that such fiscal merger will result in substantial benefit to the public and will contribute to the revitalization of blighted areas through the increased economic vitality of such areas and through increased and improved housing and economic opportunities in or near such areas. The condemnation of nonresidential real property as provided for in the Redevelopment Plan as amended by the Amendment is necessary to the execution of the Redevelopment Plan, and adequate provisions have been made for payment for property to be acquired as provided by law. This finding is based upon the need to ensure that the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan, as amended by the Amendment will be carried out and the need to prevent the recurrence of blight. Section 3. The City Council is satisfied that if any occupants of the Project Area are displaced, permanent housing facilities will be available within three years from the time of such displacement, and that pending the development of such facilities, there will be available to any such displaced occupants adequate temporary housing facilities at rents comparable to those in the community at the time of their displacement. 000036 Section 4. The City Council is satisfied that all written objections received before or at the noticed public hearing have been responded to in writing In addition, written findings have been adopted in response to each written objection of an affected property owner or taxing entity which has been filed with the City Clerk either before or at the noticed public hearing. Following consideration by the City Council, all written and oral objections to the Amendment are hereby overruled. The reasons for overruling all written objections are more fully set forth in the Findings. Section 5. The Redevelopment Plan as originally adopted and previously amended is hereby further amended as set forth in the proposed Amendment attached hereto as Exhibit A and as so amended is hereby designated as the official redevelopment plan for the Project Area. Section 6. In order to implement and facilitate the effectuation of the Amendment hereby approved, it may be necessary for the City Council to take certain actions, and accordingly, this City Council hereby: (a) pledges its cooperation in helping to carry out the Redevelopment Plan as amended; (b) requests the various officials, departments, boards and agencies of the City having administrative responsibilities in the Project Area likewise to cooperate to such end and to exercise their respective functions and powers in a manner consistent with the redevelopment of the Project Area in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan as amended; (c) stands ready to consider and take appropriate action upon proposals and measures designed to effectuate the Redevelopment Plan as amended; (d) declares its intention to undertake and complete any proceedings necessary to be carried out by the City under the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan as amended; and (e) may elect to provide, but is not committed to provide, financial assistance in support of implementation of the Redevelopment Plan as 'amended. Section 7. In accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33372, the City Clerk is hereby directed to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Agency, whereupon the Agency is vested with the responsibility for carrying out the Redevelopment Plan as amended by the Amendment. Section 8. The City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a certified copy of this Ordinance to the governing body of each of'the taxing agencies, which levies taxes upon any property in the Project Area. Section 9. If any part of this Ordinance or the Amendment is held to be invalid for any mason, such decision shall not affect the valiclity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance or of the Amendment, and the City Council hereby declares it would have passed the remainder of this Ordinance or approved the remainder of the Amendment without such invalid part. 000037 Section 10. Pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 36933, a summary of this Ordinance shall be prepared by the City Attorney. At least five (5) days prior to the Council meeting at which this Ordinance is scheduled to be adopted, the City Clerk shall (i) publish the Summary, and (ii) post in the City Clerk's Office a certified copy of this Ordinance. Within fifteen (15) days after the adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall (a) publish the summary, and (b) post in the City Clerk's Office a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance along with the names of those City Council members voting for and against this Ordinance. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its adoption. , * , · , , Introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of South San Francisco, held the 27t~ day of April, 2005. Adopted as an Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting of the City Council held the day of May, 2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: As Mayor of the City of South San Francisco, I do hereby approve the foregoing Ordinance this day of ,2005. S:\Current Ord's~4-27 -05Elca m~no.corridor.proj eot. area.oral. DOC Mayor 000038 Exhibit A AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO EL CAMINO CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT TO' EXTEND EMINENT DOMAIN AUTHORITY AND TO FISCALLY MERGE PROJECT AREAS SECTION 1. AMENDMENT OF REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. The Redevelopment Plan for the South San Francisco E1 Camin° Corridor Area Project, originally adopted by Ordinance 1132-93 on June 9, 1993 and subsequently amended and restated by Ordinance 1270-2000 adopted on June 28, 2000 (as so amended, the "El Camino Plan" or the "Plan") is hereby amended as set forth in this amendment (this "Amendment"), effective as of the effective date of the ordinance adopting this Amendment. SECTION 2. FISCAL MERGER Part V.H, [Section 508] is hereby added to the E1 Camino Plan to read as follows: H. [Section 508] Fiscal Merger 1.' .Findings. The fiscal merger of the E1 Camino Redevelopment Project Area ("El Camino Project Area") and the City's three other project areas foi: the purpose of pooling tax increment revenue is authorized by, consistent with, and will serve the legislative policies of, Health and Safety Code Section 33485 et seq.,in that such fiscal merger will result in substantial benefit to the public and will contribute to the revitalization of blighted areas through the increased economic vitality of such areas and through increased and improved housing and economic opportunities in or near such areas. 2. Fiscal Merger of Project Areas. Pursuant to, and for the purpose of pooling tax increment revenue as described in Health and Safety Code Section 33485 et seq., the E1 Camino Project Area is hereby fiscally merged with the following project areas: a. The project area '(the "Downtown/Central Project Area") established and described in the Redevelopment Plan for the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project, adoPted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 1056-89 (as .subsequently amended, the "Downtown/Central Plan"). b. The projeCt area (the "ShearWater Project Area") established and described in the Redevelopment Plan for the South San Francisco U.S. 000039 Steel Plant Site, adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 996-86 (as subsequently amended, the "Shearwater Plan"). c. The project area (the "Gateway Project Area") established and described in the Redevelopment Plan for the South San Francisco Gateway Redevelopment Project, adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 867-81 (as subsequently amended, the "Gateway Plan"). The E1 Camino Project Area, the Downtown/Central Project Area, the Shearwater Project Area and the Gateway Project Area are each referred to herein as a "constituent project area." Except as otherwise stated herein, each reference in this Amendment to a constituent project area shall mean such project area as originally established and as such project area may have been amended to add territory. This section authorizes the taxes attributable to each constituent project area which are allocated to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670Co) to be allocated for redevelopment in any of the constituent project areas for the purpose of paying the principal of, and interest on, indebtedness incurred by the Agency to finance or refinance, in whole or in part, the redevelopment project in any of the constituent project areas; except that any such taxes attributable to a particular constituent project area shall fzrst be 'used to pay indebtedness in compliance with the terms of any bond resolution or other agreement pledging such taxes from that particular constituent project area which resolution or other agreement was adopted or approved by the Agency prior to the fiscal merger of the constituent project areas. Except as otherwise noted in this Section, tax increment revenue attributable to each constituent project area may be used for any lawful purpose in any of the constituent project areas. 3. Bonded Indebtedness Limit. Notwithstanding 'anything to the contrary set forth in Section 503 of the Plan, in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33334.1, the amount of bonded indebtedness to be repaid in whole or in part from the combined allocation of taxes to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 from all of the constituent project areas which in the aggregate can be outstanding at any one time shall not exceed $232,650,000 in principal amount, except by amendment of this Plan and the redevelopment plans for the other Constituent project areas; provided however, the foregoing limitation on outstanding bonded indebtedness shall not apply to the territory added to the Downtown/Central Project Area by amendment to the Downtown/ Central Plan adopted concurrently with this Amendment (the "Downtown/Central Added Area") because the Downtown/Central Added Area is subject to a separate limitation on bonded indebtedness. 00004'0 4. Allocation of Tax Increment. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in Section 502 of the Plan, the taxes attributable to the constituent project areas that may be and are so allocated to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670Co) after the effective date of this Amendment shall not exceed a cumulative total equal to the sum of the individual limits on the allocation of taxes to the Agency as set forth in the redevelopment plans for each constituent project area, except by amendment of this Plan and the redevelopment plans for the other constituent project areas. The foregoing limitation on the allocation of taxes to the Agency shall not apply to the Downtown/Central Added Area because the Downtown/Central Added Area is not subject to a limitation on the allocation of taxes to the Agency. SECTION 3. ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY 3.1. The th/rd paragraph of Part III.C.1 [Section 308] of the Plan is hereby replaced in its entirety with the following: The Agency must commence eminent domain proceedings with respect to any property 'which it intends to acquire by such means within twelve years of the effective date of this Amendment; provided however, this Amendment shall not operate to extend the time limit within which the Agency may commence eminent domain proceedings with respect to property that was added to the Project Area by the amendment to the Plan adopted June 28, 2000 by Ordinance No. 1270- 2000 ("Added Territory"). The foregoing time limits for commencement of eminent domain proceedings may be extended only by amendment of the Plan. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Section 308, the Agency will not exercise the power of eminent domain to acquire property on which persons reside except within the Added Territory as permitted pursuant to the Plan. SECTION 4. EFFECT OF AMENDMENT All provisions of the Plan not specifically amended or repealed in this Amendment shall continue in full force and effect. SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY If any provision of this Amendment or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this Amendment, including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, provisions of this Amendment are severable. The City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraPh, sentence, clause, or 000041 phrase hereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more secti'ons, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be held unconstitutional, invalid, or unenforceable. SECTION' 6. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE, Pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 36933, a summary of the ordinance adopting this Amendment shall be prepared by the City Attorney. At least five (5) days prior to the Council meeting at which the Ordinance is scheduled to be adopted, the City Clerk shall (i) publish the Summary, and (ii) post in the City Clerk's Office a certified copy of the Ordinance. Within fifteen (15) days after the adoption of the Ordinance, the City Clerk shall (a) publish the summary, and Co) post in the City Clerk's Office a certified copy of the full text of the Ordinance along with the names of those City Council. members voting for and against the Ordinance. The Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its adoption. S:\Cummt Ord's~4-27-05Eleamln o.cotridor.project, area. onlDOC 000042 U.S. Steel/Shearwater Redevelopment Project Area 1. Resolution 2. Ordinance a. Exhibit A: Amendment 000043 RESOLUTION NO. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE U.S. STEEl/SHEARWATER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA TO FISCALLY MERGE THE U.S. STEEIdSHEARWATER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA WITH THE DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL PROJECT AREA, THE EL CAMINO CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA, AND THE GATEWAY REDEVELOPMENT PR O~TECT AREA WHEREAs, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco ("City Council") approved and adopted the Redevelopment Plan ("Redevelopment Plan") for the U.S. Steel/Shearwater Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area") by Ordinance No. 996- 86, adopted on January 8, 1986; and WHEREAS, on November 9, 1994, the City Council adopted Ordinance. No. 1151-94 to amend the Redevelopment Plan by amending certain time limitations in accordance with AB 1290; and WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Plan was further amended in March 2004 by adoption of Ordinance ~-2004 eliminating the deadline for incurring debt incurrence in accordance with SB 211, and by adoption of Ordinance 1337-2004, extending certain time limitations in accordance with SB 1045; and WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco ("Agency") is vested with responsibility to carry out the Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, the Agency desires to again amend the Redevelopment Plan in order to effectuate the fiscal merger of the Project Area with the E1 Camino Corridor Redevelopment Project Area, the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area and the Gateway Redevelopment Project Area in order to pool tax increment revenue from the four project areas and establish a unified bonded indebtedness limit for the four project areas while retaining the separate identity of each project area for other purposes; and WHEREAS, the Agency has prepared a proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan (the "Amendment"), a copy of which is on file with the Agency Secretary and the City Clerk; and 000044 WHEREAS, adoption of the Amendment is necessary to provide the Agency, the City and the South San Francisco community with additional financial and legal resources to expand and complete the redevelopment program in the Project Area through activities such as development of public improvements, revitalization of commercial and industrial areas, land assembly and disposition for redevelopment, provision of financial and other assistance to property owners for redevelopment of their property, .and the provision of assistance in the development, preservation, acquisition and rehabilitation of affordable housing; and WHEREAS, as set fOrth in City Council Resolution and Agency Resolution , each adopted on March 9, 2005, the City Council and the Agency have each determined that establishment of a Project Area Committee is not required because the Amendment does not authorize use of eminent domain for property on which persons reside and does not provide for the development of public projects that will cause displacement of a substantial number of Iow- and moderate-income households; and WHEREAS, as set forth in City Council Resolution __ and Agency Resolution , the City Council and the Agency have each determined that (i) the fiscal merger is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061Ca)(3), and (ii) the potential environmental effects of the Amendment have been analyzed in previously certified Environmental Impact Reports, and no new projects are proposed, no new impacts have been identified, there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the prior EIRs were certified, and there is no new information that was unavailable at the time the prior EIRs were certified; and WttEREAS, the City Planning Commission (the "Planning Commission") has reviewed the Amendment, has found that the Amendment conforms to the City's General Plan and has recommended the approval and adoption of the Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Agency has prepared and reviewed a Report to Council in compliance with the requirements of Community Redevelopment Law (Health & Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) and a Supplement to such Report, which Report and Supplement are on file with the City Clerk and' the Agency Secretary; and WHEREAS, pursuant to notice duly given, a full and fair public hearing has been held on the Amendment, and the Agency has considered all written and all oral comments and testimony relating thereto and has been fully advised thereon; and WHEREAS, the Agency has taken ali other actions required by law in connection with the preparation and consideratiOn of the Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Redevelopment Agency as follows: Section 1. The Amendment, the Report to Council, the Supplement and all related documents, correspondence and lxansmittals, copies of which are on file in the office of the Agency Secretary and the City Clerk, are hereby approved. O0OO45 Section 2. The Agency hereby recommends approval and adoption of the Amendment by the City Council. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the Redevelopment Agency o~' the City of South San Francisco at a meeting held on the __ day of ,2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: City Clerk S:\Current Reso's\4-2705U.S. Steel.shearwater.redevlpment.pro.area.res.DOC 000046 ORDINANCE NO. 2005- AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PI_AN FOR THE U.S. STEEL/SHEARWATER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA TO FISCAIJ,Y MERGE THE U.S. STEEL/SHEARWATER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA WITH THE DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL PROJECT AREA, THE EL CAMINO CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA, AND THE GATEWAY REDEVELOPMENT PROIECT ~ WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco ("City Council") approved and adopted the Redevelopment Plan ("Redevelopment Plan") for the U.S. Steel/Shearwater Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area") by' Ordinance No. 996- 86, adopted on January 8, 1986; and WHEREAS, on November 9, 1994, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1151-94 to amend the Redevelopment Plan by amending certain time limitations in accordance with AB 1290; and WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Plan was further amended in March 2004 by adoption of Ordinance -2004 eliminating the deadline for incurring debt incurrence in accordance with SB 211, and by adoption of Ordinance 1337-2004, extending certain time limitatiOns in accordance with SB 1045; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received from the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco (the "Agency") a proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan (the "Amendment"), a copy of which is attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the Amendment provides for the fiscal merger of the Project Area with the E1 Camino Corridor Redevelopment Project Area, the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area and the Gateway Redevelopment Project Area in order to pool tax increment revenue from the four project areas and establish a unified bonded indebtedness lim/t for the four project areas while retaining the separate identity of each project area for other purposes; and WHEREAS, adoption of the Amendment is necessary to provide the Agency, the City and the South San Francisco community with additional financial and legal resources to expand and complete the redevelopment program in the Project Area through activities such as development of pubhc improvements, revitalization of commercial and industrial areas, land assembly and disposition for redevelopment, provision of financial and other assistance to property owners for redevelopment of their property, and the provision of assistance in the development, preservation, acquisition and rehabilitation of affordable housing; and 000047 WHEREAS, as set forth in City Council Resolution __ and Agency Resolution , each adopted on March 9, 2005, the City Council and the Agency have each determined that establishment of a Project Area Committee is not required because the Amendment does not authorize use of eminent domain for property on which persons reside and does not provide for the development of public projects that will cause displacement of a substantial number of low- and moderate-income households; and WHEREAS, as set forth in City Council Resolution ~ and Agency Resolution , the City Council and the'Agency have each determined that (i) the fiscal merger is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), and (ii) the potential environmental effects of the Amendment have been analyzed in previously certified Environmental Impact Reports, and no new projects ~re proposed, no new impacts have been identified, there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the prior EIRs were certified, and there is no new information that was unavailable at the time the prior EIRs were certified; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission (the "Planning Commission") has reviewed the Amendment, has found that the Amendment conforms to the City's General Plan and has recommended the approval and adoption of the Amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council and the Agency conducted a joint public heating on May 27, 2005, concerning adoption of the Amendment; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was published in a newspaper of general circulation in San Mateo County once per week for four weeks prior to the date of the heafing~ and a copy of such notice and affidavit of publication are on file with the City Clerk and Secretary of the Agency; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing together with a statement concerning acquisition of property by the Agency was sent by fn'st class mail to the last known address of each assessee of each parcel of land in the Project Area, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll for the County of San Mateo; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was sent by first class mail to all residents and businesses within the Project Area; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was sent by certified mail, return receipt requested to the governing body of each taxing agency that receives taxes from property in the Project Area; and WHEREAS, the Agency has prepared a Report to Council in compliance with the requirements of Community Redevelopment Law (Health & Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) and a Supplement to such Report, which Report and Supplement are on file with the City Clerk and the Agency Secretary, and are hereby incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the City Council has evaluated the Agency's Report to Council, the Supplement, and the report and recommendations of the Planning Commission, has OOOO48 provided an opportunity for all persons to be heard, and has received and considered all evidence and testimony for and against the adoption of the Amendment, and the City Council has, by Resolution No. , adopted written findings ("Findings") in response to each written objection received from an affected property owner or taxing entity; and WI-IEREAS, the Agency and the. City Council have complied with all requirements of Community Redevelopment Law in connection with the consideration and adoption of the Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ? Section 1. Purpose and Intent. The purpose and intent of the City Council with respect to the Amendment are: (i) to fiscally merge the City's four project areas in order to pool tax increment revenue from the four project areas and establish a unified bonded indebtedness limit for the four project areas while retaining the separate identity of each project area for other purposes, and (ii) to accomplish to the greatest extent possible (a) the elimination of blight in the Project Area, and Co) the expansion and completion of the redevelopment program in the Project Area through the development of public improvements, the revitalization of commercial and industrial properties, land assembly and disposition for redevelopment, the provision of financial and other assistance to property owners for redevelopment of their property, the development, preservation, acquisition and rehabilitation of affordable housing, the expansion of employment opportunities, and the promotion of private sector investment in the Project Area. Section 2. Findings and Determinations. In accordance with Health and Safety Code Sections 33354.6(a), 33367 and 33457.1, and based upon the evidence contained in the Report to Council, the Findings and other documents prepared in connection with the Amendment adoption process, and the evidence presented at the public hearing, the City Council hereby finds and determines that: The Project Area continues to be characterized by blighting conditions as documented Section II of the Report to Council prepared for the Amendment and in the Report to Council prepared in connection with the original adoption of the Redevelopment Plan. The blighted conditions in the Project Area are so prevalent and so substantial that they cause a reduction of or lack of proper utilization of the area to such an extent that they constitute a serious physical and economic burden on the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private enterprise or governmental action, or both, without redevelopment. This finding is based in part on the facts that governmental action available to the City without redevelopment would be insufficient to cause any significant correction of the blighting conditions, and that the nature and cost of the improvements necessary to 000049 Co eradicate such blight are beyond the capacity of the City and private enterprise acting alone or in conCert without redevelopment. The Amendment will facilitate the redevelopment of the Project Area in conformity with the Community Redevelopment Law and in the interests of the public peace, health, safety and welfare. This finding is supported by the fact that redevelopment of the Project Area as contemplated by the Redevelopment Plan as amended by the Amendment will implement the objectives of the Community Redevelopment Law by 'aiding in the elimination and correction of the conditions of blight in the Project Area; providing for planning, development, redesign, clearance, reconstruction or rehabilitation of properties which need improvement; providing affordable housing, including housing for low- and moderate-income persons; providing additional employment opportunities; facilitating private investment; and providing for more beneficial use of under-utilized land. The adoption and carrying out of the Amendment is economically sound and feasible. This finding is based in part on the fact .that under the Redevelopment' Plan, as proposed to be amended, the Agency will be authorized to seek and utilize a variety of potential financing resources, including tax increments and that no public redevelopment activity will be undertaken unless the Agency can demonstrate that it has adequate revenue to finance the activity. The Report to Council further documents the economic feasibility of the Amendment and related undertakings. The Amendment is consistent with the General Plan of the City including, without limitation the Housing Element of the General Plan, which substantially complies with the requirements of Article 10.6 (commencing with Section 65580) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code. This finding is based upon the report of the Planning Commission that the Amendment conforms to the General Plan of the City of South San Francisco. The carrying out of the Amendment .will promote the public peace, health, safety and welfare of the City and will effectuate the purposes and policies of the Community Redevelopment Law. This finding is based on the fact that redevelopment as contemplated by the Redevelopment Plan, as amended by the Amendment,. will benefit the Project Area by correcting conditions of blight and by coordinating public and private actions to stimulate development, contribute toward needed public improvements and improve the social, economic, and physical conditions of the Project Area. ~ The Agency has a feasible method and plan for the relocation of families and persons who may be temporarily or permanently displaced from housing facilities in the Project Area. This finding is based upon the fact 00005 0 that the City Council and the Agency recognize that the provisions of Government Code Section 7260 et seq. would apply in the event of relocation resulting from the Agency's implementation of the Redevelopment Plan as amended by the Amendment. The City Council finds and determines that the provision of relocation assistance according to. the Agency's adopted Relocation Guidelines and applicable law constitutes a feasible relocation method. There are, or will be provided within the Project Area or in other areas not generally less desirable with regard to Public utilities and public and commercial facilities and at rents or prices within the financial means of 'the families and persons who may be displaced from the Project Area, decent, safe, and sanitary dwellings equal in number to the number of and available to such displaced families and persons and reasonably accessible to their places of employment. This finding is based in part on the fact that no person or family will be required by the Agency to move from any dwelling unit in the Project Area until suitable replacement housing is available according to law. Families and persons shall not be displaced prior to adoption of a relocation plan pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33411 and 33411.1. Dwelling units housing persons and families of low or moderate income shall not be removed or destroyed prior to the adoption of a replacement housing plan pursuant to Health and Safety Code Sections 33334.5, 33413 and 33413.5. This finding is based in part on the fact that the Agency shall displace no families or persons nor remove or destroy dwelling units housing persons and families of low or moderate incomes unless and until relocation assistance as required by law is provided. The elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the Project Area could not be reasonably expected to be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone without the aid and assistance of the Agency. This finding is based upon the existence of blighting influences, including the lack of adequate public improvements and facilities, structural deficiencies, dilapidation and deterioration, factors that hinder economically viable use, and the inability of individual developers to economically remove these blighting influences without public assistance to acquire and assemble sites for development as detailed in the record including the Report to Council. The lack of private investment incentive, and the cost of requiring individuals (through assessments or otherwise) to eradicate or significantly alleviate such blighting conditions, and the inadequacy of other governmental programs and financing mechanisms to eradicate or significantly eliminate such blighting conditions, make elimination of blight in the Project Area infeasible without the aid and assistance of the Agency under the Amendment and the Community Redevelopment Act. 000051 The time limitations and the limitation on taxes that may be allocated to the Agency as set forth in the Redevelopment Plan as amended by the Amendment are reasonably related to the proposed projects to be implemented in the Project Area and to the ability of the Agency to eliminate blight within the Project Area. This finding is supported by the fact that redevelopment depends in large part, upon private market forces beyond the control of the Agency, and shorter limitations would impair the Agency's ability to be flexible and respond to market conditions as and when appropriate and would impair the Agency's abi/ity to maintain development standards, and controls over a period of time sufficient to assure area stabilization. In addition, shorter time limitations would limit the revenue sources and financing capacity necessary to carry out proposed projects in the Project Area. The fiscal merger of the Project Area and the City's three other project areas for the purpose of pooling tax increment revenue is authorized by, consistent with, and will serve the legislative policies of, Health and Safety Code Section 33485 et seq., in that such fiscal merger will result in substantial benefit to the public and will contribute to the revitalization of blighted .areas through the increased economic vitality of such areas and through increased and improved housing and economic oppommities in or near such areas. Section 3. The City Council is satisfied that if any occupants of the Project Area are displaced, permanent housing facilities will be available within three years from the time of such displacement, and that pending the development of such facilities, there will be available to any such displaced occupants adequate temporary housing facilities at rents comparable to those in the community at the time of their displacement. Section 4. The City Council is satisfied that all written objections received before or at the noticed public hearing have been responded to in writing In addition, written findings have been adopted in response to each written objection of an affected property owner or taxing entity which has been filed with the City Clerk either before or at the noticed public hearing. Following consideration by the City Council, all written and oral objections to the Amendment are hereby overruled. The reasons for overruling all written objections are more fully set forth in the Findings. Section 5. The. Redevelopment Plan as originally adopted and previously amended is hereby further amended as set forth in the proposed Amendment attached hereto as Exhibit A and as so amended is hereby designated as the.official redevelopment plan for the Project Area. Section 6. In order to implement and facilitate the effectuation of the Amendment hereby approved, it may be necessary for the City 'Council to take certain actions, and accordingly, this City Council hereby: (a) pledges its cooperation in helping to carry out the Redevelopment Plan as amended; Co) requests the various officials, departments, boards and agencies of the City having administrative responsibilities in the 000052 Project Area likewise to cooperate to such end and to exercise their respective functions and powers 'in a manner consistent with the redevelopment of the Project Area in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan as amended; (c) stands ready to consider and take appropriate action upon proposals and measures designed to effectuate the Redevelopment Plan as amended; (d) declares its intention to undertake and complete any proceedings necessary to be carried out by the City under the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan as amended; and (e) may elect to provide, but is not committed to provide, financial assistance in support of implementation of the Redevelopment Plan as amended. Section 7. In accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33372, the City Clerk is hereby directed to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Agency, whereupon the Agency is vested with the responsibility for carrying out the Redevelopment Plan as amended by the Amendment. Section 8. The City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a certified copy of this Ordinance to the governing body of each of the taxing agencies which levies taxes upon any property in the Project Area. Section 9. If any part of this Ordinance or the Amendment is held to be invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts: of this Ordinance or of the Amendment, and the City Council hereby declares it would have passed the remainder of this Ordinance or approved the remainder of the. Amendment without such invalid part. Section 10. Pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 36933, a summary of this Ordinance shall be prepared by the City Attorney. At least five (5) day's prior to the Council meeting at which this Ordinance is scheduled to be adopted, the City Clerk shall (i) publish the Summary, and (ii) post in the City Clerk's Office a certified copy of this Ordinance. Within fifteen (15) days after the adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall (a)'publish the summary, and Co) post in the City Clerk's Office a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance along with the names of those City Council members voting for and against this Ordinance. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its adoption. 000053 Introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of South San Francisco, held the 27th day of April, 2005. Adopted as an Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting of the City Council held the day of May, 2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: As Mayor of the CitY of South San Francisco, I do hereby approve the foregoing Ordinance this ~ day of ,2005. S :X'Current Ord's\4-27-05shearwater.ord. Doc Mayor oooo5' Exhibit A AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO U.S. STEEL PLANT SITE/SHEARWATER RF. DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO FISCALLY MERGE PROJECT AREAS SECTION 1. AMENDMENT OF REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. The Redevelopment Plan for the South San Francisco U.S. Steel Plant Site, adopted by Ordinance 996-86 on January 8, 1986 and subsequently amended (as so amended, the "U.S. Steel/Shearwater Plan" or the "Plan") is hereby amended as set forth in this amendment (this "Amendment"), effective as of the effective date of the ordinance adopting this Amendment. SECTION 2. FISCAL MERGER Part V.F, [§506] is hereby added to the U.S. Steel/Shearwater Plan to read as follows: F. [§506] Fiscal Merger 1. Findings. The fiscal merger of the U.S. Steel Plant Site/Shearwater Project Area ("Shearwater Project Area") and the City's three other project areas for the purpose of pooling tax increment revenue is authorized by, consistent with, and will serve the legislative policies of, Health and Safety Code Section 33485 et seq., in that such fiscal merger will result in substantial benefit to the public and will contribute to the revitalization of blighted areas through the increased economic vitality of such areas and through increased and im~)roved housing and economic opportunities in or near such areas. 2. Fiscal Merger of Project Areas. Pursuant to, and for the purpose of pooling tax increment revenue as described in Health and Safety Code Section 33485 et seq., the Shearwater Project Area is hereby fiscally merged'with the following project areas: a. The project area (the "Downtown/Central Project Area") established and described in the Redevelopment Plan for the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project, adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 1056-89 (as subsequently amended, the "Downtown/Central Plan"). 00005'5- b. The project area (the "Gateway Project Area") established and described in the Redevelopment Plan for the South San Francisco Gateway Redevelopment Project, adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 867-81 (as subsequently amended, the "Gateway Plan"). c. The project area (the "El Camino Project Area") established and described in the Redevelopment Plan for the E1 Camino Corridor Project, 'adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 1132-93 (as subsequently amended and restated by Ordinance No. 1270-2000, the "El Camino Plan"). The Shearwater Project Area, the Downtown/Central Project Area, the Gateway Project Area and the E1 Camino Project Area are each referred to herein as a "constituent project area." Except as otherwise stated herein, each reference in this Amendment to a constitUent project area shall mean such project area as originally established and as such project area may have been amended to add territory. This section authorizes the taxes attributable to each constituent project area which are allocated to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670(b) to be allocated for redevelopment in any of the constituent project areas for the purpose of paying the principal of, and interest on, indebtedness incurred by the Agency to finance or refinance, in whole or in part, the redevelopment project in any of the constituent project areas; except that any such taxes attributable to a particular constituent Project area shall £u'st be used to pay indebtedness in compliance with the terms of any bond resolution or other agreement pledging such taXes from that particular Constituent project area which resolution or other agreement was adopted or approved by the Agency prior to the fiscal merger of the constituent project areas. Except as otherwise noted in this Section, tax increment revenue attributable to each constituent project area may be used for any lawful purpose in any of the constituent project areas. 3. Bonded Indebtedness Limit. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in Section 503 of the Plan, in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33334.1, the amount of bonded indebtedness to be repaid in whole or in part from the combined allocation of taxes to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 from all of the constituent project areas which in the aggregate can be outstanding at any one time shall not exceed $232,650,000 in principal amount, except by amendment of this Plan and the redevelopment plans for the other constituent project areas; provided however, the foregoing limitation on outstanding bonded indebtedness shall not apply to the ten-itory added to the DowntoWn/Central Project Area by amendment to the Downtown/Central Plan adopted concurrently with this Amendment (the 000056 "Downtown/Central Added Area") because the Downtown/Central Added Area is subject to a separate limitation on bonded indebtedness. 4. Allocation of Tax Increment. Notwithstanding anyth/ng to the contrary set forth in Section 502 of the Plan, the taxes attributable to the constituent project areas that may be and are so allocated to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670(b) after the.effective date of this Amendment shall not exceed a cumulative total equal to the sum of the individual limits on the allocation of taxes to the Agency as set forth in the redevelopment plans for each constituent project area, except by amendment of this Plan and the redevelopment plans for the other constituent project areas. The foregoing limitation on the allocation of taxes to the Agency shall not apply to the · Downtown/Central Added Area because the Downtown/Central Added Area is not subject to a limitation on the allocation of taxes to the Agency. SECTION 3. EFFECT OF All provisions of the Plan not specifically amended or repealed in this Amendment shall continue in full force and effect. SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY If any provision of this Amendment or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this Amendment, including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, provisions of this Amendment are severable. The City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause; or phrase hereof irrespective of the. fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be held unconstitutional, invalid, or unenforceable. [SECTION 5. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE The ordinance adopting this Amendment shall be published once, with the names of those City Councilmembers voting for or against it, in the San Mateo Times, a neWspaper of general circulation in the City of South San Francisco, as required by law, and shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its adoption.] 000057 The Gateway Redevelopment Project Area 1. Resolution 2. Ordinance a. Exhibit A: Amendment 000058 RESOLUTION NO. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PIAN FOR THE GATEWAY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ARF~ TO FISCAl J,Y MERGE THE GATEWAY PROJECT AREA WITH THE DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL PROJECT AREA, THE CAMINO CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT' AREA, AND THE U.S. STEEL/SHEARWATER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco ("City Council") approved and adopted the Redevelopment Plan ("Redevelopment Plan") for the Gateway Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area") by Ordinance No. 867-81, adopted on June 17, 1981; and WHEREAS, on November 9, 1994, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1149-94 to amend the Redevelopment Plan by amending certain time ]imitations in accordance with AB 1290; and WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Plan was further amended in March 2004 by adoption of Ordinance -2004 eliminating the deadline for incurring debt incurrence in accordance with SB 211, and by adoption of Ordinance 1337-2004, extending certain time limitations in accordance with SB 1045; and WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco ("Agency") is vested with responsibility to carry out the Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, the Agency desires to again amend the Redevelopment Plan in order to~ effectuate the'fiscal merger of the Project Area with the E1 Camino Corridor Redevelopment Project Area, the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area and the U.S. Steel/Shearwater Redevelopment Project Area in order to pool itax increment revenue from the four project areas and establish a unified bonded indebtedness limit for the foUr project areas while retaining the separate identity of each project area for other purposes; and WHEREAS, the Agency has prepared a proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan (the "Amendment"), a copy of which is on file with the Agency Secretary and the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, adoption of the Amendment is necessary to provide the Agency, the City and the South San Francisco community with additional financial and legal resources to expand and complete the redevelopment program in the Project Area through OOOO59 activities such as development of public improvements, revitalization of commercial and industrial areas, land assembly and disposition for redevelopment, provision of financial and other assistance to property owners for redevelopment of their property, and the provision of assistance in the development, preservation, acquisition and rehabilitation of affordable housing; and WHEREAS, as set forth in City Council Resolution __ and Agency Resolution , each adopted on March 9, 2005, the City Council and the Agency have each determined that establishment of a Project Area Committee is not required because the Amendment does not authorize use of eminent domain for property on which persons reside and does not provide for the development of public projects that will cause displacement of a substantial number of low- and moderate-income households; and WHEREAS, as set forth in City Council Resolution and Agency Resolution , the City Council and the Agency have each determined that (i)the fiscal merger is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061Co)(3), and (ii) the potential environmental effects of the Amendment have been analyzed in previously certified Environmental Impact Reports, and no new projects are proposed, no new impacts have been identified, there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the prior EIRs were certified, and there'is no new information that was unavailable at the time the prior EIRs were certified; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission. (the "Planning Commission") has reviewed the Amendment, has found that the Amendment conforms to the City's General. Plan and has recommended the approval and adoption of the Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Agency has prepared and reviewed a Report to Council in Compliance with the requirements of Community Redevelopment Law (Health & Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) and a Supplement to such Report, which Report and Supplement are on file with the City Clerk and the Agency Secretary; and WHEREAS, pursuant to notice duly given, a full and fair public heating has been held on the Amendment, and the Agency has considered all written and all oral comments and testimony relating thereto and has been'fully advised thereon; and ' WHEREAS, the Agency has taken all other actions required by law in connection with the preparation and consideration of the Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL~ by the Redevelopment Agency as follows: Section 1. The Amendment, the Report to Council, the Supplement and all related documents, correspondence and transmittals, copies of which are on file in the office of the Agency Secretary and the City Clerk, are hereby approved. Section 2. The Agency hereby recommends apProval and adoption of the Amendment by the City Council. 000060 I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco at a meeting held on the __ day of ., 2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: S:\Current Reso's~4-27-05gateway.res.DOC Clerk 000061 ORDINANCE NO. 2005- CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CAL~ORNIA AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE GATEWAY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA TO FISCALLY M]ERGE THE GATEWAY PROJECT AREA WITH THE DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL PROJECT AREA, TI~ FI. CA_MINO CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA, AND TI~ U.S. STF~RIJSHEARWATER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco ("City Council") approved and adopted the Redevelopment Plan ("Redevelopment Plan") for the Gateway Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area") by Ordinance No. 867-81, adopted on June 17, 1981; and WHEREAS, on November 9, 1994, the City Council adopted ordinance No. 1149-94 to amend the Redevelopment Plan by amending certain time limitations in accordance with AB 1290; and. WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Plan was further amended in March 2004 by adoption of Ordinance 1338-2004 eliminating the deadline for incurring debt incurrence in accordance with SB 211, and by adoption of Ordinance 1337-2004, extending certain time limitations in accordance with SB 1045; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received from the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco (the "Agency") a proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan (the "Amendment"), a copy of which is attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the Amendment provides for the fiscal merger of the Project Area with the E1 Camino Corridor Redevelopment Project Area, the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area and the U.S. Steel/Shearwater Redevelopment Project Area in order to pool tax increment revenue from the four project areas and establish a unified bonded indebtedness limit for the four project areas while retaining the separate identity of each project area for other purposes; and 000062 WHEREAS, adoption of the Amendment is necessary to provide the Agency, the City and the South San Francisco community with additional financial and legal resources to expand and complete the redevelopment program in the Project Area through activities such as development of public improvements, revitalization of commercial and industrial areas, land assembly and disposition for redevelopment, provision of financial and other assistance to property owners for redevelopment of their property, and the provision of assistance in the development, preservation, acquisition and rehabilitation of affordable housing; and WI-IF~REAS, as set forth in City Council Resolution 23-2005 and Agency Resolution 04-2005, each adopted on March 9, 2005, the City Council and the 'Agency have each determined that establishment of a Project Area Committee is not required because the Amendment does not authorize use of eminent domain for property on which persons reside and does not provide for the development of public projects that will cause displacement of a substantial number of low- and moderate-income households; and WHEREAS, as set forth in City Council ReSolution 23-2005 and Agency Resolution 04-2005, the City Council and the Agency have each determined that (i) the fiscal merger is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 1506100)(3), and (ii) the potential environmental effects of the Amendment have been analyzed in previously certified Environmental Impact Reports, and no new projects are proposed, no new impacts have been identified, there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the prior EIRs were certified, and there is no new information that was unavailable at the time the prior EIRs were certified; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission (the "Planning Commission") has reviewed the Amendment, has found that the Amendment conforms to the City's General Plan and has recommended the approval and adoption of the Amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council and the Agency conducted a joint public hearing on May 27, 2005, concerning adoption of the Amendment; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was published in a newspaper of general circulation in San Mateo County once per week for four weeks prior to the date of the hearing, and a copy of such notice and affidavit of publication are on file with the City Clerk and Secretary of the Agency; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing together with a statement concerning acquisition of property by the Agency was sent by fn:st class mail to the last known address of each assessee of each parcel of land in the Project Area, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll for the County of San Mateo; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was sent by fn:st class mail to all residents and businesses within the Project Area; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was sent by certified mail, return receipt requested to the governing body of each taxing agency that receives taxes from property in the Project Area; and 000063 WHEREAS, the Agency has prepared a Report to Council in cOmpliance with the requirements of Community Redevelopment Law (Health & Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) and a Supplement to such Report, which Report and Supplement are on file with the City Clerk and the Agency Secretary, and are hereby incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the City Council has evaluated the Agency's Report to Council, the Supplement, and the report and recommendations of the Planning Commission, has provided an opportunity for all persons to be heard, and has received and considered all evidence and testimony for and against the adoption of the Amendment, and the City Council has, by Resolution No. ., adopted written findings ("Findings") in response to each written objection received from an affected property owner or taxing entity; and WHEREAS, the Agency and the City Council have complied with ail requirements of Community Redevelopment Law in connection with the consideration and adoption of the Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Purpose and Intent. The purpose and intent of .the City Council with respect to the Amendment: (i) to fiscaily merge the City's four project areas in order to pool tax increment revenue from the four project areas and establish a unified bonded indebtedness limit for the four project areas while retaining the separate identity of each project area for other purposes, and (ii) to accomplish to the greatest extent possible (a) the elimination of blight in the Project Area, and (b) the expansion and completion of the redevelopment program in the Project Area through the development of public improvements, the revitalization of commerciai and industrial properties, land assembly and disposition for redevelopment, the provision of financial and other assistance to property owners for redevelopment of their property, the development, preservation, acquisition and rehabilitation of affordable housing, the expansion of employment opportunities, and the promotion of private sector investment in the Project Area. Section 2. Findings and Determinations. In accordance With Health and Safety Code Sections 33354.6(a), 33367 and. 33457.1, and based upon the evidence contained in the Report to Council, the Findings and other documents prepared in connection with the Amendment adoption process, and the evidence presented at the public hearing, the City Council hereby finds and determines that: a. The Project Area continues to be characterized by blighting conditions as documented Section II of the Report to Council and in the Report to Council prepared in connection with the originai adoption of the Redevelopment Plan. bo The blighted COnditions in the Project Area are so prevaient and so substantial that they cause a reduction of or lack of proper utilization of the 000064 Co eo area to such an extent that they constitute a serious physical and economic burden on the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private enterprise or governmental action, or both, without redevelopment. RedeVelopment of the Project Area is necessary to effectuate the public purpose of Community Redevelopment Law. This finding is based in part on the facts that governmental action available to the City without redevelopment would be insufficient to cause any significant correction of the blighting conditions, and that the nature and cost of the improvements necessary to eradicate such blight are beyond the capacity of the City and private enterprise acting alone or in concert without redevelopment. The Amendment will facilitate the redevelopment of the Project Area in conformity with the Community Redevelopment Law and in the interests of the public peace, health, safety and welfare. This finding is supported by the fact that redevelopment of the Project Area as contemplated by the Redevelopment Plan as amended by the Amendment' will implement the objectives of the Community Redevelopment Law by aiding in the elimination and correction of the conditions of blight in the Project Area; providing for planning, development, redesign, clearance, reconstruction or rehabilitation of properties which need improvement; providing affordable housing, including housing for low- and moderate-income persons; providing additional employment opportunities; facilitating private investment; and providing for more beneficial use of under-utilized land. The adoption and carrYing out of the Amendment is economically sound and feasible. This finding is based 'in part on the fact that under the Redevelopment Plan, as proposed to be amended, the Agency will be authorized to seek and utilize a variety of potential financing resources, including tax increments and that no public redevelopment activity will be undertaken unless the Agency can demonstrate that it has adequate revenue to finance the activity. The Report to Council further documents the economic feasibility of the Amendment and related undertakings. The Amendment is consistent with the General Plan of the'City including, without limitation the Housing Element of the General Plan, which substantially complies with the requirements of Article 10.6 (commencing with Section 65580) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code. This finding is based upon the report of the Planning Commission that the Amendment conforms to the General Plan of the City of South San Francisco. The carrying out of the Amendment will promote the public peace, health, safety and welfare of the City and will effectuate the purposes and policies of the Community Redevelopment Law. This finding is based on the fact that redevelopment as contemplated by the Redevelopment Plan, as oooo6 amended by the Amendment, will benefit the Project Area by correcting conditions of blight and by coordinating public and private actions to stimulate development, contribute toward needed Public improvements and improve the social, economic, and physical conditions of the Project Area. The Agency has a feasible method and plan for the relocation of families and persons who may be temporarily or permanently displaced from housing facilities in the existing Project Area. This finding is based upon the fact that the City Council and the Agency recognize that the provisions of Government Code Section 7260 et seq. would apply in the event of relocation resulting from the Agency's implementation of the Redevelopment Plan as amended by the Amendment. The City Council finds and determines that the provision of relocation assistance according to the Agency's adopted Relocation Guidelines and applicable law constitutes a feasible relocation method. There are, or will be provided within the Project Area or in other areas not generally less desirable with regard to public utilities and public and commercial facilities and at rents or prices within the financial means of the families and persons who may be displaced from the existing Project Area, decent, safe, and sanitary dwellings equal in number to the number of and available to such displaced families and persons and reasOnably accessible to their places of employment. This finding is based in part on the fact that no person or family will be required by the Agency to move from any dwelling unit in the Project Area until suitable replacement housing is available according to law. Families and persons shall not be displaced prior to adoption of a relocation plan pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33411 and 33411.1. Dwelling units housing persons and families of low or moderate income shall not be removed or destroyed prior to the adoption of a replacement housing plan pursuant to Health and Safety Code Sections 33334.5, 33413 and 33413.5. This finding is based in part on the fact that the Agency shall displace no families or persons nor remove or destroy dwelling units housing persons and families of low or moderate incomes unless and until relocation assistance as required by law is provided. The elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the Project Area could not be reasonably expected to be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone without the aid and assistance of the Agency. This finding is based upon the existence of blighting influences, including the lack of adequate public improvements and facilities, structural deficiencies, dilapidation and deterioration, factors that hinder economically viable use, and the inability of individual developers to economically remove these blighting influences without public assistance to acquire and assemble sites for development as detailed in the record including the Report to Council. 000066 The lack of private investment incentive, and the cost of requiring individuals (through assessments or otherwise) to eradicate or significantly alleviate such blighting conditions, and the inadequacy of other governmental programs and financing mechanisms to eradicate or significantly eliminate such blighting conditions, make elimination of blight in the Project Area infeasible without the aid and assistance of the Agency under the Amendment and the Community Redevelopment Act. The time limitations and the limitation on taxes that may be allocated to the Agency as set forth in the Redevelopment Plan as amended by the Amendment are reasonably related to the proposed projects to be implemented in the existing Project Area. and to the ability of the Agency to eliminate blight within the Project Area. This finding is supported by the fact that redevelopment depends in large part, upon private market forces beyond the control of the Agency, and shorter limitations would impair the Agency's ability to be flexible and respond to market conditions as and when appropriate and would impair the Agency's ability to maintain development standards and controls over a period of time sufficient to assure area stabilization. In addition, shorter time limitations would limit the revenue sources and f'mancing capacity necessary to carry out proposed projects in the existing Project Area. The fiscal merger of the Project Area and the City's three other project areas for the purpose of pooling tax increment revenue is authorized by, consistent with, and will serve the legislative policies of, Health and Safety Code Section 33485 et seq., in that such fiscal merger will result in 'substantial benefit to the.public and will contribute to the revitalization of blighted areas through the increased economic vitality of such areas and through increased and improved housing and economic oppommities in or near such areas. Section 3. The City Council is satisfied that if any OCcupants of the existing Project Area are displaced, permanent housing facilities will be available within three years from the time of such displacement, and that pending the development of such facilities, there will be available to any such displaced occupants adequate temporary housing facilities at rents comparable to those in the community at the time of their displacement. Secl:ion 4. ' The City Council is satisfied that all written objections received before or at the noticed public hearing have been responded to in writing In addition, written findings have been adopted in response to each written objection of an affected property owner or taxing entity which has been filed with the City Clerk either before or at the noticed public hearing. Following consideration by the City Council, all written and oral objections to the Amendment are hereby overruled. The reasons for overruling all written objections are more fully set forth in the Findings. Section 5. The Redevelopment Plan as originally adopted and previously amended is hereby further amended as set forth in the proposed Amendment attached hereto as Exhibit A and as so amended is hereby designated as. the official redevelopment plan for the Project Area. Section 6. In order to implement and facilitate the effectuation of the Amendment hereby approved, it may be necessary for the City Council to take certain actions, and accordingly, this City Council hereby: (a) pledges its cooperation in helping to carry out the Redevelopment Plan as amended; (b) requests the various officials, departments, boards and agencies of the City having administrative responsibilities in the Project Area likewise to cooperate to such end and to exercise their respective functions and powers in a manner consistent with the redevelopment of the existing Project Area in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan as amended; (c) stands ready to consider and take appropriate action upon proposals and measures designed to effectuate the Redevelopment Plan as amended; (d) declares its intention to undertake and complete any proceedings necessary to be carried out by the City under the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan as amended; and (e) may elect to provide, but is not committed to provide, financial assistance in support of implementation of the Redevelopment Plan as amended. Section7. In accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33372, the City Clerk is hereby directed to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Agency, whereupon the Agency is vested with the responsibility for carrying out the Redevelopment Plan as amended by the Amendment. Section 8. The City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a certified copy of this Ordinance to the governing body of each of the taxing agencies which levies taxes upon any property in the Project Area. Section 9. If any part of this Ordinance or the Amendment is held to be invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance or of the Amendment, and the City Council hereby declares it would have passed the remainder of this Ordinance or approved the remainder of the Amendment without such invalid part. Section 10. Pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 36933, a summary of this Ordinance shall be prepared by the City Attorney. At least five (5) days prior to the Council meeting at which this Ordinance is scheduled to be adopted, the City Clerk shall (i) publish the Summary, and (ii) post in the City Clerk's Office a certified copy of this Ordinance. Within fifteen (15) days after the adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall (a) publish the summary, and Co) post in the City Clerk's Office a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance along with the names of those City Council members voting for and against this Ordinance. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its adoption. 000068 Introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of South San Francisco, held the 27~ day of April, 2005. Adopted as an Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting of the City Council held the __ day of May, 2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: As Mayor of the City of South San Francisco, I do hereby aPprove the foregoing Ordinance this ~ day of ,2005. S:\Current Ord's~4-27-05 gateway, ord. DOC Mayor 000069 AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GATEWAY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT TO FISCALLY MERGE PROJECT AREAS SECTION 1. AMENDMENT OF REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. The Redevelopment Plan for the South San Francisco Gateway Redevelopment Project, adopted by Ordinance 867-81 on June 17, 1981 and subsequently amended (as so amended, the "Gateway Plan" or the "Plan") is' hereby amended as set forth in this amendment (this "Amendment"), effective as of the effective date of the ordinance adopting this Amendment. SECTION 2. FISCAL MERGER Part V.D [§504] is hereby added to the Gateway Plan to read as follows: D. [§504] Fiscal Mer,qer 1. Findinqs. The fiscal merger of the Gateway Redevelopment Project Area ("GatewaY Project Area") and the City's three other project areas for the purpose of pooling tax increment revenue is authorized by, consistent with, and will serve the legislative policies of, Health and Safety Code Section 33485 et seq., in that such fiscal merger will result in substantial benefit to the public and will contribute to the revitalization of blighted areas through the increased economic vitality of such areas and through increased and improved housing and economic opportunities in or near such areas. 2. Fiscal Merger of Proiect Areas. Pursuant to, and for the purpose Of pooling tax increment revenue as described in Health and Safety Code Section 33485 et seq., the Gateway Project Area is hereby fiscally merged with the following project areas: a. The project area (the "Downtown/Central Project Area") established and described in the Redevelopment Plan for the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project, adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 1056-89 (as subsequently amended, the "Downtown/Central Plan"). b, The project area (the "Shearwater Project Area") established and described in the Redevelopment Plan for the South San Francisco U.S. Steel Plant Site, adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 996-86 (as subsequently amended, the "Shearwater Plan"). c. The project area (the "El Camino Project Area") established and described in the Redevelopment Plan for the El Camino Corridor Project, 000070 adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 1132-93 (as subsequently amended and restated by Ordinance No. 1270-2000, the "El Camino Plan"). The Gateway Project Area, the Downtown/Central Project Area, the Shearwater Project Area and the El Camino Project Area are each referred to herein as a "constituent project area." Except as otherwise stated herein, each reference in this Amendment to a constituent project area shall mean such project area as originally established and as such project area may have been amended to add territory. This section authorizes the taxes attribUtable to each constituent project area Which are allocated to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670(b) to be allocated for redevelopment in any of the constituent project areas for the purpose of paying the principal of, and interest on, indebtedness incurred by the Agency to finance or refinance, in whole or in part, the redevelopment project in any of the constituent project areas; except that any such taxes attributable to a particular constituent project area shall first be used to pay indebtedness in compliance with the terms of any bond resolution or other agreement pledging such taxes from that particular constituent project area which resolution or other agreement was adopted or approved by the Agency prior to the fiscal merger of the constituent project areas. Except as otherwise noted in this Section, tax increment revenue attributable to each constituent project area may be used for any lawful purpose in any of the constituent project areas. 3. Bonded Indebtedness Limit. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in Section 503 of the Plan, in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33334.1, the amount of bonded indebtedness to be repaid in whole or in part from the combined allocation of taxes to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 from all of the constituent project areas which in the aggregate can be outstanding at any one time shall not exceed $232,650,000 in principal amount, except by amendment of this Plan and the redevelopment plans for the other constituent project areas; provided however, the foregoing limitation on outstanding bonded indebtedness shall not apply to the territory added to the Downtown/Central Project Area by amendment to the Downtown/Central Plan adopted concurrently with this Amendment (the "Downtown/Central Added Area") because the Downtown/Central Added Area is subject to a separate limitation on bonded indebtedness. 4. Allocation of Tax Increment. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in Section 502 of the Plan, the taxes attributable to the constituent project areas that may be and are so allocated to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670(b) after the effective date of this Amendment shall not exceed a cumulative total equal to the sum of the individual limits on the allocation of taxes to the Agency as set forth in the redevelopment plans for each constituent project area, except by amendment of this Plan and the redevelopment plans for the other constituent project areas. The foregoing 000071 limitation on the allocation of taxes to the Agency shall not apply to the Downtown/Central Added Area because the Downtown/Central Added Area is not subject to a limitation on the allocation of taxes to the Agency. SECTION 3. EFFECT OF AMENDMENT All provisions of the Plan not specifically amended or repealed in this Amendment shall continue in full force and effect. SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY If any provision of this Amendment or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this Amendment, including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, provisions of this Amendment are severable. The City Council .of the City of South San Francisco hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase hereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be held unconstitdtional, invalid, or unenforceable. SECTION 5. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE The ordinance adopting this Amendment shall be published once, with the names of those City Councilmembers voting for or against it, in the San Mateo Times., a newspaper of general circulation in the City of South San Francisco, as required by law, and shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its adoption. 000072 Supplement to the Report. to Council South San Francisco Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2005 Prepared by South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency '400 Grand Avenue 2nd'Floor South San Francisco, CA 94080 ' ' ' · ' . ........ i ....... and Seifel CONSULTING INC, 1388 Sutter ~'eel Suite 520 San Francisco, CA 94109 Tel 415.931,96D0 000073 Table of Contents Supplement to the Report to Council South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency Section A. Section B. Section C. .Section D. Section E. Introduction Supplement to Chapter VIII~ Planning Commission Report and Recommendation Supplement to Chapter IX, Summary of Public Review of the Plaa Amendments Supplement to Chapter XH, Summary of Consultations with Taxing Entities Related Documents 000074 A. Introduction The South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency has prepared and submitted for City Council consideration proposed Plan Amendments to the Downtown/Central, E1 Camino Corridor, Gateway and Shearwater Redevelopment Projects. The Plan Amendments ihclude fiscally merging the four Project Areas as well as the addition of the area known as the Oyster Point Marina to the Downtown/Central Plan. By Resolution No. 04-2005 adopted March 9, 2005, the Agency submitted to the City Council the Report to Council for the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. Since that time, additional information has been received that merits consideration by the City Council and Agency Board, and in some instances, inclusion in the Report to Council. The purpose of this Supplement to the Report to Council (Supplement) is to provide the City Council with such additional information in preparation for its consideration of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger at its joint public hearing with the Agency scheduled for April 27, 2005. Specifically, this Supplement contains the following additional information: · The Planning Commission Staff Report and recommendation in favor of adoption of the Plan Amendments, as a supplement to Chapter VIII of the Report to Council. The April 7, 2005 resolution of the Planning Commission is included. · A supplement to Chapter IX of the Report to Council that includes the summary of the community meeting, the community meeting and joint public hearing notices, a list of attendees and a written letter submitted to the Agency as well as the Agency's response. · Summary of additional meetings with taxing entities requesting, further discussion of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger as well as the notification of the jointpublic hearing are included as a supplement to Chapter XII and Appendix J of the Report to Council. · 'City Council and Agency resolutions adopted on March 9, 2005. South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency A-1 South San Francisco Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger Supplement to the Report to Council April 2005 Be Supplement to Chapter VIII, Planning Commission Report and Recommendation This section includes the report and recommendation of the Planning Commission adopted by resolution at the Planning Commission's April 7, 2005 meeting. The Planning Commission has recommended adoption of the Plan Amendments, based on the staff report provided after this section.. The Planning Commission has als6 determined that the Plan Amendments conform to the 1999 General Plan. South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency B- South San Francisco Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger · Supplement to the Report to Council . April 2005 Planning Commission staff Report DATE: April 7, 2005 TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Report and Recommendations Regarding Proposed Plan Amendments to the Redevelopment Plans for the DOwntown/Central, E1 Camino Corridor, Gateway and ShearWater redevelopment project areas. BACKGROUND The City of South San Francisco and the South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") are considering amendments to the redevelopment plans for the four existing redevelopment project areas: Downtown/Central, E1 Camino Corridor, Gateway, and Shearwater. The proposed Amendments would (i) amend the redevelopment plan for the Downtown/Central project area to add the Oyster Point Marina and Business Park ("Added Area") to the project area, (ii) amend the redevelopment plans for the original E1 Camino Corridor project area and the Downtown/Central project area to extend the time period within which the Agency will have authority to acquire nonresidential .property by eminent domain within such project areas, and (iii) amend the redevelopment plans for the Downtown/Central project area, the.E1 Camino Corridor project area, the U.S. Steel/Shearwater project area and the Gateway project area in order to effectuate a fiscal merger of such project areas. The Fiscal Merger will allow the Agency to: : · Alleviate the physical and economic blighted conditions that are.present in the Downtown/Central Added Area. · Combine financial resources and facilitate efforts to better implement its Redevelopment Program, which will accelerate the alleviation of adverse conditiom in the four Project Areas. · Provide flexibility to combine and focus revenues from different Project Areas on the 'needs of a particular Project Area. · :Over time, adjust focus on various Project Areas so that the community's overall redevelopment needs can be addressed in a more efficient and effective manner. PRIOR ACTIONS On March 10, 2004, 'the City Council of the City of South San Francisco (,'City Council") adopted Resolution No.25-2004, which designated a Survey Area for the purpose of amending the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area"), to add territory to the Project Area. STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commi.~sion SUBJECT: Report and Recommendations Regarding Proposed Ping Amendments to the Redevelopment Plans Page 2 of 4 On April 15, 2004, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2633 establishing the boundaries of the area proposed to be added to the Project Area (the "Added Area") approving a Preliminary Plan for the Added Area in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33324 and recommending that the Agency accept the Preliminary Plan. By Resolution No. 06-2004, adopted on May 12, 2004, the Redevelopment Agency 'approved the Preliminary Plan and directed staff to prepare amendments to add the Added Area-to the Downtown/Central Project Area and to fiscally merge the Downtown/Central, Gateway, and U.S. Steel/Shearwater project areas. The Agency subsequently resolved that the fiscal merger should also include the El Camino Corridor project area. On March 9th,. the Redevelopment Agency approved the Report to Council for the proposed Amendments and Fiscal Merger, authorized transmittal of the Report and the proposed Amendments to the City Council, Planning Commission, the taxing entities, community residents and property owners, and the City Council and the Agency authorized the holding of a joint public hearing to consider adoption of the proposed Amendments. The text of the proposed amendments is included with this staff report. Following review by the Planning Commission, the proposed amendments will be incorporated into ordinances that will be considered .for adoption at the joint Agency/City Council public hearing. REPORT TO COUNCIL In connection with the proposed Amendments, the Agency caused to be prepared, and pursuant to Resolution No. 13'2004 adopted December 8, 2004, approved a Preliminary Report pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33344.5 and authorized transmittal of the Preliminary Report to affected taxing entities, the Planning Commission and the community. The attached RepOrt to the City Council ("Report") has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of Section 33352 of the Community Redevelopment Law (CRL).. Much of the information in the Report to Council was presented in the Preliminary Report previously transmitted to the Planning Commission. Several new sections were added to the Report as required by Community Redevelopment Law, including: a proposed Five-Year Agency Implementation Plan; summary of consultations with affected taxing entities; documentation of remaining blight; and a summary of the Controller's Report. In all other respects, the Preliminary Report has not been substantively changed. Prior to the joint Agency/City Council hearing, a supplement to the Report will be prepared which will include the Planning Commission's report and recommendations on the proposed amendments and a summary of the consultations with community organizations, residents and property owners. STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Report and Recommendations Regarding Proposed Plan Amendments to the Redevelopment Plans Page 3 of 4' PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission is being asked to adopt a Resolution (i) finding and determining that adequate environmental review has been completed for the proposed Amendments, that the proposed Amendments are consistent with the General Plan,'and that the public activities which may be undertaken in the project areas and in the area proposed to be added to the Downtown/Central project area are consistent with the General Plan; (ii) recommending the approval and adoption of the Amendments; and (iii) authorizing transmittal of the Planning Commission's report and recommendations to the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council. FINDINGS Environmental Review The Planning Commission is being asked to adopt a finding that adequate environmental review has been completed for the propOsed amendments and fiscal merger. Staff has determined that the fiscal merger, as a financing mechanism for unspecified future projects, and Which itself will have no significant effect on the environment, is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061Co)(3). The proposed Plan amendments do not alter the projects and activities proposed to be implemented in the project areas. The potential envirOnmental effects of the 'activities proPOsed to be undertaken in the existing project areas and in the Added Area were analyzed in the East of 101 Area Plan EIR which was adopted and certified in 1994 and in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report, a program level EIR that was adopted and certified in October, 1999. The Chief Planner has reviewed the proposed amendments and has determined that in connection with the adoption of the Plan Amendments, the Agency may properly rely upon these prior EIR's because no new impacts are associated with the amendments, no projects have been specified that were not analyzed in the prior EIR's, there are no substantial ,changes to the circumstances under which the previously analyzed project will be undertaken, and there is no new information that was unavailable at the time the prior EIR's were certified. General Plan Consistency The proposed Amendments do not alter the land use designations of properties within the existing project areas or the Added Area, and the land use designations contained in the Redevelopment Plans are the same as the land use designations contained in the adopted land use map of the City's General Plan2 The proposed Amendments do not propose changes to existing development standards for properties located in the existing project areas and the Added Area, and the development standards applicable to the existing project areas and the Added Area as enforced by the Redevelopment Plans are the same as the development standards contained in the City's General Plan. The land use.designations, circulation systems, public facilities,. proposed projects and programs and development standards set forth in the Redevelopment Plans conform to the City's General Plan and are not affected by the proposed Amendments. STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Report and Recommendations Regarding Proposed Plan Amendments to the Redevelopment Plans Page 4 of 4 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution: 1) adopting findings that adequate Environmental Review has been completed for .proposed Amendments, that the proposed Amendments are consistent with the General Plan, and that the public activities which may be undertaken in the project areas and in the area proposed to be added to the Downtown/Central project' area (the "Added Area") are consistent with the General Plan; 2). recommending the approval and adoption of the Amendments; and 3) authorizing transmittal of the Planning Commission's report and recommendations to the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council. Redevelopment Manager Attachments: Resolution Report to Council Proposed Plan Amendments DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION FAX [85'0] 82g-8~3g .April 14, 2005 Redevelopment A§~ncy of the City of South San Francisco 400 Grand Ave. SoUth San Francisco, CA_ 94080 Dear ~gency Members: This letter ~transmits Planning.Comm~,Sion P, esolution No. 2642-2005 to the Redevelopment Agency of:the City of South San Francis'co for inclusion as part of the Agency's Report to the City Council pursuant to Section 33352 of the Core-unity P, edewlopment Law. Kesolution No. 2642-2005 is deemed to bo the r~port and recomr%ndations of the Planning Commission c0nc~vn~g the proposed Amendments to the Redevelopment Plans for the Downtown/Central, E1 Carn~o Corridor, C~eway and U.S.Steel/Shearwkt~r redevelopment project areas and contemplated public projects and activities thereunder, as requ/red by ' applicable provisions °flaw. · Sincerely, Secr~a_.-y to the Planning Commission Enclosure: Resolution No. 2642-2005 Cc: City Manager · City Clerk'. Seifel Consulting 7S8601-1 ........................................... I~O~ICE. OF-ACTION ............................. ~ .................................................. SOUTH SAN FIL~CISCO PLANNING COMMISSION TO: DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIc AND. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION:. PLANNING DIVISION (6so) 877.BmS FAX (650) 626-8839 South San Francisco Redevelopment Agemy ?04-0056- RDA Boundaries & ~scal Merger- Recommending adoption of ammdments to the redevelopment plans for the Downtown/Central, E1 Cam{r~o Co~idor, Gateway and Shearwater redevelopment project srcas, (including the ~ldifion of territory to the Downtown/Central project area and the fiscal m~rger of the projeot areas), and adoptiug findings that adequate environmental review has been completed. Subproj eot: RDA04-0001 ADDRESS: RedoveIopm~nt ~ojeot.A~eas The South San Francisco Pl-nn~ug Corm~.~sion at a mc~ting held on April ?, 2005 voted (7-0-0) to take the following action on the above applications: EAPPROVED DHNmr~ D CONTINUED 'E FORWARDED .Resohfiau No. 2642 Based on the Findings of D~nial (Specific Date or Off Calendar) Recou:auondation to APPROVE Item T~ntatively scheduled for~ City Council Meeting I certify that the foregoing is an accurate repreSe~ztion of the action of the Planning Commission in consid~ation of this ~plication. .- Chief Planner of the City of South San Fraueisco CC: City Mauager City Clerk Siefel Consulting 12, 2005 RESOI,UTION NO. 2642-2005 .................................................... .~ .............................................................................. ... ............................................ .. .................................. ~ .................................. PLANNING COMMISSION, CITY OF SOU'I~ SAN FRANCISCO STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION OF ~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF TW~. CTrY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REPORTING ON AND REcedING ADOPTION'OF~lV~.NTS TO ~ REDEVELOPMENT i~LANS FOR ~ D OWNTOWN/CENTR~, EL CAMINO CORRIDOR, GATEWAY'AND SlCrP, ARWATERREDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS, (INCLUDING ~ ADDrI'ION OF TERRITORY TO ~ DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL PROJECT AREA AND THE FISCAL MERGER OF TIlE Pi~OJECT AREAS), AND ADOPTING F/NDINGS.THAT ADEQUATE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW HAS BEEN CO1VfPLETED W~.REAS, thc l~edevclopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco (the "Agency") has prepared and submitted to the Planning Commission of the City of South San Prancisco¥("Planning Cor.~u{~ion'') proposed amendments to the l~edevclopmeat Plans for the Downtown/CentmI, E1 Camino Con,der, Gateway and U.S. Stecl/Shearwater p~oject areas (collectively, thc "Amendments") which Amendments would (i) fiscally merge thc four project areas, (ii) add t~ritory to the Downtown/Central project a~a; and (ih') ~m'tend the time ]~m~t within which the Agency may use eminent domsin to acquire non-residential proper~y in the · Downtov~Centml and E1 Camino Con-idor project areas; Wr-~.~, th~ Planning CommisSion previously formulated and adopted, Prelim/nary Plans for the each of the project areas; WHE~, by P,.esolution 2633, adopted'on April 15, 2004, the ?launfug Comm~.~sion approved a Pre 'hminary Plan for the areaproposed to be added to the Downtown/Central project area (th~ "Added Area''); ' ~AS, in accordance with Section 33346 of the Comm~u~ty Redevelopment Law ('Health and Safety Code. Section 33000 et seq.) the Planning Com~n~ssion is required to review the proposed Amendments and make its report and recommendations thereon to the Agency and the City Council of the City of South San Francisco (''City Council"), including a determ~uati0n as to whether the Amendments conform to the Gen~ Plan of th~ City of' South San Francisco ("General Plan");. 738343-1 WHEREAS, Section 65402 of the Government Code provides in part: "(a) If a general plm or par~ thereofb~s been adopted, no real prop~ty shall be acquired by dedication or otherwise for street, square, park or other public pin-poses, and no real property shall be disposed of, no street shall be vacated or abandoned, and no · public buila~g or structure shall be constructed or authorized, tithe adopted general plan 1 ~ve be~ subdued ~ ~d ~o~ upon by~e plug ~cy ~ ~ ~o~ ~ .(c) A Io~ ag~cy s~ ~t ~q~e r~ pmp~ for ~y of~e p~os~' ~~ ~ 'p~ph (a) nor ~o~ of~ym~ p~p~, nor ~ct o~ ~o~e apubHc . . locad0~ p~ose ~d ~t of ~ ~fi~ ~osifio~ or ~h pubic b~ or to ~ S~fion ~46 of~ H~ ~d S~e~ Code ~d Section 65402 of~e Gov~m~t Code,. ~e to b~ m~ ~.~e ~cy:~d ~e ~ Co~cfl for ~ comid~afion ~ ~gon ~e . ~c~t ~ect on ~ ~nm~t, ~ ex,pt ~m CBQA p~t to CBQA Section 15061 ~)(3); ~, ~e P~osed Am~dm~ do not ~ ~e pmj~ ~d ~fi~fies propos~ to be ~pl~ted ~ ~e pmj~t ~, ~d do not ~d ~ ~~ ~ ~e ~fio~ s~ ~AS, the potential e~vi~ental effects of thc aCtiOnes ~os~ to b~ ~d~ ~ ~o ~s~ project ~o~ md ~ ~e pmpos~ A~ed ~ w~e ~~ ~ ~e B~ of 101 ~a PI~ Bn~nm~ ~p~t R~o~ wMch w~ ~ ~d ~~ ~ 19~4 ~d ~ ~e G~ PI~ Bn~m~ ~p~ ~o~ a pro~ l~el ~ ~t w~ ~op~ ~d c~ ~ Octob~, 1999; ~d W]:r2RBAS, the City's Chief Planner Ins'reviewed ~ proposed Amumchnents and has determi,~ed that in connection with the adoption of the Amendments, the Ag~my and the City Council may properly rely upon the prior ElLs because no new envirowmental impacts are associated with the Amendments, no projects have been specified thut were:not maalyzed in the prior WhYs, there are no substantial'chaugas to the circumstances Under which the previously ~s-t "' 2 ~lyzed project will be und~'rak~ and there is no new i~rormation ~at was ~v~able at.~ '.. ................. i~n-Y~ii~-~i~¥~'~J~~ ........................................................... ~ ........................................... ~ ................................. i ....................................... . Now TI~'~.REFORE, ~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN, FRANCISCO DOES ~Y'~.REBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Pl,nni~§ Commission hereby finds and d~termines tb~,t adequate environn~tal review has been completed for the proposed Amendments and ~cal hair§er because (i) the fiscal merger is exe~npt from CEQA ~ursUant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3), and (ii) the poten~al enviro,~m ~ntal effects of the proposed Amendments have been analyzed in previously certified Env/ronmental Impact Reports, and no new projects are proposed, no new impacts havebmm idenfi:fed, there are no substantial eh a,~ges in the cimumstances under which the prior EIRs were certified, and there is no new information that was unavailable at the t~me the pr/or ~ were certified. · Section 2. The Planniu~ Commission lass reviewed the proposed Amendments and hereby finds and determines in accordance with Section 333~ ortho CommunityRedeveIopment Law, that the.proposed Amendments are consistent with the General Plan. Section 3. The Planning Comn~ssionherebyfinds and determines thatpublic activities and under~k/n~ that are described in Government Code Section 65402 and which maybe undertaken within the existing projec~ areas and the Added Area pursuant to the redevelopmen~ plans for such project areas as amended by the proposed Amendments are.consistent with the Gen~ Plan. Section ~. The Planning Comr~ssionhereby~epo~ts to the A§ency and the City Councilthe findings referred to in Sections 1, 2 and 3 hereof~ and recommends the approval and adoption ortho Amendments. h the event t~at prior to its adoption of the Amendments,the CityCouncfl desires to make any m~nor, technical, or clarifying changes to the Ar~endments, the Planning Commission hereby/in& and determines that any such minor, technleah or clarifying changes need not be referred to it for further report and recommendation, and hereby waives its 'report and recom~endationunder Section 33347 of the Co~mm~ityRedevelopment Law concerning any such change. Section 5. The Planning Commission hereby authorizes and directs the Secretary of the Planuing Cornmi.~sion to transmit a copy of this Resolution to the Agency and the.City Council for consideration as part of the Agency's Report to the City Council pursuant to Section 33352 of the CommunitY Redevelopment Law, and this Resolution shall be deemed the report and recommendations of the Planuing Commission concerning the proposed Amendments and contemplated public projects and activities thereunder, as required by applicable provisions of law. 738343-1 3 City of South San Francisco at the regular me~iug held on the ?t~ day of April, 2005 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Giust~ Corr~r~.~sion= Honan, Comm~.~qon= Prouty, Corr~.~.4on~r Romcro, Commissioner 8kn, Vice C'hairp=son ~ md Chakp~-son Teglia NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: 73B34..~.I 4 NNNN~ '~ Ce Supplement to Chapter IX, SUmmary of Public Review of the Plan Amendment Based on the response of the community, it was decided to hold only one community meeting on March 29, 2005. Following is a summary of the March 29, 2005 Commllnity Meeting on the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. This section includes the notice for the community meeting and the joint public hearing. It also contains a copy of the sign-in sheet for the attendees at the community meeting, a letter from an attendee as well asthe AgencY's response to the letter. · On MarCh 29, 2005, the Agency prepared a presentation' on the Plan Amendments'and Fiscal Merger for the business owners, property owners and tenants in all four Project Areas, who were notified of the community meeting and joint public hearing via letter. (A sample notification letter and the joint public hearing notice are included at the end of this section.) Norton Fragoso, Redevelopment Manager,' presented an introduction .to redevelopment in South San Francisco and tax increment, financing,, and she demonstrated the benefits of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger for the community. Ms. Fragoso addressed questions from the attendees during and following the presentation. Armando Sanchez, South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency staff, and Marie Munson, Managing Consultant from Seifel Consulting he., were also available to answer questions during and following the presentation. Approximately 25 members of the community were in attendance at the meeting. The attendees.who signedthe attendance sheet are.included following this section. . The concerns °fthe community members centered on eminent domain. Norton Fragoso clarified that eminent domain was only being reinstated for the Agency in the Downtown/Central Original Project Area and E1 Camino Original Project Area. It would also be established in the Downtown/Central Added Area; however, as this area is owned by the City, the Agency does not anticipate exercising eminent domain in this area. Ms. Fragoso stated that eminent domain would not be exercised to acquire property on which persons reside. Furthermore, at this time, the Agency has no plans to utilize eminent domain for any particular project. Some attendees inquired about potential change of land use designation. Ms. Fragoso explained.that the Redevelopment Plan Amendments for all of the Project Areas would not change the land uses in the Project Areas, and that the General Plan sets land use designations. Other attendees asked what is the Agency's vision for the Downtown area. Norton Fragoso provided a description of the primary activities to be undertaken by the Agency in the Downtown, explaining that the Agency provides funding for infrastructure work, toxic clean up and building improvements. She then described that the Agency created a proposed Implementation Plan in conjunction with the Plan. Amendments, which summarizes the projects, 'activities, and estimated revenues and expenditures for the Agency for the next five years.. She then, provided a list of representative projects from the proposed Implementation Plan. One resident asked if a community center would be developed at Willow Gardens (within the E1 Camino Added Area), and Ms. Fragoso explained that it was included as a potential project within the proposed Implementation Plan. To conclude the meeting, Norma Fragoso explained the next steps in the process for adopting the Plan Amendments, specifically, the Planning Commission review on April 7, 2005 and the joint public hearing on April 27, 2005. She stated that community members could review a copy of the Report to Council on the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger at City Hall, or they could call her and request a compact disc including a copy of the report. She then invited the community members to attend the joint public heating. She also stated that Armando Sanchez, Marie Munson and she were available for further South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency C-1 South San Francisco Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger Supplement to the Report to Council April 2005 questions after the meeting, and that the public could contact her at her office as well. The meeting was then concluded. The Agency received a letter from a community member following the community meeting. The Agency responded on April 12, 2005 and addressed the community member's concerns. South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency C-2 South San Francisco Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger Supplement to the Report to Council April 2005 March 22, 2005 DEPARTMENT OF. ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT F,~x [sSo) ~ RE: Public Hearings on Proposed Amendments to the Redevelopment Plans for thc City of South San Francisco Dear Property Owner/Business Owner/Resident: Over thc years, thc South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency has funded economic development initiatives, public infrastructure and facilities improvements, parks, toxic remediation assistance, and other revitalization initiatives within its four redevelopment project areas. In order to enhance the Agency's redevelopment efforts, the City of South San Francisco and.its Redevelopment Agency are considering mending the Redevelopment Plans to enhance the Agency's financial resources and provide more flexibility to fund future redeveloPment 'activities. ~- The Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco is in the final stages of adopting amendments to the four existing redevelopment project areas identified above. The primary purposes of the amendments are to (i) add territory tothe Downtown/Central project area; (ii) fiscally merge the four redevelopment projects for the purpose of pooling tax increment revenue to increase funding flexibility for the redevelopment program; (iii) establish a unified bonded indebtedness limit for the four project areas; and (iv) extend the time limits 'for the exercise of eminent domain (condemnation) authority to acquire non-residential property in the Downtown/Central project area and the original E1 Camino COrridor project area. The'proposed Redevelopment Plim Amendments do not raise taxes and do not change the zoning/land use designation of your property. The Amendments are intended to provide the Redevelopment Agency, the City,Of South San Francisco, and the community with additional financial and legal, resources to complete the redevelopment programs in the Downtown/Central, Gateway, E1 Camino Corridor and U.S. Steel/Shcarwater project areas through activities such as the development Of public improvements, revitalization of commercial and industrial areas, land assembly and disposition for redevelopment, provision of financial and other assistance to existing property owners for the redeVelopment of their property, and assistance in the development, preservation, acquisition and rehabilitation of affordable housing. As they were originally adopted, the Redevelopment Plans for the four project areas authorize the Agency to purchase real property, and in limited circumstances, to acquire property by condemnation. The proposed plan Amendments would extend the time period within which the Agency may acqui~ non-residential property in the Downtown/Central and E1 Camino Corridor ?~7so2.~ 1 projeCt areas and would authorize the Agency to acquire non.reSidential prope~y in the area proposed to be added to the Downtown/Central project area ("Added Area"). Therefor, if you own non-residential property within the existing project areas or the prOposed Added Area, your property is subject to the possibility of acquisition by condemnation under the limited circumstances set forth in the Redevelopment Plans, as amended. It is importaut to note that the' Agency's USe of its property acquisition authority is limited. At this time, n° properties have been identified for acquisition. As required by Health and .Safety Code Section 33350, this' Notice is being sent to property owners, bUSineSses, residential tenants and community organizations located thin the four project areas . . - o ,~ ,-~ ,~ ~.umiuia ~ nola a joint puullc nearing at 7:00 m on Wedues v r,,41 2005 iu the City Council Chambers in the Municipal Services Building at 33 Arroyo Drive, SOUth San Francisco, to Consider adoption of the proposed Plan Amendments and an accompanying hnpl~mentation Plan. Any person wishing to speak on the subject may do so at the hearing. ~u preparation' for t~e formal public hearing, a community information meeting on the proposed Amendments is scheduled for lViarch 29, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Please plan to attend the me,ting if you have questions about the proposed Amendments orthe redevelopment process in general. Copies of the proposed Amendments, the Final Report to City.Council on the Proposed Amendments and Fiscal Merger (including the Implementation Plan) are available at the City Clerk's office at 400 Crrand Avenue for your review. I thank you for .raking the time to review this information, and invite you to attend the community meeting on March 29~, and the public hearing on April 27~. If you have any questions feel free to contact Norm, Fragoso, Redevelopment Manager, at 650-829-6620. ecutive Director' · En~osures 737802-3 2 INFO~~ON AND PUBLIC i~ARING NOTICE FOR THE PROPOSED ADOPTION OF REDEYELOI~MENT PLAN AMENI)MENr$ (INCLUDING FISCAL MERGER) AND FIVE-YEAR IMPI,EMENTATION PLAN FOR THE DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL, EL CAMINO CORRIDOR~ GATEWAY AND U.S. STEEL/SHEARWATER REDEVELOPMENT PRO~ECT AREAS 'IN THE CITY OF SoIYrH SAN FRANCISCO COMMUNITY INFORMATION MEETING 7:00 p.m., Tuesday, Mm'eh 29, 2005 City Council Chambers Municipal Services Building 33 Arroyo Drive SOuth San Francisco, California PLANNING CO.MlVIINSION I~EARING 7:00 p.m., Thursday, April 7, 2005 City Council Chambers Municipal Services Building 33 Arroyo Drive South San Francisco, California JOINT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING 7:00 p.m., Wednesday, April 27, 2005 City Council Chambers Municipal Services Building 33 Arroyo Drive South San Francisco, California 734711-2 nnnnql NOTICE OF JOINT 'PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF JOINT PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF Ti~,~ OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO ON (A) PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ~ REDEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR.THI~ DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL, GATEWAY, EL CAMINO CORRIDOR AND U.S. STEEI. dSHEARWATER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS, INCLUDING.THE FISCAL MERGER OF THE PROJECT AREAS, THE .EXTENSION OF TIME LIMITS ]FOR EMINENT DOMAI~ AUTHORITY, AND ~ ADDITION OF TERRITORY TO ~ DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL PROJECT AREA, AND (B) A PROPOSED NEW FIVE-~ IMPLEMENTATION PLAN F°R REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco will hold a joint public hearing on April 27, 2005, at 7:00 p._m~ or as sOon.as POssible thereafter, in the City Council Chambers located in the Municipal. Services Building at 33 Arroyo Drive, Sotrch San Francisco, California t° eomider all evidence and testimony for or against the approval and adoption of (A) proPOsed redevelopment: plan amendments (the "Amendments"), including (i) the fiscad' merger of the existing redevelopment plans (the "Existing Redevelopment Plans") for South San Francisco's four existing redevelopment project areas (Downtown/Central, Gateway, El Camino Corridor and U.S. Stccl/Shearwater), (ii) the addition of territory to the Downtown/Central project area, and (iii) the extension of time limits for the exercise of eminent domain authority in the Downtown/Central project area and the original El Cemino Corridor project area; and (B) the proposed new five-year implementation plan for the four project ai~as (the "Implementation Plan"). The joint public hearing is' being convened and conducted, and thi.~ notice is being provided'in compliance with Health and Safety Code Sections 33350, 3'3355, 33356, 33361, 33451, 33452, and 33490. The scope, purposes, and Objectives of the proposed Amendments include: (i) the addition of' territory to the Downtown/Central project area; (ii) the fiscal merger'of the four redevelopment projects for the. purpose of POoling tax increment revenue from the four project areas to increase funding flexibility for the redevelopment'program while retaining the separate identity of thc four projects for other purposes; (iii) the establishment of a unified bonded indebtedness limit for the four project areas; and (iv) the extension of time limits for the undertaking of eminent domain (condemnation) proceedings to acquire nonresidential property in the Downtown/Central project area and the original El Camino Corridor project ama. . The Amendments are intended to provide the Redevelopment Agency, the City of South San Francisco, and the community with additional financial and legal resources to complete the redevelopment pwgrams in the Downtown/Central, Gateway, El Camino Corridor and U.S. SteeYShearwater project areas through activities SUch as the development of public improvements, revitalization of commercial and industrial areas, land assembly and disposition for redevelopment, provision of financial and other assistance to existing property owners for the 734711-2 2 redevelopment of their property, and assistance in the development, preservation, acquisition and rehabilitation of affordable housing. The Implementation Plan sets forth the Redevelopment Agency's proposed program of activities and expenditures for the four project areas for the upcoming five-year period (July 1, 2005 - June 30, '2010), including the manner in which such programs will achieve the purposes and requirements of the Community Redevelopment Law, assist in the alleviation of blight in the four project areas, and increase, improve and preserve affordable housing'opportunities in the community. The Implementation Plan is intended to replace the current implementation plan for the four project areas, and takes into account the additional financial and legal resources that would become available to the Redevelopment Agency through the proposed Amendments. The purpose of the joint public hearing is to consider: 1. The proposed Amendments; 2. The Redevelopment Agency's Report to Council on the proposed Amendments and fiscal merger of the four project areas, which Report includes, among other documents, the Implementation Plan; and 3. All evidence and testimony for and against the approval and adoption of thc proposed Amendments and the proposed Implementation Plan. At the public hearing described in this notice, all persons having objections to the proposed Amendments and/or the Implementation Plan may appear and ~how cause why the proposed Amendments and/or the Implementation Plan should not be adopted. Persons raising any legal challenge to the proposed actions may be limited to raising only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the Agency Secretary, the City Clerk, or to the Redevelopment Agency or the City Council at or prior to the public hearing. Any person who is opposed to the proposed Amendments and/or the Implementation Plan may give' their objections in writing to the City Clerk at any time prior to or at the public heating described in this notice. Written comments may be filed with the City Clerk at 400 Cyrand Avenue, South San Francisco, CA 94080. The proposed Amendments, the Agency's Report to Council on the proposed Amendments and Fiscal Merger (including the Implementation Plan), and other related documents are on file and available for inspection Monday through Friday betw~n the hours of 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. at the following location: City Clerk's Office City of South San Francisco · 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 73471 !-2 Exhibit A ace°mpanying this notice is a map showing the general location of the four existing' project areas. Exhibit B is a map showing the area proposed to be added to the Downtown/Central Project Area. Exhibit C is the legal description of the area proposed to the added to thc Downtown/Central project area. Legal descriptions of the land within the existing .project areas are available from the City Clerk free of charge, and may be found in the following documents in the Official Records of San Mateo County: Document No. 39091486 recorded July 13, 198.9 (Downtown/Central project area); Dooxment No.'93117799' recorded June 28, 2000 (El Camino Corridor project area); Document No. 9205 recorded November 19, 198.1 (Gateway project.area); and D°eument No. 85072170 recorded july 18, 1985 (U.S. Steel/Shearwater project area).. ~ ' - ' For further information, please call Nor~ Fragoso at (650) 829-6620 .between the hours'of 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. ' "' By order of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco. A~sistant Executive D~r Date: March 22, 2005 734711-2 4 NNnnn ,~ EXHIBI~ A Redevelopment Project A~s Bmmdm'ies ~ Do~mm/C~U*~l Pm~ot A~ EXH~Er[T 13 $ 4 7 10 EXHIBIT C OYSTER POINT MARI~ PROJECT AREA ~,ru~ ~ r'ur~, ~u~ ul' I lie LANDS ,SHOWN.ON THE MAP RECORDED IN VOLUME 56 OF PARCEL MAPS AT PAGE 61 IN THE RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: ' < ... - . - MOUNT DIABLO0 fa,e= ,,,~, ~.~,,~'..b~?, .uN_z.~ !_N ~SHIP 3 SO~. ~GE 5 ~, ~ IN VOLUME 52 OF P~C~ ~ AT PAGE ~ IN ~ ~~S O __ F ~D C~ AT ZONE ili C I ~ ~~ ~ ~S ON · ~ STA~ P~ C~~ ~S~ ~ 1~ ~ ~ ~ ~1~69.~; R~ ~~.6~ 1) THENCE 8 89' 28' 33" E ALONG THE NORTHERLY UNES OF LOTS 3 THROUGH 7 FOR 2945.93 F1=~-"1'; 2) _THENCE S 0° 3!' 27" WALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 3 FOR 1313.22 FEET; 3) ,THENCE N 89" 32' 13" W ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINES OF LOTS 3 THROUGH 7 FOR 3215.06 FEET; 4) THENCE N 5) THENCE N 56~: 42' 47" E FOR 52.49 FEET; 42' 47" E FOR 13.78 FEET; 7") THENCE RADIAL TO SAID CURVE N 86° 6' 40" W FOR 55.00 FEET; ...... , r~v,~,~ ru,ad)u~ Ui- ,555.Z2 FEET AND A CENTRAL ,aNGLE OF 17' 2r 45" FOR AN ARC LENGTH OF 169.22 FEET., SAID CURVE HAVING' 9) A C~ORD eF-N~NG OF N4.' 50' 32" ~ ~,O~ 168.56 FEET; 10)~-E~ TO S~D CraVE ?S .~S ~' W roe ~.e0 FEET; ~ ra:~t:: RLONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, CONCAVE TO THE WEST AND RADIAL TO · .~u ,~.~ r'~r~ ~ attL; U=NGTH OF 385.36'FEET, SAiD CURVE HAVING A CHORD BEARING OF N 34' 23' 41" W FOR 376.93 FEET; CENTR~ ~LE """' '"~-~- -Ve~- - A R~US OF l~.'m FEET. ~ A ^ OF CUeW -lz) m Mr-r~q.a= N .56° 17 46" E FOR 56.44 FEET; ' ' 13) THENCE N 0".31' 27" E FOR 35 68 FEET; 14) THENCE N 88 58' 41"E FOR 7'96 FEET' 15)__THE_ NcE N 56' 29' 53"E FOR 1bT7; 34 Fi~T- !6) THENCE N 41° 29' 57" E FOR 168'64 FEETi 17) THENCE N 3.5' 21' 27" oR ~_~ ~ m==-r EFO ...... ., ~.~:,; 18) THENCE N 46' 35' 27" E FOR 208.33'FEET; 19) L~:::~TToANTi~_GE ~NT..,B~F~. ! .N.G' _?.7_50_ 11'47' W ALONG A CURVE TO THE CENTRAL "~"'" ...... ° ~,c~,~, tIAWNG A RADIUS OF 204.99 FEET AND A ~a..~..z:: ~,.a- ;zl~ 3t5 25' FORANARC LENG' HAVING A CHORD e~NG . ~ .~- ~ ~... ,:~T~. ~OF~ ~ FEET, S~D CURVE 20 THENCE N lY' ' ' O .... ' --- ..-..' .. r~ =.~..m r-c:: ~; · } 31 27' E FOR 277.31 FEET TO SAID NORTHERLY UNE OF LOT 7; · THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES IN THIS DESCRI~ ARE IN AMERICAN SURVEY FEET ON THE CALIFORNIA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM 1983, ZONE IlL TO CONVERT TO GROUND DISTANCES MULTIPLY BY 1.00007. THE AREA OF THIS PARCEL IS 97.07 ACRES MORE OR LESS. DESCRIPTION PREPARED BY: KENNEFH P. MOORE, LS. 4918 LICENSE EXPIRES 12/30/04 J~y 14! 20O4 ...... ,. ~uu ~u/H~ PI6gAL MERGER OFTHE PROJE~AR~$,'~E ~NSlON OF~ME · ~?.- ~:".'~ ".:' ~VIC~:, . :'.~ · ". "': ~M~S FOR' EMINENT DOMAIN AUTHOR~, AND THE ADD,laN'OF ~RRITORY'TO ~E DOW~OWNIC~TRAL'PR~E~ . ;'~p~;ffi~'~d 'b~:'fo~_ba.~' ':"AR~,"AND.(B)'A PROPOSED'NEW FIVE-~AR'IMP~MENTA~ON p~N FOR RED~ELOPME~'PROJE~S ..... ", ~'. ' ' ]'a Wfl ' be' ' .... - ~ ' p ~ s~,.nod.o~}e~v~ p¢ the ~m~ed ~end~an~ In~ u~ ~ ) ~e ud~ll~ of. mr~o~ to ~e ~Wnt~antm rO t' ~:;- .- d'dm~ amPI' ' ' .... ~l]l)t. ~ ~ ~e~er~e~urm~mp~ntpm~cmlort~gurp~e'ofpooflno~ln~nr~nue~mt~f~ur mn ~as"." u ' '. .- ..... ~ .-.'L..Jn pm~a~m~. ' .::..~ :,:. -.'. -'' '. '..'. - L ; '. .:' -' . :-~ .-: ".'-'... . -'. .".. '~.' - : " , ..'''.'~ .... "- ., : 'L~'~ -'; .... "'~ ':;-'".'~'. ".~ ' ~' "~."''.:'~.~.'- .-:'': ;"~.~-"...'.''. -, '..~:~..',..,.:'- .~.~ t~ .~ '. '~' ",~.~; ..... ..'..' .~,". ~na m,u~ng, p~on m ~ ~m~ ~a~, ano may ua 1oun~ ~'~ mlm~g ~acu~ m t~ offimal ~s e~ San Mat~ ~un~ Do~ment N~ ~91~ m~ad July ' ' ~a~t~nN/~..,,-. ' ,' '.' ;:' ',"~" :'.'.-', . ~..~.:.'.. "; ',": ~.~: "':.' :: . ." :..". :~'-."? ,~}5:' ~-;~'".'y~ ':"' · .:' :',/.~',.,' ,:.'. -,~ ~A~E~,W~ FI~.~. .::...:,:.,....,,..- ....... ..:.~;,: ::, : ....... . . ,~. .... ,. ,; . . .-.........~ ~.~.: ..... ..... . . .... .~... ~K~ ' SLOOUM;. ~OR~U~ '- ' -.'.' ' '.... '... ·..".. :....':: . ,~:..'.. '. ': .... '-.. '.. · ~.. '.. ~ ..... ' .:-.' ], ~. :,'. -. ' .... :..'.-. ';" ;':. :.'.j . · . ' ...' ~: ':. .". '.. ' ..' . · ~'i ' ' .... "::" : .~: . ~ ,... . lUmol'~) blckler,M mmive · · .,..: :". : LSITJlS orltij . ' ~.i' ., . ,... ',~ ., . .: :... ::~. ,!i:.;: i ./ :.':' ~' · .:. .,:..:...: ... o ....... · ' %. '".: '.r' · , ...';..,,... '..~' : ml~i'al paD, .. :.~,.;.': · '.,..;...: · ~ ...' ,.: -:,.'.... '. .. .' .... .. ....': . ....., . ... :; · .. .... _.~o~,~.o.,' L"" ~.~J ~ .n~..~? o~. ,~u ~.,.~,. m~p.o.n.'""~._,~ nd .r~ ?~,~.~4, ,~ .,~,~ s,o~. ~,~'s w.~.' ' v L.F~.._el~am~M~go. io.?He{.nn.M?mmp, m..me.mo..m~men~m{eent?,ufOys, t. krt,omt~,~ont~map~dbvolu~4r ;.... ..!..~ ,.as~,s.,s . .dm.,k~: .~ ~.r~.se, ~, ~'"d.,0.t.".,_.".,,".~_ ~.r,~-'nm-0,?~,r.~S.,s~..' ': ; ... · .... .: ...' .., ..:... · ~ ';' ..', - ~.. ~ Thenca~r~7:Wd~ngthgBmlmtyflflg'ofln13tor13134~leeC · ~..' . · . ,.: :-.. · -.. .... '.. ,... : < ;..'.' ' ''~ ir~avaa i~ glOoJq3~-.. ,".' ' '.' ' ", -. ' '' "- · ' . ,, .... '. ",..~".'...'- -. <~./.'.,' '¢.'..'.,.':- · ~-. m~,~,, ,~1 ,~.,~.~,,. ...31 Th~.'.,.nee. NB~.:.92 13,._,W, llm1. g..thaSpu. H~erb/lbmsd~lo~3th/bbgh7 for3~1~0Bfeo~ .....~ ,.;. ;,... :.-....:. :.. ........ .... ,4,~,~,., ~ ..... ....,.,_' ,41 ,"{'h~"l~ffN~'~ 4~'~..E{~rFm~T.;4~l~m~, ,...., . ...- ...... . . ...:. ....,....,.. , .....:..; .... ,. · ...:~..,-...: ,~Ts~,~'~'" ~: ;d'V'.~ '~! 'r~i,n,4N'ii{l-4~4'~.;'U.i',,¢l:~,~i'fm .".:..., '. '.- :'~ .:: '.. ': .' .... -':-'.; ;.":,' ...... '." :.;.;':.:., -.....'.'.'.-.':'!...- · ;: : · .... ~_ Tim~alonga.,u~we~.lhelelimrtd{~v~Lol~.Wm~h~ln~#m~ore10~fmt dn,m~lmhm le~l" '30'for ..... . ~k perldu' ~,' ba~ re- ... ............ ~ ~g ~ . . a.n n~. · · .. ,... -,::,...;........ .. .'4.. I} Yl:m~.h~'m.{{ml'.'~'lu ."m~.. Nf~'r4n"-'Wl~rl{{i,{~fn~ ~:'::-:'~'~.' .'J.; ' ':": !;':'.' .'?.."'"."".';:';: ."'.':3'J: ~""~'~/I : " .ve'{m.nd,~mnlr~d~.l:N~a{or~hB'll'_ ._nmm..r?C~',,.,~"n,..~.~w,~m.L....-[l.~?~.,{.Md~r~, .~vi..O,~onNS.~'~'Wf~,~bB~' .;'.,. ~ '1 w~g.~ns~l.B:~h.~ In',h~Gm'm'~lPmv~lflnn I I ul'~en.~m"iwmmu .~r~wTu ~" ~'B ry. '~r.~101n~,....'.: . . ;!: . ' · ..' .... . ~ . '' ' .~ ' . ' '.'-'.' . I .t L-lie._JH, .,p..~,..~.~xi ~ I! ~ .nB r,mpDr / I k lo)'mm? ,,1~), ,*....,. ·., ..~. h,n, ~n~,v, ~0 m, w,,,I ,~. r,,~,,, ]. ,,. p,,~,,,~.~, .,~.. h.v~.,l ~us ~' {i.~,~ t.,t .nd ,, ,m,~lr~. L' .". ". 'l ~.nBuffv~_"..~R"c,:~.{n" _~z~em:mB I I'__.,_~0~.'4?.~.-"' ~iW~...,~h_?f__:~_~"~.em.'"'muR,,~lmv~,i,,.,hb~b~n~rN~.~dl-WMr~U3Mu . ~':.', ".. I 3..o~?. jfl?~,ta?F.,mvall~G[wa.~lH~..l'~., j I 11111~?v?.tro~'8.uJ~nD.?l___b~?t. nllN4~qF ~.~:l:aiong eouweMtherlghboon~avatolheSou~tvingnradluaof195:lBfaetaqda ~: '.: , I c~.,n,ou, s.m~..,e~_.eo~_. ,n.m _r~t we~_ ,ne ac II · ~centrm~n~i~u~]1~z~r~p~rgmng~f2~9~eet~m~d~drvehavh1g~hn~b~d~:~h~B2~5~Er~ ~r-~ """ · .m~..ena~.m. Ule.~.l.~oflt'gomogwolnoto~.ll.l~Thnn,eNso..0'4d"E~4l~~· . . . . . - . -;-; :. . ;. .' ;,:-- ..... :--., . ...~,[.., .ula_m..g~uii'.o~& ~, .'. ".-~ ... I.I 13FThenoeNi0'31r~7'E'lor3~08~C '" -. ": ' . '" , '. ; '~'"'." '" '" -' ;' '" ' ~ - :'i~' '-' ~_e_~ll¥ .G'~kt(~W'Ha~,~30Wdst2OU1Avk-/I 141Then~N'~8.~41~ElorT.90boC . .' . -'. '."- .., ' ,; .' '~'.; .... · '" ;-'.':..'.'.. '; "' ~.:":. .u~.P,m, .APrflaB,'200~end-..fl~ahaflbB|l-l~Then~eNf0-~,~53, E~orlg?~4fea~_ .' ..' ,.. ; :.: .:; .. · .... · ',. ..' '.- .,".,...'; ;,..' ;,' .' a;,, .'., p-'eandarne-,tapu~D'meeUn~m~edby I/']m]lmnnN41.'~,67, c-rorlG&e4fH~. "~, ..'.' ' .:'; ... '.~ ' · ' · · .'. :' ';' ;:?,' ' '. ,, :. · '..'~' ,, r~of~hn~dddf,u,~,,m,,~,~r,.,~,~-~'~,l,~' ~/ 17~ThormoN35. S1 27 ElnrB~,Olfne~ .. .... . -. · . .. : ....... the,,,,,,,,,,,~"fl~,~.,~;/i.lelThonceN40'3~*.27'~.fm'u~a~,~ '. '-:. ... '.::.., .: ;............ .... .; '....',... , ..' . -,.~ ...: '.. .;., .. o~ow Ule ph~lJr~ o~lad'h C~ Coun-~,,,,,~ M n. ~, ~7,, c J,, ~-~ c--,~,, ,,,~,,k.o,, ,,_. _,,-- .,. · _~'__S~n~rm mngtu o.; ,m- ~o ,co .sm ms un; ;.m~n m un,ali mO~ ea~ eurw naviflg n r. naro ooanno o~ S 81;.~2'.34" .W.t"o.r 04,48 fao~ . ." ': .,.. ~ · '.,p~mumnl. ~m ~ . ' ': ".' ~.','. ;. ',; '..~ ' . '..~.:...~' ..: · :' .'. ',. ' ." ;.' -. -.. ... '.'. .., · ~ ,a,~n, enm m rem~uon eameo4arecuy lo a~ io ~onvart m grosma omanees rmimply ~y i.noo0't~ : ~. . . · .. :..: · · : . · tmtorlGolthePoh~~o~e.Goo. 'Theamal~'thepef~ells97,DTaurusmoreorhus& ' :, ...., .. · · -' .. · ' . '. . '.' .. : · ~xitraL'L'.... ' .... · -. · : Ooamtpth~npm~emdby:.~... , "J'. '.' . ;.. .t:.~ -.-:.,'4.: .... ...,. .-'. ..'. :. · ; ~ ..:.: '. ' ..' ,~. · . . · .'- ':.. ' · ;..' :.'.'::': '.."'. '.' .XemnmhP, Moore, L,S, 4919.. ;..; ', ,.' . :-.:..... / ':..~., ;... .. ;... . . :; '.- ~..' :..i . ~.. · .; ..... .___.... .....,... . · .. 'Ll~eneeGxpkesl~3Q~4 . . : · ,.-.. .. . · . ...... . ..... .. Iill~n~4gOTOT · .'" ·" ' ' J-h~ld.~O04t ;'" :' '~ "' ' ' '.' ' ' , "' ' ;'- "- · ' ' .': ' '. ' · - '. ' '" ' ';:" ' ~005 . .', ,'' :"'" ' -:'..; " ;' ,..",.".' ''- '." '-'-.' .'.; "'... "'.' .' .-'. .' ' .':. :. ' ~'. .... .,' '' ....... :t.'!, - , ',, I'. .- ~_ ...... . .................. ~.' ........................... I ' II , Itl "1 '' ! ........... ' .... "' =~~" :i..';.,~ ~..~....~. .:.L..,.i~.... .':,' ....... I '; ': . " .' " ..... .- ...,'" " .... 'L' '. !. ":. '.'" . .'~ . ,. ¢ 3~2~/05 The.City CoUnoil City of South San Francisco 400 Grind Avenue South San FranCisoo~ CA 94080' 'Subject;. l:am_ OPPOSED TO T~.I~_ ~ PROPOSED a.lVi~_- I~~~S and/or the IMP~Wl~..NT, .ATIO~ _illyOB,!,EGTIoN,~.' . . . . This plan,woUld displace mobile home owners at,the EL CAMINO CORRIDOR area. This 'plan Would give the mobile home Owners no rer'°"me to obtain FULL, CURRENT VALUE OF THEIR MOBILE HOMES , qualified by the PROXIMATE EXISTING LOCATIO~ of the MOBILE HOME. ne~ to ma~e wn~ comments about the plan which I am m opposition , Mv I own a mobile home located on 636 iii Camino Real, next door to South "' City High School parking lot, on "B" StreeL My landlord, (the park _.manager) has been trying to get rid of the park so he can sell the pmpe~. Sin~e he previously, was not permitted to do so - his strategy was to NOT ALLOW ANY NEW mobile homes or trailers TO Mo%rE IN and to TEAR mSUN H_O. s e are sure you are aware oS-these actions). When someone moves out or dies or he evicts, he then ~ DOWN THE MOBILE HOME. ChLrrently, we are down to 14 mobile homes. For over one Yoar, '1 wanted to scSI my mobile home, (sole~ out of fo~r due to the d~ninishing mobile homes in the park), but no one w/Il bulr it consb'egng the park looks h'ke it will be tom do~ soon. THIS._ PREVE_~. AND PRE _~. UDE$ THE Ell. La'TING MO?-~ EH__n~.., ~. ownER F. RO# !..OCANc~VAND THE CQN. DmoN ~ _T~IE M, OBI!_P H_OME, '- LET ALONE JUST A plain old FAIR. PRICE BASED UPON THE VALUE AND CONDITION OF THE' MOBILE HOI~ BY fl'S'ELF. Now, most of these' homes can not be moved - as they have been on the cem~t stilts for many decades and for Various other rea,wns, when someone leaves, TI-lB LAND LORD $O..~,~ OFI~RS .TO BUY MOBILE HOME (mainly because he gu'Il not allow ¢myo~e else to move even tloUgl~ when ~keal he s~s that i~ not the ca~e). Dtu. t TH~ POOR PEP, SON HAVING TO leave IHEIR MOBILB HOME at a much less than current.value price., (ONE. PERSON THAT we in the park know of, was offered $6,000 'for his mobile home, ~ IHS HOME WAS WORTH $25,000EASILY.: MY PROBLBMIS that when I MOVED INTO THE- PARK $ years ago; I paid for the location of Where my mobfle'home mo..oue no. me}mem...as mey say location, locatio location- ' --'hna ... · · _ ~ . this was a big sci .. point Irom the real estate agent as well as the owner. memeal problems and conditions) and I am only able to work buIa small amount of time amtI am ~ plus years old... I can not afford to pay rent.anywhere else.. My mobile home me~us ~verrthing to me and I HAVE NO FAMILY TO TURN TO, IF I HAl/ti TO MOVE OUT- since : NoT,aa,irom To $6,ooo when I ~ve ~ m~. I ~ not risk ttyin~ to move the mobile home, since/t can not be moved, mooue nome (two years ago when I checked into it). What can I do?. I would be displaced. This is extremely distressing and a -Al/ . . -,-~u~-~-~ me greany. I wanted was a place to live, so I urchased the ' · · P mobile home With all of the small inheritance I recePeed from my dying uncle - who was.the last of my family. WHO CAN I TURN TO TO DISCUSS MY DH~MA WITH? Can you please help me. I feel it is not fair for me to be displaced and offered a pittsnce for my home because no one would buy it, because the parkis being torn down~. Where. ca~ ! find ~ w~a~ o~o~s I ~_~ve~ ¢~.yo.~ D!esse, please hel~ me? Sincerely, Vanessa Clark 636 E1 Cumin° Real, #19 South San Francisco, CA 94080 DEPARTMENT OF · ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (~o) ~.~.s{~mo FAX (6frO] 829-61~.3 " Vanessa Clark 6:36 E1Camino Real Space 19 South San Francisco CA 94080. April I2,.2005 Dear Ms. Clark, Thc City of South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency received your letter of March 29, 2005 oppOsing the. Redevelopment Plan Amendments and the Five-Year Implementhtion Plan. We would like to clarify that although the mobile home park is within the redevelopment area, the proposed Plan. Amendment and the Five-Year Implementation Plan have no relation to your current housing situation. We are sorry to hear about the difficulties you face but it is a private matter between you and your landlord. The City of South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency is not a party to what is happening at the mobile home park, nor does the Agency have any plans to undertake a project at that location. As we informed you earlier, the proposed Plan Amendments are intended fo enhance the Agency's ability to undertake redevelopment projects in thc Project Areas. The Agency's proposed projects are identified in the Five-Year Implementation Plan. These projects will not involve the displacement of any residents, whether in mobile homes or in fixed homes. Thus you are not are not at risk of displacement due to Agency activities, the proposed amendments or the. adoption of the Implementation Plan. Having clarified this, we suggest you contact La l~aTa Centro Legal (415-575-350O) to discuss your legal options with your landlor& We are.also including a list of affordable housing in San Marco County. Although these homes have long waiting lists, we suggest you contact them and get on waiting lists now. The rents they charge are affordable bemuse they are based on tenant's income and their ability to pay. Also, .you may have noticed the new housing development being built near the South San Francisco BART station. This project will have several affordable one-bedroom units and you may want to contact the developer to inquire about renting when the units become available. You can reach the project developer at 858-626-8337. '~' Norma Fragoso Redevelopment Manager ' 000106 D. Supplement to Chapter XH, Summary of Consultations with Taxing Entities At the request of two affected taxing entities, the Agency held separate follow up meetings with the two taxing entities. On March 23, 2005, Agency staffand Seifel Consulting representatives met with the South San Francisco Unified School District (SSFUSD) officials Superintendent of Schools Barbara Olds and Ronald McEntire, Assistant Superintendent Business Services.'The school district staff requested a meeting to review the SSFUSD's contractual pass through payments .and statUtory pass through payments under the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. On April 7, 2005, City and Agency staff as well as Seife! Consulting staffmet with San Mateo County officials Assistant County Manager Paul T. Scannell, Deputy County Manager Mary McMillan and Deputy County Council Lee A. Thompson. County staff requested the meeting and asked the Agency io clarify specific provisions of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger..The County had questions On redevelopment projects, pass through payments, the proposed ferry terminal and redevelopment plan limitations. - .... ' Barbara Christensen, Director of Community/Government for san Mateo County 'Community College District (SMCCCD),' sent a letter to Norma Fragoso requesting clarification of statutory pass through payments from the Shearwater Project pursuant to the April 2004 removal of the debt incurrent deadline. The Agency has provided clarification to the SMCCCD. In addition, all of the affected taxing entities were notified of the joint public hearing and transmittal of the Report to Council on March 24, 2005. A sample nOtification letter is provided following this section. South San Francisco Redevelopmem Agency D-1 South San Francisco Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger Supplement to the Report to Council April 2005 Ma~h 24, 2005 DERARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AND.. 'COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (e,5ol 8~..~2o FAX [srpo) San Matzo County ~$5 Connty Cmt~', Third Floor R~lwood CitTi 12.4. 94063-1665 Re: Notice of~oint Public Hearing and Transmi~ of Report to Com/cil for South San Francisco Red~olopment Project Area Fiscal Mcrgc~ and Amondme~t to ' Add Territory to tho Downtown/Central Redevo, lopm~nt Project Area Dear M~', Sloc~'n: " Pursuant to Community Redevelopment Law (California Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) ("CRL"), tho Redevelopment Agency of tho City of South San Francisco ("Agency") is preparing.redevelopment phm amendments (tho "lh'oposed Plan ~,meadment~") wi/ich, if adopted, would (i) add territory to the Downtown/CenUal lh'ojeet Area, (ii) fiscally merge the Downtown/cenwal.l~roject Area,.th¢ I~1 Camino.Conidor l~°j eet Area~ the Gateway. Project Area and the Shem'water Project Area (collectively, the "l~rojeet Areas"), and ('fii) exteigl tho time limits within which tho Agency may exowiso the power of eminent domain over nom'eaidential property in the Downtovm/Central and the original El Camino Corridor project We have previously h'ansmitted a Statement of Preparation together with a legal deScriPtion and a map of the boundari~ of the proposed added territory and a Preliminary Report prepared in accordance with CRL Sections 33344.5 and33354.6, which includes among other information: (a) a description of conditions in the existing Project Areas and the proposed added tenitory, (b) a summary ofredevelopmeat'aetivities undertaken to date, (c) a description of remaining blighted conditions in the Project Areas, (d) a description of the redevelopment a~tivities proposal to be undertaken in the Project Areas, and (e) an analysis of the fiuaneial feasibility of the proposed redevelopment activities. On March 9, 2005, the Agency and the South San Francisco City Council ~'Cit7 Council") adopted resolutions consenting to the holding of a joint public hehring on the Proposed Amendments and' Fiscal Merger and author/~ng ~ttal of the Final Report to Council to the l~g Commission and a~ected taxing entities. · As more particularly described in the enclosed Notice, the ~0int Pub. lie Hearing is scheduled for:. 7:00 p.m., Wedues~y, April 27, 2005 City Council Chambers, Municipal Services Building · 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco. Also enclosed with this letter in CD' format is a copy of the Final Report to Council on 'the Proposed Amendments and Fiscal Merger ("Report to Council,), prepm'ed in aec. on:lance with Sect/on' 33352 of the CRL, Mu~b of the/nformation in the Report to Council was presented in the previously transmitted Preliminary Repor~ Several new sections were 'added to the Report as required by Community Redevelopment Law, including: a proposed Five-Year Agency Implernentation Plan; summary of consultations with affected taxing entities; documentation of rern~/nLng blight; and a summary of the Controller's Report: In all other respects, tho Preliminary Kepor~ has not been substantively changed. ?flor to the jo{hr Agency/City Council hearing, a supplement ~o the Report will be pr~ared which will include. the Planning Commission's .report and recommendations on the Pmlmsed Amendments and a ~mmary of additional consultations with'taxing entit/es, eommumty organizations, residents and property owners. . -. The Proposed plan Amendments will not alter the activities proposed to be undertaken in the Project Are~, nor wJ. lI they exter~d the ~nancial and time l{m{tations set forth in the existing redevelopment plans. Under the proposed fiscal merger, eagh project Axea will eontinu~ to be governed by it~ own. redevelopment plan with its associated goals and time limits; howeVex, the four Project.Areas will have a combined dollar Iirn/t for coll~tion of tax increment revenue and a combined limit on the maximum amount o£outstanding bonded indebtedness. The potential environmental effects of the ac~vities proposed to be unde~aken in the existing Project Areas have been analyzed in Program Environmental Impact RePorts which were prepared and certified in connection with. the ~option of th.e redevelopment plans for each .Project Area..The potential.environmental effects of the activ/fies.pmpo~ed to be.und~aken in ...... ~ .. the added territory have been analyzed in Program Environmental Impact Reports previously prepared and certified for the Downtown/Cenlxal Project Area redevelopment plan and for the CiW's General Plan. In accordance with CRL Sections 33328, 33344.5, and 33352, in connection with the proposed plan amendments, the Agency is required to provid~ each aff~tvd taxing entity with a copy of the PrelirdnaD- R~ort, to consult with each affected taxing entity, md to prepare a. response to any written concerns expressed by the.affected taxing entities. Please contact Norma Fragoso at (650) 829-6620 if you have questions or comments or if you would like to obtain a printed copy of the Final Rcpbrt to Enclosures SAN MATEO COUNTY. COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT Office of the Chancellor RE. CEIVED · Cafiada College, Redwood City College of San Mateo, San Mamo Skyline College, San Bruno Apfil12,2005 Ms. Norma Fragosa City of South San Francisco 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco CA 94080 APR 1 4 2005 E & CD DEPT Dear Norma, We have received and reviewed various information provided by Seifel Consulting on the planned amendments and merger of various redevelopment project areas by the South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency (Agency)'. We have one area of concern in regards to the Shearwater Project Area (Project Area), which we raised at the consultation meeting in February. We had not heard back from you on this issue, so we are placing this concern in writing. In March'2004, the Agency amended the Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area to delete the last date to incur debt. Pursuant to the information provided by Seifel Consulting,' this will trigger statutory payments beginning in 2006-07. However, the San Mateo Community College District is listed as not receiving such payments because we have an agreement already in place. Section 33607.7 (b) of the Community Redevelopment Law (CRL) governs who receives statutory payments and in part states: "Ifa redevelopment agency adopts an amendment that is governed by the provisions of this section, it shall pay to each affected taXing entity either of the following: (~) If an agreement requires payments to the taXing entity, the amount to paid by an agreement between the agency and an affected taXing entity entered into prior to January I, 1994. (2) If an agreement does not exist, the amounts required by subdivisions (b), (c), (d) and (e) of Section 33607. 5..." While the District did enter into an agreement with the Agency when the Redevelopment Plan was approved for the Project Area, that agreement does not require that payments be made, and none have been made since the .adoption of the Plan. In fact, the agreement states that "the Agency and the District agree that so long as the present California school finance system remains in effect, the Agency shall have no obligation to consider any payrnents to the District under this Agreement". Pursuant to the agreement, the District has also never requested any payments be made. The District therefore believes that it is entitled to statutory payments pursuant to Section 33707.7 of the CRL as long as no payments are being made under the agreement. We would appreciate it if you would provide us with a response to this letter prior to the joint public hearing on the amendments to the Redevelopment Plan. If we don't hear. from you prior to the heating, then this letter shall serve as an objection to the adoption of the amendments, since we believe that the financial Projections included in the Preliminary Report as they deal with pass through payments are in error. Please letme know if you have any questions, or when we can discuss this issue further. Sincerely,' Barbara Christensen Director of Community/Government Relations C; EliZabeth Seifel, Seifel Consulting Donald J. Fraser, Fraser & Associates Ron Galatolo, Chancellor 000111 DEPARTMENT OF. ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (650) 829-8620 FAX (650) 829-6623 Paul T. 'Scannell, Assistant County' Manager County of San Mateo 400 County Center, First Floor Kedwood City, CA 94063 April 15, 2005 Dear Mr. Scannell~ Thank you for inquiring about the City of South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency's use of' Low-Mod Housing fund with respect to the Agency's Redevelopment Plan Amendment. The City of South sma Francisco is deeply committed to the provision of affordable housing and we welcome the opportunity to share our efforts with the Board of Supervisors. Enclosed. you find several documents that detail our efforts: · ' The Agency's most recent Redevelopment Housing Activities Report submitted to HCD ' in December 2004. This report prOvides the Agency's accounting of its 20% RDA Housing Set-Aside. · An internal docUment outlining Funds Available as of 6/30/2004 and the intended use of those funds. We would appreciate if you would keep this document confidential as it involves several projects that are still being negotiated. · An intemal' count of affordable housing activity ~)ver the Past decade (1994-2004). This report reflects affordable housing projects funded with RDA Low-Mod Housing funds and as well as units developed by the private sector. The affordable units provide by the private sector are the result of the City's 20% inclusionary housing requirement. I would also like to call to your attention the City's Five Year Implementation Plan for FY 2004- 05 to FY 2008-09. This'Plan is included as Appendix H in the Report to COuncil (which you previously received) for the proposed Fiscal Merger and Plan Amendments adding territory to the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area. The following tables and section will be of particular interest to the Board of Supervisors: Table 18, pg. 38, Affordable Housing See. 6 Housing Program, pg. 33-35 · Table 15, pg. 30, Housing Production Upon reviewing these documents, we are certain you will agree that the City of South San Francisco is very aggressive in developing affordable housing. In fact, the Bay Area Council recently awarded the City of'South San Francisco an "A" grade for its affordable housing efforts. Letter to Paul scannel . Page 2 of 2 ' · Regarding your request for an analysis of the fiscal impact to tho County of the proposed merger, Seifel Associates informed me the analysis you would like requires several.months of work. This includes reconstructing the tax increment and assessed value projections at an estimated cost of $10,000 to $20,000, ·which is not feasible at this time. Nevertheless, staff is working with Seifel Associates to provide you with a response consisting of a very simple analysis of the impact to the County, based on gross assessed value projections and the County share of property taxes with the Fiscal Merger and Plan Amendments. I hope to have this analysis for you early next week, in time for you to brief the Board of Supervisors prior to the joint public on April 27t~. Finally, you requested information about the Marina and requirements for mitigation and · abatement'of toxics. The Oyster Point Landfill is a closed, unlined Class Ill landfill..The City of South San'Francisco owns the Oyster Point Marina in its entirety. The majority of the landfill is open space, but a portion of the landfill has been developed and includes a public marina, boat launch, a small yacht club, a boat sales building,.and a small office and hotel complex. The San Marco Harbor District (Harbor District) operates the public marina on the landfill and is responsible for ongoing landfill maintenance. Commercial development is planned for the western portion of the site. The development guidelines are summarized in the East of 101 Master Plan (July 1994) and in the Oyster Point Marina Specific Plan (September 1983), both Prepared by the City. ' . . In ~ticipation of future development, the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) issued order No. 00.-046 on June 21, 2000 (order), The Order imposes new closure and post- closure requirements on the City as part of future development. The following information is provided to supplement the email sent by Mar~_y. Van Duyn, Assistant City Manager, on 4/15/05 to Mary MeMillan. (This email is also attached for your review). " Oyster Point Marina Regulatory AUthority Regional Water .Quality Control Board >Waste Discharge Requirements- Order 00-046 >Indutrial Storm Water Permit, Waste Discharge · Identification (WI)ID) No. 241SO16184 Integrated Waste Management Board · .>Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) No. 41-AA-0065 San Marco County Health Services Agency- Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) Please feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions regarding the enclosed materials at (650) 829-6620. Norma Fragoso Redevelopment Manager ¢c: Mary McMillan, Deputy .County Manager Attachments 'roject Area California Redevelopment AgencieS-Fiscal Year 2003/2004 Project Area Contributions to Low and Moderate Income Housing FUnds Sch A Project Area SUmmary Report SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RDA Tax inbr. 100% of Tax 20% Set Aside Tax Increment AmoUnt Deferral Deposited to Increment Requirement Allocated Exempted Repayment Hsng Fund Percent of Tax · Incr Dep Repayment' .:' Deferrals Other Income Total DeP~sited to Ho.'uslng t OWNTOWN/CENTRAL $7,005,812 $1,401,162 $1,401,162 $0 i ROJECT i L CAMINO CORRIDOR $1,733,971 $346,794 $346,794 $0 i~ ATEWA¥ PROJECT $6,301,558 $i,260,312 $i,260,312 $0 [ ~IEARWATER PROJECT $2,263,446 $452,689 $452,689 $0 ' $0 $1,401,162 .20.00% $346,794 20.00% $1,260,3i2 .20.00% $452,689 20.00% $0 $o $o '$0 $0 $o $0 / $1,~, 01,162 $3z?,794 i. $1,260,312 $4,~2,689 gency Totals: $17,304,787 $3,460,957 $3,460,957 $0 $0 $3,450,957 20.00% - $0 $0 Note: Print this report In Landscape Orientation (Use the Print Icon just above~ theri Properties then Landscape) Page I of 12/28104 /.'.? .i California Redevelopment Agenclea- Fiscal Year2003/2004 Project Area Contributions to Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund · : ' · . Sch A Project Area Financial In.formatlon Agency Address s o u'rff ~.~i-~i~-u-c~s-Cb .............................. :RDA P,O, Box 711 South San Francisco CA 94083 Project Area DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL PROJECT ...... Type: ,Inside Project Area Status: Active - i'' :. '-- 'Plan Adoption: 1989 Plan Expiration Year: .2029 Cumulative per. So Gross Tax Increment $7;005,812 Calculated $1~401,162 ,Amount Amount .Amount Allocated Exeml3ted Deferred $1,401,162 '$0 $0 Repayment Cate_clory Total Additional Revenue Total Housing Fund Deposits for Project Area Total ~ ..D. eposlted ~ i ~. ;' ~.' ~-~,,.. $1,401,162 20,00% $0 .$1,401,162 Project Area EL CAMINO CORRIDOR Type: inside Project Ama .Status: .Active Plan. Adoption; 1993 P|an Expiration Year: 2033 Gross Tax Calculated Amount Amount' Amount Total % Increment .Deposit Allocated 'Exempted .Deferred D~posited -- $1,733,971 $346,794 $346,794 $0 $0 $346,794 20.00% Repayment .Catel3. ory Total Additional Revenue Total Housing Fund Deposits for Project Area $0 '$0 $346,794 Cumulative 'pef. $0 Page 1 of 2 12/28/04 California Redevelopment Agencies- Fiscal Year2003/2004 Project Area Contributions to,Lowand Moderate Income HOusing Fund $ch A Project Area Financial Information Project Area GATEWAY PROJECT Type: Inside Project Area Plan Adoption: ~1981 Status: Active Gross Tax Calculated :Amount Increment Deposit Allocated $6,301,558 $1,260,312 $1~260,312 Total Housing Fund 'Deposits for Project Area Amount Amount Total % .'Exempted ~beferred p~l~osi~ed -- $0 $0 $1,260,312 .20.00% Repayment .$0 Cate!;lory Total Additional Revenue $0 $1,260,312 · Cumulatlve Def. $0 Project Area SHEARWATER PROJECT Type: Inside Project Area Plan Adoption: 1985 Status: Active Plan Expiration Year: 2026 Gross Tax Calculated Increment Depose $2,263,a,46 $452,689 Amount Amount Amount Allocated ,Exempted Deferred · $452,689 ' $0 $0 Repayment Cate.clory Total Additional Revenue Total Hou sing Fund Deposits for Project Area Total D~poslted .$452,689 $0 $0 $452,689 20.00% Cumulative Def. .80 Agency Totals For All Project Areas: Gross Tax Calculated Increment peposit $17,304,787 $3,450,957.4 Amount Amount Amount .Total % Allocated .Exempted Deferred Deposited $3,460,957 $0 $0 $3,460,957 20% Cumulative Def. $0 Total Additional Revenue from Project Areas: $0 Total Deferral Repayments: $0 Total Deposit to Housing Fund from Project Areas: $3,460,957 Page 2 of 2 12/28/04 _o California Redevelopment Agencies - Fiscal Year 2003/2004 · :Sch A/B Project Area Program Information :'SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RDA ~roje-ct'Are-a: EL-CAMiN'O-CORRiDOR FUTURE UNIT CONSTRUCTION Estimated ,Low ,,.M, 5derate 0 0 .... Execution .Completion " Contract Name Date_ . .' - pete :.~ Very Low. Oak Avenue·Housing -County Site '01/28/04 01/27/06 43 ' Page 1 of I 12/28/04 AdjuSted Beginning ~ .~aiance Califomia Redevelopment Agencies - Fiscal Year 2003/2004 Status of Low and Moderate Income Housing Funds Sch C Agency Financial Summary SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RDA Project Agency Net Other Total * Unen- '~ 'Unen-- · Unert- Area .Other Total Resources Housing Housing Encum- cU~nbemd :i* ' /:-Cumbered clUmbered Receipts Revenue Expenses Available Fund Assets Fund Assets brances Balance "Designated Nat Dsgntd i ~;11,970,842 $3,460,957 $144,900 $2,075,951 $13,500,748 $8,818,565 $22,319,313 $427,896 $13,072,852 '~. $1 i,000,000 $2[072,852 ~penses Debt Service Housing Other Plannin~ and Property .. sub~idieS' . Toial Rehabilitation ' Administration Acquisition ' 003/200 $300,b/5 $98,204 $45i,835 $:~99,370 $717,183 $10~,784 $2,075,gS:'j" *The Unencumbered Balance is equal to Net Resotlrces Available minus EnciJmbrarices Note: Print this report in Landscape Orientation (Use the Print Icon just above, then PrOperties theii Lar~dscape) Page I of I i2/28/04 California Redevelopment Agencies - Fiscal Year 2003/2004 Status of Low and Moderate Income Housing Funds ~ch C. Agency Financial and Program Detail SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RDA Total Tax Increment From PA[s} $3,460,95'7 'Other Revenues not reported on Schedule A :~ :Sum of Beginning Balanceand Revenues -Beginning Balance $11,970,842 Adjustment to Beginning Balance ..... .$0 Adjusted Beginning Balance ;$11,970,842 Total Receipts f~om'PA(s) $3,460,957 '$14e,,900 .'$15,576,699 Expenditure Item Subitsm Debt Service ;)ebt Principal Payments Interest Expanse Tax Allocation, 'Bonds & Notes ~ubtotal of Debt Service · Amount 'Remark $155,575 :.$300,575 - Housing Rehabilitation No Information Provided Other ~1o Information Provided . SUbtotal of Housing Rehabilitation Subtotal of Other !$98,204 - $98,204 $45! 835 $451,835 .Loans & other expenditures Planning and Administration Costs ~,dministration Costs 3ther =lanning, Survey/Design Subtotal of Planning and Administration Costs $33,935 $321,898 $43,537 $399,370 City Admin Cost Allocation Property Acquisition Paga I of 3 12/28/04 0001-1-9 California Redevelopment Agencies'. FisCai Year'2003/2004 Status of Low and Moderate Income Housing Funds Sch C. Agency Financial and Program Detail Sou'rH SAN-FRANCISCO RDA Expenditure Item Property Acquisition Land 'Purchases .Subltem "Subtotal of Property Acquisition Amount $717,183 -$717,183 Remark Subsidies from the LMIHF Ist Time Homebuyer.Down Payment ~ssistance . - '~.- 3ther .Subtotal of Subsidies from the LMIHF $50,000 $58,784 Shelter Network and HIP Housing $108,784 · Total Expenditures $2,078,951 Other Housing Fund Assets Net Resources'Available $13,500;748 Indebtedness For Setasldes Deferred $0 Cate.qory Loan Receivable for Housing Activiflea Amount $8,818,565 Total Other Housing Fund Assets $8,818,565 Remark Total Fund Equity $22,319,313 1999/2000 $1222562 2000/2001 $1391983 2001/2002 $3374612 2002/2003 $32T'/425 sum of 4 Previous Years' 'Tax Increment for 2003/2004 Prior Year Ending. Unencumbered Balance $9266582 $7,677,471 Excess Surplus 'for 2003/2004 $0 Sum of Current and 3 Previous Years' Tax Increments Adjusted Balance Excess Surplus for next year Net Re~ourcea Available Unencumbered Designated $11,504,977 $9,206,451 $0 $13,500,748 $11,000,000 Page 2 of 3 12/28/04 NNN1 California Redevelopment Agencies -.Fiscal Year 2003/2004 · .::Status of Low and. Moderate Income Housing Funds .. Sch C Agency Financial and Program'Detall :SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RDA Unencumbered Undesignated ',Total Encumbrances Unencumbered ]~alance Unencumbered Balance Adjusted for Debt Proceeds · Unencumbered Balance Adjusted forLand Sales :Excess Surplus Expenditure Plan Excess Surplus Plan Adoption Date $2,072,852 $427,895 ,~_!3,072,852 .$3,866,401 .$0 SIts lmprowment Activitles Benefiting : Income Level - '" Low Moderate Total. Housaho[ds Land Held for Future Development Site.Name .Num Of ..Acres Zonln~ Purchase Estimated ' pate Start Date .Remark Use of the Hous. ing Fund to Assist Mortgagors Income;AdJu stment Factor Home · Non Housing Redevelopment Funds Usage ' ' Resource Needs :1 LMIHF Deposlts/Wlthdrawls Requirements Completed Hope t$ Document Document ' ~.Custodlan Custodian Name Date .Name . Phone Agency general ledger 30-JUN-04 'David Woo COpy Source Achievements Deeoription Page' 3 of 3 12/28/04 O001gt '~ California Redevelopment Agencies - I~iSc~l Year 2003/2004 " ' ..' .~Sch D General Project Information - : SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RDA Project Area Name: EL CAMINO CORRIDOR Project Name: Oak Farms BMRs Address: VariousSouth San Owner Name: VeriousFranclsco JNIT INVENTORY -94080 Other Provided without LMIHF Very Low Low Moderate Above Mod Became Total Inellqlble New Construction ~on-Agency Owner .Unit Non-Elderly 0 ;0' Unit Total '0 0 5 28 5 28 Page I of 2 ~m~o~ 0 0 0 ! 2 2 'California Redevelopment Agencies -.Fiscal' Year 2003/2004 ~: .: ..... . ~: :Soh D General Project Information .... . .'SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RDA ProJegt__A. re__a. N..a_m__e:__ _O U_TSIDE _P_R O JEC.T.A R EA. Project Name: 312 Miller Avenue Address: 312 Miller AvenueSouth San 94080 Owner Name: City of SSF RedevFatepai~Agency JNIT-INVENTORY Other Provided with LMIHF Unit . . Non-Substantial Rehabilitation ,gency Rental Non-Elderly Unit Total :~ROJECT FUNDING SO.URCE ....... ~Fundin~! Source Redevelopment Funds .Very .Low -Low Moderate .,Above Mod '.'.BeCame lneli_qlble Total 4 0 .0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 4 Amount $715,000 Page 2 of 2 12/28/04 SCHEDULE HCD E ' ' CALCULATION OF INCREASE IN AGENCY'S INCLUSIONARY OBLIGATION F°R ~CTiViTiES " (This Form Is Information Only: ActUal'Obligation la' based'on implementation Plan) Repg~ Ye_a-r-r:~20.03/200~4 _ ,: ...................................... Agency: SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RDA 'NOTE: 'This form is a summary of the totals of all new construction or substantial rehabilitation units from forms HCD-D7 which are developed in a ·project a~ea 'by any entity (agency or non-agency). · ' . · ...' ~. ' .- ~'. ..... '~ .PARTi..,. : .' ~. ' .,: .... ·: · ~:. :."-:. '' '[H&SCSection33413(b)(1)] ' ,. . ..;,.. " .... "' ~'"' · ' .. "~ ' :AGENCY'DEVELOPED ~ ' ·" ': · .... ' 1. New Units ,'-. :':: .' . . . · Substantially Rehabilitated Units ...... · :' ' ' ' ' 0 3. Subtotal - Baseline of Units (add line 1 & 2) ...... ' .. · ,:..i.' ";' ·: · .' O 4. Subtotal of Inclusionary Ob gation Accrued this Year for Units {line 3 x 30%) · . "',. ' ·: .... ~ - ...". "= · · . · , ':::. :i0 5.Subtotal of !nclusionary Obligation Accrued this yearforVery-Low Income Units (line 4 x 50%) : :. ,..? :.. :. · ...... ..... =' ...... ~' . ':".'. '.' ':::. ~'::'.:'~'..'.'=i.':'' .'~" :i;' ', · -',,..' '"0' PART II [H&SCSectlon33413(b)(2i] · ' ' '. · ' "'..' .' ' ~ ' . NON-AGENCY DEVELOPED UNITS 6. New Units -: ,.~ · '.' ~ · 33 7. Substantially .Rehabilitated Units · · · · 0 8. Subtotal -.Baseline of Units (add lines 6 & 7) ~ . :...'~ .' 33 9. Subtotal .of3nclusionary Obligation Accrued this year for Units (line 8 x 15%) . . :: ....: ..., 0. Subtotal of'lnclusionary Obligation Accrued this year for Very.Low Income Units (line 9 x 40%) 5 PART ill · · '* ' TOTALS : :'" · I 1. Total Increase in Inclusionary Obligations Dudng This Fiscal' Year (add line 4 & 9). . 5 2. Total Increase in Very Low Income Units Inclusionary Obligations Dudng This Fiscal Year (add line 5 & 10) .2 California Redevelopment Agencies - F'tacaJ Year 2003/2004 Schedule E (11/01) "r'otaJa may,be Impacted by rou~ng 12/28/20O4 Page I of 1 "" 000124 SCHEDULE HCD.E1 -~, . :'CALCULATION OF INCREASE IN AGENCY'S. INCLusIONARY OBLIGATION :FOR ACTIVITIES' (This Form Is Information Only: Actual Obligation is based on Implementation ·Plan) ~,.. . .. . ~.:..-) :.:; .... : ,... , . ...... , · . - . RepoJ:t,:Y:ea£:_T_2003/20O4 Agency: SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO .RDA · .~ :, .'~' ,..... ,..~.....,...,..-..:... ,.. , . Project Area: EL CAMINO CORRIDOR Project:. 339/341 COMMERCIAL AVENUE : -:... .. :.. ~-. ,-,.: ,. ...:.',~ - . ..... ~.~:. ;' PARTI. " ' ' · · , i , .AGENCY DEVELOPED 2. Substan~Jally Rehabilitated .Units · . · 4. Subtotal .of Inclusionary Obligation Accrued this' Year for Units(line 3 x 30%) 0 5. Subtotal of.lnclusionary Obligation Accrued this year for Very-Low Income Units ( ine 4 x 50%) ~ ~. ....... 0 · . .' : 6. New Units · 7. SubstantiallY Rehabilitated Units 0 8. Subtotal -Baseline of Units (add lines 6 & 7) 9. Sdbtotal oHnclusionary Obligation Accrued this year.for Units (line 8 x 15%) .... - ~ ~..- . ,: . '.-. · 10. Subtotal_ of inclusionary Obligation Accrued this year for Very Low Income Units ( ine 9 x 40%) ., ,-..,[ 0 · PART III ,, 11'. Total Increase in lnclusionary Obligations During This Fiscal Year (add line 4 & 9) ' I'" 0. 12. Total Increase in 'Very Low Income Units In¢lusionary Obligations Dudng 'This Fiscal Year (add line 5 & 10) I 0 NOTE: This form 'is-a summary of the tOtals of.all new ~construction or substantial rehabilitation units from forms HCD~D7 which are developed in a 'project area by.any entity (agency or non-agency). California Redevelol~me~t Aganol~ - i=lm3a] Year 200~2004 ~hedule E (11/01) Page I of 1.2 12/28/2004 SCHEDULE HCDE1 CALCULATION OF ·INCREASE IN AGENCY,S INCLUSlONARY OBLIGATION FOR ACTIVITIEs (This Form is Information Only: ·Actual Obligation is.based on Implementation Plan) R ep_o_~_Y_ear_L_2OO3/2004_. Agency: SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RDA Project Area: EL CAMINO CORRIDOR Project= CHESTNUT CREEK NOTE: 'This form Is a summa!;y of.the totals of.'all :new.construction or:substantial rehabilitation 'units from ·fOrms HCD-D7.which are developed ,In a project area.by any entity (agency or:non,agency). [H & SC Section 33413(b)(1)] · AGENCY.'DEVELOPED . . ,.. 1, New Units : .... 2, Substantially Rehabilitated Units - · · 0 0 5, 'Subtotal of Inclusionary Obliga~on Accrued this year for Very-Low Income Units (line 4 X 50%) · · [H & SC Section 334i3(b)(2)] ' : ' ' '' NON'AGENCY DEVELOPED UNITS · 6..New Units · 0 7, Substanfially~lehabilitated Units '. ' ' ' ' ' '8, Subtotal r Ba§eline of Units (add lines 6 &7) - :.'~'-' "" .' - "'""' 0 9. 'SUbtotal of.l~clusionary Obligation Accrued this year for Units (line 8 x 15%) : ' "' ~ ' :: 0 10, Subtotal of Inclusionary Obligation Accrued this year for Ve[y Low Income Units (line 9 x 40%) ~- ' 0 TOTALS -,. 11. Total Increase .in Inclusionary Obligations During This FisCal Year (add line 4 & 9) :" ' '" "1 0 12. Total Increase in Very Low Income Units Inclusionary Obligations During This'Fiscal Year(add line 5& 10) I 0 California Redevelopment Agencies. F:acaj Year 2003~004 8e. hedule E (11/01) 'Totals rray be ~pa~.t~d by roun~ng Page 2 of 12 12/28/2004 ' SCHEDULE HCD E1 . CALCULATION OF INCREASE IN AGENCY'S INCLUSIONARY OBLIGATioN:FOR ACTiViTiES . (This Form ts I,nformaUOn On!y: Actual Obligation is based on Implementation Plan) .Re_po~rLYea_!:;__2003120~4 - ._ Agency: SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RDA Project Area: EL CAMINO CORRIDOR Project.' GREENRIDGE 'NOTE: This form isa summary ofthe totals of all new construction or substantial ~ehabllit~tio~ from forms HCD,D7 which are developedin a project area by any entity (agency or non-agency). · 'PART I "-' [H &.SC Sec~on 33413(b)(1)] - . AGENCY DEVELOPED . 1. New U. nits' : ' . ~ 2. SubstanMally Rehabilitated .Units -- ' :' . 5. SubtotaJ of Inclusionary Obligation Accrued this year for Ve~-Low Income units (line.4 x 50 ~) 6. New Units PART II [H & SC Section 33413(b)(2)] NON'AGENCY.DEVELOPED UNITS 7. SubstantieJly,Rehabilitated Units 8. Subtotal - Baseline of Units (add lines 6 & 7) ' ~ ~of Ir!~lusionary Obligation Accrued th'----""-~s year for UnJ.ts (li~e 8. x 15%) m 10. Subtotal of'lnclusionary Obligation Accrued this year for Very. Low Income Units (line 9 x40%) Call~a Redevelopment Agenctea. F:lacaJ Year I~hed~e E (11/01) Page 3 of 12 I2/28/2004 0001191' SCHEDULE HCD E1 ' . CALCULATION OF INCREASE IN AGENCY'S INCLUSIONARY OBLIGATION FOR ACTIvITIEs .(This Form is Information Only: Actual .Obl!gation is based on Implementation Plan) Report Ye a_~.~ J2 0_0 3/2 0.0_4..: Agency: SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RDA Project Are~: EL CAMINO CORRIDOR 'Project: OAK FARMS.BMRS "This form 'ls:a summaryof the totals of all new construction orsubstantlal rehabilitation units NOTE: from forms HOD~D7 .which are developed .in a 'project area byany entity (agency or non'agency). · PART I · [H&SOSectlon33413(b)(!)] , . ": ' ' ': ' AGENCY DEVELOPED 1, New Units 2. Substantially Rehabilitated Units. ' ' "' ' :" ' ":"' ~ '~ 0 · 3. Subtotal - Baseline of Units (add line 1 & 2) . ., .... .... 4..Subtotal Of-lnclusionary Obligation Accrued. this Year for Units (line 3 x 30%) ........... '' ''~" .... '~' ":'"' ' ":'" ";~'' 0- 5. Subtotal of. lnclusionary Obligation Accrued .this year fo[.VerY~Low Income Units (line 4 x 50%) ' ' .' 0 '":" ' :' ' '":"~ ' ,' ' '-' 'PARTtI'' ..' · ', -- -- [H & SC Seclion 33413(b)(2)] ..... . NON'AGENCY:DEVELOPED UNITS ' 6. New Units 7; Substantially, Rehabilitated Units ' ..... ~ ." :'i '33 8..Subtotal - B~:~eline of Units (add'lines 6 & 7) "9. rSUbtOtal of I~clusionary Obligation Accrued this year for Units (line 8 x 15%) · 33 TOTALS 11. Total Increase in Inclusionary Obligations During 'This Fiscal Year (add line 4 & 9) ,: , ' I 5 12, Total Increase in Very Low Income Units Inclusionary Obligations During This Fiscal Year (add line 5 &. 10) J 2 CeJlf~mla Redevelopment Agencies. FlscaJ Year 2003/2004 S~nedule E (11/01) "TotaJs may be impacted by munrang Page 4 of 12 12/28/2004 · . ..... FIFI£110o NOTE= SCHEDULE HCD E1 : - CALCULATION OF INCREASE IN AGENCY'S INCLUSIONARYOBLiGATiON FOR ACTIVITIES " * (This Form Is In~ormation Only: Actual Obl!gatlon :is,based on Implementation Plan) Report Yea_r: ~0D.3/2004. ' Agency: SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RDA . ..... ~'roject Area: EL CAMINO CORRIDOR Project: WILLOW GARDENS - 976 SANDRA CT This form is a summar~ of the tOtals of.all new construction ~rSUbstantlal rehabilitation units ;from forms HCD'D7 WhiCh' are developedln a project area by anyentity (agenCy or nOn-agency). ............ PART I -- -[H & SC Section 33413(b)(1)] AGENO~DEVELOPED ..~antial!y RehabilJtate~ Units 3. Subtotal -,Baseline of Units (add line 1 &~ ' '. . ~iona~"~bligation Accrued this Yesr for 5. :Subtotal of Inclusionary Obligation'.Accrued this year'for Very;Low Income Units (line 4'x 50%)·. IH & SC Sec~on 33413(b)(2)] 'NON-AGENCY DEVELOPED UNITS 6. New Units 7. Substantially Rehabilitated Units ~ Inclusionary Obligation Accrued this. year for Units (line 8.x ~15%) 10. Subtotal of IncluSionary Obligation Accrued this Y~ome Units (line 9 X 40%) Cal~la Redevelopma~ Ag~. Fbcal Yam' 2003/2004 ~ule E (11/01) 'TotaJa nay be Impamad by mua~ng Page 5 of 12 12/28/2004 000129 SCHE.,D, ULE HCD 'El CALCULATION OF 'INCREASE IN AGENCY.S INCLUSIONAR¥ OBLIGATION FOR ACTIVITIES (This Form is. information 0nly: Actual Obl!gation Isbased on Impiem~ntat!onPian) Report Year: :20.03/2004. "~' Agency: SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RDA Project Area: EL CAMINO CORRIDOR Project: WILLOW GARDENS - 982 BRUSCO WAY sUmm~rY This f0rm of. the totals of.all new construction Isa forms HCD~D~..ch .are ~developed in a-project 'area by any entitY (agency or non,agency). 'PART I [H & $.C.Section 334~3(b)(1)] AGENCY DEVELOPED 2. Substan Rehabilitated Units " 3. Subtotal-.:Baseline of Units (~ . . 5. Subtotal.of Inclusionary Obligation Accrued this year.for.Very,Low IncOme Units (line 4.x 50%) PART II IH & SC Section 33413(b)(2)] NON-AGENCY DEVELOPED UNITS 6..New Units ' ' · 7.~.Substantially Rehabilitated Units ~ ----- 8...Subtotal. - -Baseline of Units (add lines 6 & 7). 9. Subtotal of. lnclusionary Obligation Accrued this year. for Units (line 8 x 15%) 10. SubtotaJ of Inclusionary Obligation Accrued this year for Very Low Income Units (line .9 x 40%) Cal]fc3mla Redevelopment Agancte~ - Fiac~ Year 2003/2004 Schedule E (11/01) 'TotaJs may be Impacted by munn~ng Page 6 of 12 12/28/2004 000~30 SCHEDULE HCD ~E1 CALCULATION .OF INCREASE IN AGENCY'S INCLUSIONARY OBLIGATION FOR AcTiVITIES '(This Form~.. :'ls'~.-.Inf°rmati°n:~-,. . . Only: Actual Obligation is based on Implementation Plan). Rep_Art Year: ~2Q03/2004__ Agency: SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RDA 'Project Area: EL CAMINO CORRIDOR · Project: WILLOW GARDENS - 986 BRUSCO WAY NOTE: This'form is a summary of the totals of ali new construction or Substantial reh'abi Iitation ,units '. J -from forms' HCD;D7 WhiCh.are developed-in a project area by anyentity (agency .or'~.non,~Jgency); ": -i~' :' ~* ~:.~' * * " * .~ . . . . . I .' · [H &$¢$e~tion.33413(b)(1)] . :' '. . ' ' · .. AGENCY~DEVELOPED. . . 1.·NewUnits· ,.: .-.-:.' · ' ...' .'~. '- · - ' 2. Substantially Rehabilitated Units . . ..,.. 3. Subtotal -' Baseline of Units (add line 1 & 2) · ": ' ":":"'- .' '-" ' :.'.-: 0 4. Subtotal.of inolusionary Obligation Accrued this Year for.Units (line'3 x 30%) · ': ., .'. ';,.: :' :" "" ..... .. '; .'~ ~0 5.. Subtotal. of: Inclusionary. . Obligation.. Accrued this Year. . for.,Very-Low Income Units (line 4 x 50%) ' ':' ~ · · .: 0 · '" "'?:: "'"" !'' :. :.: '.' "' ..;"-'-.". ". · '' '. ' PART 11 · .... · : [H & SC Section 33413(b)(2)] ' · NON-AGENCY,DEVELOPED UNITS" 6..New Un[ts : ' ..... 7. Substantially,Rehabilitated Units · 8. Subtotal - Baseline of Units(add lines 6 & 7) ' : ': ~'" -' ' ':' 9. Subtotal of !nclusionary Obligation Accrued this year for.Units (line. 8 x 15%) · ' ""' · . 0 10. Subtotal of inclusionary Obligation Accrued this year for Very Low Income' Units (line 9 x 40%) ' .' .0 · '.'" "' "' ' ' PARTlll ..... TOTALS · · -11. Total IncreaSe in lnclusionary Obligations During This Fiscal Year (add line4 &.9) ~ '...": ..... ., "0 12. Total Increase in Very Low Income Units Inclusionary ObligatiOns Dudng This Fiscal Year (add line 5 & 1.0) " CaJlfomia Redevalopment Agencies - ~ Yaa~ ~ Schedule E (11/01) "rotals may be Implored by mun¢~ng Page 7 of 12 12/28/2004 SCHEDULE HCD E1 , . CALCULATION OF.INCREASE IN AGENCY!S INCLUSIONARY OBLIGATION 'FOR ACTIVITIES (This Form is Information On!y: Actual Obligation is-based o~ ImplementatiOn. Pian) Re_port Year: .:,-20_03/2004 · Agency: SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RDA Project Area: EL CAMINO CORRIDOR .Project: WILLOW GARDENS ..990 BRUSCO WAY NOTE: This form is asummary of.the.totals ~of all new construction or 'Substantial rehabilitation .units from fOrms HCD-D7 wh'lch ,are deve!oped.tn aproJect area by any entity(agenCy or non.agency). i .... :PART I · · ' iH & SCSec~o. 3S413(b)0)]" AGENCY DEVELOPED= 1. New Units :" :"' ' '" ' ......... ~'" ~ ': ":0 2. SubstantialiyRehabilitatedUnlts" . ' " ': ' ' '" : "" '": ~ ' '"=' ...... ' ' '" · ~:0 3~ Subtotal -·Baseline of Units (add line 1 & 2) .. ~. ......... ' " ' "" 4. Subtotal of.lnclusionary.Oblig~on Accrued this Year for Units (line 3 x,80%) ~., '.' '~.., '.iI ii ...." : '0 '5. Subtotal of InclusionarYObliga§on Accrued this year for Very-Low Income Uni!s .(line 4 x 50%) "-" · 0 · .'.. ' PARTII ' · .. . · [ii & 80 Sec'don 33413(b)(2)] '.' .-' NON.AGENCY DEVELOPED UNITS ' 6. New Units "' · 7.:Substantially..Rehabilitated Units · ' .... ~" .' ~ -0 8. :Subtotal - BaSeline of Units (add lines 6 & 7) : : ....... :~: :"~' =" .... .0 9.. Subtotal of laClusionary Obligation Accrued .this year for Units (line 8 X 15%)' ~'. '' ~'' ' 0 10. Subtotal of Inclusionary Obligation Accrued this year for Very Low Income Units (line 9 x 40%)' 0 PART Ill '. -- TOTALS 11. 'Total Increase in Inclusionary Obligations During This .Fiscal Year ~(add line 4 & 9) .... ' O 12. Total Increase in Very Low Income Units Inclusionary Obligations During This Fiscal year (add line 5 & 10) 0 CaJlfoml~ R~velopment A~ - R~caJ Year Schedule E (11/01) 'Tc~a~ may be lmoacted by iou~c~ng Page 8 of 12 12/28/2004 000132 · .Report Year: ~20_~_~_/2004 -:'~"'' Agencyi SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 'RDA .Project Area: EL CAMINO CORRIDOR Project: WILLOW GARDENS 'PROJECT NOTE: SCHEDULE HCD E1 :-.':~: . CALCULATION OF INCREASE IN AGENCY.S INCLUSIONARY-OBLIGATION FOR ACTiViTiES (This Form Is Information Only:' Actual Obligation Is,based on Implementation Plan) *This form Is a summa~ ~of the totals of all new,construction or substantial reh;bilit~;tiOn units ;from forms -HCD;D7'~Whlch are developed In a. project :area ~by,any entity .(agency-Or hon-agency). ' PART :1 - [FI & SC Section 334~3(b)(1)] - AGENCY.DEVELOPED 2~ Rehabilitated ~ .... . 3. Subtotal - Baseline of. Units (add line 1 & 2) [H & SC Section 33413(b)(2)] NON'AGENCY-DEVELOPED 'UNITS 6. New Units 7~y~ehabilitated Units 8. Subtotal - Bas'ehne o . ~ of ln~lus onary.Obligation Accrued this year_f~)r .Units (line 8 'x 15%) 10. Subtotal of Inclusionary Obligation Accrued this year'for Very Low Income units (line 9 x 40%) '12. Total Increase .in Very . CaE~mla Racte~t Ageactea. RacaJ Year 2003/2004 ,~/ledale E (11/01) "3'ota~ may b~ tmpac, ted by taunting Page 9 of 12 12/28/2004 000133 CALCULATION OF INCREASE IN.AGENCys iNCLusiONARY oBLIGATION~FORACTIVITIES (This Form is Information .Only: Actual Obligation'is.based on ImPlem, entatlon Plan) Report Year: "2~0'3/2004 Agency: SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RDA .Project Area: DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL PROJECT 'Project.' GRANT HOTEL ~whiCh .aredevei6ped !~na p~d~t areaby~.anyi~t~'[~,~;~;,;~".~;;~ ;;~i:- ~~ PART .tH & SC S~'~On 2. Substantially Rehabilitated Units ~ ' 3; Subtotal -, Baseline, of Units (~) -; - ~i ..;:;! ,.....;: ~ % :!~SUbtOtal of Inclusiona &'New Units 7. 'Substantially Rehabilitated Units PART II IH & SO..Sectlon 33413(b)(2)] NON-AGENCY DEVELOPED UNITS 8. Subtotal - Baseline of Units (add lines 6 & 7) ~lnclusionary Obligation Accrued this year for :Units (line 8 x 15%) - 10, Subtotal of Inclusionary Obligation Accrued this ye .ar for Very Low Income Units (line 9~ PART III TOTALS 11. Total Increase in Incl usionary Obligations Dudng This Fiscal Year (add line 4 & 9) 12. Total Increase in Very Low Income Units lnclusionary Obligations Dudng This Fiscal Year (addline 5 ~ 10) CallfomllRedevelopment Agen~laa. FiacaJ Year 2003/2004 Schadule E (11/D1) may be imp~-,ted by muncrmg Page 10 of 12 '12/28/2004 00013 'SCHEDULE HCDE1... CALCULATION OF INCREASE IN AGENCY'S INCLUSIONARY OBLIGATION EOR ACTIVITIES O'his Form Is Information' only~ ActUaI-Obligationle based'%' implementation Plan) - .~.."-'::: :! ~,.. ) ..:' ,.. ~ ,. :',:.,'.? - =: ,= : .' ... ~.~-.,., , ,: :.~ , . .., _ ~ 'Report Year: 2003/2004 Agency: SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO .RDA Project Area: DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL PROJECT -Project: METROPOLITAN HOTEL. NOTE:..This form.Is a summary of the totals o fall new ConstructiOn .or sUbStantial rehabilitation .units: · "from formS'HcD~D7=wtiich~::ar~ ~ieveloPedin a:P~ojeC~ iare~:b'y~:ai~y e~itY(agency:or, non-agenCy)..: .",.': =.~' ::. '.:: ~ :'-:: · ..' ": ":...'. ~,': :'"' -!..'~i':::~ .:':: '. '.-'.,.' '~.-: :.' :. ~PART:I ::~ · '"~ : ' ' :'.'..'"~ '~/:'' .~: .... · ~' ' .'~ ' '.' - · ": '. .: ,IH & Sc S~'~on S34~3(b)¢)] · ~ :. ' . : ....... , · . ~ AGENCy;DEVELOPED'.. · .. . . 1. New Units ......:'.::.:~ ;:, .~ · ~.,.=..: '.~ .-:~ ..... ......... .. :'...: ..... :.- ~ .... : ..'., .-' - .' . :. . 2. Substantially. Rehabilitated Units ...... ' .... "" ..... ' ' '' ' · :'.:: ." :':'-:.:~:, .i :: :" ~ '" 3. Subtot~ :'Baseline of Units (add I ne 1' & 2) .... · ..... ': ' :'" ' ~" ,.. ,':':-'., .-.'.' .,,. ........ :. -":' ~''. :0 4. Subtotal of lnclusionary Obligation .Accrued this Year forUnits (tine 3.x 30%)· :'.'./.' :. ~. :../.. - '. : .:-. · .... .-0. 5..Subtotal of Jnclusionary Obligation Accrued ~his year for Very-Low.'lncome Units.(line 4 x 50%) ' : ~.0 . ' :' "" .... "'":." '~' ;'~:'" ' ·' "' ;,i/~.'.:.:' '~': '::..:=':: ."., .'.. ;' .=...,. ';': - '.'~'! :-'- ~.: '- · .'. I · *- .:, ...' :,.. ::.- .: -. *:..:'.-.::·.-/. * :-.-:': -. ",.':':, -. :.',".-': =: .' :PART !1 ; .:' .... ':'" -- · .. ·. :'. - . · "'" :.:' "'~ ' ". ' ' ': · . ' ' .' [FI & SC Section 334i.3(b)(2)] · .. NON-AGENCY DEVELOPED UNITS 6. New, Units.." . .... .. ....... - ~; Substantially,Rehabilitated Units ' ' ' "· '. · - : ..... :' 0 8. Subtotal - Baseline of. Units,(,add I nes 6.& 7) . - ................. ' ' ....... : :.' ·: .. '.' · 'O 9. Subtotal of lr~clusionary Obligation Accrued this year for Units .(line 8.x 15%) .' .. ' - ' ,. i,'' .... · .." . ·'-0 10. Subtotal of lnclusionary Obligation.Accrued this ye~.forVary Low .Income Unite (line 9 x 40%) . :' .0 ...' .i. ..... . :., .., .-...:.,:.:.. ........,.: ._. . PART ili :. .: .. . · . . · TOTALS ' 11. Total Increase in Inclusionary Obligations Dudng .'l'his .Rscal Year, (add line 4 & 9)".. i. .... ' · I "' ' ' 0 12.' Total Increase in Ve~/Low Income Units inclusionary Obligations Dudng This F3scal Year (add tine 5 & 10) 't" O CaJlfomlaRedev~Ai~ndes - F'bm~ Yaar 200a~004 Scl~lule E (11/O1) Page 11 of 12 12/28/2004 000135 SCHEDULE HCD E1 CALCULATION OF INCREASE IN AGENCY'S INCLUSIONARY OBLIGATION .FOR ACTIVITI'ES (This Form is Information Only: Actual Obligation Is based on lmplementatibn Plan) Report Year: 2003/2004 :Agency= SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RDA Project Area: DOWNTOWN/CENTRAL PROJECT Project= VILLA HILLSPRUCE .NOTE: This form is,'a summary of the totals of all new construction .or substantial rehabilitation units from forms,HCD,D7 which are developed in .a project area by any entity (agency or non-agency). -' · PART I · · · [H & SC Section 33413(b)(1)] AGENCY DEVELOPED 1. New Units · 0 2, Substantially Rehabilitated Units '" _',' . 0 3. Subtotal - Baseline of Units (add .line 1 & 2) .... 0 4, Subtotal of Inclusionary Obligation Accrued this Year for Units (line 3 x 30%) ~ ' 0 5. Subtotal of Inclusionary Obligation Accrued this year for Very-Low Income Units (line 4 x 50%) ' ' '0 · . " PART II .. . [H & SC Section 33413(b)(2)] NON-AGENCY DEVELOPED UNITS 6, New Units 0 7. Substantially.Rehabilitated Units 0 8. Sub[u[-~i.- Baseline of Units (add lines 6 & 7) 0 9. Subtota! of Inclusionary Obligation Accrued this year for Units(line 8 x 15%) 0 10, Subtotal of Inclusionary Obligation Accrued this year for Very Low Income Units (line 9 x 40%) I 0 I PART 111 TOTALS 11. Total Increase in Inclusionary Obligations During This Fiscal Year (add line 4 & 9) .I 0 '12. Total Increase in Very Low Income 'Units Inclusionary Obligations During This Fiscal Year {add line 5 & 10) I 0 Ca~fomla Redevelopment Agancle~. Fia~aJ Ya~r 2003/2004 E, chedule E (11/01) · 'rota~ may be Impa~ted by mun~ng Page 12 of 12 12/28/2004 City of South San Francisco Affordable Housing Inventory 1994-2004 City/RDA Substantia~ Rehabilitation Funding? CompletiOn Bronstein's Y 94-95 Schreir . :" Y 94-95 Grand Hotel-~i Y 98-99 Metropolitan Hotel Y 98-99 30% 31-50% 51-60% 61-80% 81-120% Tot:al units 6 6 3 3 24 24 65 65 Total 89 0 0 9 0' 98 Acquisition & Rehab 339-341 Commercial Avenue Longford Avenue WG - 395 Susie & 986 Nora WG - 344 Susie WG ~ 976 Sandra & 982-986-990 Brusco 320 C Street 310 Miller Ave 312 Miller Ave 111 Chestnut (3 offsite units proposed) Hansen (3 offsite units proposed) Total Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Completion 30% 31-50% 51-60% 61-80% 81-120% Total units 8/1/2001 4 4 9/1/2002 I 1 3/16/1999 2 3 3 8 1/11/2001 2 2 4 11/27/02 6 10 _ 16 02-03 1 1 10/15/2004 2 I 3 5/24~2004 3 1 4 TBA TBA 14 21 5 0 0 40 New Construction Greenridge · Chestnut Creek 260 Hillside (BMR) Oak Farms (BMR) Total Completion 30% 31-50% 51-60% 61-80% 81:120% Total units Y Y N N 99-00 16 16 1 33 03-04 37 3 40 1/24/03 I 1 9/16/03 5 5 53 19 1 0 6 79 Entitled 440 Commercial- H4H Marbella (BMR) Fairfield (BMR) Total Y N N CZ) CZ) O0 Completion 30% 31-50% 51-60% 61-80% 81-120% 'Total units TBA 3 1 4 TBA 28 42 70 TBA 29 43 72 3 1 57 0 85 146 '.Planned Completion 30% ' 31-50% 51-60% 61-80% 81-120% Total units 'Oak Grand Avenue (County site) Y TBA 15 28' 43 90 Oak Avenue (BMR) N TBA 1 2 3 Urban Housing (BMR) N TBA 8 11 19 15 28 9 0 13 65 Total Affordable Units 30% 30-50% 50-80% 80-120% Total units Total Completed Units Total EnUUed and planned units 156 40 6 9 6 217 18 29 66 0 98 211 Total Units 174 69 72 9 104 428 Does not include First Time Homebuyer Loans Does not include 125 units developed by BRIDGE Housing at Magnolia Senior Center, of which' 75 units are affordable to Iow/moderate residents. Re'development Funds Available as of 6120104 Low Moderate Housing Funds (56) 20% Money Collected since projects' inception through June.30. Downtown 8,233,000 El Camino 1,350,000 Gateway 9,078,000 Shearwater 1,680,000 Total 20,341,000 Funds Available, 6/30/04: Bond Proceeds on hand, uncommitted: '3,866,000 Undesignated Reserves, and Reserves comitted to Capital Projects not yet spent as of 6~30/04: 8,180,000 Funds Available, 6130104: 2,'046,000 Committed to: San Mateo County Housing Project: Alta Vista Pumhase/Rehb Miller Ave. Purchase/Rehab Linden Ave. Site Acquisition El Camino/PUC Site Acquisition Less Froject Commitments: =Funds Not Yet Committed: 4,000,000 1,200,000 800,000 1,000,000 5,000,000 . (12,000~000) 46,000 000140 Page 1 of 1 Fragoso, Norma From: VanDuyn, Marry Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 8:35 AM To: 'MMcmillan@co.sanmateo.ca.us' Cc: Steele, Jim; Fragoso, Norma Subject: Oyster Pt. Landfill · Mary: In response to your request for follow-up informatiOn regarding our clean-up of this property and the agencies we are dealing with, you may contact the following individuals for information: Mr. Grog Schide San Mateo County Health Services Agency Public Health and Environmental Division 455 County Center · Redwood City, CA And Ms. Julie Menack California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region 1515 Clay St. Ste.1400 Oakland, CA (510) 622-2300 Our consultant (performing site testing and fili'ng annual reports) Eileen Fanelli ' Gabewell Inc 51 Idora avenue San Francisco, CA (415) 566-7026 If I can provide you with any additional information please let me know. Thank you for your assistance, Marty Van Duyn City of South San Francisco 0O0142 E. Related Documents This section includes the Agency and City Council resolutions adopted March 9, 2005 consenting to the joint public hearing. South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency E-1 South San Francisco Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger Supplement to the Report to Council April 2005 ooo 4a RESOLUTION NO. 04-2005 KEDEVELOPMENT AOHN. CY, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REPORT TO COUNCIL ON PROPOSED REr)EVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS AND FISCAL MERGER, ADOFIING FINDINGS THAT A PROJECT AREA COMMrlTEE IS NOT REQUIRED AND THAT ADEQUATE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW HAS BEEN 'COMPLETED, TRANSMITTING THE REPORT TO THE cITY PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL, AND REQUESTING A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PlAN AMENDMENTS AND FISCAL MERGER WHEREAS, on March 10, 2004, the City Council of tho City of South San Francisco ("City Council") adopted Resolution No. 25-2004~.which designated a Surv~ Area for thc purpose of amending the Downtown/Central RedeveloPment Project Area ("Project Area") to add territory to the Project Area; and WHEREAS, on April 15, 2004, the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco ("Planning Commission'') adopted Resolution No. 2633 establishing the boundaries of tho area proposed to be added to the Project Area (the "Added Area''), appwving a Preliminary Plan for the Added Area in accordance with Health and Safety Code'Section 33324, and r~c. ommending that the Agency accept, the Preliminary Plan; and WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 06-2004, adOpted on May 12, 2004, the Agency approved the Preliminary Plan and directed staff to prepare amendments to. add thc Added Area to the Downtown/Central Project Area and to fiscally merge the Downtown/Central, Gateway, and U.S. Steel/Shem-water project areas; and WHEREAS, the Agency subsequently resolved that the fiscal merger should also include the El Camino Corridor project area; and WHEREAS, tho Agency is in th, process of preparing: (i) an amendment to the redevelopment plan for the.Downtown/Central project area to add thc Added Area to the Pwject Are. a, (ii) amendments to the redevelopment plans for the E1 Camino Corridor project area and the Downtown/Central project area to extend the time period within which thc Agency will have authority to acquire nonresidential property by eminent domain within such project ar~,% and (iii) amendments to thc redevelopment plans for the Downtown/Central project, area, the .El Camino Corridor project area, thc U.S. Steel/Shearwater pwject area and thc Gateway project area in order to effectuate a fiscal merger of such project areas; and WHEREAS, in connect/on with the foregoing amendments, the Agency has caus~ to be prepared, and pursuant to Resolution No. 13-2004, adopted December 8, 2004, has approved a Preliminary. Report .pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33344.5 and has authorized transmittal of the Preliminary Report to affected .taxing entities, the Planning Commission and thc WHEREAS, the Agency has consulted with representatives ofthe affected taxing entities and with pwject area residents, pwperty owners, businesses and comm~ty organizations, and the Agency hasscheduled a Series of community meetings to continue such consultation; and WHEREAS, in connection with the foregoing amendments, the Agencyhas caused to be prepared a Report to Council pursuant to Health & Safety Code Section 333:52; and WHEREAS, tho pwposed amendments will not authorize the Agency to use eminent domain to acquire propertY on which persons reside and do not provide for public projects that will displace a substanlial number oflow- and moderate-/ncomo person; and · . WHEREAS, Agency and Planning DeParlment staffhave detemfined that the'fiscal merger, as a financing mechanism for unspecified future projects and which Will itself have.no significant effect on the,environment, is exempt from CEQA pursuant to. CEQA GUidelines Section 15061 (b)(3); and . " ' ' · ' wHEREAS, the proposed amendments do not alter the projects and activities proposed to be implemented in the project areas, and do not extend the financial and t/me limitations set forth in the existing redevelopment plans; and . WHEREAS, the potential environmental effects 0fthe actiVities proposed to be undertaken in the existing project areas and in the proposed Added Area were analyzed in the East of 101 Area Plan Environmental Impact Report which was ndupted and certified in 1994 nnd in the General 'Plan Environmental Impact Report, a program level EIR that was adopted and certified in October, 1999; and WHEREAS, the City's Chief'Planner has reviewed the proposed amendments 'and has determined that in connection with the 'adoption of the plan amendments, .the Agency and the City Council may properly rely upon the prior EIRs because no new impacts are associated with the amendments, no projects have been specified that were not analyzed in the prior El'Rs, there are no substantial changes to the ciromnstances uraler which the previously analyzed project will be undertaken, and there'is no new information that was unavailable at the time the prior EIP, z were certified; and ' ' WHEREAS, Sections 33348 and 33349 of the Health and Safety Code require both the City Council and the AgenCY to conduct public hearings on .the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, Section 33355 of the Health and Safety Code authorizes the Agency and the City Council to hold a joint public h~ing upon the consent of both. 00014 7 'NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco that the Agency hereby: , .Section 1. APprOves the Report to Council on the prOposed plan amendments and fiscal merger, directs the Executive Director to transmit the Report.to the City Council, and requests that the City Coundl hold a joint public hearing with the Agency to consider the proposed plan amendments and fiscal merger on April.2?, 2005, at 7:00 p.m. at.400 South.Grand Avenue, South San Francisco, California. Section 2. Directs the Executive Director to lransmit the Report to Council to affected taxing entities, thc Planning Commis~on, community organizations, prop~ owners, business oWners, and residents of the project areas, and d/rects the Executive Director and Agency staff to continue consultation with such parties, to hold at least one community meet/nE prior to 'the joint public hearing on the proposed amendments, and to make the proposed ordinances adopting the amendments available for public inspection prior to submitting them to the City Council. Section 3. Directs the Executive Director of the Agency to comply with ail noticing requirements, for the joint public heating set forth inthe Community RedevelOpment Law. Section 4. Finds that the formation ora Project AreaCommittee is not required because the proposed, amendments do not authorize the use of eminent domain for property on which persom reside' and do not propose public projects that will cause displacement of a substantial number of low- and moderate-income households. Section 5. Finds that adequate environmental review has been completed-for the proposed amendments and fiscal merger because (i) the fiscal merger is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061COX3), and (ii) the potential environmental effects of the proposed amendments have been analyzed in previously certified Environmental Impact Reports, and no ~ projects are proposed, no new impacts have been identified, there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the prior EIRs were certified, and there is no new information that was unavailable at thc time thc prior EIRs were certified. 0OO148 I hereby certify thsI the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and'adopted by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Frmcisco at a regulm' meeting held on the 9~ day of March2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Boardmembcrs Richard A. Garbarino, Pedro Gonzalez, and Karyl Matsmnoto, Vice Chair Joseoh A. Femekes and Chair Raymond L. Green None. None, · None ATTEST: //'~/t~ ~'). ~ . . "-:/. Clcrk 000149 .[ ,,9I_. RESOLUTION NO. 23-2005 CITy. COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE REPORT TO COUNCIL ON PROPOSED REDEVELOP~ PIdkN AMENDMENq~ AND FISCAL MERGER, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT A PROJECT. AREA COMMITTEE IS NOT REQUIRED AND THAT ADEQUATE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW HAS BEEN COMPLE]'~, AND CONSENTING TO A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PLAN .AMENDMENTS AND FISCAL MERGER WHEREAS, on March 10, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 25-2004 which designated a Survey Area for the purpose of amending the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area") to add territory to the Project Area; and WHEREAS, on April 15, 2004, tho Planning CommiSdon ofth¢ City of South San Fnmcisco ("Planning Commission") adopted Resolution No. 2633 establishing the boundaries of the area proposed to be added to the Project Area (the "Added Area',), appwving a Preliminary Plan for the Added Area in acco~ce with Health and Safety Code Section 33324, and recommending that the Ag~noy acc~t the Preliminary Plan; and ' WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 06-2004, adopted on May 12, 2004, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco ("Agency") approved the Preliminary Plan and directed staff to prepare amendments to add the Added Area to the Downtown/Central Pwject Area and to fiscally merge the Downtown/Central, Gateway, and U.S. Ste~l/Shearvvater project areas; and WHEREAS, the Agency subsequently resolved that the fiscal merger should also include the E1 Camino Corridor project area; and · WHEREAS, the Agency is in the process of prt~paring: (i) an amendment to the redevelopment plan for the Downtown/Central project area to add the Added Area to thc Project Area, (ii) amendments to the redevelopment plans for the El Camino Corridor project area and the Downtown/Central project area to extend the time period within wlxich the Agency will have authority to acquire nonresidential property by eminent domain within such project areas, and (iii) amendments to the redevelopment plans for the Downtown/Central project area, the E1 Camino Corridor project area, the U.S. Stoel/Shearwater project area and the Gate-way project area in order to effectuate a fiscal merger of such project areas; and WHEREAS, in connection wiih the foregoing amendments, the Agency has caused to be prepared, and by adoption of Resolution No. 13-2004, adopted December 8, 2004, h~s approved a Preliminary R~ort pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33344.5 and has authorized transmittal of the Prelimin_ary Report to affected taxing entifie~ the Planning Commission and the O0O15O WHEREAS, the Agency has consulted with representatives of the affected taxin~ entities and with project area residents, property .owners, businesses and community organizations, and the Agency has scheduled a series of cornrounity meetings to continue such consultation; and .WHEREAS, in connection with the 'foregoing amendments, the Agency has caused to be prepared a Report to Council pursuant to Health & Safety Code Section 33352; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will not authorize the Agency to use eminmt don~. to acquire property on which persons reside and do not provide for public projects that will displace a substantial number of low- and mOderate-income persons; and WHEREAS, Agency and Planning Department staffhave determined that the fiscal merger, as a financing mechanism for unspecified future projects and which will itself have no significant effect on the environment, is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Ouidelines Section 15061 (bX3); and WHEREAS, thc proposed ameratments do not alter the projects and activities proposed ~o be implemented in _the project areas, and donot extend the financial and time limitations set forth in the exist/ns !~levelopment plans; and WHEREAS, the potential environmental effects oftbe activities proposed to be underiaken in the existing project areas and in thc proposed Added Area were analyzed in the East of 101 Area Plan Environmental Impact Report which was adopted and certified in 1994 and in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report, a pwgram level EIR that was adopted and certified in October, 1999; and WHEREAS, the City's Chief Planner has reviewed the proposed amendments and has determined that in connection with the adoption of the plan amendments, the Agency and the City Council may properly rely upon the prior EIRs because no new impacts are associated with the amendments, no projects have been specified that were not analyzed in the prior EIRs, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the 'previously analyzed project will be undertaken, and there is no new information that was unavailable at the time the prior EIRs were certified; and WHEREAS, Sections 33348 and 33349 of thc Health and Safety Code r~luire both the Cit~ Council and the Agency to conduct public hearings on thc proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, Section 33355 of the Health'and Safety Code authorizes the Agency and the. City Council to hold a joint public hearing upon the consent of both. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City Council: Section '-1. Receives the Report to Council on the proposed plan amendments and fiscal merger and consents to a joint public hearing with the Agency to consider the proposed plan amendments and fiscal merger on April 27, 2005, at 7:00 p.m. at 400 South Grand Avenue, South San Francisco, California. 0001.51 Section 2. Authorizes the Agency to comply with all ·noticing reqmrgments for the joint public hearing set forth in the Community Redevelopment Law on behalf of the City Council, and directs the Agency to continue consultation with community organizatio~ businesses, pmporty owners and residents of the project areas, to hold at least one community meeting prior to the joint public hearing on the proposed amendments, and to make the Proposed Ordinances adopting the amendments available for public inspection prior to submitting them to the. City Council. Section 3. Finds that the formation ora Project Area Committee is not required because the proposed amendments do not authorize the use of eminent domain for property on which persons reside and do not Propose public pwjects that will cause displacement ofa.substantiaI number of low- and moderate-income hoUSeholds. .Section 4. Finds that adexttmt¢ ~(~imnmental roview has been completed for the proposed amendments and-fiscal merger because (i) the fiscal merger is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3), and (ii) the potential environmental effects of the proposed amendments have been analyzed in previously certified Environmental Impact'Reports, and no now projects are proposed, no new impacts have been identified, thoro are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which thc prior EIRs were Certified, and ther° is no now information that was unavailable at the time the.prior EIRS were certified. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was reguhrly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a reguhr meeting held on the 9'~ day of March 2005 by the following vote: ' Councilmembers Richard A. Oarbarino. Pedro Oonz~lez; and Karvl Matsumoto, Mayor Pro Tern loseph A. Femekes and Mayor Raymond L. Green NOES: NOne. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. 000152 AGENDA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR MEETING MUNICIPAL SERVICE BUILDING COMMUNITY ROOM WEDNESDAY, APRIL 27, 2005 7:00 P.M. PEOPLE OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO You are invited to offer your suggestions. In order that you may know our method of conducting Agency business, we proceed as follows: The regular meetings of the Redevelopment Agency are held on the second and fourth Wednesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. in the Municipal Services Building, Community Room, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, California. Public Comment: For those wishing to address the Board on any Agenda or non-Agendized item, please complete a Speaker Card located at the entrance to the Community Room and submit it to the Clerk. Please be sure to indicate the Agenda Item # you wish to address or the topic of your public comment. California law prevents Redevelopment Agency from taking action on any item not on the Agenda (except in emergency circumstances). Your question or problem may be referred to staff for investigation and/or action where appropriate or the matter may be placed on a future Agenda for more comprehensive action or a report. When your name is called, please come to the podium, state your name and address for the Minutes. COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES PER SPEAKER. Thank you for your cooperation. The Clerk will read successively the items of business appearing on the Agenda. As she completes reading an item, it will be ready for Board action. RAYMOND L. GREEN Chair JOSEPH A. FERNEKES Vice Chair PEDRO GONZALEZ Boardmember RICHARD BATTAGLIA Investment Officer BARRY M. NAGEL Executive Director RICHARD A. GARBAR1NO, SR. Boardmember KARYL MATSUMOTO Boardmember SYLVIA M. PAYNE Clerk STEVEN T. MATTAS Counsel PLEASE SILENCE CELL PHONES AND PAGERS HEARING ASSISTANCE EQUIPMENT IS AVAILABLE FOR USE BY THE HEARING-IMPAIRED AT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETINGS CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL AGENDA REVIEW PUBLIC COMMENTS CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Motion to approve the minutes of April 13, 2005 2. Motion to confirm expense claims of April 27, 2005 PUBLIC HEARING Joint Redevelopment Agency/City Council public hearing regarding proposed amendments to the redevelopment plans for the Downtown/Central, E1 Camino corridor, Gateway and U.S. Steel/Shearwater redevelopment project areas to: fiscally merge the four project areas, add territory to the Downtown/Central Project Area; extend the time limit for the exercise of eminent domain within the Downtown/Central Project Area and the original E1 Camino Corridor Project Area; consideration of new Implementation Plans for all four Redevelopment Areas. (approve resolutions) ADJOURNMENT REGULAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING APRIL 27, 2005 AGENDA PAGE 2 RDA AGENDA ITEM #3 PUBLIC HEARING o Joint Redevelopment Agency/City Council public hearing regarding proposed amendments to the redevelopment plans for the Downtown/Central, E1 Camino corridor, Gateway and U.S. Steel/Shearwater redevelopment project areas to: fiscally merge the four project areas, add territory to the Downtown/Central Project Area; and extend the time limit for the exercise of eminent domain within the Downtown/Central Project Area and the original E1 Camino Corridor Project Area (approve resolutions) Refer to Item #5 under Special Meeting AGENDA CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR MEETING MUNICIPAL SERVICE BUILDING COMMUNITY ROOM WEDNESDAY, APRIL 27, 2005 7:30 P.M. PEOPLE OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO You are invited to offer your suggestions. In order that you may know our method of conducting Council business, we proceed as follows: The regular meetings of the City Council are held on the second and fourth Wednesday of each month at 7:30 p.m. in the Municipal Services Building, Community Room, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, California. Public Comment: For those wishing to address the City Council on any Agenda or non-Agendized item, please complete a Speaker Card located at the entrance to the Council Chamber's and submit it to the City Clerk. Please be sure to indicate the Agenda Item # you wish to address or the topic of your public comment. California law prevents the City Council from taking action on any item not on the Agenda (except in emergency circumstances). Your question or problem may be referred to staff for investigation and/or action where appropriate or the matter may be placed on a future Agenda for more comprehensive action or a report. When your name is called, please come to the podium, state your name and address (optional) for the Minutes. COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES PER SPEAKER. Thank you for your cooperation. The City Clerk will read successively the items of business appearing on the Agenda. As she completes reading an item, it will be ready for Council action. RAYMOND L. GREEN Mayor JOSEPH A. FERNEKES Mayor Pro Tern RICHARD A. GARBARINO, SR. Councilman PEDRO GONZALEZ Councilman KARYL MATSUMOTO Councilwoman RICHARD BATTAGLIA City Treasurer SYLVIA M. PAYNE City Clerk BARRY M. NAGEL City Manager STEVEN T. MATTAS City Attorney PLEASE SILENCE CELL PHONES AND PAGERS HEARING ASSISTANCE EQUIPMENT AVAILABLE FOR USE BY THE HEARING IMPAIRED AT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE INVOCATION PRESENTATIONS Proclamation: West Nile Virus and Mosquito and Vector Control Awareness Week, April 27-May 1, 2005; recipient: San Mateo County Mosquito Abatement District Board Member Ray Honan Proclamation: National Historic Preservation Month, May 2005; recipient: Historic Preservation Commission Chair Joe D'Angelo Teen Poetry Contest Winners - Ann Mahon, Library Program Manager and Annie Kerin, Librarian II AGENDA REVIEW PUBLIC COMMENTS ITEMS FROM COUNCIL · Announcements · Committee Reports CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Motion to approve the minutes of April 13, 2005 2. Motion to confirm expense claims of April 27, 2005 o Resolution approving findings in support of revocation of Conditional Use Permit (UP 96-090) for live entertainment at 309 Airport Boulevard Resolution authorizing Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Phase XVIII Construction Contract Amendment I with G. E. Chen Construction, Inc. in the amount of $600,000 o Resolution authorizing amendment to agreement with CH2MHill/T.Y. Lin International for continued design and construction services for the Oyster Point Grade Separation Project Phase II (flyover) and Oyster Point Grade Separation Phase III (hook ramps) in the amount of $325,000 o Motion to accept Beacon Street storm drain replacement project as complete in accordance with plans and specifications REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA APRIL 27, 2005 PAGE 2 Resolution authorizing amendment to agreement with Brian, Kangas, Foulk (BKF) for continued design and engineering services for the Oyster Point Grade Separation Project Phase III (hook ramps) in the amount of $578,918 o Resolution authorizing agreement with American Medical Response (AMR) to provide non-emergency (BLS) ambulance services o Resolution authorizing funding for demolition of greenhouse structures located at Orange Memorial Park and amending the 2004-05 CIP budget PUBLIC HEARING 10. Consideration of Planning Commission's approval of Case No. P02-0020, mitigated negative declaration, reclassification from medium density zoning district (R-2-H) to multi-family density residential (R-3-L), residential planned unit development, tentative subdivision map, design review and a housing agreement including provisions for affordable housing on an 0.52 acre site, for the construction of a 2-story, eight unit condominium development, situated at 111 Chestnut Avenue; Owner and applicant: Best Designs a) Resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approving a Planned Unit Development, a Tentative Subdivision Map, Design Review, and Affordable Housing Agreement related to 111 Chestnut Avenue b) Motion to waive reading and introduce an ordinance changing the zoning designation for 111 Chestnut from medium density zoning district (R-2-H) to multi-family density residential (R-3-L) ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 11. Personnel Changes: a) Resolution approving job specification and salary placement for newly developed Public Works Inspector classification b) Waive reading and introduce an ordinance amending SSFMC Chapter 3.12, adding Public Works Inspector 12. Report on "Every Fifteen Minutes Program" two day seminar at E1 Camino High School - Police Chief Raffaelli and Police Corporal Mike Rudis COUNCIL COMMUNITY FORUM ADJOURNMENT REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 27, 2005 AGENDA PAGE 3 AGENDA ITE I #$ DATE: April 27, 2005 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Marry Van Duyn, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DENYING THE APPLICANT'S APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVOCATION OF USE PERMIT ii UP 96-090 REGARDING CHRISTY'S BAR & GRILL AT 309 AIRPORT BOULEVARD RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution upholding the Planning Commission decision revoking Use Permit 96-090 allowing karaoke and live music until 1AM at an existing cocktail lounge as reflected in the findings of denial. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION: The City Council reviewed the applicant's appeal at its meeting of April 13, 2005 and upheld the decision of the Planning Commission revoking the Use Permit that allowed karaoke and live music until 1AM at an existing cocktail lounge. CONCLUSION City staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution upholding the decision of the Planning Commission and denying the applicant's appeal. Marry Van Duyi{ I Assistant City M~nager Attachments: Resolution RESOLUTION NO. CITY COUNCIl., CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S REVOCATION OF USE PERMIT UP 96-090 AND UPHOLDING THE REVOCATION OF UP 96-090 ALLOWING KARAOKE AND LIVE MUSIC UNTIL 1AM AT CHRISTIE'S BAR AND GRILL WHEREAS, on January 20, 2005, the Planning Commission held a duly-noticed public hearing to consider an action, initiated by the Chief Planner at the request of the Police Department, to revoke Conditional Use Permit number UP-96-090, allowing karaoke and limited live music at Chri'stie's Bar and Grill; and WHEREAS, following the hearing, the Planning Commission continued the matter in order to allow staff to revise the findings to incorporate evidence and testimony adduced at the heating; and WHEREAS, at its duly-noticed meeting on February 3, 2005, the Planning Commission voted unanimously, by a vote of 7-0, to revoke UP 96-090, which allowed the owner to have karaoke (audience participation sing along) and live music with limited dancing until lam; and WHEREAS, as provided for by South San Francisco Municipal Code section 20.90.040, on February 16th, 2005, the owner of Christie's Bar and Grill submitted a timely appeal of the decision to the City Council; and WHEREAS, at the owner's request, the City Council continued the matter on two occasions, from the originally-scheduled appeal heating date of March 9, 2005 and March 23, 2005; and WHEREAS, on April 13, 2005, the City Council held a duly-noticed public hearing to consider the appeal of the Planning Commission's decision, at which heating the City Council considered the record of proceedings at the Planning Commission, the decision of the Planning Commission, the findings contained in the staff report, and arguments presented to the Council by both staff and the applicant; and WHEREAS, following the heating, the City Council voted unanimously, by a vote of 5-0, to deny the appeal and to uphold the decision of the Planning Commission to revoke UP 96-090 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco, as required by South San Francisco Municipal code 20.91.030, that the City Council hereby denies the appeal of the revocation of UP 96-030 and upholds the decision of the Planning Commission to revoke the Conditional Use Permit of Christies's Bar and Grill allowing karaoke and live music with limited dancing until 1 am, and hereby adopts the following findings based on public testimony and the materials submitted to the City of South San Francisco Planning Commission and the South San Francisco City Council which include, but are not limited to: Memorandum to the Planning Department from Sergeant Alan Normandy dated October 5th, 2004; South San Francisco Police Incident Reports detailing police response to incidents at Christie's Bar and Grill; Planning Commission staff report, dated January 20, 2005; the Planning Commission meetings of January 20, 2005 and February 3rd, 2005, and the City Council meeting of April 13th, 2005. 1. Section 20.91.020(t)) of the South San Francisco Municipal Code provides that a violation of one or more of the conditions of approval of a use permit may constitute grounds for revocation of a use permit. 2. In December of 2003, then-Planning Sergeant Jim Thane met with Christie's owners Kent Sato and Evelyn Kuo in response to multiple public safety concerns. In discussions with the owners, then-Sergeant Thane clarified specific issues of concern as to the owners' Use Permit, including a clarification of allowable types of live music as provided for in the original Conditions of Approval and associated staff report, which contemplated that music would be limited to karaoke and live music played by no more than three un- amplified musicians. 3. On September 25, 2004, Police Department personnel discovered that Chfistie's had hired a disc jockey known as "Club 650." The Conditions of Approval provide that the only forms of entertainment allowed are karaoke (audience participation sing along) and live music with limited dancing. As had already been explained to Mr. Sato in the above- reference discussion with then-Sergeant Thane, Condition of Approval 2(a) does not allow for the playback of amplified recorded music. 4. On September 27, 2004, Sergeant A1 Normandy spoke with Kent Sato, Christie's owner, to clarify further the scope of the Use Permit as originally.issued. Sergeant Normandy again explained that the original staff report accompanying the Conditions of Approval anticipated that the "live music with limited dancing" referenced as a Condition of Approval would mean live and un-amplified acoustic music limited to an ensemble size of a trio or smaller. Mr. Sato indicated a full understanding of the Use Permit conditions, and indicated that he would comply with the conditions as Sergeant Normandy had explained them. 5. Section 2(c) of the conditions of approval provide that the Chief of Police may immediately suspend the operation of the business if the he or she finds that there are violations of the Use Permit or ABC license, or if there is a single significant violent crime, or a single significant incident warranting multiple police units or multiple police jurisdiction response with the operation of this use, which he or she determines is detrimental to public health or safety. 6. On November 11, 2003, the Police Department investigated an Assault with a Deadly Weapon that occurred at Christies Bar and Grill (SSF Police Case Report #03-11-30- 006). South San Francisco Police Sergeant Jim Thane was dispatched to Christy's Bar, where witnesses reported a large fight among patrons. One victim was hit in the head with a pool stick. In later conversations with the owner, South San Francisco police Sergeant Jim Thane advised the owners that this incident would qualify as the type of "single significant incident" contemplated in the above-referenced condition of approval. 7. On October 2nd, 2004, the Police Department responded to reports of a "rap contest" at Christie's Bar and Grille. A citizen reported a large group of people loitering outside of the establishment. Officers were dispatched to the scene, and five separate police units responded to the disturbance. Officers responding to the scene reported smelling the distinct odor of burnt marijuana, and reported that the large group of patrons assembling outside of the Bar obstructed the sidewalk. The rap contest exceeded the scope of permissible "live music" as this term had been clearly explained to Mr. Sato during previous encounters with Police Department personnel. 8. On January 12, 2005, South San Francisco police responded to a report of two male subjects physically fighting on the sidewalk outside of Christie's Bar and Grill. Officers were dispatched to the scene, separated the subjects and learned that the incident had started when a disruptive patron entered Christy's and created a disturbance. Christy's owner Kent Sato escorted the patron outside, at which point the patron assaulted Sato by striking him in the face. A struggle ensued and the pair collided with a plate glass window of an adjacent business, Auto Row Parts, shattering the window and resulting in multiple lacerations to Sato's face. 9. Section 20.91.020(b) of the South San Francisco Municipal Code provides that a use permit may be revoked upon a finding that the manner in which the use is conducted is detrimental to the public health or safety. 10. The repeated disturbances to the peace and significant incidents warranting multiple unit police response are detrimental to public health and safety. The first incident, from November 11, 2003, resulted in a ½ inch laceration along the left eyebrow of a bar patron. The incident from January 12, 2005 resulted in multiple lacerations to the face of Bar owner Kent Sato. Thus, the conduct of the business has resulted in at least two reported injuries. Additionally, officers responding to citizen reports at Christies's have reported the presence on the premises of the distinct odor of burnt marijuana, a restricted dangerous drug classified in Schedule 1 of the California Health and Safety Code and possession of which is illegal under California Health and Safety Code section 11357. 11. A compelling public necessity warranting the revocation of a use permit for an otherwise lawful business may exist where the conduct of the business constitutes a nuisance. South San Francisco Municipal Code section 8.54.070(k)(1) provides that any use of property which gives rise to a reasonable determination that said use represents some threat to the health and welfare of the public by virtue of its unsafe, dangerous or hazardous nature is a nuisance. 12. Condition 2(d) of the Conditions of Approval requires the owner to be responsible for controlling behavior inside and outside the business. Despite several requests from the Police Department, the owner has been unable to control the unruly and unlawful conduct of patrons visiting his establishment. This failure to control the conduct of patrons inside and outside of the establishment has resulted in injuries to patrons and staff alike. Additionally, the Planning Commission and City Council expect that recipients of Conditional Use Permits will understand the parameters and conditions imposed under their permits. The owner has repeatedly demonstrated a failure to understand and comply with both the letter and spirit of several Conditions of Approval of the Use Permit, including the limitation of live entertainment to karaoke and live music with limited dancing, and the requirement to monitor admission to the building and occupancy load imposed by Condition of Approval 2(f). 13. The repeated occurrence of disturbances of the peace requiring multiple officer response and resulting in injuries to Christy's patrons and staff constitute a threat to the health and welfare of the public. The repeated disturbances and need for police intervention render the operation of Christy's Bar and Grill a nuisance. 14. Therefore, based on all the evidence in the record, including but not limited to the testimony received at the duly noticed Planning Commission public heating on January 20, 2005, the Planning Commission Hearing of February 3rd, 2005, and the City Council Meeting of April 13, 2005, the City Council hereby finds that there exists ample evidence in the record and staff reports to support the Planning Commission's decision to revoke UP 96-090 as the owner has violated numerous conditions of approval despite repeated warnings and that the continued operation of karaoke and live music at this site is detrimental to the public safety. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting held on the 27th day of April, 2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: S:\Current Reso's\4-27-05Christys_ Revocation CC resolution 1.DOC City Clerk Staff Report DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: April 27, 2005 Honorable Mayor and City Council Marty Van Duyn, Assistant City Manager AGENDA ITEM #4 APPROVAL OF AIRCRAFT NOISE INSULATION PROGRAM PHASE XVI~ CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AMENDMENT 1 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council, approve the attached Resolution for Amendment 1 to the construction contract between G.E. Chen Construction, Inc. and the South San Francisco's Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Phase XVII/in the amount of $600,000 for areas immediately adjacent to but outside of the original 1983 noise footprint. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION In 1983, the City's Aircraft Noise Insulation Program (ANIP) was created to help homeowners reduce the interior noise of homes that are impacted by over-flying aircraft. In accordance with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) guidelines, homes subject to 65 db of noise or higher (based on a Noise Contour Map adopted in 1983) qualified for Federal Grants to assist with the cost of providing noise insulation to such homes. In 1995, the San Francisco International Airport (SFIA) entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the City, wherein the SFIA agreed to provide the City with approximately $45,000,000 in funds to assist with the noise insulation of all remaining homes within the noise footprint established in 1983. Thus far, the ANIP has completed noise insulation work on well over 6,000 single family and 860 multi-family residences within the City using a combination of both FAA Grants and SFIA MOU funds. At this time, the ANIP has completed noise insulation work on all homes located within the area qualifying for FAA funds. After years of accruing interest on the initial MOU funds, ANIP has available funds which can be used to provide noise insulation work on additional homes outside the original 1983 Noise Footprint. After reviewing the MOU in detail, staff has determined with concurrence from the SFIA, that the remaining accrued interest funds belong to the City of South San Francisco with the condition that they are only to be used to provide sound insulation on homes within the ANIP. It was further agreed by SFIA that such funds could also be used to insulate homes immediately adjacent to but outside of the original 1983 Noise Footprint. Staff Report Subject: Page 2 Approval of Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Phase XVlll Construction Contract Amendment 1 Thus, the ANIP has moved forward to notify homeowners and begin noise insulation work on homes located within the Village Way and Camafitas areas, which are adjacent to but located outside of the 83 Noise Footprint. To date, ANIP has received requests to participate from approximately half the homeowners located in those areas and anticipates receiving several more requests over the next few months. This amendment will provide the funds necessary to complete the noise insulation work on approximately 70 homes within the Camaritas Boulevard area. All other requirements and specifications for Phase XVIII shall remain in effect. FUNDING The ANIP budget for FY 04-05 allocates $1,187,600 for both administration and construction costs. Approval of this amendment will provide the necessary funds of $600,000 needed to complete the homes located on Camaritas Boulevard. The increase to the Phase XVIII Contract will leave the ANIP with an approximate balance of $3,400,000. Based on staff recommendations, a portion of this remaining fund balance is being held back as a contingency to insulate homes located within the existing 83 Noise Footprint that have yet to apply for participation in the program. It is estimated that noise insulation for approximately 340 more homes can be accomplished with this remaining fund balance, depending on the number of windows and doors associated with each home. At this time, we do not anticipate receiving any additional funds from either the FAA or SFIA for the ANIP program. Marty Van Duyn [ } Assistant City Manh~ger ~-~a]ry M. Na~ -- City ManagerN,,..._.~ Attachment: Resolution Amendment No. 1 G.E. Chen Contract, Dated March 10, 1999 Memorandum of Understanding ANIP Boundary/Footprint map RESOLUTION NO. CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT #1 TO THE AGREEMENT WITH G.E. CHEN CONSTRUCTION, INCORPORATED TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE COMPLETION OF NOISE INSULATION WORK FOR HOMES INSIDE OF AND IMMEDIATELY CONTIGUOUS TO THE AIRCRAFT NOISE INSULATION PROGRAM NOISE FOOTPRINT WHEREAS, on March 10, 1999, the City Council adopted a Resolution awarding a construction contract to G.E. Chen Construction, Inc. in the amount of $2,563,000 to complete Phase xvm of the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program ("ANIP"); and WHEREAS, since the execution of that contract, City has completed noise insulation work on over 6000 single-family and 860 multi-family residences within the original noise footprint; and WHEREAS, the City, through ANIP, has now completed noise insulation work on all homes located within the area that qualifies for Federal grant funding through the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA"); and WHEREAS, in 1995, the City entered into a Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") with the San Francisco International Airport ("SFIA") under which SFIA agreed to provide approximately 45 million dollars in funding to assist with noise insulation; and WHEREAS, City and SFIA have jointly interpreted the terms of the MOU, and agree that accrued interest on the original MOU funding belongs to the City and may be used to provide sound insulation for homes within the noise footprint and homes immediately adjacent but outside of the original 1983 ANIP noise footprint; and WHEREAS, City wishes to provide funding for continued insulation work on approximately 70 homes within the ANIP area including the areas of Village Way and Camaritas Boulevard; and WHEREAS, staff recommends amending the original City/Contractor Agreement in order to provide funding for the completion of insulation of these approximately 70 homes. All work specifications as contained in Contractor's original bid shall remain in effect; and WHEREAS, the amendment increasing funding will leave approximately $3,400,000 dollars in it the MOU interest fund balance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City Council hereby approves amendment of the City/Contractor Agreement between G.E. Chen Construction, Inc. and the City of South San Francisco to provide for an increase in total compensation of Six Hundred Thousand ($600,000.00) Dollars in order to provide additional 735378-1 funding for the noise insulation of approximately 70 homes both within and immediately contiguous to the ANIP noise footprint.. A copy of the contract amendment is attached. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the contract amendment on behalf of the City of South San Francisco. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting held on the 27th day of April, 2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: City Clerk 735378-1 FIRST AMENDMENT TO CITY/CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND G.E. CHEN CONSTRUCTION, INC. TO INCREASE TOTAL COMPENSATION FOR EXPANSION OF AIRCRAFT NOISE INSULATION PROGRAM This First Amendment to the City/Contractor Agreement ("First Amendment Agreement") is made and entered into as of __, 2005 by and between G.E. Chen Construction, Inc., a California corporation ("Grantee") and the City of South San Francisco, a municipal corporation ("City"), organized and existing under the laws of the State of California. RECITALS WHEREAS, on March 10, 1999, the City Council adopted a Resolution awarding a construction contract to G.E. Chen Construction, Inc. in the amount of $2,563,000 to complete Phase XVIII of the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program ("ANIP"),; and WHEREAS, since the execution of that contract, City has completed noise insulation work on over 6000 single-family and 860 multi-family residences within the original noise footprint; and WHEREAS, the City, through ANIP, has now completed noise insulation work on all homes located within the area that qualifies for Federal grant funding through the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA"); and WHEREAS, in 1995, the City entered into a Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") with the San Francisco International Airport ("SFIA") under which SFIA agreed to provide approximately 45 million dollars in funding to assist with noise insulation; and WHEREAS, City and SFIA have jointly interpreted the terms of the MOU, and agree that accrued interest on the original MOU funding belongs to the City and may be used to provide sound insulation for homes within the noise footprint and homes immediately adjacent but outside of the original 1983 ANIP noise footprint; and WHEREAS, City wishes to provide funding for continued insulation work on approximately 70 homes within the ANIP area including the areas of Village Way and Camaritas Boulevard; and WHEREAS, City and Contractor wish to amend the original City/Contractor Agreement in order to provide funding for the completion of insulation of these approximately 70 homes. All work specifications as contained in Contractor's original bid shall remain in effect. NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: AGREEMENT AMENDMENT 1. The City/Contractor Agreement was entered into March 10, 1999. 2. The first paragraph of Section 5 "Contract Price" is amended to read as follows: "5. Contract Price. City shall pay, and contractor shall accept, in full payment for the work to be done the sum of Three Million, One Hundred and Sixty Three Thousand, three hundred ($3,163,300.00)." All other terms and conditions in the City/Contractor Agreement, entered into March 10, 1999, remain in full force and effect to the extent they are not in conflict with the aforementioned revised language. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement on the day and year first above written. CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO DATED: BY: Barry M. Nagel, City Manager G.E. CHEN CONSTRUCTION, INCORPORATED DATED: ATTEST: BY: Its: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Steven T. Mattas, City Attorney Steven T. Mattas, City Attorney 735360-1 AIRCRAFT NOISE INSULATION PROGRAM - PHASE XVlll PROJECT NO. PB-98-16. BID NO. 2239 C0 ¥ CFI-Y/CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this 1Othday of March 19 99., between the CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, a municipal corporation and poli!ical subdivision of the State of California, hereinafter called"'CITY" and G.g. Chert Construction, Thc. , hereinafter called "CONTRACTOR"' WlTNESSETH- WHEREAS, City has taken appropriate proceedings to authorize construction of the improvements herein provided and for the execution of this contract; WHEREAS, a notice was duly published for bids for the contract for the improvements hereinafter described; WHEREAS, on March 10 , 19 99 __ notice duly given, the city Council of said City awarded the contract for the construction of the improvements hereinafter described to the Contractor, which Contractor said Council found to be the lowest responsible bidder for said improvements; WHEREAS, City and contractor desire to enter into this agreement for the construction of said improvements; IT IS AGREED as follows: 1. Scope Of Work. Contractor ~hall perform the work described briefly as follows: The work consists of the furnishing of all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services necessary for the Aircraft NOise Insulation Proqram. Phase XVIII, Proiect No. PB-98-16. Also included are any such other items or details not mentioned above that are required by the Specifications, Details and Plans which areito be construCted Or furnished an'd installed as shown on the plans, as specified herein and as directed by tlie Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager. The aforementioned improvements are further described in the "Contract Documents" hereinafter referred to. 2. The Contract Documents. The complete contract consists of the following documents: This Agreement (including Supplemental Agreement, if used); the Notice Inviting Sealed Bids; the Accepted Bid; the Information for Bidders (including FAA Requirements and Appendices); the Proposal (including Designation of Subcontractors, Certificate of Nondiscrimination, and Non-collusion Affidavit); the Labor'and Material Bond; the Faithful Performance Bond; the General Prevailing Wage Provisioa; the General Conditions (including Supplemental General Conditions); the General Requirements; the Specifications; the Project Details; and the Project Plans. All of the above named documents are intended to cooperate, so that any work called for in one and not mentioned in the other, or vice versa, is to be executed the same as if mentioned in all said documents. The documents comprising the complete contract will hereinafter be referred to. as "the Contract Documents." ~ The term "Contractor" as used herein is employed without distinction as to either number or gender and shall include whenever the context shall permit all agents, representatives, employees, servants, subcontractors and business or so~:ial invitees. A-1 All rights and obligations of City and Contractor are fully set forth and described in the Contract Documents. 3. Schedule. All work shall be performed in accordance with the schedule conforming to Section 01310 of the Contract Documents. 4. Equipment - Performance of Work. Contractor shall furnish all tools, equipment, apparatus, facilities, labor and materials necessary to perform and complete in a good and workmanlike manner the work . of general construction as called for, and for the manner designated in, and in strict conformity with, the Contract Documents for the Aircraft Noise Insulation Proqram. Phase XVlII, Pi'oiect No. PB-98-10. The equipment, apparatus, facilities, labor and materials shall be furnished and said work performed and completed as required in said plans and specifications under the direction and supervision .and subject to the approval of the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager of said City or his designated assistant. 5. Contract Price. City shall pay, and Contractor shall accept, in full payment for the work agreed' to be donethe sum of Two Million, Five Hundred Sixty Three Thousand, Three Hundred ************************************. Dollars ($. 2,563,300.00 ). Said price is determined by the unit prices contained in Contractor's bid. The quantities'and unit prices are set forth in Proposal attached hereto and made a part hereof as if set forth herein verbatim. In the event work is performed or materials furnished in addition to those set forth in Contractor's bid and the specifications herein, such work and materials will be paid for at the unit prices therein contained. Said amount shall be paid in installments as hereinafter provided. 6. Time for Performance. The time fixed for the commencement of such work is the time specified in the NOtice to Proceed from the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager, and the time fixed for its completion is the number of calendar days from the date of the Notice to Proceed that is specified in Section 01010 of the ConTract Documents. ' The Contractor shall complete the work called for under the Contract Documents in all parts and requirements within such number of calendar days. The Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager shall furnish the Contractor a monthly statement showing the number of calendar days charged to the contract for the preceding month, the number of calendar days specified for the completion of the contract, and the hum ber of days remaining to complete the contract. The Contractor will be allowed one (1) week in which to file a written protest, setting forth in what respects said mq~thly statement is incorrect, otherwise the statement shall be deemed to have been accepted by the Contractor as correct. . 7. Riqhts Of City to Increase Calendar Days. If such' work is not com'Pleted within such time, the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager shall have the right to increase the number of calendar days in 'the amount it may determine will best serve the interest of the City. If the.. Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager desires to increase said number of calendar days, he or she shall have the further right to charge to Contractor and deduct from the final payment for the work the actual: cos~ of e~qgineering, inspection. superintendence, and other overhead expenses which are directly chargeable to Contractor and which accrue during the period of such extension, except that the cost of the final: service and Preparation of the final estimates shall not be included in such charges, provided, however, . that no extension of time for the completion Of such work shall be allowed unless at least twenty (20) days prior to the tim e herein fixed for the completion thereof or the time fixed by the Aircraft Noise Insulation Rroqram Manager for such completion as extended, Contractor shall have filed an application for an extensio~thereof, in writing with the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager. A-2 8. Option of City to Terminate Aqreement in Event of Failure to Complete Work. If Contractor shall have refused or failed to prosecute the severable part thereof, with such diligence as wiil insure its work, or any completion within the time specified, or any extensions thereof, or shall have failed to complete said work within such time, or if Contractor should be adjudged a bankrupt, or if Contractor should make a general assignment for the benefit of Contractor's creditors, or if a receiver should be appointed in the event of Contractor's insolvency, or if Contractor, or any'Subcontractor, .should violate any of the provisions of this Agreement, the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager may give written notice to Contractor, and Contractor's sbreties of its intention to terminate this Agreement, such notice to contain the reasons for such intention to terminate this Agreement, and unless within five (5) days after the serving of such notice, such violation shall cease and satisfactory arrangements for the correction thereof be made, this Agreement may, at the option of City, upon expiration of said time, cease and terminate. 9. Liquidated Damaqes. In case all the work called for under the contract in all parts and requirements is not finished or completed within the number of calendar days as set forth herein, damages will be sustained by the City, and it is and will be impracticable and extremely difficult to ascertain and determine the actual damage which the City will sustain in the event of and by reason such delay, the Contractor will pay to the City the sum specified in the Contract Documents for each and every day's delay in finishing work in excess of the number of calendar days prescribed; and the contractor shall pay said liquidated damages as herein provided, and in case the same are not paid, the City may deduct the amount thereof from any monies due or that may become due the Contractor under the contract. The Contractor shall not be assessed with liquidated damages for the cost of engineering and inspection during any delay beyond the time .named for the completion of the Work caused by acts of God or of the public enemy, acts of the City, fires, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes, and freight embargoes, or delays of Subcontractors due to .such cause, provided that the Contractor shall notify the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager in writing the cause of delay within ten (10) days from the beginning of such delay, and the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program shall ascertain the facts and the extent of the delay, and his finding of the fact thereon shall be final and conclusive. If the Contractor is delayed due to reason of alterations made by the City, or by any act of the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program ..Manager, not contemplated by the contract, the time of completion shall be extended proportionately and the Contractor shall be relieved during the period of such extension of any claim for liquidated damages, engineering or inspectioncharges or other penalties. The Contractor shall have no claim for any other compensation for any such delay. 10. Performance by Sureties. In :the event of any termination as hereinbefore prov. ided, City shall immediately give written notice thereof to Contractor and Contractor% sureties and the sureties shall have the right to take over and perform the Agreement, provided, however, that if the sureties, within five (5) days after giving them said notice of termination, .do not give the City written notice of their intention to take over the performance of the Agreement and do not commence performance thereof within five (5) days after notice to the City of such election, City may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion by contract or by any other method it may deem advisable, for the'account, and at the expense, Of Contractor, and the sureties shall be liable to City for any excess cost or damages occasioned City thereby; and, in such event, City may, without liability for so doing, take possession of and utilize in completing the work such materials, appliances, plant and other property belonging to Contractor as may be on the site of the'work and necessary therefor. Should Contractor contract in an individual capacity, the surety bond shall contain the following provision: "Should Contractor contract in his individual capacity, the death of the Contractor shall not relieve the surety of its obligations." 11. Disputes Pertaininq to Payment of Work. Should any dispute arise respecting the true value of any work done, of any work omitted, or if any extra work which Contractor may be required to do, or respecting the size of any payment to Contractor during the performance of this contract, such dispute shall be decided in accordance with Section 4.3 of the General Provisions. A-3 12. Permits. Compliance with Law. Contractor shall, at his or her expense, obtain all necessary permits and licenses for the construction of each improvement, give all necessary notices and pay all fees and taxes required by law. Building Permits are not required for the work described in the Contract Documents. 13. Superintendence by Contractor. Contractor shall give personal superintendence to the work on said improvements or have a competent foreman or superintendent, satisfactory to the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager, on the work at all times during progress with authority to act for him. 14. Inspection by City. Contractor shall at all times maintain proper facilities and provide safe access for inspection by City to all parts of the work and to the shops wherein the work is in preparation. 15. !nspection and Testinq of Materials. Contractor shall notify City a sufficient time in advance of the manufacture or production of materials to be supplied by Contractor under this contract in order that City may arrange for mill or factory inspection and testing of same. Any materials shipped by Contractor from the factory prior to having satisfactorily passed such testing and inspection by City's representatives, or prior to the receipt of notice from such representative that such testing and inspection will not be required, shall not be incorporated on the job of said improvements. Contractor shall also furnish City, in triplicate, certified copies of all required factory and mill test reports. 16. Extra and/or Additional Work and Changes. Should City at'any time during the progress of said work request any alterations, deviations, additions or omissions from said specifications or plans or other contract documents, it shall be at liberty to do so, and the same shall in no way affect or make void the'price, as the case may be, by a fair and reasonable valuation. Request for such change must be.made in writing, signed by the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager, and shall be accompanied by plans and specifications for such purposes and shall be accepted in writing by the C'ontraotor. 17. Permits and Care of the Work Contractor has examined the site of the work and is familiar with its topography and condition, location of property lines, easements, building lines'and other physical factors, and .limitations affecting the performance of this Agreement. Contractor, at Contractor's expense, shall obtain any permission necessary for any operations conducted off the property owned or controlled-by City. Contractor shall be responsible for the proper care and protection of all materials delivered and work performed until completion and final acceptance. ' 18.. Other Contracts. City may award other cdntracts for additional work and Contractor shall fully cooperate with such other Contractors and carefully fit Contractor's own work to that provided under other contracts as may be directed by the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager. Contractor shall not commit or permit any act which will interfere with the performance of work by any other Contractor. 19. Payments to Contractor. On the 5th.and 20th days of each and every montl~ during the progress of the work, commencing with the 5th day of the month following the Notice to Proceed, Contractor shall submit to the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager a complete itemized statement of all labor and materials incorporated into the improvement during the preceding month and the portion of the contract sum applicable thereto. On approval in writing of said statement by the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager, it shall be submitted to the City Council at its first regular monthly meeting next succeeding such approval and within three (3~) days after approval thereof by the City Council, City shall pay Contractor a sum based upon ninety percent (90%) of the contract price apportionment of the labor and materials incorporated into the improvement under the contract during the month covered by said statement. City shall file with the County Recorder's Office a Notice of Completion within ten (10) days after said improvements shall have been completed and accepted by City and written proof of said filling shall be delivered to the Contractor. A-4 The remaining ten percent (10%), less that amount withheld by City to correct defective work or otherwise complete the contract, shall be paid Contractor thirty (30) days after recordation of the notice of completion of the work, on duly a certified voucher therefore, after Contractor shall have furnished City with a release of, or bond against all claims against City, if required by City, arising under and by virtue of this contract, and work done, and materials furnished hereunder. In the event there are any claims specifically excepted by Contractor, if permitted by City, from the operation of the release, there shall be retained by City stated amounts to be set forth therein and approved by the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager. If there be any claims filed against the work, City shall withhold final payment until the validity of such claims shall have been properly determined and in this regard City is hereby empowered to pay directly to the claimant the full amount of any valid claims. Pursuant to Chapter 13 (commencing with Section 4590) Division 5, Title 1 of the Government Code of the State of California, securities may be substituted for any moneys withheld by a public agency to ensure performance under a contract. At the request and expense of the Contractor, securities equivalent to the amount withheld shall be deposited with the City, or with a State or Federally Chartered Bank as the escrow agent, who shall release such securities to Contractor following the expiration of 30 days from the date of filing of a Notice of Completion of the work by City, unless such securities are to be withheld by City to correct defective work or otherwise complete the contract or are subject to withholding by City to satisfy stop notices or other calms and costs associated therewith. The request for substitution of securities to be deposited with the City, or with a State or Federally Chartered Bank asescrow agent, shall be submitted onthe form entitled "Supplemental Agreement No. Substitution of Securities for Funds Withheld," which, when executed by the contractor and the City, shall constitute a Supplemental Agreement forming a part of this Contract. The City shall have thirty (30) days from receipt of any written request, :properly completed and signed by the Contractor and, if applicable, accompanied by an escrow agreement in a form acceptable to City, to approve said request and effect the substitution. City shall not unreasonably withhold approval of said request. City shall determine the value of any security so deposited. Such Supplemental Agreement and any escrow agreement shall provide for the release of the securities to Contractor as set forth herein and shall also set forth the manner in which City may conved the securities or portions thereof to cash and apply the proceeds to the accomplishment of any purposes for which moneys may be withheld and utilized as described in this Contract, including but not limited to the completion of the contract, correction of defective work and the answering of any stop notice claims and litigation cost thereof. Securities eligible for investment under this section shall be those listed in California Government Code Section 16430 or bank or savings and loan certificates of deposit. The Contractor shall be the beneficial owner of any securities substituted for moneys withheld and shall receive any interest thereon. 20. Contract Security. Concurrently with'the execution hereof, Contractor shall furnish: (1) a surety bond in an amount equal to at least one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price as security for the faith pedormance of this contract; and (2) a separate surety bond in an amount equal to at least one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price as security for the payment of all persons performing labor and furnishing materials in connection with this contract in accordance with Section 4200-4208, inclusive, of the Government Code of the State of California. Sureties on each of said bonds and the form thereof shall be satisfactory to the City. 2:1.' Hold-Harmless Aqreement and Contractor's Insurance. Contractor agrees to, and shall, hold City, its elective and appointive boards, officers, agents and employees harmless from any liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injury, including death, as well as from claims for property damage which may arise from Contractor's or any of Subcontractor's operations under this Agreement, whether such operations be by Contractor or by any Subcontractor or Subcontractors, or by any one or more persons directly or indirectly employed by, or acting as agent for, Contractor or any Subcontractor or Subcontractors. Contractor A-5 agrees to, and shall, defend City and its elective and appointive boards, officers, agents and employees from any suits or actions at law or in equity for damages caused, or alleged to have been caused, by reason of any of the aforesaid operations, provided as follows: a. The City does not, and shall not waive any rights against Contractor which it may have by reason of the aforesaid hold-harmless agreement, because of the acceptance by City, or the deposit with City by Contractor, of any of the insurance policies hereinafter described in Paragraph 22 hereof. b. That the aforesaid hold-harmless agreement by Contractor shall apply to all damages and claims for damages of every kind suffered, or alleged to have been suffered, by reason of any of the aforesaid operations of Contractor or any Subcontractor, regardless of whether or not such insurance policies shall have been determined to be applicable to any of such damages or claims for damages. 22. Insurance. The Contractor shall take out and maintain during the life of this Agreement the following policies of insurance: Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability Insurancr: providing full statutory coverage. In signing this Agreement, the Contractor makes the following certification, required by Section 1861 of the California Labor Code: "1 am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or to underfake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of the Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Agreement." Comprehensive General Liability Insurance 'Public Liability Insurance '(includes 'premises, elevator if applicable; products, completed operations, personal-injury and contractual): (1) Bodily Injury Liability: (2) $ 500,000 each person $1,000,000 each occurrence Property Damage Liability (includes XCU.[explosion, collapse, and underground damage]; water damage and broad form properly damage or third party liability): $ 500,000 per occurrence c. Comprehensive Automobile Liability Insurance (includes owned, non-owned, and hired vehicles): (1) Bodily Injury Liability: $ 500,000 per person (2) Property Damage Liability: $ 500,000 each occurrence $1,000,000 each occurrence It is agreed that the insurance required by Subsections b and c, in an aggregate amount of not less than ONE MILLION FIVE-HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,500,000), shall be extended to include as additional insured the City of South San Francisco, its elective and appointive boards, commissions, officers, agents, and employees, with respect to operations performed by the A-6 contractor, as described herein. Evidence of this insurance described above shall be provided to · City upon execution of this Agreement and shall be subject to approval of the City Attorney as to form, amount and carrier. The policy of insurance shall also contain a provision indicating that such insurance Shall not be reduced or canceled except upon thidy (30) days written notice to City. In addition, the following endorsement shall be made on said policy of insurance: "The following are named as additional insured on the above policies: The City of South San Francisco, its elective and appointive boards, officers, agents and employees." "Notwithstanding any other provision in this policy, the insurance afforded hereunder to the City of South San Francisco shall be primary as to any other insurance or reinsurance covering or available to the City of South San Francisco, and such other insurance or reinsurance shall not be required to contribute to any liability or loss until and unless the approximate limit of liability afforded hereunder is exhausted." The above requirements that the City be named as additional insured, that the insurance shall be primary to any other, and that the insurance not be canceled without notice, shall be provided in the form of an endorsement signed by an authorized representative of the insurance company providing coverage, who shall declare his or her authority to sign on behalf of the insurer. 23. Proof of Carriaqe of Insurance. Contractor shall furnish City through the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager, concurrently with the execution hereof, with satisfactory proof of carriage of the insurance required and that each carrier shall give City at least thirty (30) days prior notice of the cancellation of any policy during the effective.period of this contract. 24..Leqal Work:Day - Penalties for Violation. Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work. Contractor s.hall not.require more than eight (8) hours labor in a day from any person employed by the Contractor in the.performance of such Work. Contractor shall forfeit as a'penalt¥ to City the sum of TWENTY- FIVE DOLLARS. ($25),for each laborer, workman or mechanic employed in the execution of this contract by Contractor or by any Subcontractor for each calendar day during which such laborer, workman or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of the provisions of'Section .1813 of the Labor Code of the State of California. 25. Prevailinq Waqe Scale. The minimum compensation to be paid for labor upon all work'performed under this contract shall be the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general prevailing rate for holidays and overtime work as provided in the General Prevailing Wage Provision in the Contract Documents. 26. Em~Time for Performance - Procurement of Materials. If, because of war or other declared national emergency, the Federal or State government restricts, regulates or controls the procurement and allocation of labor or materials, or both, and if solely because of said restrictions; regulation or controls, Contractor is, through no fault of Contractor, unable to perform this agreement, or the work is thereby suspended or delayed, any of the following steps may be taken: a. City may, pursuant to resolution of the Council, grant Contractor additional time for the performance of this agreement, sufficient to compensate in'time, for said delay or suspension. To qualify for such extension of time, Contractor, within ten (10) days of Contractor's discovering such inabi ty to perform, shall notify the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager in writing thereof and-give specific reason therefor; Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager Shall thereupon have sixty (60) days within which to procure such needed materials or labor as is specified in this agreement, or permit substitution, or provide for changes in work in accordance with other provisions of this agreement. Substituted materials, or changes in the work, or both, shall be ordered in writing by the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager and the concurrence of the Council shall not be necessary. All reasonable expenses of such procurement incurred by A-7 the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Manager shall be defrayed by Contractor; or If such necessary materials or labor cannot be procured through legitimate channels within sixty (60) days after the filing of the aforesaid notice, either party may, upon thirty (30) days written notice to the other, terminate this agreement. In such event, the Contractor shall be compensated for all work executed upon a unit or upon a Cost-plus ten percent (10%) basis, whichever is the lesser.. Materials on the ground, in process of fabrication or in route upon the date of notice of termination specially ordered for the project and which cannot be utilized by contractor, shall be compensated for by City at cost, including freight, provided that Contractor shall take all steps possible to minimize this obligation; or c. City Council, by resolution, may suspend this agreement until the cause of inability is removed, but for a period not to exceed (30) days. If this agreement is not canceled and the inability of Contractor to perform continues, without fault on Contractor's part, beyond the time during which the agreement may have been suspended, as herein provided, City Council may further suspend this agreement, or either party hereto may, without incurring any liability, elect to declare this agreement terminated upon the ground of impossibility of performance. In the event City declares this agreement terminated, such declaration shall be authorized by the City Council, by resolution, and, Contractor shall be notified in writing thereof within five (5) days after the adoption. In such event, the Contractor shall be entitled to proportionate compensation at the agreement rate for such portion of the agreement as may have been performed; or d. City may terminate this agreement, in which case Contractor shall be entitled to proportionate compensation at the agreement rate for such portion of the agreement as may have been performed. Such termination shall be authorized by resolution of the Council. Notice thereof shall be forthwith given in writing to Contractor and .this agreement shall be terminated ,upon receipt by Contractor of such notice. In the event of the termination in this subparagraph (d), none of the covenants,.conditions or provisions hereof shall apply to the work not performed and City shall be liable to Contractor only for the proportionate compensation last herein mentioned. 27. Provisions Cumulative. The provisions of the Agreement are cumulative, and in addition to and not in limitation of, any other rights or remedies available to City. 28. Notices. All notices shall be in writing and delivered in person or. transmitted by certified mail, postage prepaid. Notices required to be given to City shall be addressed as follows: City-Clerk 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, California 94080 NoticesrequiredtobegiventoContractorshallbeaddressedasfollows: G.E. Chen Construction, Inc. 340 W.23rd Ave San Mateo, CA 94403 NoticesrequiredtobegivensuretiesofContractorshallbeaddtessedasfollows: USF&G Company #2 Embarcadero Center, Suite 1300 San Francisco, CA 94111 A-8 Notices required to be given to the Escrow Agent of Contractor, if any, shall be addressed as lollows: 29. Interpretation. As used herein, any gender includes each other gender, the singular included the plural and vice versa. 30. One Year Guaranty Upon Final Acceptance. The Contractor agrees that upon final acceptance of the work following guaranty shall become operative: that Contractor shall repair or replace, at its own expense, any of said work which shall at any time during a one (1) year period subsequent to the date of final acceptance become damaged or defective because of faulty workmanship or defective materials. Contractor shall file with City a corporate surety bond in the sum of ten percent (10%) of the final contract price (including all change orders for extra work) securing this guaranty to City, and said bond shall be filed at the time final acceptance of this work is requested. Should Contractor not file said bond as required herein, City may retain the remaining ten percent (10%) of the contract price as a cash bond for said one (1) year period. Should Contractor within a reasonable time after demand made fail to make any and all such repairs or replacements, City may undertake said repairs and replacements with its own forces or through 'contract, and Contractor shall reimburse City for any and all costs of said repairs or replacements, even if said cost exceed the principai sum of the corporate surety bond which is security for the performance of this guaranty. Contractor and his surety may provide the foregoing guaranty in the original performance bond. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, two (2) identical counterparts of this Agreement, consisting of thirleen (13) pages (being pages 1 through 13), each of which counterparts shall for all purposes be deemed an original of said Agreement, have been duly executed by the parties hereinabove named, on the day and year first hereinabove written. ' ATTEST: -City ~erk CITY: City of South San Franc.' c~o, --...~ City M an*ager ATTEST: CONTRACTOR: By: G.'R.. Ct-ten Construct'ionr Thc. Title: Chun-Yi President By: Title: (If Contractor is an individual, so state. If Contractor is a Corporation, a corporate seal or signatures of the President or Vice President and the Secretary or Treasurer are required). APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney A-9 AIRCRAFT NOISE INSULATION PROGRAM - PHASE XVIIt PROJECT NO. PB-98-16. BID NO. 2239 SUPPLEMENT AGREEMENT NO. SUBSTITUTION OF SECURITIES FOR FUNDS WITHHELD THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the City of South San Francisco, hereinafter referred to as "City" and hereinafter referred to as "Contractor," and forms a part of the contract between City and Contractor dated ,19 __ for the construction of the Aircraft Noise Insulation Proqram, Phase XVIII, Proiect No. PB-98-16 (the "Contract"). City and Contractor, for the consideration named hereinafter, agree as follows: 1. Contractor desires to substitute a (insert the type of security) (the "Security") in the amount of Dollars ($ ) for monies withheld or to be withheld under Section 19 of the contract. 2. City shall have thirty (30) days from the receipt of this Supplemental Agreement, properly completed and executed by Contractor and, if applicable, accompanied by an escrow agreement in the form acceptable to City, to approve such Supplemental Agreement and determine the value of the Security to be deposited. Upon approval hereof by City and receipt of the Security by City or escrow.agent, as applicable, City shall release to Contractor, at the time of each progress payment, funds equivalent to the amount which would otherwise have been withheld there from, until the total of funds released equals the value as established by City of the Security or Securities then on deposit. 3. Deposit of the Security may be made with City or with a state of Federally Chartered Bank as escrow agent. If deposit is to be made with the latter, Contractor first must execute and have the escrow agent execute an escrow agreement in a form acceptable to City. The executed escrow agreement shall be submitted to City with this Supplemental Agreement. City agrees not to unreasonably withhold approval of such escrow agreement. 4. City may, at any time, sell or otherwise convert to cash such portions or all of the Security or Securities as in City's discretion may be r~ecessary to accomplish any of the purposes set forth in the Contract relati'~/e to fulfillment of the Contract, correction of work payment of stop notice claims and other claims, expenses, deductions, and forfeitures, including but not limited to the purposes described in Section 19 of the contract and Section VII(M) of the General Provisions, and may apply the proceeds thereof to such purposes in the manner permitted in the applicable sections(s) and provisions of law; provided, however, that Contractor shall be given not less than two (2) Working days' written notice of City's intent to do so and.within said two (2) working days, may deliver to City, in cash, the amount which City has so notified Contractor it intends to use and City shall first utilize such funds prior to converting or selling any of the Security or Securities. The proceeds remaining, if any, from a Security or Securities converted to cash hereunder, after the accomplishment of said purposes by City, shall be retained by City in the same manner as any other funds which are retained under the Contract,. unless or until Contractor substitutes other Securities therefore pu(suant to the aforementioned sections of the Contract. Any escrow agreement entered into hereunder shall contain provisions to effect City's rights under this section, including a provision requiring the escrow agent to release the Security or Securities to City upon its demand for use or application as set forth herein. A-10 MAR-O2-2005(~ED) 16:23 Ci±y Clerk - SSF (FAX)650 8296641 P. 001/001 Date: To: From: Subject: october 28, 1992 Honorable Mayor and city Council city Manager .PROPOSED MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH SAN FRANCISCO AIRPORT The accompanying agreement is the product of a considerable amount of work by C/CAG's ad hoc committee. The intent of the agreement is to enumerate the actions to be taken by SF0 to mitigate the impacts associated with the planned expansion of the Airport. The agreement outlines a substantial commitment by the Airport to fund the insulation of dwelling units in the affected environs, as well as specified transportation projects to relieve congestion and traffic problems. Vice Mayor Teglia served on the ad hoc committee and is prepared to review with you the salient points of the agreement. The Roundtable is expected to discuss and act on the document at its October 28 meeting, and C/CAG will do likewise on October 29. The Airports Commission will consider it in early November. From the staff's perspective, the agreement is reasonable'and will provide the resources necessary to insulate noise-impacted homes in our community - and to do so at an accelerated pace. For the above reasons, staff is supportive of the agreement and recommends its approval. It would, therefore, be appropriate for the Council to authorize your representative to vote affirmatively on the agreement, at the October 29 C/CAG meetfng. Additionally, the Council should authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement on behalf of our city. City Manager JA:ad Attachment CENTRAL RECOED5 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING !~2, ~HIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING is entered into as o'f Oc ertl29, y the Director of Airports of the City and County of San Francisco, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the state of California, acting on behalf of the San Francisco International Airport ("SFIA"), the County of San Mateo, each of the cities within San Mateo County signing this agreement, the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County ("C/CAG"), and the Airport/Community Roundtable ("Roundtable"). SFIA, the County of San Mateo, the cities, C/CAG, and the Roundtable are collectively referred to here~n as. the "Parties." Recitals A. The San Francisco International Airport (the "Airport") is the fifth largest airport by volume in the United States and the seventh largest airport by volume in the world. The Airport 'is an important asset for the entire San Francisco Bay Area because it generates and stimulates employment and.economic growth and meets the domestic and international transportation and travel needs Of'Bay Area residents, the businesses and the tourist industry. B. Because the Airport is located in a largely urbanized area, the operation of the Airport affects the residents of commumities near the Airport. Aircraft noise and traffic generated by.the Airport are issues of particular concern to these communities.' C. Over the past several years, SFIA, C/CAG and the Roundtable have been working together cooperatively to resolve issues associated.with the operation of SFIA. The parties recognize that it is in their long term mutual interest to continue to solve Airport-related issues through this cooperative process. D. The San Francisco Airports Commission (the "Commission") is presently considering the adoption of a San Francisco International Airport Final Draft Master Plan (the "Master Plan"). The Master Plan provides for the -1- expansion, consolidation, remodeling and implementation of certain changes to the Airport facilities over the period from 1986 to 2006. The City and County of San Francisco has conducted environmental review of the Master Plan. The Final Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") on the Master Plan was certified by the Planning Commission of the City and County of San Francisco on May 28, 1992. E. On July 15, 1992, SFIA Staff issued a Draft Mitigation Program for the Master Plan (the "Draft Mitigation Program"). The Draft Mitigation Program contains the Staff's recommendations on the mitigation measures and conditions that the Airports Commission should adopt if it chooses to approve the Master Plan. The' Draft Mitigation Program includes mitigation measures that were proposed in the EIR to mitigate potentially significant environ- mental impacts of the Master Plan, other conditions that were suggested in the EIR but are not required (because they do not relate to potentially signif- icant environmental impacts of the Master Plan), and other conditions that have been suggested by Airport staff and the public to lessen other effects of the Master Plan. F. The Airports Commission has held two public hearings on the Draft Mitigation Program and has received both written and oral comments from the public on the Draft Mitigation Program. Based in part on this public testimony, Airport staff is preparing a Final Mitigation Program {the "Final Mitigation Program") to recommend to the Airports CommisSion. G. C/CAG and the Roundtable have reviewed the Draft Mitigation Program and contend that the mitigation measures for vehicular traffic and aircraft noise impacts of the Master Plan should be enhanced. H. While SFIA believes that the entire Draft Mitigation Program is legally adequate and complete in its present form, SFIA is willing to compromise with C/CAG and the RJundtable on these outstanding issues if that will allow the parties to reach an overa)l agreement with respect to the implementation of the Master Plan. Hence, in recognition of the desire to cooperate with the Roundtable and C/CAG on these issues, SFIA is prepared to cooperate with the Cities regarding actions as may be appropriate to respond to concerns 'of 'San Mateo County residents regarding airport-related noise and airport-related traffic. I. Therefore, this Memorandum of Understanding sets forth the understanding of the Parties on the way in which remaining issues associated with home insulation funding and transportation may be resolved, and the Master Plan implemented, on a collaborative basis. Aqreement In the interest of assuring the mutual satisfaction of SFIA, the Roundtable and the C/lAG with respect to the implementation of the Master Plan, and the associated Mitigation Program, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Purpose of Memorandum of Understandinq The purpose of this agreement is to establish a framework, and to describe specific actions, for the accommodation of the reasonable concerns of C/CAG, the Roundtable and SFIA with regard to the proposed SFIA Master Plan and the' Mitigation Program for it. Further, this agreement is intended to allow SFIA to respond to the air transportation needs of the entire Bay Area community and the traveling public, while providing fair and reasonable measures to deal with certain concerns of C/CAG and the Roundtable relating to the on-going operation of SFIA, and the implementation o7 the Master Plan. 2. Actions to be Taken The Parties agree to undertake the actions set forth below. Although certain actions may require one Party or anoth'er to take a principa) or leading role, all the Parties agree to support and assist all other Parties in performing these actions: A. Fundinq for Noise Insulation SFIA shall recommend that the Commission include a section in the Final Mitigation Program related to noise insulation to provide that the Airports -3- Commission shall guarantee and spend up to $120 million for noise insulation in the cities surrounding the Airport, per the terms shown in Exhibit 1. B. Traffic; Transportation Systems Manaqement SFIA shall recommend that the Commission (1) adopt the mitigation measures and conditions of approval that are already included in the Draft Mitigation Program related to traffic and transportation; (2) add to the conditions of approval a requirement that SFIA's Transportation.Systems Management ('TSM") coordinator shall meet regularly with the San Mateo County Congestion Management Agency staff and the San Mateo County Transportation Authority staff to exchange information related to traffic and transportation problems within San Mateo County, and exchange progress reports related to the Airport's and the County's TSM'programs; and (3) adequately fund and implement a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) program that can be expected to attain a reduction in the percentage of passengers and employees, who come to SFIA in single-occupant vehicles, of two percent (2%) each year for the first five years of the Master Plan period, and one percent (1%) each year there- after through the end of the Master Plan period. C. Mitiqation Monitorinq and Reporting SFIA shall recommend that the Commission (il adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for both the mitigation'measures and the conditions of approval in the Draft Mitigation Program (as recommended to be modified pursuant to this Memorandum of Understanding} that establishes monitoring and reporting responsibilities for.each of the mitigation measures and conditions of approval; and {ii) that the Roundtable and CZCAG be designated to act as reporting agencies with respect to certain of the mitigation measures associated with noise insulation and transportation. D. .Support for Master Plan Provided that the Commission shall adopt the recommendations of SFIA set forth in Sections 2{Al, 2(B) and 2(C) above, and 2{G) and 2{H) below, all Parties shall support and promote the implementation of the Master Plan and Mitigation Program, as adopted by the Airports Commission, and cooperate to achieve their implementation. E. Protection of New Residents Provided that the Commission shall adopt the recommendations of SFIA set forth in Sections 2(Al, 2(B) and 2(C) above, and 2(Gl and 2(H) below, all the Parties (other than SFIA) shall introduce, support and promote (as appro- priate) actions to protect new purchasers of homes within the communities surrounding the Airport. Among these actions 'are the following: i. Adoption by cities applying for noise insulation funds o~ ordinances requiring that any realtor or person offering a home for sale. advise a prospective purchaser of (al the distance of the home from the outer perimeter of the Airport, and (b) the nature and scale of the Airport, to wit, that it is the fifth largest airport by volume in the United .States and the seventh largest by volume in the world, and ii. Adoption by cities applying for noise insulation funds of .ordinances requiring that any-home constructed after January 1, 1993 or renovated at a cost equal to 25% or more of the value of the home, and located within the 65 CNEL based on the 1983 contour map must be insulated to meet standards applied in noise insulation programs supported by the Federal Aviation Administration. · F. Mutual Commitment and Relianc, The Parties agree to use their best efforts to achieve the full implementation of the actions described in this Memorandum of Understanding; each Party is relying on the other Parties so to act. Achievement of the benefits of this agreement require mutual cooperation, and the actions contemplated by this agreement are interdependent. Thus, the Parties recognize that any failure or refusal by any Party to perform its obligations shall jeopardize the good faith commitment which is essential to the integrity of this Memorandum of Understanding and could result in the termination of this agreement. -5- G. Traffic Study and Additional Traffic Mitiqation Measures SF[A shall recon~mend that, in addition to adopting the mitigation measures and conditions of approval that are already included in the Draft Mitigation Program, the Commission shall Implement the measures identified Exhibit 2. H. Development of Joint Work Plan' To respond to community concerns regarding airport-related noise, Commission shall develop with the Roundtable a Joint Work Plan each year on such noise-related issues. These issues include but are not limited to those topics listed in Exhibit 3. Commission shall also provide funding to the Roundtable in the amount of $100,000 per year, for the years 1993-2000 to support the Roundtable efforts in addressing the noise related measures identified in the Annual Joint Work Plan. .. Based on analysis and discussion resulting from the Joint'Work Plan, the Commission and the Roundtable shall jointly identify airport/aircraft operating procedures which Commission shall implement, as soon as practicable to mitigate aircraft noise impacts. If Identified actions or procedures are beyond the scope and authority of the Commission to implement, the Commission shall request and support the appropriate agencies to implement such actions as soon as practicable. In order to implement this section, the Commission and the Roundtable shall enter into an amendment to the Memorandum of Understanding that created the Roundtable, as shown in Exhibit 4. I. Conqestion Manaqement Plan Commission shall meet the San Mateo County Congestion Management Plan countywide standards, as developed and administered by the San Mateo County Congestion Management Agency (CMA) (Government Code Sections 65088 et seq.). -6- J. ~mplementation of Specific Measure~ Commission shall evidence its acceptance of this MOU and the recommendations'of SFIA by incorporating the terms of this Memorandum of Understanding and the Exhibits and Mitigation Measures included in this Memorandum of Understanding, into the Final Mitigation Program and.Mitigation Monitoring Program, as appropriate, at the time of adoption and approval of the Master Plan. These following Exhibits are attached to and are part of this Agreement: Exhibit ! - Aircraft Noise Insulation Program Exhibit 2 - Traffic Mitigation Measures Exhibit 3 - Joint Work Plan Exhibit 4 - Amendment No. ! to the Memorandum of Understanding regarding acceptance of the Joint Action Plan and establishing an Airport/Community Roundtable. Counsel for C/CAG and Commission shall work together to ensure that the terms of this M0U and Exhibits are properly incorporated into the approval of theMaster Plan. K. Authorization by Commission Co~ission shall evidence its approval and authorization of this MOU by adopting the measures recommended by SFIA in accordance with the foregoing terms and provisions. -7- Accepted and agree_ to as of the date first abov~ .ritten. Cities in San Mateo County By: Town of Atherton By: City of Belmont By: City of Brisbane By: City of Burlingame By: Town of Colma By: City of Daly City By: City of East Pa)o Alto By: City of Foster City By: City of Half Moon Bay By: Town of Hillsborough' By: City of Menlo Park By: . City of Mi))brae By: City of Pacifica DFC:kcd - DFC¢2298.AKA Town o£~rtola Valley By: City of Redwood City By: City of San Bruno By: City of San Car]os By: _ ~ "- -.. City o~_~th San Francisco By: Town of Woodside County of San Mateo By: President, Board of Supervisors City and County of San Francisco . By: Airports Co~ission Louis A. Turpen, Director of Airports City/County Association of Governments of SanlMateo County (C/CAG) By: Chai rperson Airport/Community Roundtable By: Chairman EXHIBIT 1 AIRCRAFT.NOISE INSULATION PROGRA~ The Airports Commission (Commission) and signatory cities in the vicinity of San Francisco International Airport (SFIA) shall administer and implement an aircraft noise insulation program, based on the following terms: FUND ING f2.) .. ¸5. The Commission shall guarantee to spend up to $120 million for aircraft noise insulation in the signatory cities in the vicinity of SFIA. The $120 million may be derived From any source deemed appropriate by the Commission, including grants-in-aid from the federal government disbursed directly to the cities or through SFIA to the cities, and other funds available to Or through the Con~nission. The funds shall be available to each signatory city on a pro rata basis, based on each city's total number of eligible noise-impacted dwelling units. Each signatory city shall present the actual number of eligible noise- impacted dwelling units within its jurisdiction, with validating data to the Commission. - The commission shall provide the pro rata share oF funds to each signatory city upon the receipt of the required data, based on the city's total number of eligible noise-impacted dwelling units. In addition to providing the Commission"with the required data, re: eligible number of dwelling units, each city shall identify and submit prior to January 15 of any year, the anticipated ~umber of dwelling units it intends to insulate, accompanied by an aircraft noise easement for each dwelling unit to be insulated. The Commission shall provide the actual necessary funds no later than the subsequent July 1, to each city to insulate the identified number of dwelling units. Provided each signatory city satisfies the terms of this £xhibit, the Commission shall not withhold funds from that city. In the event the funds established under this program are not spent by the year 2000, the Commission shall continue to provide any unspent or unencumbered funds for use by signatory cities to insulate the remaining dwelling units in their jurisdictions. When ail funds described herein have been spent by the signatory cities, the Commission shall continue to participate in the noise insulation program, Under the F~ 80%/20%.~ matching ratio, to insulate any remaining dwelling units and other noise-sensitive land uses. EXHIBIT 1 - AIRCRAFT NOISE INSULATION PROGRA~4 Page 2 ELIGIBILITY e All aircraft noise-impacted dwelling units in San Mateo County, as defined herein, within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour, as shown on the FAR · Part 150 Noise Exposure Map (NEM) for SFIA (1980 Baseline) approved by the FAA in 1983, are.eligible to be insulated against aircraft noise under this program. Eligible noise~impacted dwelling units, as identified in the existing noise insulation program, are defined as follows: a. single-family detached dwelling units (owner-occupied and rentals). b. single-family attached dwelling units {owner-occupied and rentals, e.g. duplexes, townhouses, row houses, etc.). c. multi-family dwelling units (owner-occupied and rentals, e.g. apartments, etc.).. Any city that contains eligible aircraft noise-impacted dwelling units, as defined herein, is eligible to participate in this program. IMPLEMENTATION Each signatory city shall administer its own program consistent with this Exhibit and any other terms to which the parEies may mutually agree. Each signatory city shall design and administer its own program in a manner that will assure that all eligible noise-impacted dwelling units, as defined herein, are insulated by the year 2000, exclusive of those dwelling units of which the owners decline to participate in.the program. Each eligible noiseJimpacted dwelling unit, of which the owner participates in this program, shall receive sufficient noise insulation improvements to achieve at least an interior noise level of 45 dB CNEL or less, as measured for aircraft noise. All existing criteria and requirements in the current noise insulation program shall remain in effect, including the provision for grant of easement {aircraft noise easement). EXHIBIT 1 - AIRCRAFT NOISE INSULATION PROGRAM Page 3 IMPLEHENTATION - continued To become eligible for its pro rata share of funds, (1) each signatory city shall file a pre-application with the FAA to receive federal matching funds for its total noise insulation program, to insulate al! eligible dwelling units within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour, as shown on the FAR Part 150 Noise Exposure Map (NEM) for SFIA (1980 Baseline), approved by the FAA in 1983; (2) Each city shall submit a copy of the pre-application to the Commission with the number of dwelling units estimated to be insulated each year; (3) Each city shall also submit subsequent applications for federal funds, as required by the.FAA. If the FAA approves a new Noise Exposure Map (NE-M), as part of the Commission's FAR Part 150 Noise Compatibility Program, the Noise Exposure Map (NEM) approved by the FAA in 1983 for SFIA (1980 Baseline) shall continue to be used. for the Commission's funding commitment for th~s program, unless C/CAG and the Commissiom agree otherwise in writing. The insulation of dwelling units, as described herein, shall not affect the criteria for determining the need for a variance under state or federal law. SFIA staff shall cooperate fully to provide technical assistance to all cities participating in this program. CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO "AIRORAFT NOISE INSULATION PROGRAM" P,O, BOX 711 sOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94083 PROGRAM BOUNDARY MAP ClT3; OF DALY CITY CITY OF PACIFICA StaffReport AGENDA ITEM #5 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: April 27, 2005 Honorable Mayor and City Council Marry Van Duyn, Assistant City Manager AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT WITH CH2MI-11I J fI'.Y.LIN INTERNATIONAL (A JOINT VENTURE) IN THE AMOUNT OF $325,000, FOR THE OYSTER POINT INTERCHANGE AND GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an amendment to the consulting services agreement with CH2MHilI/T.Y.Lin International (a joint venture) for continued design and construction support services for the Oyster Point Grade Separation Phase II (Flyover) Project close out and Oyster Point Grade Separation Phase III (Hook ramps) Project construction and close out in the amount of $325,000. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION On December 10, 1986, the City entered into an agreement with CH2MHill/T.Y.Lin International (a joint venture) for engineering, and management services for design and construction on State Route 101 for the Oyster Point Interchange and Grade Separation Project. This amendment for $325,000 will include additional services needed for design engineering, construction support, record drawings and record of survey to complete the construction and to close out the project. The construction of Oyster Point Grade Separation Phase ll (Flyover) Project is complete. The Oyster Point Phase m (Hook Ramps) construction is planned to be completed by August 2005. Final record drawings, record of survey and right-of-way transfers for both projects are estimated to be completed by December 2005. FUNDING Funding is available in 2004-2005 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the Oyster Point Grade Separation Phase Il (Flyover) and Phase llI (Hook Ramps) Project. Staff Report Subject: Page 2 AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT WITH CH2MHILL/T.Y. LIN INTERNATIONAL (A JOINT VENTURE) IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 325,000, FOR THE OYSTER POINT INTERCHANGE AND GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT By: (~ld.,tk~ ~ Marty Van Duyn (/] Assistant City Mattra~er "~a~-ry ~VI. Nag~r~' City Manager Attachment: Resolution Copy of Amendment Letter of Amendment Request Copy of CH2MHill/T.Y.Lin International Agreement RESOLUTION NO. CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH CH2MHILL/I'.Y. LIN INTERNATIONAL (A JOINT VENTURE) FOR CONTINUED DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE OYSTER POINT GRADE SEPARATION PHASE II (FLYOVER) PROJECT CLOSE OUT AND OYSTER POINT GRADE SEPARATION PHASE III (HOOK RAMPS) PROJECT CONSTRUCTION AND CLOSE OUT IN THE AMOUNT OF $32.5,000 WHEREAS, staff recommends authorization of an amendment to the consulting services agreement with CH2MHill/T.Y. Lin International (a joint venture) for continued design and construction support services for the Oyster Point Grade Separation Phase II (Flyover) Project close out and Oyster Point Grade Separation Phase III (Hook Ramps) Project construction and close out in the amount of $325,000; and WHEREAS, funding is available through the 2004-2005 Capital Improvement Program Budget for the Oyster Point Grade Separation Phase 1I (Flyover) and Phase Ill (Hook Ramps) Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City Council hereby authorizes an amendment to the consulting services agreement with CH2MHill/T.Y. Lin International (a joint venture) for continued design and construction support services for the Oyster Point Grade Separation Phase II (flyover) Project close out and Oyster Point Grade Separation Phase HI (Hook Ramps) Project construction and close out in the amount of $325,000. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the agreement on behalf of the City of South San Francisco. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a meeting held on the __ day of ,2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: City Clerk S:\Current Reso's\4-27-05CH2MHill.agree.res.doc AUTHORIZATION OF PAYMENT IN ADDITION TO CONTRACT AMOUNT FOR CH2M Hill/T. Y. Lin International WHEREAS, CITY and CONSULTANT have entered into an Agreement dated December l0th, 1986 whereby CONSULTANT will perform certain services related to the proposed improvements on State Route 101 (Oyster Point Flyover/Hook ramps Project) and, WHEREAS, CITY is authorized to pay CONSULTANT a total of five million eight hundred sixteen thousand six hundred fifty eight dollars $5,816,658), for said services; and, WHEREAS, in order to continuing services anticipated through the end of construction, CONSULTANT requests additional payment in the amount of three hundred twenty five thousand dollars ($325,000); and, WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, the City Manager is authorized to provide payment in excess of that stated in the Agreement for additional services performed. NOW THEREFORE, in accordance with the terms set forth in the Agreement, the City Manager hereby authorizes an additional payment of three hundred twenty five thousand dollars ($325,000) to be made to CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT agrees this will be the CITY's total contribution for payment of additional costs and/or services under the Agreement unless additional payments are authorized in accordance with the terms of the Agreement and said terms of payment are mutually agreed to by and between the parties. All other terms, conditions and provisions in the Agreement remain in full force and effect. If there is a conflict between the terms of this Amendment and the Agreement, the terms of the Agreement will control unless specifically modified by this Amendment. Dated: By: By: CONSULTANT Barry Nagel, City Manager Approved as to Form: By: Steven T. Mattas, City Attorney F:/file cabinet/my files/staff reports/BKF amendment CH2MHILL T-Y-LIN INTERNATIONAL A JOINT VENTURE CH2M HILL 155 Grand .~,venue Suito 1000 Oakland. CA 94612 P.O. Box 12681 Oakland, CA 94604-2681 Tel 510.251.2426 Fax 510.893.8205 April 14, 2005 CH2M Hill Projects 154208 & 137331 Bijan Beigi, City of South San Francisco Project Manager for Oyster Pt. Flyover & Hook Ramps Projects 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 Reference: Oyster Point Flyover, Phase Il, Bayshore Boulevard/US 101 Hook Ramps Project, Phase III and Gibson Disposal Site Professional Services Subject: Purchase Order Extensiorts/Additions Dear Bijan: Per your request and based on our discussion from yesterday's meeting, indicated below are the estimated dollar amounts (as of our Feb. 8, 2005 invoice) that will be needed to extend and/or provide additional Purchase Orders (PO) in order to continue and complete our Tasks on the Flyover, Hook Ramps and Gibson Disposal Site. One of the main contributing factor to cause for the this PO' extension was due to the additional time needed to complete the construction of both the Flyover and Hook Ramps and the extended time required to close out the Gibson Disposal Site. Oyster Point Flyover (Project Closeout in accordance with the conditions in the Cooperative Agreement between City & Caltrans that include preparation of As-Built Plans and Record of Survey): S270t000.00 .BayshoredUS 101 Hook Ramps (Services During Construction - Support the City and its Construction Management Personnel, including coordination with the project's closeout): 555,000.00 Gibson Disposal Site (Professional Services in providing Technical Assistance to Mike Voss, City Attorney, in connection with the Remedial Investigation and Risk Assessment of the Site through the "Potential Responsible Parties (PRP) Technical Committee. It is estimated that our work could continue through the end of 2006 or even beyond subject to the PRP Group's resolution): $45,000.00 Please bear in mind that the above amounts are only estimated and ,are based on normal work conditions & processes. Because our work will involves coordination and/or approval with various agencies, i.e. Caltrans, County of San Mateo, SMCTA, and Gibson PRP Group, there is a potential Bijan Beigi, City of South San Francisco Page 2 April 14, 2005 CH2M Hill Projects 164208 & 137331 that the above amounts will change. I will inform you of any changes as they arise. Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, CH2M HILL ~Me] emolador/~~~-'-'~' CH2M HillFFY Lin - JV Project Manager Cc-' Dennis Jang, Ih' Lin International Mark Brady, CH2M Hill EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION NO. _88-86 AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE OYSTER POINT ~NTERCHANGE AND GRADE SEPARATION SOUTH SAN FBANCISCO, CALIFORNIA THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 10th day of December , 1986, by and between the CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, a municipal California corporation (herein- after referred to as "CITY"), and CH2M HILL/T.Y. LIN INTER- NATIONAL, a joint venture (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT"). WI TNE S SETH : WHEREAS, the CITY requires engineering, and management ser- vices to process, design, and construct proposed improvements on State Route 101 in the City of South San Francisco, San Mateo County, at Oyster Point Boulevard at the Southern Pac- ific Transportation Company (SPTC) track (hereinafter re- ferred to as the PROJECT), and other engineering services; and WHEreAS, the CONSULTANT is duly licensed as a registered Professional Engineer in the State of California, is quali- . fied and experienced to provide such services, and has the personnel and facilities necessary to accomplish the work within the required time. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual cove- nants, agreements and conditions contained herein, CITY and CONSULTANT agree as follows: ARTICLE 1: CONSULTANT'S SERVICES. The CONSULTANT shall perform professional services required by the CITY for this PROJECT upon receipt of a fully executed TASK ORDER from the CITY. Each TASK ORDER shall list the scope of services to be performed, state the time within which the work is to be completed, delineate any special conditions, state the method of compensation for services, and authorize the CONSULTANT to proceed. It is agreed between the parties to this AGREE- MENT that the CONSULTANT cannot be responsible for delays occasioned by factors beyond its control, nor by factors which could not reasonably have been foreseen at the time the AGREEMENT was prepared. It is agreed that CONSULTANT will take reasonable steps to comply with time requirements if factors beyond CONSULTANT'S control make the time schedule difficult to achieve. ARTICLE 2: COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT FOR SERVICES. As consideration for providing the services under ARTICLE 1~ the CITY shall compensate the CONSULTANT on a Labor and Expenses basis for each TASK ORDER unless specifically modified by the TASK ORDER. The basis of compensation for each TASK ORDER shall be determined at the time the CITY and CONSULTANT engage in meaningful negotiations for that TASK ORDER. A. Labor and Expenses. For the Labor and Expenses compensation basis, the CITY shall pay the CONSULTANT the amount of the CONSULTANT's salary costs expended for each service, times a multiplier for general overhead and profit, plus direct expenses in connection therewith for the services listed in the TASK ORDER. Each TASK ORDER may include a Not-to-Exceed Cost Ceiling. Except as otherwise specified herein, the total payment for each service shall not exceed the Cost Ceiling listed in the TASK ORDER, without a formal amendment of the TASK ORDER. Payment shall be made for the amount due for each service rendered during the monthly billing period based on salary costs expended times a multiplier, plus direct expenses. Representa- tive hourly billing rates which include the general overhead and profit multiplier are shown in the attached Exhibit A. Payment shall be made within 45 days after date of monthly billing for the CONSULTANT's actual value of work accomplished from the date of the TASK ORDER authorization, less previous payments. For the purpose of payment, the salary costs, mul- tiplier and expenses shall be those rates typically utilized by the CONSULTANT for billing purposes as de- fined in Section B below. B. Definitions. 1. CONSULTANT's salary costs are the amount of the direct wages and salaries of the coNSULTANT's employees working on the PROJECT, plus a percent- age of such wages or salaries to cover all taxes, payments, and premiums measured by or applicable at the time of performance to such wages or sal- aries, such as, but not limited to, Worker's Com- pensation Insurance, Social Security, State and Federal unemployment insurance, pension plan costs, and pro rata allowances for vacation, sick leave, and holiday pay. 2. CONSULTANT's general overhead costs are those general administrative and operating costs, exclusive of salary cost overheads, that are in- curred by the CONSULTANT. during the period of per- formance of the services. The multiplier to cover the CONSULTANT's general overhead costs and profit shall be 2.20, or as indicated in the TASK ORDER. 3. CONSULTANT's direct expenses are the costs incurred on, or directly for, the PROJECT, other than the salary costs and general overhead costs (as defined hereinbefore). Direct expenses shall mean all expenses incurred by the CONSULTANT .including, but not limited to, materials, supplies, subsistence, transportation, outside services, and equipment rental expenses incidental to and rea- sonably necessary for the performance of the proj- ect. Fees for subconsultant and other outside services shall be charged at CONSULTANT's cost plus 5 percent for administration. Certain direct expenses shall be charged in accordance with the CONSULTANT's Standard Schedule of Rates and Charges applicable at the time of invoicing. ARTICLE 3: AVAILABILITY OF DATA. The CITY shall make available to the CONSULTANT all technical data in the CITY's possession, including maps, reports, drawings, surveys, soil boring logs, and other information required by the CONSULTANT relating to this work. ARTICLE 4: PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS. CONSULTANT shall be responsible, to the level of competency presently main- tained by other practicing professional engineers in the same type of work in CITY's geographic area, for the profes- sional and technical soundness, accuracy, and adequacy of all designs, drawings, specifications, and other work and materials furnished under this AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT makes no other warranty, express or implied. ARTICLE 5: SOILS WORK. In soils investigation work and in determining subsurface conditions for the PROJECT, it is understood that soil characteristics may vary greatly between'successive test points and sample intervals. The CONSULTANT will perform this work in accordance with gen- erally accepted soils engineering practices and shall use this information to the same extent as would any independent engineer in making its recommendations to the CITY on the PROJECT, and makes no other warranty, express or implied° ARTICLE 6: COST ESTIMATES. The estimates of cost for the PROJECT provided for herein are to be prepared by the CONSULTANT through exercise of its experience and judgement in applying presently available cost data, but it is recog- nized that CONSULTANT has no control over cost of labor and materials, or over competitive bidding procedures and market conditions, so that it cannot warrant that the project con- struction costs will not vary from its cost estimates. ARTICLE 7: TERMINATION. This AGREEMENT may be termi- nated in whole or in part in writing by either party in the event of substantial failure by the other party to fulfill its obligations under this AGREEMENT through no fault of the terminating party. The CITY may terminate this AGREEMENT at any time upon mailing of notice in writing to the CONSULTANT that the AGREEMENT is terminated. Upon receipt of a notice of ter- mination, CONSULTANT shall promptly cease work on the PROJECT (unless the notice directs otherwise) and cancel services or products which CONSULTANT had ordered in accordance with this AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT shall be compensated for all work performed prior to time of receipt of notice of termination, and shall be compensated for materials ordered by the CONSULTANT or its employees, or services of others ordered by the CONSUL- TANT or its employees prior to receipt of notice of termina- tion whether or not such materials or final instYuments of services of others have actually been delivered, provided that CONSULTAuNT is not able to cancel such orders for mate- rials or services of others. City shall compensate CONSULTANT in the event of termi- nation based upon the amounts established by this AGREEMENT and attachments hereto. Where the provisions of this AGREE- MENT cannot be applied, the payment shall be based upon a reasonable estimated percentage of the work completed. In the event of termination, CONSULTANT shall deliver or otherwise make available to CITY all data, drawings, specifications, reports, estimates, summaries, and other such information and materials as may have been accumulated by CONSULTANT in performing this AGREEMENT, whether completed or in progress. ARTICLE 8: CHANGES: CITY may request, from time to time, changes in the Scope of Services to be provided. Com- pensation for any such change shall be in accordance with Article 2. ARTICLE 9: OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. Ail maps, designs, reports, work, data, and other documents completed or par- tially completed by CONSULTANT in the performance of this AGREEMENT shall become the property of CITY. Any reuse of documents by CITY for purposes other than intended by this PROJECT will be at CITY's risk and CITY will hold CONSULTANT harmless from all claims and damage arisinq out of reuse of CONSULTANT's work. ARTICLE 10: INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. CONSULTANT is an independent contractor retained by the CITY to perform the work described herein. All personnel employed by the CON- SULTANT, including subcontractors and personnel of said subcontractors, are not and shall not be deemed to be employees of the CITY. The CONSULTANT and approved subcontractors shall comply with all State and Federal laws pertaining to employment and compensation of their employees or agents, including the provision of Worker's Compensation. The CITY shall not, under any circumstances, be liable to CONSULTANT or any person or persons acting .for CONSULTANT for any death, injury, or property destruction or damage received or claimed relating to or stemming from the activi- ties undertaken pursuant to the AGREEMENT. ARTICLE 11: ASSIGNMENT. CITY is entering into this AGREEMENT in consideration of the rendition of services re- quired herein by CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT shall not assign any of the duties, responsibilities, or obligations of this AGREEMENT to any other firm, company, entity, or individual, except with the express written consent of CITY, and then only upon such terms and conditions as CITY may set forth in writing. Nothing set forth in this paragraph shall preclude CONSULTANT from assigning any of the money due and owing %o it from CITY. ARTICLE 12: INDEMNIFICATION. CONSULTANT shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless, the CITY and its officers and employees from and against all claims, losses, damage, in- jury, and liability for damages arising from negligent acts, errors or omissions of the CONSULTANT in the performance of its services under this AGREEMENT. This indemnification shall extend for one year after completion of the PROJECT as well as during the period of actual performance of services under this AGREEMENT. Acceptance by the CITY of the insur- ance certificates required under this AGREEMENT does not relieve the CONSULTANT from liability under this indemnity and hold harmless clause. CONSULTANT's liability to the CITY for any cause or combination of causes is, in the ag- gregate, limited to an amount no greater than the fee earned under this AGREEMENT, whether such liability arises in breach of Contract or Warranty, tort including negligence, strict liability or otherwise. ARTICLE 13: INSURANCE. During the term of this AGREE- MENT, CONSULTANT shall maintain in full force and effect at its own cost and expense, the coverage stated in paragraphs A, B, and C. The insurance coverages required herein shall be provided separately and equally by the two joint venture partners, with each firm providing one-half of the required coverage. A. Worker's Compensation Insurance Full Worker's Compensation Insurance shall be pro- vided with a limit of at least $100,000 for any one person. B. General Liability andBodily Injury Insurance CONSULTANT shall obtain and keep in full force and effect, a comprehensive general liability policy for at least $500,000 combined limit for bodily injury and property damage; provided that the CITY, its officers, employees, and agents are to be named additional insureds under the policy, and that the Do policy shall stipulate that this insurance will operate as primary insurance for work performed by CONSULTANT and its subconsultants, and that no other insurance effected by CITY or other named insureds will be called on to cover a loss covered thereunder. Said policy may contain an exception for bodily injury and property damage claims aris- ing out of the rendering or failure to render pro- fessional services by such CONSULTANT, including: l. The preparation of maps, drawings, reports, surveys, change orders, designs, or specifi- cations; and 2. Supervisory inspection, surveying or engi- neering services. Professional Liability Insurance CONSULTANT shall carry professional liability insurance to the amount of $1,000,000. Certificate of Insurance CONSULTANT shall complete and file with the City Engineer, within fifteen (15) days of the execution of the AGREEMENT, and prior to engaging in any op- eration or activity set forth in this AGREEMENT, certificates of insurance which shall provide that no cancellation, major change in coverage, or ex- piration by the insurance company will be made during the term of this AGREEMENT, without thirty (30) days written notice to CITY prior to the effective date of such cancellation, or change in coverage. Both firms of the joint venture shall submit separate insurance certificates stating their coverage as hereinbefore required. ARTICLE 14: ~OTICES. Ail notices herein required shall be in writing and shall be sent by certified or registered mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: TO CITY: Robert S. Yee Deputy City Manager/City Engineer 400 Grand Avenue P.O. Box 711 South San Francisco, California 94083 TO CONSULTANT: George E. Homolka CH2M HILL/T.Y. LIN INTERNATIONAL, a joint venture 2200 PowelI Street, 8th Floor Emeryville, California 94608 ARTICLE 15: CONFORMANCE TO APPLICABLE LAWS. CONSULTANT shall comply with all applicable Federal, State, and munici- pal laws, rules, and ordinances. No discrimination shall be made by CONSULTANT in the employment of persons to work under this AGREEMENT because of race, color, national origin, an- cestry, sex or religion of such person. CONSULTANT shall comply with provisions of CITY's Affirmative Action Contract Compliance Program. ARTICLE 16: WAIVER. In the event that either CITY or CONSULTANT shall at any time or times waive any breach of this AGREEMENT by the other, such waiver shall not constitute a waiver of any other or succeeding breach of this AGREEMENT, whether of the same or any other covenant, condition or obligation. ARTICLE 17: ATTORNEY'S FEES. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce or construe the terms of this AGREEMENT may recover from the other party its reasonable costs and attorney's fees expended in connection with such an action. ARTICLE 18: BINDING ON SUCCESSORS. This AGREEMENT is binding on the heirs, successors, and assigns of the parties hereto and is not to be assigned by either party without first obtaining the written consent of the other. ARTICLE 19: AMENDMENT. This AGREEMENT may be amended, modified, or changed by the parties provided that said amendment, modification, or change is in writing and approved by both parties. ARTICLE 20: SCOPE OF AGREEMENT. This writing consti- tutes the entire agreement between the parties relative to consulting services for the PROJECT. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this AGREEMENT the day and year first above written. CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO CH2M HILL/T.Y. LIN INTERNATIONAL a joint venture /~prpOrge F~. Homol'k~, ject Manager Ch-"ar 1-e s ~eim Deputy Project Manager ATTEST: , City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: , City Attorney SFA9/055 10 EXHIBIT A AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES FOR OYSTER POINT INTERCHANGE AND GRADE SEPARATION SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA REPRESENTATIVE 1987 HOURLY RATES AT BILLING MULTIPLIER* Classification Engineer 0 Engineer 1 Engineer 2 Engineer 3 Engineer 4 Engineer 5 Engineer 6 Engineer 7 Planner 1 Planner 2 Planner 3 Planner 4 Planner 5 Technician 1 Technician 2 Technician 3 Technician 4 Technician 5 Hourly Rate Junior Engineer $ 44.00 Staff Engineer 52.00 Staff Engineer 57.75 Project Engineer 64.25 Senior Engineer 73.25 Project Manager 83.00 Senior Project Manager 92.00 Principal 107.50 Junior Planner 44.00 Staff Planner 52.00 Staff Planner 64.25 Project Planner 73.25 Senior Planner 83.00 Draftsman 35.00 Draftsman 42.25 Designer 50.50 Designer 58.50 Senior Technician 67.50 Office 32.00 *These rates will be confirmed in January, 1987. The above billing rates are approximate average rates for the staff level indicated. Projected actual 1987 billing rates for individuals expected to work on the project are shown on the following pages. SFA9/039 CH2M HILL Employee Grade Weihs, E. EN 1 Sears, M. EN 1 Ashford, S. EN 2 Mog, D. EN 2 Ionta, T. EN 2 Johnson, M. EN 2 Levernier, D. EN 3 Corpuz, F. EN 3 Aldrich, J. EN 3 Johnson, J. EN 3 Cole, H. EN 4 Melhorn, L. EN 4 Wilburn, H. EM 5 Kelstrom, D. EM 5 Nyby, D. EN 5 Kiang, D. EN 5 Harrasser, E. EM 6 Elliott, R. EN 6 Homolka, G. EN 6 O'Leary, W. EN 6 Bender, O. EN 7 Dominguez, S. TA 1 Douglas, A. TA 1 Nassar, C. TE 1 Cortez, A. TE 1 Leong, S. TA 3 Haecker, D. TE 3 Angelo, D. TE 3 Remolder, M. TE 3 Chittenden, T. TE 4 Pouliot, P. TE 4 Newman, D. TM 5 Johnson, K. TE 5 Lawson, R. SC ~ Van Schaack, J. ED 4 Vaughn, R. SV 5 Word Processing Avg. Rate Projected 1987' Hourly Billing Rate $ 48 47 53 06 56 25 59 53 6009 6318 60 74 63.44 66~21 71.45 74 93 84.89 72.10 72.94 73.34 77.70 78.87 104.94 102.98 118.68 95.73 19.53 24.61 32.68 33.04 32.19 44.14 46.09 48.17 57.97 61.42 57.39 63.83 56.05 58.39 57.73 31.47 *The above billing rates are projections for 1987. Actual 1987 billing rates may vary. SFR16/266-1 T. Y. LIN Projected 1987' Employee Grade Hourly Billing Rate Fei, M. P 2 $ 42.35 Cormier, K. P 2 44.04 Druillard, F. P 2 47.07 Ho, T. P 3 48.30 Kompfrer, T. P 3 50.81 Hsiao, K. P 3 59.14 Lu, H.S. P 4 66.47 Zimmerman, R. P 4 80.75 Pu, D. P 5 95.63 Seim, C. P 5 105.49 Tai, J. P 5 111.42 Redfield, C. P 5 119.36 Connell, R. Principal 106.63 Yang, Y.C. Principal 164.64 Lin, T.Y. Principal 180.33 Noyk, S. T 2 34.67 Kwok, B. T 2 37.66 Chien, L. T 3 33.23 Levine, J. T 3 45.15 Leung, S. T 4 54.46 Hung, F. T 4 56.60 *The above billing rates are projections for 1987. Actual 1987 billing rates may vary. SFR16/266-2 TASK ORDER NO. 1 OF THE AGREEMENT CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND CH2M HILL/T.Y. LIN INTERNATIONAL, a joint venture AUTHORIZATION OF SERVICES FOR PROJECT REPORT AND CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FOR THE OYSTER POINT INTERCHANGE AND GRADE SEPARATION Purpose: The purpose of the TASK ORDER is to authorize and direct the CONSULTANT to proceed with the work specified in Item 2 of this TASK ORDER, in accordance with the provi- sions of Article 1 of that AGREEMENT between the parties hereto dated , 1986. S~ope of Work The work authorized by this TASK ORDER is described in the "Scope of Services" attached hereto as Exhibit 1-A. 3. Time of Performance: The work authorized by this TASK ORDER shall be per- formed as shown on the attached schedule on Exhibit !-B. compensation and Payment: Compensation shall be on a Labor and Expense basis as provided in Article 2 of the AGREEMENT. The cost ceil- ing for the work authorized by this TASK ORDER shall be $185,000. Support data are attached as Exhibit 1-C. Payment shall be in accordance with Article 2 of the AGREEMENT. 5. Effective Date: This TASK ORDER shall become effective immediately upon its execution by both parties. Special Conditions: CONSULTANT shall assign the following members of its staff to perform the work included in this TASK ORDER. The individuals shall not be removed from the PROJECT without the written consent of the City. o George E. Homolka, Project Manager o Charles Seim, Deputy Project Manager Les Melhorn, Assistant Project Manager--Design Development Process 7. Incorporation by Reference: Ail items and conditions contained in the aformentioned AGREEMENT between the City of South San Francisco and CH2M HILL are incorporated herein by reference. Executed this ;~kday of 1986. CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO CH2M HILL~.Y. LIN INTERNATIONAL, a joint ~nture  or~ ~ Homolk~ Project Manager c~arles Seim Deputy Project Manager ATTEST: , City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By , City Attorney SFA9/056 EXHIBIT 1-A TASK ORDER NO. 1 THE OYSTER POINT INTERCHANGE AND GRADE SEPARATION SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA SCOPE OF SERVICES BACKGROUND The City of South San Francisco is proposing to finance and construct improvements to the Oyster Point Boulevard Inter- change at Highway 101 and a grade separation to eliminate the existing at-grade crossing of Oyster Point Boulevard at the Southern Pacific Transportation Company (SPTC) tracks. The City prepared a Grade Separation Feasibility Study to identify alternatives and is currently preparing an environ- mental document to investigate and develop plans for mitigat- ing the potential impacts of the proposed improvements. Caltrans has revised the conceptual geometrics and is actively developing the project through their project development process. The Project Study Report has been approved, the Project Development Team has been formed, and the Memorandum of Understanding for the planning and design phase, is being prepared. The purpose of this TASK ORDER is to perform the necessary studies and preliminary designs to prepare a Draft Project Report, a Draft Project Approval Report, and other documents leading to the formal clearance and approval of the proposed imProvements by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the California State Public Utilities Commission (PUC), and the Southern Pacific Transportation Company (SPTC). SCOPE OF SERVICES The CONSULTANT's work is described in the following tasks: TASK 1-1: ADMINISTRATION CONSULTANT will be the contractor with the City of South San Francisco for all services for this project. Environmental and traffic consultants are presently under separate contract with the City. Coordinating and managing the work of the CITY's other consultants is not included in the scope of work for this TASK ORDER unless specifically indicated. Subtasks for the work in this task are: Subtask 1-1.1: Administration Administer the contract with the City and the contracts with subconsultants. Monitor compliance with the proVi- sions of the contracts. Provide a single point of con- tact for the City with regard to contractual matters. 1 Subtask 1-1.2: Monitoring Monitor progress of the project regarding budget and schedule. Provide status reports and billings on a monthly basis. TASK 1-2: ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT will be responsible for management of the project consultant team, coordination with the City and affected agencies and production of reports, maps, and graphics. In- cluded are the following subtasks. Subtask 1-2.1: Management Manage the work efforts of the project team. Provide work plans, schedules, and budgets. Provide direction regarding project goals and policy. Establish standards regarding product quality, format, presentation, graph- ics, and content. Coordinate the activities of the project consultant team. Disseminate information, di- rect team efforts, coordinate work tasks and outside contacts. Subtask 1-2.2: Coordination Assist the City by participating in Project Development Team meetings. Provide agenda items, presentation material, and reports. Make presentations and partici- pate in discussions. Prepare followup data for the activities assigned at the meetings. Schedule and conduct meetings with the City, Caltrans, FHWA, and other· affected agencies and organizations to obtain data, perform project work, expedite reviews, and accomplish processing requirements. Subtask 1-2.3: Production Prepare Project Work Plans and other documentation required by Caltrans. Assist in the preparation of the freeway agreement(s) and encroachment permit requests. Manage the assembly and production of the Draft Project Report and Draft Project Approval Report, including the draft and final environmental document furnished and prepared by OTHERS. The Notice of Preparation, public meeting notices, public presentation material, handout material, and the records of public meetings and hear- ings will be prepared by OTHERS. Subtask 1-2.4: Quality Control Monitor the overall process for conformance with Cal- trans, FHWA, the National Envirornnental Policy Act (NEPA), the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , and City processing requirements. TASK 1-3: DATA COLLECTION. CONSULTANT will obtain from Caltrans, City of South San Fran- cisco, City of Brisbane, County of San Mateo, SPTC, utility companies, and land developers within the area the following available data: o Site survey records o Mapping and survey control records o Site topographic maps o Right-of-way maps o Tentative maps and landscaping master plans o Assessor's maps, deeds, and property reports o As-built utilities records for power, gas, water and telephone o City subdivision maps o As-built improvements plans o Geotechnical reports o Hazardous materials reports o Other proposed transportation projects CITY shall assist in obtaining this data in the event that such data is not made available directly to CONSULTANT. TASK 1-4: MEETINGS AND COORDINATION CONSULTANT will attend and provide technical support for the CITY and environmental consultant during the initial meeting at the project site with FHWA representatives. Schedule and conduct meetings with the City, Caltrans, FHWA, developers, and other affected agencies and organizations to obtain data, perform project work, expedite reviews, and accomplish processing requirements. These meetings are to satisfy individual requests and requirements by affected agencies and organizations and will be limited to a total of 20. TASK 1-5: PREPARE BASE MAPS CONSULTANT will develop controlled topographic base mapping at a 1 inch equals 100 feet scale, and 1 inch equals 50 feet covering the project limits and immediate vicinity. Mapping will be pencil manuscript format and will conform to Caltrans mapping standards as of the date of this contract. These maps will be a compilation of information gathered previ- ously in Task 1-3 above and will include ground control surveys, aerial photography, and map compilation. CONSULTANT will plot the following: o Private property ownerships o Existing drainage features o Existing topography o As-built improvements o Applicable city and county boundaries o Street names o Existing utility information CONSULTANT will also provide two oblique photographs enlarged to a suitable scale. TASK 1-6: REFINE CONCEPTUAL PLAN CONSULTANT will refine Caltrans concept plan. This refine- ment will be based on a 1 inch equals 100 feet scale concept plan being developed by Caltrans and information regarding interchange, intersection, and roadway operations analyses prepared by OTHERS. The new concept plan will reflect City and Caltrans standards or known design exceptions required. The Plan will be plotted on the base maps developed in Task 1-5. Based on this plot, right-of-way requirements will be scaled and preliminary utility relocation requirements will be developed for the use by the utility companies. These plans will include plan, profile, and detour require- ments for purpose of developing a budget estimate as de- scribed later in this document. TASK 1-7: PREPARE PRELIMINARY REPORTS BASED UPON EXISTING DATA Subtask 1-7.1: Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation and Report The Geotechnical Report will be based on existing data and reports. Supplemental field investigation may be TASK necessary and will be covered under the additional services identified as Task 1-13. Basic information regarding the design of foundations for the bridge structures, the approach fills, and the roadway retaining walls will be developed. Also included will be the preliminary roadway structural sections. The traffic index, necessary for the roadway structural section design, will be provided by OTHERS. Subtask 1-7.2: Preliminary Drainage Report The Preliminary Drainage Report will be based on exist- ing data and reports only. The report will be based on planned private developments and improvements proposed by CALTR3~NS. Recommendations for the size and location of drain inlets, cross culverts, and shoulder drains will be included. Subtask 1-7.3: Bridge Structure Type Report The bridge structure type concept will be studied to develop concepts that best meet the goal of providing aesthetically pleasing, economical structures. The structure type alternatives will be investigated within the required constraints of the project site, Caltrans, and SPTC. Bridge superstructure types to be investi- gated will include steel, cast-in-place concrete, and precast concrete. The report will include descriptions of the structure type recommended, sketches and renderings of the possi- ble improvements, and typical structural sections. 1-8: PREPARE PLANNING ESTIMATE Consultant will prepare a planning level estimate based on the revised conceptual geometrics. The planning level estimate will be made in advance of approval of the Project Report. TASK 1-9: PREPARE PROJECT SCHEDULE A project schedule will be developed based on the Caltrans "Major Project Primary Activities and Major Milestones" chart dated February 1984. The schedule will extend to the pro- posed contract advertisement date. TASK 1-10: PREPARE DRAFT PROJECT REPORT AND DRAFT PROJECT APPROVAL REPORT Report drafts will be prepared in accordance with guidelines as shown in Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual. TASK 1-11: COORDINATE ACTIVITIES WITH ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT Because the environmental study requires investigation of alternative configurations, the CONSULTANT will furnish the environ3nental consultant with required input during their studies. The information may include preliminary structure type and size, roadway fill height and extent, alternative ramp and roadway locations, and riqht-of-way requirements. Also required will be the preliminary information from the engineering studies and reports, including the preliminary geotechnical, and drainage data. TASK 1-12: PREPARE REVISED PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION (PUC) PRIORITY APPLICATION FOR GRADE SEPARATION CONSULTANT will prepare information required for application to the PUC for grade separation funding. This information will be based on the revised geometrics and budget estimate established under previous tasks. TASK 1-13: PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES CONSULTANT shall provide any additional services as requested by the CITY to include the following items: o Perform additional field surveys to supplement information obtained within Task 1-3. o Perform boundary resolution and right-of-way survey. o Provide design services for alternative concept development. o Attend meetings in addition to those in Task 1-4 o Other items as determined by the CITY. Since the extent of these services is not established at this time, the required fee for this task cannot be determined. An amount of $20,000 is included in the total fee to allow for work which may be required for the task. SFA9/057 TASK Task 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 1-6 1-7 1-8 1-9 1-10 1-11 1-12 1-13 ORDER NO. 1 EXHIBIT 1-B THE OYSTER POINT INTERCHANGE AND GRADE SEPARATION SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA SCHEDULE 1986 1987 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Administration Engineering Management Data Collection Meetings and Coordination' Prepare Base Maps Refine Conceptual Plan Prepare Preliminary Reports Based Upon Existing Data Prepare Planning Estimate Prepare Project Schedule Prepare Draft Project Report and Draft Project Approval Coordinate Activities with Environmental Consultant Prepare Revised Public Utilities Commission (PUC) Priority Application for Grade Separation Provide Supplemental Services xx XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX X X X XX XX XX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX XX XX XX XXXX XXXX xx xx xx April 14 Completion of Task Order No. SFP45/002 xxx XXX xx xx ~XHIBIT 1-C ~ THE OYSTER POINT INTERCHANGE AND GRADE SEPARATION SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA The maximum fee for the project is: Task 1-1: 1-2: 1-3: 1-4: 1-5: 1-6: 1-7: 1-8: 1-9: 1-10: 1-11: 1-12: Administration Engineering Management Data Collection Meetings and Coordination Prepare Base Maps Refine Conceptual Plan Prepare Preliminary Reports Based Upon Existing Data Prepare Planning Estimate Prepare Project Schedule Prepare Draft Project Report and Draft Project Approval Report Coordinate Activities with Environmental Consultant Prepare Revised P.U.C Priority Application for Grade Separation Subtotal 1-13: Provide Supplemental Service (Allow) TOTAL NOT-TO-EXCEED FEE Maximum Fee $ 2,100 5,300 5,300 23,100 48,900 37,000 21,300 10,500 2,100 2,100 5,200 ~2 100 $165,000 20tO00 $185,000 SFA9/058 StaffReport AGENDA ITEM #6 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: April 27, 2005 The Honorable Mayor and City Council Terry White, Director of Public Works BEACON STREET STORM DRAIN REPLACEMENT ENGINEERING FILE SD-00- I, PROJECT NO. 51-13231-0008 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council, by motion, accept the Beacon Street Storm Drain Replacement Project as complete in accordance with the plans and specifications. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: This project replaced the previous stoma drain on the north portion of Beacon Street in order to reduce local flooding during the wet season. A portion of the previous line had settled over the years and had a severe \;-dip in the line between two drain inlets. FUNDING: The construction was completed by Northwest Construction at a total cost of $177,333.15 which includes the awarded amount of $154,240.00 plus $23,093.15 for extra costs for unknown field conditions such as hauling contaminated excavation soil to a disposal site in Half Moon Bay and additional concrete/asphalt repairs. There was adequate funding for the project. Terry White i } Director of Pt~b:lic Works BaYrrrY/M. Nagel ~ City Manager "--__.~ RTH/TW G:\PROJECTS\SD-00-1 Beacon ST. Stm-m\staffrepo~tacceptance.doc Staff Report AGENDA ITEM # 7 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: April 27, 2005 Honorable Mayor and City Council Marry Van Duyn, Assistant City Manager OYSTER POINT GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT PHASE 1II (HOOK RAMPS) AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT WITH BRIAN, KANGAS, FOULK (BKF) FOR $578,918. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an Amendment to the consulting services agreement with Brian, Kangas, Foulk (BKF) for continued design engineering and construction support services for the Oyster Point Grade Separation Project Phase III (Hook Ramps) in the amount of $578,918. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION On September 24, 1997, the City entered into an agreement with BKF for design and engineering services for the Oyster Point Grade Separation Project Phase 11I (Hook Ramps). This amendment for the amount of $578,918 will include additional services needed for construction support, record of survey and record drawings to complete the construction and to close out the project. Construction on this phase is planned to be completed by August 2005. Final record drawings, record of survey and right-of-way transfers are estimated to be complete by December 2005. FUNDING Funding is available through the 2004-2005 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the Oyster Point Grade Separation Project and Phase m (Hook Ramps) Project. Staff Report Subject: OYSTER POINT GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT PHASE 1/I (HOOK RAMPS) AMENDMENT 4 TO THE CONTRACT OF BRIAN, KANGAS, FOULK (BKF) Page 2 By: .~~)., .~x A ?~ Marty Van Duyn-- - Assistant City Manager Approved~ I, / ,-~ ............ / '.-Ba'/rr~?~fi. Nagel ? City Manager Attachment: Resolution Copy of Amendment Letter of Amendment Request Copy of Brian, Kangas, Foulk contract RESOLUTION NO. C1TY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSUIJFING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BRIAN, KANGAS, FOULK FOR CONTINUED DESIGN ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE OYSTER POINT GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT III (HOOK RAMPS) IN THE AMOUNT OF $578,918 WHEREAS, staff recommends the authorization of an amendment to the consulting services agreement with Brian, Kangas, Foulk for continued design engineering and construction support services for the Oyster Point Grade Separation Project Phase III (Hook Ramps) in the amount of $578,918; and WHEREAS, funding is available through the 2004-2005 Capital Improvement Program Budget for the Oyster Point Grade Separation Project and Phase III (Hook Ramps) Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City Council hereby authorizes an amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with Brian, Kangas, Foulk for continued design engineering and construction support services for the Oyster Point Grade Separation Project 11I (Hook Ramps) in the amount of $578,918 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the agreement on behalf of the City of South San Francisco. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a meeting held on the __ day of ., 2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: City Clerk S:\Current Reso's\4-27-05brian.kangas. foulk.res.doc AUTHORIZATION OF PAYMENT IN ADDITION TO CONTRACT AMOUNT FOR BRIAN, KANGAS, FOULK WHEREAS, CITY and CONSULTANT have entered into an Agreement dated September 24, 1997 whereby CONSULTANT will perform certain services related to the Oyster Point Grade Separation Project Phase III (Hook ramps); and, WHEREAS, CITY is authorized to pay CONSULTANT a total of three million, seven hundred one thousand, five hundred sixty seven dollars ($3,701,567), for said services; and, WHEREAS, in order to continuing services anticipated through the end of construction, CONSULTANT requests additional payment in the amount of five hundred seventy eight thousand, nine hundred eighteen dollars ($578,918); and, WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, the City Manager is authorized to provide payment in excess of that stated in the Agreement for additional services performed. NOW THEREFORE, in accordance with the terms set forth in the Agreement, the City Manager hereby authorizes an additional payment of five hundred seventy eight thousand, nine hundred eighteen dollars ($578,918); to be made to CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT agrees this will be the CITY's total contribution for payment of additional costs and/or services under the Agreement unless additional payments are authorized in accordance with the terms of the Agreement and said terms of payment are mutually agreed to by and between the parties. All other terms, conditions and provisions in the Agreement remain in full force and effect. If there is a conflict between the terms of this Amendment and the Agreement, the terms of the Agreement will control unless specifically modified by this Amendment. Dated: By: CONSULTANT By: Barry Nagel, City Manager Approved as to Form: By: Steven T. Mattas, City Attorney F:/file cabinet/my files/staffreports/BKF amendment I BI F ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS March 24, 2005 BKF No. 960241-15,17,18,19 ?CEIVED AR 2 4 2005 Mr. Ray Razavi City Engineer City of South San Francisco PO Box 711 South San Francisco, CA 94080 Subject: Engineering and Surveying Services Route 101/Bayshore Boulevard Hook Ramps Dear Ray: As requested, we have attached a copy of our June 22, 2004 request for additional services to cover anticipated services to the end of construction. This request brings our PO with the City in line with the project Forecast-at-Completion. The request was made in June 2004, as requested by the City, to allow time for our PO to be updated before the $3,701,567 limit was reached. The limit was reached four months later in October 2004. Since then we have continued to provide the City with prompt response to construction staking requests and RFIs so that the construction schedule is not impacted. It is now nine months since we submitted our PO and we request that it is processed without further delay so that we can continue to provide our services to the end of construction. Very truly yours, BKF ENGINEERS Adrian Corlett, PE Associate/Project Manager Copies: Jan O'Flaherty, BKF Engineers, Principal/Vice-President Doug Wiebe, Wiebe Associates 540 Price Avenue Redwood City California 94o63-~411 phone 65o.482.63oo fax 650.482.6399 www. bkf. com BIll' ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS .Tune 22, 2004 BICF No. 960241-15,17,18,19 Mr. ~lohn Gibbs Director of Public Works City of South San Francisco P.O. Box 711 South San Francisco, CA 94080 Subject: Engineering and Surveying Services Route lO1/Bayshore Boulevard Hook Ramps Dear John: In response to your request, we have prepared this proposal to cover anticipated services through the end of construction. The target construction completion date is now August 1, 2005. This request for additional services reflects those tasks to be performed by BKF as shown in the updated project budget. This is a request to bring our PO with the City in line with the ForecaSt-at-Completion numbers .shown in the project budget spreadsheet as presented to SMCTA. This request for additional services also covers the previous project budget update from September 2003. The updated Forecast-at-Completion numbers are a combination of the additional construction duration of the project and response to specific issues that have arisen during the past year's construction activity. In approximate chronological order these can be summarized as follows: the Contract//2 Bid Package was revised to include CH2M Hill's Retaining Wall No.6; support for the ongoing process to the finalize right-of-way and easement agreements with SFWD; the need for a cathodic protection consultant as the SFWD potential corrosion issue was more complicated than ori~nally anticipated; a prolonged Caltrans approval process which included changes such as the new requirement for a Storm Water Data Report; an ongoing process since the completion of Contract #1 to satisfy SFWD's punchlist requirements; a significant number of RFIs from thc contractor over the past several months; and a need for additional record drawings as the number of contract drawings has increased. In addition, this request includes the work involved in merging the Contract #1 bid package with the Flyover, which was anticipated in our last contract addendum request but not specifically excluded .since the cost was not known at that time. 540 Pdce Avenue Redwood City Califomia p4o63.z4:z~ phone 650.482.6300 fax 650.482.6399 www. bkfcom Mr. John Gibbs City of South San Francisco June 22, 2004 BKF No. 960241-15,17,18,I9 Page 2 SERVICES DURING CONSTRUCTION · Design Support Services During Bid and Construction It is now estimated that construction of Phases 1 and 2 will take a total of 46 months to complete, with the target construction completion date of August 1, 2005. Services during construction are therefore now estimated as follows: BKF Design Support TY Lin Design Support Submittal Review MicroStation conversion Record Drawings Total 200 weeks ~ 30 hr./week ~ $135/hr. 340 hr. ~ $145/hr. 400 hr. ~ $135/hr. 150 hr. ~ $135/hr 280 drawings (~l 3 hr./drawing ~ $99/hr. $793,630 49,000 54,000 20,000 83,000 999,630 Construction Staking Construction staking for layout of one set of stakes is estimated as follows: 195 days (30% of construction period) ~ $2050/day $400,000 · Record of Survey: We will be required to provide Caltrans with updated Right-of-Way Record Maps at the conclusion of construction_ As you are aware, processing a Record of Survey through Caltrans is a lengthy and laborious process. Based on the effort required to prepare and process the Phase I Record of Survey, we estimate that this fee will be $100,000. A1VIENDED FEE BUDGET The total contract figure and category budgets shown below match the mounts budgeted for BKF services in accordance with forms submitted to SMCTA for the purposes of tracking project expenditures. The above extensions of the scope of work will be performed on a time-and-expense basis per our current contract terms for a fee not-to- exceed the revised contract amount. A copy ofBKF's hourly fee schedule for 2004 is enclosed for reference. In mary, engineering and surveying services provided by BKF will be as shown below. Numeric designations are for SMCTA cost elements. Mr. John Gibbs City of South San Francisco June 22, 2004 BKF No. 960241-15,17,18,19 Page 3 Description Fees for Amended Scope of Services 0.99 1. 2. 3. Preliminary Engineering (BKF No. 960241-15) Traffic Studies PSR/PR Geometric Approval Drawings 0.99 Subtotal $ 39,877 103,527 15,214 158,618 0.01 1. 2: 3. 5. 6. 7. 8. Final Design - PS&E (BICF No. 960241-17) Survey & Mapping Structure Design (T. Y. Lin) Civil Design: a~ Civil Design b. Electrical Engineering for Ramp Metering (MTH) c. Landscape Architecture (Su~rnura) d. Cathodic Protection (M.J. Schiff) Oeotechnical Rngineering Utility Coordination and Design: Right-of- Way Engineering Project Management & Administration. Detour Traffic Plans: 0.01 Subtotal 132,737 163,518 1,425,420 35,000 40,000' 36,000 NIC-byothers 432,802 121,809 216,951 _ 18.000 2,622,237 0.19 1. 2. 3. 4. Services During Construction (BKF No. 960241-18,-19) Civil Construction Support Structural Construction Support (T. Y. Lin) Construction Staking Right of Way Record of Surv~f at Completion 0.19 Subtotal 950,630 49,000 400,000 ~00,000 1,499,630 Total Revised Contract Amount Less Current Contract Amount Amendment Total 4,280,485 .(3,701,567) $ 578,918 Mr. John Gibbs City of South San Francisco June 22, 2004 BKF No. 960241-I 5,17,18,19 Page 4 The above amendment also covers the previous project budget update f~om September 2003 so that our PO with the City is brought in line with the Forecast-at-Completion numbers in the SMCTA project budget spreadsheet If this proposal is acceptable, please provide us w/th confirmation of your authorization to proceed with these additional services at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions, I may be reached by telephone directly at (650) 482-6336. Very truly yours, LS Q._~cip al/Vi ce-Pres ident~~./ JMO'F:hs K.'hMeln~I996~60241 l'tmak R~mps~14 lvOc~-Proposal~A Proposa]t~O~s.~004061~...Addl~q.doc Copies: Adrian Corlett, BKF Engineers Doug Wiebe, Wiebe Associates APPROVED STANDARD CONTRACTUAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made at South San Francisco, California, as of ~'~O ~,___~t/~__, 1997, by and between the CITY of South San Francisco, a municipal corporation ("CITY"), at~d Brian, Kangas, Foulk ("CONSULTANT"), who agree as follows: A. ~SI.~C~F~. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall provide to CITY the services described in Exhibit "A". CONSULTANT shall provide said services at the time, place and in the manner stx~cified ir~ Exhibit "A". B. PA~. CITY shall pay CONSULTANT for services rendered pursuant to tiffs Agreement at the time and in the manner set forth in Exhibit "B". The payments specified in Exhibit "B" shall be the only payments to be made to CONSULTANT for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall submit all billings for said services to CITY ........ according to the usual and customary procedures and practices of the CITY. C. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT. Except as set forth in Exhibit "C", CONSULTANT shall, at its sole cost and expense, furnish all facilities and equipment which may be required for furnishing services pursuant to this Agreement. CITY shall furnish to CONSULTANT only the services, facilities and equipment listed in Exhibit "C" according to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit "C". Unless otherwise provided, all services and material to be furnished by the CITY will be without cost to the CONSULTANT. D. GENERAL PROVISIONS. The general provisions set forth in Exhibit "D" are part of this Agreement. In the event of any inconsistency between said general provisions and any other terms or conditions of this Agreement, the other term or condition shall control insofar as it is inconsistent with the general provisions. --'- E. ~. All exhibits referred to herein are attached hereto and are by this reference ~ ' incorporated herein. F. CONTRACT ADNIINISTRATION. This Agreement shall be administered by the Director of Public Works. All correspondence shall be directed to or through the Director of Public Works or his or her designee. G. NOTICES. Any written notice to Consultant shall be sent to: Ms. Janine O'Flaherty Vice /c~-, ;,de~/: Brian Kangas Foulk 540 Price Avenue Redwood City., CA 94063 Any written notice to City shall be sent to: Director of Public Works City of South San Francisco 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 Executed as of the day first above stated: City Clerk Approved as to form: oj/CONSULT2.AGR .... Exhibit "A": Exhibit"B": Exhibit "C": Scope of Services Payment Schedule City Services City of South San Francisco, a muni~rporation City Mar~ger~ Exhibit "D": General Provisions Exhibit "E"' Consultant Team 2 EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of ~vork is set forth in the attached three page BKF No. 96024 I- 11 docmnent dated September 19, 1997, entitled "Preliminary Engineering for Hook Ramp PSR/PR C-~ PS ak_ E", which contains Tasl<s One (1.0) through Six (6.0) which CONSULTANT shali complete as provided herein. CONSULTANT shall provide and CITY shall review all svork completed after each Task. After reviewing the ~vork completed, CITY ~vill authorize CONSULTANT in writing to proceed with the next Taslc No work shall be commenced by CONSULTANT on any Task until such rv~:itten authorization is given CITY. J:\WPD~w~405~01 ka, GREEkFE B 98kB I~. EX_A S¢l:rtcmb~r 19, 1997 No. 960241.11 Scope of Wori, This scoi~ is Field ~ ~o~ P.3 Sept.'tuber 19, I~97 B~LF No. 9602~1o] l Refine geomc'tri¢ ~ign for sele~-t~d Pr~ l~you~ pla~ profile Compl~ ~oa~t ~ fi~t~f.~y ~ ~ ~velop ~fion ~e C~r~ ~~ ~g C~r~ w/~o~ ~ T~ ~e ~c of~le ~on Septerabcr 19, 1997 BK.F No. 960241.11 P~ge ~ Brian Kangas Foui Engineers o Surveyors o Planners February 24, 1998 BKF No. 960241-15,16 _Consultant Team Route 101/Bayshore Boule;,~r-~ Hook Ramps South San Francisco and Brisbane, California Brian Kangas Foulk Jan/ne O'Flaherty Bennett Chun CCS Planning and Engineering Mike Aronson Biggs Cardosa Associates Tom Swayze MTH Engineers Ken Ngai Projects Pacific Chad Cructher Civil engineering and lead consultant for PSR/PR and PS&E Traffic report and operational analysis for PSR/PR Structural engineering for retaining walls PS&E Electr/cal engineering for lighting and ramp metering PS&E Landscape architecture for slope planting & irrigation PS&E Professional Services by Others: Professional services to be provided by the City of South San Francisco include project management (Wiebe & Associates), hazardous material testing and engineering (CI-I2MHiI1), geotechnical engineering (CH2MHill), and initial topographic surveying (CH2MHill). Professional services for design of utility- system relocations will be provided by the impacted utility companies. · /,, t EAST OF J City of South Sa~ Francisco Engineers.. Surveyors ~ Planners February 24, 1998 B.KF No. 960241-15, 16 7Yansmitted [qa Fax to (650) 829-6689 Mr. Dmmis Chuck Public Works Engineering City of South San Francisco P.O. Box 711 South San Francisco, CA 94080 Subject: Engineering and Smweying Services Route 101/Bayshore Boulevard Hook Ramps South San Francisco and Brisbane,' California Dear Derails: ;>:. Enclosed is a revised consultant team list. The nmne o£ l:he landscape ~u'chitecture firm has been con'ected. Projects Pacific is also providing landscape architect-ure services 1:or the. ~y's Oyster Point fly-over project (as a subconsultm~t to CH2MHilI.) As I mentioned this morning, the enclosed team is necessary to provide all services proposed in my February 3, 1998 letter to John Gibbs. The original pro3osal included BKF work only. Please let me know if you need anything else to finalize the contract. Very truly yours, BRIAN KANGAS FOULK L'-----t~mcipal/Vice_President JMO'F:hs Enclosure BKF2~\ OL~ ~x,.IA~N~990\go024 i\CORRESP/,ProB~sali(,buck,9~,?..l~.~,~[ ~ d'~c 540 Price Avenue ,~ Redwood City, CA940~3 ,, {650)482-6300 FAX~'5",.o', ,,c~ EXHIBIT "B" PAYMENrl' SCHEDULE 1. CITY shall pay CONSULTANT an amount not to exceed the total sum of Two Hundred Thirty Thousand Dollars ($230,000.00) for services to be performed and reimbursable ,costs, not to exceed $15,000, incurred pursuant to this Agreement as set forth below: a. Costs for Taslcs One (1.0) through Three (3.0) (as set forth in Exhibit "A') shall not exceed Fifty Five Thousand Dollars ($5.5,000). b. Costs for Taslcs Four (4.0) through SA: (6.0) shall not exceed One Hundred Sixty Five Thousand Dollars ($165,000). c. There is a built-in Ten Thousand Dollar ($10,0'00) budget contingency for ~vork required in Tasks One (I .0) through Six (6.0). 2. CONSULTANT shall submit invoices, not more often than once a month during the term of this Agreement. Invoices shall comply w-ith CITY requirements for same and shall indicate which Task(s) enumerated in the Scope of Services is covered by the invoice. 3. CITY shall make monthly payments, based on such invoices, for services satisfactorily performed, provided that CONSULTANT has received prior authorization from CITY to proceed with the enumerated Task(s) covered by the invoice. 4. The total sum of Two Hundred Thirty Thousand ($230,000) for services and costs not to exceed Fifteen Thousand ($15,000) as stated above, shall be the total which CITY shall pay for the services to be rendered CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement. CITY shall not pay any additional sum for any expense or costs whatsoever incurred by CONSULTANT in rendering services pursuant to this Agreement. 5. CITY shall make no payment for any extra, urtn~r or additional service pursuant to this Agreement unless such extra smMce and the price therefor is agreed Exhibit February 24, 1998 - pcp J:\WPDRClNRSW~405kO BAG REEWEB 98~B KF.EX.B Page 1 of 3 to in writing and executed by the CITY Manager or other designated official of CITY authorized to obligate CITY thereto, prior to the time such extra service is rendered. 6. The services to be provided under this Agreement may be terminated without cause at any point in time in the sole and exclusive discretion of CITY. In this event, CITY shall compensate the CONSULTANT for alt outstanding costs incurred for all CITY authorized work which is satisfactorily completed as of the date of written notice thereof. CONSULTANT shall maintain ~dequate togs and timesheets in order to verify costs incurred to date. J :\WPD~M NRSW'~405~ 1 ~G REEggEB 98~3 KF. EX. B Exhibit ~B~ February 24, 1998 - pcp J:\WPI)kMN~40~ I~G~ 9~ ~.~.B Page 2 of 3 EXHIBIT "C' None, other than those specified in Exhibit "D'. J:\WPI~MNRSWVI05~01 ~AG REEXFEB 98~B K.F. EX.C Exhibit C February 3, 1998 - pcp I:\WPDXMNRS¥¥M05~01 ~GREEXFEB98~KF. EX. C Page 1 of I EXHIBIT "D" GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT. At all times during the term of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall be an independent contractor and shall not be an employee of City. CITY shall have the fight to control CONSULTANT only insofar as the results of CONSULTANT's services rendered are pursuant to this Agreement. 2. LICENSES~_PERMITS, ETC. CONSULTANT represents and warrants to CITY that it has all licenses, pem~its, qualifications and approval of whatsoever nature which are legally required for CONSULTANT to practice its profession. CONSULTANT represents and warrants to CiTY that CONSULTANT shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect at all times dm4ng the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals which are legally required for CONSULTANT to practice its profession. In addition to the foregoing, CONSULTANT shall obtain and maintain during the term hereof a valid City of South San Francisco Business License_ 3. TIM____~E. CONSULTANT shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this Agreement as may be reasonably necessaLy for satisfactory performance of CONSULTANT's obligations pursuant to this Agreement. (a) The CITY will authorize the CONSULTANrF in writing to proceed prior to the CONSULTANT starting work on any of the tasks listed in Exhibit ~'A." (b) The CITY will make its facilities accessible to CONSULTANT as required to CONSULTANT's performance of its sm~,'ices. The CITY will be responsible for ali acts of CITY'S personnel performed ~vith the scope of their employment. (c) Unless otherwise agreed to in the Scope of Sep, qces, the CITY will "obtain' arrange and pay for all advertisements for bids, permits and licenses required by local, state or federal authorities, and land easements, rights-of-way and access necessa .fy for the CONSULTANT's services or project construction. (d) The CITY will examine the CONSULTANT's studies, reports, sketches, drawings, specifications and other doctm.~ents, obtain advice of an attorney, insurance counselor, accountant, auditor and other consultants as CITY deems appropriate, and render decisions required of CITY in a timely manner. 4. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. CONSULTANT shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract "occurrence coverage" insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property whid~ may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the CONSULTANT. its agents, representatives, employees or subconsultants. The cost of such insurance shall be included in the CONSULTANT's bid. 2 (a) (b) no less than: ..Minimum__ Limits of Insurance. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad I. Insurance Services Office fon2~ number G1 0002 (Ed. 1/73) covering comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services Office form number GL 0404 coveting Broad fbm~ Comprehensive General Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage ("occurrence" form CG oool.) Insurance Services Office form number CA O00l (Ed. 1/78) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 "any auto" and endorsement CA 0025. Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability Insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain limits General Liability: $ 1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily inju .ry, personal injury and property damage. If commercial General Liability insurance or other form with a generaI aggregate limit is used, either the general agg~:egate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. <c) Automobile Liability: $1,000.000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. YVorker's Compensation and E~a~ployers Liability: 1,4,rorker's compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability limits of SI,000,000 per accident. Other Insurance Provisions. The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. General Liability and Automobile Liability Coverages. a. The CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the CONSULTANT; products and completed operations of the CONSULTANT, premises owned, occupied or used by the CONSULTANT, or automobiles oxx-~qed, leased, hired or borrowed by the CONSULTA1WF. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of the protection afforded to the City, its office~-s, officials, employees or volunteers. b. The CONSULTANT's insurance coverage shall be primary.- insurance as respects the CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the CITY, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be in excess of the CONSULTANT's insurance and shall not cont.dbute xvith it. c. Any failure to comply ~4th reporti~g provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the CITY, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. d. The CONSULTANT's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except ,aqth respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the CITY, its officers, offidals, employees and volunteers for losses arising from ~vork performed by the CONSULTANT for the CITY. 3. Professional Liability. CONSULTANT shall carry professional liability insurance in an amount of $2,000,000 per claim; a ,000,000 aggregate, to ~2 adequately protect the CONSULTANT against liability caused by negligent acts, errors or omissions on the part of the CONSULTANT in the course of perfom~ance of the services specified in this Agreement. 4, All Coverages. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by ~- either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (:30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the CITY. (e) -Acce tPS-~ility--9-f-Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VH. (0 Verification of Coverage. CONSULTANrI' shall furnish CITY with certificates of insurance and ~vith original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. .....: The certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the CITY before work commences. The CITY reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of alt required insurance policies, at any time. (g) Subconsultants. CONSULTANT shall include all subconsultants as insureds under its policies or shall £urnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subconsultant. All coverages for subconsultants shall be st~bject to ail of the requirements stated herein. (h) The Risk Manager of CITY may approve a variation in those insurance requirements upon a deten~ination that the coverages, scope, limits and forms of such insurance are either not commercially available or that the CITY's interests are otherwise fully protected. 5. CONSULTANT NO AGENT. Except as CITY may specify in writing, CONSULTANT shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of CITY in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. CONSULTANT shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Aga'eement to bind CITY to any obligation whatsoever. 6. ASSIGNMENT PROHIBITED. No party to this Agreement may assign any right or obligation pursuant to this Agreement. Any attempted or purported assignment of any right or obligation pursuant to this Agreement shall be void and of no effect. 7. CONSULTANT TEAM. The CONSULTANT. shall provide and maintain the professional team to perform the services and furnish the materials in connection with this Agreement whose names and capacities are set forth on Exhibit. WE.' In the event that any member of that team shall leave the employ of the CONSULTANT or be transferred to another office of the CONSULTANT, the CONSULTANT shall so advise the CITY and replace him or her x~4th a new member who is competent to perform the required work and who shall be satisfactory to the CITY. Such other agents or employee consultants or subconsultants not listed on Exhibit'"E~ as may be required to perform any portion of this Agreement shall be competent and shall be suitably experienced in the function which they perform. In the event that CITY, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement, desires the removal of any such persons, CONSULTANT shall, immediately upon receiving notice from CITY of sudq desire of CITY, cause the removal of such person or persons. 8. _STANDARD OF PERFORMANC~E. CONSULTANT shall perform all services required pursuant to this Agreement in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession in ,vhich CONSULTANT is engaged in the geographical area in which CONSULTANT practices its profession. All instruments of service o~' whatsoever nature which CONSULTANT delivers to CITY pursuan, t to this Agreement shall be prepared in a substantial, first class and workmanlike manner and confo;na to the standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in CONSULTANT's profession. The CONSULTANT ,vill re-perform any services not meeting this standard without additional compensation. 9. HOLD HARMLESS AND RESPONSIBILITh~ OF CONSULTANTS. CONSULTANT shall take responsibility for the ~vork, shall bear all losses and damages directly or indirectly resulting to him, to any subconsuttant, to the CITY, to CITY officers and employees, or to parties designated by the CITY, on account of the performance or character of the work, unforeseen difficulties, accidents, occurrences or other ca.uses predicated on active or passive negligence of the CONSULTANT or of any subconsultant. CONSULTANtr shall indemnif),, defend and hold harmless the CITY, its officers, offidals, directors, en~ployees and agents fron~ and against any or all loss, liability, expense, claim, costs (including costs of defense), suits, and damages of every lqind, nature and description directly or indirectly arising from the performance of the work. This parag~-aph shalI not be construed to exempt the CITY, its employees and officers from its own fraud, w/!If'ul injury or violation of law whether willful or negligent. For purposes of Section 2782 of the Civil Code the parties hereto recognize and agree that this agreement ~.s not a construction contract. By execution of this agreement CONSULTANT ac!mowiedges and agrees that it has read and understands the provisions hereof and that this paragraph~is a material element of consideration. Approval of the insurance contracts does not relieve the CONSULTANT or subconsultants from liability under this paragraph. 10. GOVERNMENTAL REGULATIONS. To the e-xtent that this Agreement may be funded by fiscal assistance from another governmental entity, CONSULTANT shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations to which CITY is bound by the terms of such fiscal assistance program. I 1. DoCUMENT~. Ali original calculations, reports, data, maps, models, charts, studies, surveys, photographs, memoranda or other written documents or materials prepared by CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of CITY upon completion of the work to be performed heretmder or upon termination of the Agreement provided, ho~vever, that the CONSULTANT may provide the CITY with legible photostatic copies in lieu of the originals. Any plans and specifications shall bear the name of the CONSULTANT together with the CONSULTANT's certification number, if any. If the CONSULTANT's working papers or product includes computer generated statistical material, the CONSULTANT shall provide the material to the CITY in a mutually agreefl-upon computer machine-readable format and media. 12. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE ~FVS. CONSULTANT shall comply with all laws applicable to the perfom~ance of the work hereunder, including, but not limited to, laws prohibiting discrimination based on race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical handicap, medical condition, marital status or sex. 13. USE OF RECYCLED PRODUCTS. CONSULTANri- shall prepare and submit when applicable all reports, ~vritten studies and other printed material on re.cycled paper to the extent it is available at equal or less cost than virgin paper. 14. MEDIATION. Should any dispute arise out of this Agreement, which cannpt be resolved by the parties, the parties shall meet in mediation and attempt to reach a resolution with the assistance of a mutually acceptable mediator. The costs of the mediator, if any, shall be paid equally by the parties. If a mediated settlement is reached, neither party shall be deemed the prevailing pa-ty for pm-poses of the settlement, and each party shall bear its o~xq~ legal costs. Neither party shall be permitted to file legal action without first meeting in mediation and making a good faith attempt to reach a mediated resolution. 15. FORCE MAJEURE. The CONSULTANT is not responsible for damages or delay in performance caused by acts of God, strikes, lockouts, accidents or ti Staff Report .4 GEND.4 ITEM #8 DATE: April 27, 2005 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Philip White, Fire Chief SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A NETWORK PROVIDER AGREEMENT WITH AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONSE (AMR) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a network provider agreement with American Medical Response (AMR). BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The Fire Department desires to enter into a network provider agreement with AMR. Such an agreement is necessary if the Department's non-emergency Basic Life Support (BLS) Ambulance is to receive authorization to transport Kaiser medical insurance subscribers to and from hospitals, clinics or doctors offices. AMR has the national, master non-emergency ambulance provider contract for Kaiser. In those instances where an AMR BLS ambulance is unable to transport the Kaiser subscriber, a member of the provider network would be called to provide the transport services instead. This provider network agreement would commit the Fire Department's BLS ambulance to provide non-emergency ambulance transport services for Kaiser subscribers in San Mateo, Santa Clara and San Francisco Counties when AMR is unable to do so. In the event, the Fire Department's BLS ambulance is unavailable, the transport request would be transferred to another provider in the network. There are no performance penalties contained in the agreement. Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Re: Network Provider Agreement with AMR Date: April 27, 2005 Page: 2 Other advantages of becoming a member of the provider network include placement on a 9-1-1 ambulance back-up list for San Mateo County. When AMR is unable to provide one of its own Advanced or Basic Life Support ambulances to the scene of a medical emergency the Fire Department's BLS ambulance would then respond. It is anticipated each of these services will provide significant revenue to the City. A primary reason being, payment is guaranteed by AMR for the authorized transport of Kaiser subscribers. FUNDING This network provider agreement does not create any ongoing financial obligation for the City of South San Francisco. By: Philip D. White Fire Chief Approved b' z,,,~" Ba~ M. Nag? City Manager~.~ ATTACHMENT: Resolution RESOLUTION NO. CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A NETWORK PROVIDER AGREEMENT WITH AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONSE (AMR) WHEREAS, staff recommends the authorization of a Network Provider Agreement with American Medical Response. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City Council hereby authorizes a Network Provider Agreement with American Medical Response. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the contract on behalf of the City of South San Francisco. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a meeting held on the __ day of ,2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: S:\Current Reso's\4-27-05amer/can.medical.response.res.doc ATTEST: City Clerk StaffReport AGENDA ITEM #9 DATE: April 27, 2005 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Terry White, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 2004/2005 CIP BUDGET AND APPROVE FUNDING FOR THE DEMOLITION OF THE GREENHOUSE STRUCTURES RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council, adopt a resolution, to amend the 2004/2005 CIP Budget and to authorize funding of $200,000.00 for the Demolition of the Greenhouse Structures at Orange Memorial Park. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The Greenhouse properties were acquired by the City in 1996 with the ultimate goal of expanding Orange Memorial Park as described in the Park Master Plan. Funding was not immediately available and an interim plan to use the existing buildings for farming, classrooms rentals, and art studios was put into place. The advanced age of the buildings/structures present numerous hazards to users, including broken/fallen glass and non compliance with cun'ent seismic and building standards. A fire, that consumed an outbuilding and damaged a portion of the Greenhouses in December of 2004, is an indication of problems that can be encountered with aging structures such as these if not improved or removed. The costs associated with maintaining and operating the facilities are exceeding their income, making removal desirable at this time. Once removed the land can be opened up to farming until the funding for the park improvements are available. This will assist the City in its budget condition with a positive cash flow and substantially reduced liabilities. Users must vacate the structures and optionshave been made available to them if they can use the open space that will remain. The Friends of San Bruno Mountain, as an example, are evaluating this option to find ways to keep their plants and equipment secure in a non enclosed environment. We will continue to work with any group on options and accommodations that include greenhouse removal as a first step. FUNDING: Funding for this project will come from the E1 Camino Real Redevelopment District which has adequate funding. Proposals are to be received in June for the demolition with work planned for August 2005. The work should take 30 days and not exceed $200,000. Staff Report Subject: Greenhouse Structures Demolition Page 2 Terry Whi~) Director of Public Works Approved:f'~/ kB~4 M'. Nagelf~ City Manager k....__ Attachments: Resolution RTH/TW G:PARK\PROJECTS\CG Greenhouse Demolition/fundingstaffreport.doc RESOLUTION NO. CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION A[ITHORIZING F[JNDIN(; IN THE AMOUNT OF $200,000 FOR THE DEMOLITION OF THE GREENHOUSE STRUCTURES AT ()RANGE MEMORIAL PARK AND AMENDING THE 2004/200,5 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BIJDGET WHEREAS, staff recommends the authorization of funding in the amount of $200,000 for the demolition of the Greenhouse Structures at Orange Memorial Park; and WHEREAS, funding fol' this project will come from the El Camino Real Redevelopment District. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City Council hereby authorizes funding in the amount of $200,000 for the demolition of the Greenhouse Structures at Orange Memorial Park and amends the 2004/2005 Capital Improvement Program Budget with funding from the E1 Camino Real Redevelopment District. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the agreement on behalf of the City of South San Francisco. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a meeting held on the __ day of ., 2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: S:\Cun'ent Reso's\4-27-05demolition.greenhouse.res.doc ATTEST: City Clerk Staff Report" AGENDA ITEM #10 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Ap.hi 27, 2005 Honorable Mayor and City Council Mark Raffaelli Chief of Police $5,000 REWARD RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council by motion, authorize the Chief of Police to offer a reward of $5,000 for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the person(s) responsible for the beating of a 1.3-year-old student in our city, B ACKGROUND/DISCUSS ION On Friday April 22, 2005, at about 9:30 in the evening, an. unknown person(s) assaulted, a 13-year-old foreign exchange student, who is staying with a family in the Westbomugh area, as he was walking home after a school activity. He was struck in the head at least four times with a blunt object, cracking his skull in four locations. His attackers left him lying on the ground bleeding from the head. The young man is in a coma and in critical conditJ, on. Under the normal course of an investigation, wc would wait until we had exhausted all our investigative steps be/f?re we would consider offering a reward. H6wever, this crime was so senseless and outrageous Wre~ waj~t tOe.expedite any information that will lead to the immediate arrest of the individual(s)who is · - 'Approve~.: ~ ,, ' ~"~ .... By 'Mark/Raf'l~adii/ .... "Y~aa-r~ ~. Nage.'~'''''~''' Chief' of Police City .Manager /1 GENDA ITEM #1Ia Staft Report DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: April 27, 2005 Honorable Mayor and City Council Marty Van Duyn, Assistant City Manager REZONING OF THE PROPERTY AT 111 CHESTNUT AVENUE FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT (R-2-H) TO MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT (R-3-L) IN ACCORDANCE WITH SSFMC CHAPTER 20.87. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP ALLOWING THE SUBDIVISION CREATING EIGHT (8) PARCELS AND COMMON AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH SSFMC TITLE 19. EXCEPTIONS FROM THE SSFMC TITLE 19 ALLOWING LOTS SIZES LESS THAN 5,000 SQUARE FEET AND LOTS NOT FRONTING ON A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, IN ACCORDANCE THE SSFMC TITLE 19. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ALLOWING LOT SIZES SMALLER THAN THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT OF 5,000 SQUARE FEET AND REDUCED MINIMUM REQUIRED SETBACKS, AND PARKING AT A RATE OF 3 SPACES PER DWELLING UNIT INSTEAD OF 4.25 SPACES PER DWELLING UNIT, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SSFMC CHAPTER 20.78. AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGREEMENT RESTRICTING TWENTY PERCENT (20%) OF THE EIGHT (8) UNITS AS AFFORDABLE DWELLINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SFMC CHAPTER 20.125. DESIGN REVIEW ALLOWING FOR THE CONSTRUCTION A TWO- STORY EIGHT (8) UNIT CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT, SITUATED AT 111 CHESTNUT AVENUE (APN 011-312-090) IN THE MEDIUM DENSITY (R-2-H) ZONE DISTRICT, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SSFMC CHAPTER 20.85. Owner and Applicant: Best Designs Case No.: P02-0020 Staff Report Subject: Page 2 of 5 111 Chestnut Townhomes RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council follow the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve 1.) Rezoning of the property at 111 Chestnut Avenue from Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-2-H) to Multi-Family Residential Zoning District (R-3-L) in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.87, 2.) Tentative Subdivision Map allowing the subdivision creating eight (8) parcels and common area in accordance with SSFMC Title 19, 3.) Exceptions from the SSFMC Title 19 allowing lots sizes less than 5,000 square feet and lots not fronting on a public right of way, in accordance the SSFMC Title 19, 4.) Planned Unit Development allowing lot sizes smaller than the minimum requirement of 5,000 square feet and reduced minimum required setbacks, and parking at a rate of 3 spaces per dwelling unit instead of 4.25 spaces per dwelling unit, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.78, 5.) Affordable Housing Agreement restricting twenty percent (20%) of the eight (8) units as affordable dwellings in accordance with SFMC Chapter 20.125, and 6.) Design Review allowing for the construction a two-story eight (8) unit condominium development, situated at 111 Chestnut Avenue (APN 011-312-090) in the Medium Density (R-2-H) Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.85, subject to making the required findings and adopting conditions of approval. BACKGROUND: At the January 20, 2005 Planning Commission meeting, the Commissioners reviewed the proposed development and offered comments involving design compatibility, density, parking and access. The Commissioners established a subcommittee to meet with the applicant to resolve these issues. The Planning Commission Subcommittee met with the applicant on February 10, 2005 and offered several design suggestions. The applicant revised the plans incorporating the comments. At the Planning Commission meeting of March 17, 2005 the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the proposed development. Project Overview The 0.523 acre site was previously used as a single-family dwelling. The project includes the construction of eight two to three-story residential condominiums. As many as two of the dwellings will be restricted as affordable units. Parking will be provided on-site in individual unit garages and several open at-grade visitor parking spaces. The site will be landscaped and will provide decks attached to the un/ts. The site is adjacent to other dwellings including multi-family and the new Oak Farms town home development. DISCUSSION: The project site's General Plan land use designation, High Density Residential, allows multi-family development. The project generally complies with the General Plan goals and policies. The present zoning is Medium Density Residential (R-2-H), which does not allow the proposed density. The applicant is requesting to rezone the site from Medium Density Residential (R-2-H) to Multi-Family Residential (R-3- L) Zone District, consistent with the City's adopted General Plan. As part of the Planned Unit Development the applicant is requesting exceptions from lot area and setbacks and lot coverage to allow the eight (8) units to be on individual lots. Statistics regarding the individual buildings and lots are attached to this staff report. Staff Report Subject: Page 3 of 5 111 Chestnut Townhomes A Tentative Subdivision Map is proposed to divide the lot into eight (8) lots and common area. Exceptions are requested from the City Subdivision requirements associated with the Planned Unit Development exceptions. The project will include two affordable dwelling units in accordance with the provisions of SSFMC Chapter 20.125. The applicant has met with the City Housing Division staff to discuss and initiate the Affordable Housing Agreement between the City and the applicant. Because the project involves a zone change the project will also be required to be reviewed by the City Council. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The building generally complies with current City development standards as displayed in the following table: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Total Site Area: 0.523 acres [22,800 SF] Height Maximum: 50 FT Proposed: 35 FT Floor Area Ratio: Maximum: No Max Proposed: NA Lot Coverage: Landscaping: Automobile Parking Townhome Maximum: 65% Proposed: 40% Minimum: 10% Proposed: 35% Minimum: 34 Proposed: 24 Multi family Minimum: 18 Proposed: 24 Setbacks Front Minimum: 15 FT Proposed: 15 FT (Chestnut) : : Side Minimum: 5 FT Proposed: 10 FT Rear Minimum: 11.5 FT Proposed: 10 FT Note: IndividUal lots vary in setbacks and lot coverage. The parking is proposed to provide 3 spaces per dwelling which exceeds the multifamily standard. The SSFMC Chapter 20.74 requires as much as 4.25 spaces for townhouse developments (2 garage spaces, 2 driveway apron spaces and 0.25 visitor parking spaces per dwelling). However, City staff is of the opinion that the 4.25 space requirement is predicated on large developments involving sufficient acreage to provide private streets and driveway aprons such as the newer portions of Terrabay, and many of the Staff Report Subject: Page 4 of 5 111 Chestnut Townhomes developments on "condo hill" (generally the west side of Sign Hill). For small infill sites, without the oppommity to create private roadways and driveway aprons, such as 111 Chestnut, 3 spaces per dwelling is an acceptable parking ratio. The applicant is proposing to reduce some of the minimum required side and rear setbacks for the individual lots although the overall development generally complies with the minimum setbacks required for a multifamily building - in this regard the front and side yards comply and the rear yards come close to the 11.5 foot yard setback. Units will be provided with private yards and balconies and two play areas shared in common. Lot sizes are reduced in order for the town homes to be constructed on separate lots and sold separately. Common area is proposed and will consist of the shared driveway, the two play areas and the front yard landscaped areas. The common areas will be maintained by the homeowner's association established for the development ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: City staff prepared and circulated for public comment a Mitigated Negative Declaration for a period of twenty (20) days from April 4 to April 23, 2003, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. No substantive comments were received. The environmental document identified a couple of potential impacts including storm water runoff and construction activities. Mitigation measures are proposed to reduce the identified impacts to less than a significant level. CONCLUSION: The construction of an eight (8) unit condominium is consistent with the City's General Plan and with the Rezoning, Planned Unit Development and Housing Agreement with all applicable requirements of the City's Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. City staff recommends that the City Council follow the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve the following: 1). 2.) 3.) 4.) 5.) Rezoning of the property at 111 Chestnut Avenue from Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-2-H) to Multi-Family Residential Zoning District (R-3-L) in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.87. Tentative Subdivision Map allowing the subdivision creating eight (8) parcels and common area in accordance with SSFMC Title 19. Exceptions from the SSFMC Title 19 allowing lots sizes less than 5,000 square feet and lots not fronting on a public right of way, in accordance the SSFMC Title 19. Planned Unit Development allowing lot sizes smaller than the minimum requirement of 5,000 square feet and reduced minimum required setbacks, and parking at a rate of 3 spaces per dwelling unit instead of 4.25 spaces per dwelling trait, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.78. Housing Agreement restricting twenty percent (20%) of the eight (8) units as affordable dwellings in accordance with SFMC Chapter 20.125. Design Review allowing for the construction a two-story eight (8) unit condominium development. Staff Report Subject: Page 5 of 5 111 Chesmut Townhomes By: Assistant City Manager By: City Manager Attachments: City Council Resolution of Approval Planning Commission Resolution of Approval Draft Conditions of Approval Planning Commission Staff Reports April 18, 2002 September 19, 2002 January 20, 2005 March 17, 2005 Minutes April 18, 2002 September 19, 2002 January 20, 2005 March 17, 2005 Design Review Board Minutes March 19, 2002 Draft Housing Agreement Draft CC&Rs Mitigated Negative Declaration Plans RESOLUTION NO. CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (NO. ND02-0020), A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD-02-0002), A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP (SA02-0002) AND AN AFFORDABI iF, HOUSING AGREEMENT (AHA02-0001) FOR A .$2 ACRE SITE LOCATED AT 111 CHESTNUT AVENUE WHEREAS, the South San Francisco Planning Commission held duly noticed study sessions on April 18 and September 19, 2002; and, WHEREAS, the South San Francisco Planning Commission held duly noticed public hearings on January 20, 2005 and March 17, 2005; and WHEREAS, by Resolution adopted March 17, 2005, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the above-referenced land use entitlements; and WHEREAS, the property is designated as "High Density Residential" in the General Plan, as adopted in December 1999 and subsequently amended, and the applicant has requested a rezoning of the property from its current designation from Medium Density Residential (R-2-H) to Multi-Family Residential (R-3-L); and WHEREAS, based on public testimony and the materials submitted to the City of South San Francisco Planning Commission which include, but are not limited to: Housing Agreement prepared by the City of South San Francisco dated July 2004; Architectural and Landscape Plans, dated March 1, 2005, prepared by KDA Architects, Inc.; minutes of the Design Review Board meeting of June 19, 2001; April 18, 2002 Planning Commission staff report; September 19, 2002 Planning Commission staff report; January 20, 2005 Planning Commission staff report; March 17, 2005 Planning Commission staff report; April 18, 2002 Planning Commission Study Session; September 19, 2002 Planning Commission Study Session; January 20, 2005 Planning Commission hearing; and the March 17, 2005 Planning Commission hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: A. The City Council hereby finds as follows: Environmental Document. A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 02-0020 identifies potential adverse impacts attributable to the development of eight (8) new residences. The impacts can be reduced to a less than significant level through the implementation of mitigation measures. A mitgafion monitoring program is established to ensure that impacts are reduced to a less than significant level. Mitigation measures, including dust suppression measures during construction, preparation and submittal of a of Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, retention of a qualified acoustic engineer to identify methods to achieve acceptable noise levels, and limitation of construction hours, along with monitoring of these mitigation measures, have been incorporated into the project or made conditions of approval which will reduce identified impacts to a less than a significant level. Proiect Density. The project is consistent with the provisions of the City's General Plan that support residential development, and specifically with the Housing Element that supports provision of additional market rate and affordable housing in the community to meet on-going demand. The project's proposed density of 15.39 units per acre falls slightly below the threshold range for High Density Residential (between 18.1 and 30.0 units per acre) as contained in the General Plan Land Use Element. However, various site constraints and the site's configuration support this accommodation. In order to comply with the majority of lot and setback requirements, lot sizes have been reduced in order that townhouses may be constructed on separate lots and sold separately. The site is situated on a busy thoroughfare, and 15.39 units per acre is the maximum density that will permit preservation of the neighborhood's existing residential character. Moreover, the project fia'thers Policy number 2-G-6 of the General Plan, which encourages maximization of oppo~mities for residential development, including infill of underutilized sites, without impacting existing neighborhoods. The .523 acre site has previously been used for a single family dwelling. The proposed project provides for au additional seven residential units, while maintaining the existing character of the surrounding neighborhood. Design Compatibili _ty. The eight (8) new town houses and site landscaping comply with the City's Design Guidelines. Zoning Compliance. The residences comply with the requirements of South San Francisco Municipal Code Title 20 Zoning Regulations, as amended by the accompanying zone change ordinance. Tentative Subd/vision Map. As required by the Tentative Subdivision Map Procedures [SSFMC Title 19], the following findings are made in approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map allowing a new residential subdivision consisting of 8 single family town homes, and common area with exceptions for smaller lots, increased lot coverage and reduced building setbacks: A. The proposed lots generally conform with the requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and with the requirements of the City of South San Francisco Title 19 Subdivision Code. The map generally conforms to City standards with regards to design, drainage, utilities, and road improvements, and where these standards have not been fully met, conditions of approval 2 o have been added to assure that surroundings properties are not adversely affected. No offers of dedication are required. The lots, which vary in size and dimension, are equivalent to or larger than the sizes and configuration of residential lots in the immediate project vicinity, but are less than the City's minimum lot size requirements. The Planned Unit Development associated with the proposed development allows exceptions to the City's minimum lot size and configuration. Conditions of approval will ensure that the development complies with the Planned Unit Development and other City development standards. Bo The proposed 8 lot subdivision with a density of 15.39 dwellings per net acre generally complies with the General Plan Land Use Element designation of the site of High Density Residential even though the density does not meet the threshold of dwelling density per acre as expressed in the General Plan Land Use element. The provision of affordable housing will help the City meet its fair share allocation requirements and is consistent with the Housing Element policies regarding affordable housing. The Planned Unit Development associated with the proposed development allows exceptions to the minimum lot size, increased lot coverage and building setback requirements delineated in SSFMC Title 20 Zoning Regulations. Planned Unit Development Permit. As required by the Planned Unit Development Procedures [SSFMC Chapter 20.84], the following findings are made in approval of a residential Planned Unit Development allowing a new residential development consisting of 8 detached single family town homes with common area: The 0.53 acre site is physically suitable for a new 8 unit resident/al town home development with common area. . Exceptions for the development include reduced lot size, increased lot coverage and reduced building setbacks, all of which are similar to those allowed for other area residential developments. The new dwellings are of similar style to existing adjacent dwellings and shares similar floor area ratios. The new development is in conformity to the area in that the development closely mimics the lot area of the surrounding dwellings, general architecture and landscaping. Similar developments have existed in the area for many years, and no significant issues have been observed. The City's Design Review Board recommended approval of the proposed development. The revised plans, incorporating wrap-around balconies, differing and variegated designs for each unit, and sloped roofs, will provide for a project of superior design which will be of benefit to the neighborhood and community. Conditions of approval require that the development of the site follow the recommendations contained in the reports and conform to the City's development standards. The new residential development has been reviewed and recommended for approval by the City's Design Review Board as consistent with the City of South San Francisco Design Guidelines and to provide a high quality of fit -3- with the existing neighborhood. The new dwellings with exceptions are similar in design, floor area ratios and lot configuration to many of the existing neighborhood dwellings. The new lots will reinforce a residential environment of sustained desirability and stability by matching the development quality and design. C. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element designation of the site of Medium Density Residential and the Housing Element that encourages the development of housing to meet the City's fair share housing need. D. The new residential development will not be adverse to the public health, safety or general welfare of the community, unreasonably detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements, or detrimental to the comfort or convenience of persons working or residing in the vicinity. The development is designed to comply with the City design guidelines and the architectural theme of the similar town home developments in the vicinity. Conditions of approval are attached which will ensure that the development complies with local development standards and requirements. Provision of two affordable dwellings will assist the City in meeting the need for affordable housing. Public Benefit. The Subdivision of the .52 acre lot allowing the development of eight (8) townhouses and common area, will not be adverse to the public health, safety, or general welfare of the community, nor unreasonably detrimental to sun'ounding properties or improvements. The use is compatible with the existing neighboring residential uses. Site improvements including the provision of upgrades to the public infrastructure, and landscaping of all of the yards of each new lot and common area will reduce potential adverse impacts to the public infrastructure, circulation conflicts and provide a streetscape that is comparable to the surrounding neighborhoods. As required by SSFMC 20.84.045(B)(4), the following findings are made in approval of a reduced rate of parking in accordance w/th SSFMC 20.84.070(B): (i) The proposed parking will provide three (3) spaces per dwelling unit which exceeds the applicable multi-family standard. SSFMC Chapter 20.74 requires as many as 4.25 spaces for townhouse developments (two garage spaces, two driveway apron spaces and 0.25 visitor parking spaces per dwelling). However, this requirement is generally predicated on large developments of substantially higher acreage that have sufficient lot coverage to provide private streets and driveway aprons (e.g. the newer portions of the Terrabay development or larger developments on the West Side of Sign Hill). The smaller site size here justifies the lower -4- parking ratio, as requiring a higher number would reduce project density, FAR ratios, and could additionally reduce the overall size oft he development's common areas. Permitting the lower number of spaces will permit the project to retain the character of surrounding neighborhood properties in that more site coverage can be devoted to common areas and variegation of individual trait design. (ii) A combination of tandem garage parking and individual spaces will afford parking for two family vehicles with one visitor spot. The parking will be directly on site, and is sufficient to serve the needs of single-family households. Three parking spaces for each unit in the smaller in/ill site will thus provide adequate parking for these single family dwellings and will serve all existing, proposed and potential uses as effectively and conveniently as would the standard number required by Chapter 20.74. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco does hereby: Ao Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration assessing environmental impacts of a new eight (8) trait residential subdivision, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and Approve the Planned Unit Development allowing eight (8) single family town homes and common area with exceptions for smaller lots, increased lot coverage, lots not fronting on a public right of way, and reduced building setbacks; and C. Approve the Tentative Subdivision Map allowing the subdivision creating eight (8) parcels and common area in accordance with SSFMC Title 19; and Approve the Affordable Housing Agreement restricting twenty percent (20%) of the eight (8) tm/ts as affordable dwellings in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.125. -5- I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a meeting held on the ~ day of ,2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: S:\Current Reso's~4-27-05111 Chestnut H1 .neg.deeDOC.DOC ATTEST: City Clerk ORDiNANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO ZONING MAP TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF 111 CHESTNUT AVENUE FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-2-H) TO MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-3-L) ZONE DISTRICT WHEREAS, the property is designated "High Density Residential" in the 1999 General Plan; and, WHEREAS, the proposed development generally complies with General Plan goals and polices, specifically General Plan policy 2-G-6, which encourages the maximization of opportunities for residential development; and WHEREAS, on January 20, 2005 and March 17, 2005 the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco held duly noticed public heatings and recommended that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amendment; and WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report analyzing the impacts of the General Plan update was prepared and certified by the City Council of South San Francisco on October 13, 1999, in accordance with the provisions of CEQA; and WHEREAS, the proposed increase in density was fully addressed in the General Plan EIR; and, WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 02-0020 identifies potential adverse impacts attributable to the development of eight (8) new residences. The impacts can be reduced to a less than significant level through the implementation of mitigation measures. A mitigation monitoring program is established to ensure that impacts are reduced to a less than significant level. Mitigation measures, including dust suppression measures during construction, preparation and submittal of a of Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, retention of a qualified acoustic engineer to identify methods to achieve acceptable noise levels, and limitation of construction hours, along with monitoring of these mitigation measures, have been incorporated into the project or made conditions of approval which will reduce identified impacts to a less than a significant level. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco does hereby ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. AMENDMENTS The City Council hereby amends the City of South San Francisco Zoning Map for 111 Chestnut Avenue by changing the zoning designation from Medium Density Residential (R-2-H) to Multi- Family Residential (R~3-L). SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this ordinance, including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, provisions of this ordinance are severable. The City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase hereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be held unconstitutional, invalid, or unenforceable. SECTION 3. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall be published once, with the names of those City Councilmembers voting for or against it, in the San Mateo Times, a newspaper of general circulation in the City of South San Francisco, as required by law, and shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its adoption. Introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of South San Francisco, held the __ day of ,2005. Adopted as an Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting of the City Council held the __ day of, 2005 by the following vote: AYE S: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: As Mayor of the City of South San Francisco, I do hereby approve the foregoing Ordinance this __ day of ., 2005. Mawr Exam II Due: May 5. 2005 Providing Individualized Care (15 points) 1. Using the descriptions of the infants below, develop a list of strategies for providing individualized care for the caregiving routines for each child. Caregiving routines should include: arrivals and departures; diapering, toileting; feeding; napping; transitions; exploration and play. Matika Matika is five months old and lives with her extended family. She has been in the program for about three weeks and was breast-fed prior to enrollment. Her mother brings expressed milk or formula in bottles for her to drink during the day. The family has asked that she be fed every two hours and that she be held most of the time during the day. Matika is fussy most of the time. but especially when there are loud noises and when she is being diapered. She naps for short periods of time at varying times during the day. Matika is beginning to show a preference for sitting up so she can watch what is happening. Raul Raul is 24 months old. He has been in the program since he was nine months old. He is physically challenged and cannot pull himself up to standing. He can reach out if he is securely positioned so he's not in danger of falling over. Raul he is able to scoot around on the floor using his arms. Raul is content most of the day and does not express his needs strongly. He prefers to eat the same mild flavored and smooth textured foods every day and nap at the same time each day. He wants to feed himself and has no difficulty grasping finger foods and utensils. Raul shows a preference for toys that are stationary and that make sounds when he pushes on them. He enjoys being taken outdoors and playing on the grass. When playing with a toy that he likes, he is not easily distracted. Chelsey Chelsey is thirty months old and has been in the child care center since she was six months old. Chelsey is very active and runs everywhere she goes. Chelsey has two older brothers that she plays with and she tries to initiate the same kind of roughhouse play with other children in the center. She likes to direct other children's play and have her own way, but her feelings are easily hurt. Chelsey enjoys large motor activities but avoids puzzles or other small toys because she has difficulty manipulating them. Tagalog is the primary language spoken in her family's home. Environments for Infants and Toddlers (5 points each 2. What should be the first concerns when designing and maintaining an environment for infants and toddlers? 3. How can you see the social environment in a center-based or family child- care setting? 4. You are writing a brochure for your new infant-toddler child-care program In it you want to include a statement about your philosophy on "discipline." What do you want to share with parents on this topic? Bonus (5 points) Write a story about a day in the life of one of the children described in question one. Create the story using the descriptions, your list and your imagination. Feel free to illustrate it. RESOLUTION NO. 2641-2005 PLANNING COMMISSION, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION OF TFrl~'~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF Tlt'E CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RECOMMENDING THAT TI:IF~ SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO CITY COUNCIL APPROVE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 02-0020, RECLASSIFICATION FROM MEDIUM DENSITY ZONING DISTRICT 0t-2-H) TO MULTI-FAMILY DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 01-3-L) ZONING DISTRICT, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP, DESIGN REVIEW AND A HOUSING AGREEMENT INCLUDING PROVISIONS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON AN 0.52 ACRE SITE SITUATED AT 111 CHESTNUT AVENUE. WI-IEREAS, the South San Francisco Planning Commission held duly noticed study sessions on April.18 and September 19, 2002; and, WI-~REAS, the South San Francisco Planning Commission held duly noticed public hearings on January 20, 2005 and March 17, 2005, WI-/~REAS, as required by the "Amendment Procedures" (SSFMC Chapter 20.87), and Title 19 (Subdivision Ordinance), the Planning Commlssion makes the following findings are made in support of Reclassification from Medium Density Residential (R-2-H) Zoning District to Multi-Family Residential Zoning District (R-3-L), Residential Planned Unit Development, Tentative Subdivision Map and Housing Agreement with provisions for Affordable Housing allowing eight (8) town houses on a 0.52 acre site situated at 111 Chestnut Avenue, owned by Charles Eng, based on public testimony and the materials submitted to the City of South San Francisco Planning Commission which include, but are not limited to: Housing Agreement prepared by the City of South San Francisco dated July 2004; Architectural and Landscape Plans, dated March 1, 2005, prepared by KDA Architects, Inc.; minutes of the Design Review Board meeting of June 19, 2001; April 18, 2002 Planning Commission staff report; September 19, 2002 Planning Commission staff report; January 20, 2005 Plann~g Commission staff report; March 17, 2005 Planning Commission staff report; April 18, 2002 Planning Commission Study Session; September 19, 2002 Planning Commission Study Session; January 20, 2005 Planning Commission meeting; and the March 17, 2005 Planning Commission meeting; 1. The project is consistent with the provisions of the City's General Plan that support residential development, and specifically with the Housing Element that supports provision of additional market rate and affordable housing in the commlluity to meet going demand. The proposed density of 15.39 units per acre for the 0.52 acres to be developed with dwellings is well within the overall density of 37.5 units per acre for the High Density Residential category provided in the City's General Plan. 2. The 0.52 acre site is physically suited for the proposed townhouse subdivision. 3. The development will create a residential environment of sustained desirability and stability and will result in au intensity of land use similar to adjacent multi-family and single-family neighborhoods. The proposed density of 15.39 units per acre and the general style and quality of the new residences and site improvements is substautially similar to or superior to recently approved subdivisions in the City. 5. A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).The Mitigated Negative Declaration No.02-0020 identifies a couple of potential adverse impacts attributable to the development of eight (8) new residences. The impacts eau be reduced to a less than significant level through the implementation of mitigation measures. A mitigation monitoring program is established to ensure that impacts are reduced to a less than si~ificant level. Mitigation measures including a mitigation monitoring have been incorporated into the project or made conditions of approval which will reduce identified impacts to a less than a si~iflcant level. 6. The Subdivision of the 0.52 acre lot allowing the development of eight (8) townhouses and common area, will not be adverse to the public health, safety, or general welfare of the community, nor unreasonably detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements. The use is compatible with the existing neighboring residential uses. Site improvements ineludi,~g the provision of upgrades to the public infrastructure, and landscaping of all of the yards of each new lot and common area will reduce potential adverse impacts to the public infrastructure, circulation conflicts and provide a streetscape that is comparable to the surrounding neighborhoods. 7. The eight (8) new town houses and site landscaping comply with the City's Design Guidelines. 8. The residences comply with the requirements of South San Francisco Municipal Code Title 20 Zoning Regulations. The design and improvements are not in conflict with any known existing public easements. 9. Therefore, on the basis of (a) the foregoing Recitals which are incorporated herein, (b) the City of South San Francisco's General Plan, (c) the Mitigated Negative Declaration, (d) the Staff Report, and on the basis of the specific conclusions set forth below, the City Council finds and determines that: The Affordable Housing Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified and contaiued in the City's General Plan in that (a) the General Plan designation for the sited is High Density Residential and the proposed townhouse development is consistent with those laud use designations, (b) the project is consistent with the fiscal policies of the General Plan with respect to provision of infrastructure and public services, and (c) the Housing Agreement includes provisions relating to affordable housing. 2~ The Affordable Housing Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the zoning district in which the real property is located in that the project approvals include a zoning reclassification adopted specifically for the project. The Affordable Housing Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare in that the project will proceed in compliance with all the policies and programs of the General Plan and in compliance with all applicable zoning, subdivision, and building regulations of the City of South San Francisco. bo The Affordable Housing Agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good land use policies in that the Project will implement land use gu/delines set forth in the General Plan that have planned for residential uses at this location. The Affordable Housing Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values in that the project will be consistent with the General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the South San Francisco City Council approve Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 02-0020, Zoning Reclassification 02-0020, Residential Planned Unit Development 02-0020, Tentative Subdivision Map 02-0020, Housing Agreement and Design Review 02-0020 subject to the Conditions of Approval contained in Exhibit B. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption. -11- I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco at the regular meeting held on the 17th day of March 2005 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner G-iusti, Cornmi.~sioner Homm, Commissioner Prouty, Co~ssioner Romero, Commissioner Sim, Vice Chairperson Zernke and ChaLrperson Teglia NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: ATTEST: /s/Thomas C. Sparks Commission Secretary Thomas C. Sparks -12- At CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 111 CHESTNUT TOWNHOUSES MND, SA, PUD & DR 02-0020 (As recommended by the Planning Commission on March J 7, 2005) PLANNING DIVISION: The applicant shall comply with the City's Standard Conditions and with ail the requirements of all affected City Divisions and Departments as contained in the attached conditions, except as mended by the conditions of approval. o The construction drawings shall substantially comply with the Planning Commission approved plans, as amended by the conditions of approval including the Architectural and Landscape Plans, prepared by KDA Architecture Inc., dated March 1, 2005, Civil Engineering, Grading and Drainage, and Tentative Subdivision Map plans prepared by GL+A Civil En~neers & Land Surveyors, submitted in association with P02-0020. The landscape plan shall include mature shrubs and trees. Shrubs shall be a minimum size of 15 gallons, trees shall have a minimum size of 24 inch box and 15% of the total number of proposed trees shall have a minimum size of 36 inch box. The landscape plan shall be subject to the review and approval by the City's Chief Planner. Prior to the issuance of any Building Permit, the Final Subdivision Map shall be subject to the review and approval by the City Engineer. The Final CC&Rs shall be subject to the review and approval by the City's Chief Planner, City Engineer and City Attorney. Both the Final Subdivision Map and CC&Rs shall be recorded with the San Mateo County Recorder's Office prior to the issuance of any Building Permit. Prior to the final occupancy for each dwelling, the owner shall pay the child care impact fee in effect at the time as required by SSFMC Chapter 20.115 for the associated dwelling unit. The current fee per dwelling is $1,630.00. The total fee for all the dwellings is estimated to be $13,040.00 (8 dwellings x $1,630.00/unit = $13,040.00). Prior to the issuance of any building permit the owner shall implement the provisions of the Affordable Housing Agreement. The implementation plan shall be subject to the review an approval of the City's Housing Division Manager. The apphcant shall comply with all mitigation measures and the Mitigation Monitoring Program associated with Mitigated Negative Declaration 01-012. -13- Prior to the final inspection of each dwelling in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 19.24, the owner shall pay the City fee in-lieu of park land dedication. The fee is based on the formula contained in SSFMC Chapter 19.24 and cannot be estimated at this time without the market value being known [(Dwelling) x (Population/DU) x (3 acres/I,000 population) x (Fair Market Value/Buildable Acre) = ($ Subtotal Fee) x (1.2) = $ Fee]. The fees may be paid in a lump sum basis for the entire development. The fee payment, schedule and determination of Fair Market Value shall be subject to the review and approval of the City's Park and Recreation Director. Within six (6) months of the approval of P02-0020 the owner shall consult with the adjacent property owners regarding the design of the perimeter fence along the westerly property boundary. The fence design shall be subject to the review by the Planning Commission. 10. The final construction plans shall include changing the roof pitch of the building fagade of the two units fronting on Chestnut Avenue up to a 4 in 12 pitch to help reduce the appearance of the upper story building mass. (Planning Contact Person: Steve Carlson, Senior Planner, 650/87%8353, Fax 650/829-6639) ENGINEERING DIVISION: STANDARD CONDITIONS The Developer shall comply with the Engineering Division's "Standard Subdivision and Use Permit Conditions for Townhouse, Condominium and Apartment Developments with Private Streets and Utilities", consisting of 8 pages. These conditions are contained in the Engineering Division's "Standard Conditions for Subdivisions and Private Developments" booklet, dated January 1998, (copies of this booklet are available at no cost to the applicant from the Plann/ng and Engineering Divisions). SPECIAL CONDITIONS The existing downstream public drainage system has not been shown to have sufficient excess capacity to accommodate the storm water runoff from the fully improved Hillside Town homes Subdivision. In order to mitigate the potential impact of the storm water moil'from the improved site, the Subdivider shall design and construct improvements that will retain the subdivision's storm water on site, so that it will not exceed the storm water runoff from the site in its existing, unimproved, condition, during a 25-year design storm. -16- bo The town house driveway aprons shall provide a minimum distance of 20 feet (which is the standard for single family detached homes in the Municipal Code and is the standard discussed in the applicant's project narrative dated October 17, 2002), between the garage door and the back of the sidewalk or street curb, as applicable, to permit the aprons to be used for additional guest parking and temporary vehicle parking. Driveway aprons shall have a maximum gradient of 12%, measured fi:om the gutter flow line or pavement surface to the garage slab. The subdivider shall conform to the project's approved "Site Distance Study" requirements for landscape, grading, fencing, buildings and any other sightline obstructions along the frontage of Stonegate Drive, southeast of the lower exit driveway. Provide calculations of stopping sight distance, which account for the roadway grade. do The subdivision's common area infrastructure, including the roadway, sewer, and dra/nage improvements, shall be owned and maintained by the subdivision's homeowners association, not the City of South San Francisco. The subdivision final map shall contain a statement that no improvements within the boundaries of the subdivision are being dedicated to the City, within the proposed utility or other easements shown on the final map. The proposed yearly Homeowner's Association Budget shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval, as to the adequacy of the estimated common area improvements and infi'astmcmre maintenance and capital improvement replacement and repair reserves. In accordance with current City Ordinances and the Standard Conditions, storm water pollution control devices and filters (such as a Stormcepter or CDS unit) shall be installed within the site drainage outfall system fi:om the subdivision to prevent pollutants deposited within the site entering the public drainage system and eventually San Francisco Bay. Plans for these filters and any on-site retention facilities shall be submitted to the En~neering Division and the City's Environmental Compliance Coordinator for review and approval. The applicant shall relinquish vehicle access along Hillside Boulevard, Stonegate Drive, and Ridgeview Court, except at the two interior driveway intersections with public streets. h. Owner on Tentative Map must match the owner listed in the title report. 3. OFF-SITE IMPROVMENTS Various off-site improvements will be required to be constructed by the -15- subdivider, such as intersection conform modifications, sidewalk and curb and gutter repairs and sewer, storm drain and utility connections and modifications within Ridgeview Court. Prior to the City Council approving the final map for the subject subdivision, the subdivider shall enter into a subdivision improvement agreement to secure the installation of all off-site public improvements. Altemately, the subdivider may obtain an encroachment permit from the Engineering Division and post cash deposit to secure the performance and payment of the work within the public street right-of-ways as shown on the approved improvement plans, prior to filing the final map for approval by the City Council. 4. INSPECTION The Engineering Division provides limited inspection services for the construction of the private streets and utilities within the subdivision, that are not inspected by the City's Building Division or the developer's civil and geotechnical en~neers. In order to compensate the City for our inspection costs, the developer shall pay the hourly costs for services provided by the City's Construction Inspection staff, on a time and materials basis, in connection with the development of the subject subdivision improvements. The inspection costs will be billed monthly. The Subdivider shall pay City invoices within 30 days of their receipt and shall pay all outstanding charges prior to receiving an Occupancy Permit for the homes. 5. TEMPO~Y AND PERMANENT OCCUPANCY The subdivider will likely request temporary occupancy of one or more homes to be used as models. Also, the subdivision's permanent residents will probably want to move into their homes before heavy construction within the project is complete. Either request could result in the public and/or residents being impacted in various health and safety ways by the construction activities. ao Prior to receiving a temporary certificate of occupancy for a model home within the subdivision, the developer shall submit for the City staffs review and approval a plan that w/Il address at a minimum, the following items: 1) All construction areas shall be completely fenced off from areas accessible by the visiting public. 2) All areas subject to public travel shall be provided with adequate street and area lighting meeting the Police Department's requirements. 3) A parldng and traffic safety plan shall be prepared and implemented. -16- 4) Pavement, curb, gutter and sidewalks shall be provided within the model home complex. bo Prior to receiving permanent occupancy permits for the homes within the subdivision, the developer shall submit for the City staffs review and approval a plan that will address, at a minimum, the following items: 1) All construction areas shall be completely fenced off from the portion of the site occupied by the new residents and subject to public access. 2) All street lights within the occupied portion of the subdivision shall be operational and lit. 3) All traffic signs and pavement markings within the portion of the site accessible by the public shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans. 4) All site improvements within areas subject to public access shall be complete in accordance with the approved subdivision improvement, grading, drainage and utility plans. 5) Hours of construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday (excluding holidays). (Engineering Contact Person: Dennis Chuck, 650/829-6652) POLICE DEPARTMENT: 1. Site Plan and Subdivision Map ao The Police Department has no concerns with the subdivision map. bo On-site parking and circulation appear adequate and acceptable for the project. Co The applicant shall submit a list of proposed street names for the project to be reviewed and approved by the Police Department before filing of the parcel maps. City policy precludes the use of street names that are duplicates or sound alike of existing streets or names of living persons. Street names should be easy to pronounce, contain no unconventional spelling, and be unconfusing so that the public and the children, in particular, can handle the names in an emergency situation. The use of E1 Rancho -17- Drive is permissible. No fire lanes will be approved on site. The roadway system shall be designed so that roadways are wide enough so fire lanes are not necessary. Municipal Code Compliance The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 15.48 of the Municipal Code, "Minimum Building Security Standards" Ordinance, revised May 1995. The Police Deparmaent reserves the right to make additional security and safety conditions, if necessary, upon receipt of detailed/revised building plans. The applicant shall assure that the requirements and restrictions on construction noise (including deliveries, equipment warmup and maintenance, etc.) prescribed in chapter 8.32 of the municipal code are not violated by their own personnel or any subcontractors working on the project. Security and Safety Conditions a. Security Planting 1) Landscaping shall of the type and situated in locations to maximize observation while providing the desired degree of aesthetics. Security planting materials are encouraged along fence and property lines and under vulnerable windows. b. Doors 1) All exterior wood doors and doors leading from enclosed garage areas shall be solid core with a minimum thickness of 1- 3/4". 2) Door framing shall comply with section 15.48.060A. l.h.; details can be provided by the Building Inspector. 3) Ma/n entrance doors, pedestrian garage exit doors, and doors leading from enclosed garage areas into single-family dwellings shall be secured with a single-cylinder deadbolt lock with a minimum throw of one inch. a) The locks into the residence shall be so constructed -18- that both deadbolt and deadlocking latch can be retracted by a single action of the inside door knob. (Garage exit doors and rear french doors may have a regular deadbolt lock.) b) Strike plates shall be secured to wooden jambs w/th at least 2 inch wood screws. 4) Vision panels in exterior doors or within reach of the inside activating device shall be of burglary-resistant glazing or equivalent.~ (This includes the fixed garage window adjacent to the exit door and french door glazing panels within reach of the locking device.) 5) Overhead garage doors shall be equipped with automatic openers and shall not have bottom vents except those doors having double louvered or shielded vents or approved alternate devices to protect the locking mechanism. c. Windows 1) Windows shall be constructed so that when the window is locked, it cannot be lifted from the frame. 2) The sliding portion of a sliding glass window shall be on the inside track. 3) Window locking devices shall be capable of withstanding a force of 300 lbs. in any direction. d. Numbering 1) A street number shall be displayed in a prominent location on the street side of the residence in such a position that the number is easily visible to approaching emergency vehicles. a) The numerals shall be no less than four (4) inches in height and shall be of a contrasting color to the background to which they are attached. b) The numerals shall be lighted at night. 2) The applicant shall submit a project addressing prior to building permit application. Addresses should run in a 5/16" security laminate, ¼" polycarbonate or approved secudty film treatment, minimum. -19- eo clockwise direction. Lighting Each entry and exit door shall be equipped with a light source of sufficient wattage to illuminate the door, porch, and stairway. Area lights, switch controlled from inside the residence, are encouraged to illuminate the rear and side yards. Other 1) 2) 3) 4) The developer/applicant shall enclose the entire perimeter of the project with a chain link fence with necessary construction gates to be locked after normal construction hours. A security person shall be provided to patrol the project after normal working hours during all phases of conslruction, and adequate security lighting shall be provided to illuminate vulnerable equipment and materials. The applicant's voluntary installation of security alarm systems as a standard amenity in all residential units constructed, is encouraged on this project. The applicant shall submit an addressing plan for the project to be reviewed and approved by the Police Department. The applicant shall indicate if the plan should be approved considering principles of Feng Shui. \ The applicant shall submit a phasing plan for the project to be approved by the city as part of their first building permit application. The phasing plan shall include detail on the separation of construction activity from the use circulation and occupancy of residential units and model un/ts and sales office activities. (Police Department contact person: Sergeant E. Alan Normandy (650/8778927) D. FIRE DEPARTMENT: All buildings shall be fire sprinklered for buildings with a height 3 stories or more. Roof line extends past property line. Fire area for fire flow will be assessed using Table Ilia of the Fire Area exceeding 3,600 sq ft. Describe common walls at property lines. (Fire Department contact person: Bryan Niswonger 650/829-6671) -20- - E. WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT: The onsite new catch basins are to be stenciled with the approved San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Logo. A plan showing the location of all storm drains and sanitary sewers must be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building permit. Stormwater pollution preventions devices are to be installed. A combination of landscape based controls and manufactured controls are preferred. Existing catch basins are to be retrofitted with catch basin inserts or equivalent. Specific plans must be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. The applicant must submit a signed maintenance schedule for the stormwater pollution prevention devices installed. Roof condensate needs to be routed to sanitary sewer. This must be included in approved plans. Trash handling area must be covered and enclosed and must drain to sanitary sewer. This must be included in approved plans. Plans that include the location of the concrete wash out area and location of the entrance/outlet of fire wash during construction must be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of the building permit. Show on the approved plans the approximate locations of areas subject to inundation by storm water overflow, and the location, width and direction of flow of all watercourses existing and proposed. A grading and drainage plan that demonstrates adequate drainage on the property must be submitted and approved prior to the issuance ora building permit. 10. An erosion control plan must be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building permit. 11. Applicant must pay sewer connection fee of $1,514.00 per house, for a total of $12,112.00. (Water Quality Control contact person: Cassie Prudhel 650/877-8634) -21- Planning Commission Staff Report DATE: April 18, 2002 TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Study Session o£: Re. zoning of the property at 111 Chestnut Avenue from Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-2-H) to Multi-Fsmi]y Residential Zoning District (R-3-L) in accordance with SSFMC Chapt~ 20.87. Tentative Subdivision Map allowing the subdivision creating ten parcels (10) in accordance with SSFMC Title 19. '3. Exceptions imm the SSFMC Title 19 allowing lots sizes less than 5,000 ~ .quare feet in accordance the SSFMC Title 19. Planned Unit Development allowing lot sizes smaller than the minimum requirement of 5,000 square feet and reduced setbacks, in accordance with SSFIvlC Chapter 20.78. Homing Agreement restricting twenty percent (20%) of the nine units as affordable dwellings in accordance with SFMC Chapter .20.125. .Design Review allowing for the construction a two-story nine (9) unit condominium development, situated at 111 Chestnut Avenue (APN-011-312-090) in the Medium Density (R-2-H) Zone District, -'in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.85. Owner and Applicant: Maoe Tjoe, LLla Tjoe & Rudy Sastra Case Nos.: RZ, SA, PUD, DR & MN'D RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission conduct a Study Session of the development proposal and offer comments. -22- Staff Report To: Planning Commission Subject: RZ, SA, PUD, HA, DR & lVlND April 18, 2002 111 Chesmut Avenue Page 2 of 4 BACKGROUND: The 0.523 acre site has been used as a single-family dwelling. The project includes demolition of the existing one-story dwelling and the construction of nine two to three-story residen~xl condom~nium.~. Two of the dwellings will be restricted as affordable units. Parking will be provided on-site in individual unit garages and several open at-grade visitor parking spaces. The site will be landscaped and will provide decks attached to the units. The site is adjacent to other dwellings including multi-family and the new Oak Farm~ town home development. The project site' s General Plan land use designation, High Density Residential, allows multi- family development. The project generally complies with the General Plan goals and pohcies. The present zoning is Medium Density Residential (R-2-H), which does not allow the proposed density. The 'applicant is requesting to rezone the site from Medium Density Residential (R-2-H) to Multi-Family Residential (R-3-L) Zone District, consistent with the City's adopted General Plan. The minimum number of units required by the General Plan is me (9) units. As part of the Planned Unit Development the project is requesting exceptions are requested from lot area and setbacks and lot coverage to allow the nine (9) units to be on individual lots. Statistics regarding the individual buildings and lots are attached to this staff report. A Tentative Subdivision Map is proposed to divide the lot into ten (10) lots - for nine (9) dwellings and common area. Exceptions are requested from the City Subdivision requirements associated with the Planned Unit Development exceptions. The project will include two affordable dwelling units in accordance with the provisions of SSFMC Chapter 20.125. The applicant has met with the City Housing Division staff to discuss and initiate the Affordable Housing Agreement between the City and the applicant. The project will necessitate the demolition of a turn-of-the-century single-family dwelling, which according to the City Historic Building Survey, is not identified as either a Historic Resource or a Potential Historic Resource. Therefore, the project does not require review by the City's Historic Preservation Comraission. Because the project revolves a zone change the project will also be required to be reviewed by the City Council. The project has been determined by City staff to be incomplete in that the Tentative Subdivision Map is in preparation and the Design Review Board comments have required changes in the development. -23- Staff Report To: Planning Commission Subject: KZ, SA., PUD, HA, DR & M/XrD April 18, 2002 Chestnut Avenue Page 3 of 4 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD The project was reviewed by the Design Review Board at their meetings of March 19, 2002. At the meeting the Board Space the houses farther apart so that there is more space between each unit reduce the overall density of the' subdivision so that there is more usabie open space, provide a sidewalk from the interior of the subdivision connecting out to the sidewalk along Chestnut Avenue, make the play areas/open spaces larger and more accessible, create more usable rear- yard space between the two units by brin~-g in the rear wall of the larger unit and cantflevering the second story out, remove plants from areas in between traits as there is not enough light to feed them, consult a landscape architect to prepare a landscape plan for the entire site; provide more trees/ground cover in the interior of the subdivision, show where utility box/water meters will be located; integrate these into the design of the homes if they are to be attached to the units. The applicant has revised the plans to incorporate the Board's comments. However, not all of the plans were available to be included in the staff report. The applicant will provide a full set of plans at the meeting. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The building generally complies with current City development standards as displayed in the following table: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Total Site Area: 0.523 acres [22,800 SF] Density: Range: 18.1- 37.5 Du/Ac. Proposed: 19.1 Du/Ac. Height Maxlmnm: 50 FT Proposed: 35 Fl' Floor Ar~ Ratio: Maxim~rn_' No Max Proposed: NA Lot Coverage Maximum: 65% Proposed: 47% Landscaping:. /V[in~mnm: Automobile Parking Setbacks Minirm~Irl Front 15 FT (Chestnut) Side 5 FT Rear 11.5 FI' 10% Proposed: % 23 Proposed: 23 Proposed 15FT 5FT 10FT -24- Staff Report To: Planning Commission Subject: RZ, SA, PUD, HA, DP. & MND April 18, 2002 111 Chestnut Avenue Page 4 of 4 Note: Individual lots vary in setbacks and lot coverage. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCLWIENT City staff has determined that a Negative Declaration will be prepared for the project. Once completed the document will be circulated for public comment for a period of twenty (20) days. CONCLUSION: The construction of a nine (9) unit condomiuium is consistent with the City's General Plan and with the Rezoning, Planned Unit Development and Housing Agreement with all applicable requirements of the City's Zoning Ordinance. While the project is not complete, the Planning Commission should review the project and offer comments. St~v~ Car/son~ Set'or-Planner Plans -25- Pianning Commission staff Report DATE: TO: SUBJECT: September 19, 2002 Pla~nlng Commissign Study Session of: 1. Re. zoning of the property at 111 Chestnut Avenue from Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-2-H) to Multi-Family Residential Zoning District ('R-3-L) in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.87. 2. Tentative Subdivision Map allowing the subdivision creating eight (8) parcels and common area in accordance with SSFMC Tide 19. 'Exceptions from the SSFMC Tide 19 allowing lots sizes less than 5,000 square feet in accordance the SSFMC Tide 19. Planned Unit Development allowing lot sizes smaller than the minimum requirement orS,000 square feet and reduced setbacks, and pm-king at a rate of 2.25 spaces per dwelling unit instead of 4.25 spaces per dwelling uni~, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.78. Housing Agreement restricting twenty percent (20%) of the eight (8) units as affordable dwellings in accordance with SFMC Chapter20.'125. Design Review allowing for the construction a two-story eight (8) unit condominium development, situated at 111 Chestnut Avenue (APN 011-312-090) in the Medium Density ('R-2-H) Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.85. Owner and Applicant: Maoe Tjoe, Lila Tjoe & Kudy Sastra Case Nos.: P,Z, SA, PUD, DR & MND RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission conduct a Study Session of the development proposal and -26- StaffReport To: Planning Commission Subject: KZ, SA, PUD, HA~ DP,. & MND September 19, 2002 111 Chesmut Avenue Page 2 of 4 offer comments. BACKGROUND: The P]~nnlug Commission conducted a study session on April 18, 2002 and offered many comments including but not limited to the follow~ug: reduce the building height, eliminate the entry arbor or raise the height for emergency vehicle access, utilize pitched roofs rather th~ barrel vaults to improve the architectural compatibility with the existing neighboring dwellings, increase the landscaping, provide more open areas, and increase the parking. Two neighbors attending the meeting offered similar comments. The applicant has revised the plans to incorporate the comments. The 0.523 acre site has been used as a single-family dwelling. The project includes demolition of the existing one-story dwelling and the construction of eight two to three-story residential condom~nlum~. As many as two of the dwellings will be restricted as affordable units. Parking will be provided on-site in individual unit garages and several open at-grade visitor parking spaces. The site will be landscaped mad will provide decks attached to the units. The site is adjacent to other dwellings including multi-family and the new Oak Farm~ town home development. The project site's Genera/Plan land use designation, High Density Residential, allows multi- family development. The project generally complies with the General Plan goals and policies. The present zOning is Medium Density Residential (R-2-I-I), which does not allow the proposed density. The applicant is requesting to rezone the site from Medium Density Residential (R-2-I-I) to Multi-Family Residential (R-3-L) Zone District, consistent with the City's adopted General As part of the Planned Unit Development the project is requesting exceptions ar~ requested from lot area and setbacks and lot coverage to allow the eight (8) units to be on individual lots. Statistics regarding the individual buildings and lots are attached to this staffreport. A Tentative Subdivision Map is proposed to divide the lot into eight (8) lots and common area. Exceptions are requested fi:om the City Subdivision requirements associated with the Planned Unit Development exceptions. The project will include two affordable dwelling units in accordance with the provisions of SSFMC Chapter 20.125. The applicant has met with the City Housing Division staffto discuss and in/date the Affordable Housing Agreement between the City and the applicant. -27- Staff Report To: Planning Commission Subject: RZ, SA, PUD, HA, DP, & MND September 19, 2002 111 Chestnut Avenue Page 3 of 4 The project will necessitate the demolition of a turn-of-the-century single-family dwelllng, which according to the City Historic Building Survey, is not identified as either a Historic Kesource or a Potential Historic Resource. Therefore, the project does not require review by the City's Historic Preservation Commission. Because the project involves a zone change the project will also be required to be reviewed by the City Council. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The building generally complies with cun'ent City development staudards as displayed in the following table: DEVELOPMENT STANI)~S Total Site Axe~: 0.523 acres [22,800 SF] H~i~t Max/mm~ 50 FT Proposed: Floor Area Ratio: Max~m~-' No Max Proposed: Lot Coverage Max/mum: 65% Proposed: Landscaping. Miuim.m_' 10% Proposed: Automobile Parking Townhome lVri~h-m~m: 34 Proposed: Multffamily M/n/mum: 18 Proposed: Setbacks Mi~mum Proposed 'Front 15 FT 15 FT (Chestnut) Side 5 Fl' 8 FT Rear 11.5 FT l0 FT 35 FT NA 40% 35% 20 20 Note: Individual lots varyin setbacks and lot coverage. ENVIRO~~ DOCUMENT City staff has determined that a Negative Declaration will be prepared for the project. Once completed the document will be c/rculated for public comment for a period of twen~ (20) days. -28- StaffP, eport To: Pl~uu~ug Comm~.~sion Subj eot: P,Z, SA, PUD, HA, DP. & MND September 19, 2002 111 Chestnut Avenue ?a~e 4 of 4 CONCLUSION: The construction ora eight (8) unit condominium is consistent with the City's General Plan and with the Rezoning, Planned Unit Development and Housing Agreement with all applicable requirements of the City's Zo~g Oral-ante. The Planning Commission should review the project and offer comments. eve 'Smor-?fanner Attachrnents: Plans -29- Planning Commission Staff Report DATE: TO: SUBJECT: January 20, 2005 Planning Commlasion 1. Rezoning of the property at 111 Chestnut Avenue from Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-2-I-I) to Multi-Family Residential Zor~ing District (R-3-L) in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.87. 2. Tentative Subdivision Map allowing the subdivision creating eight (8) parcels and common area in accordance with SSFMC Title 19. Exceptions from the SSFMC Title 19 allowing lots sizes less than 5,000 square feet and lots not fronting on a public right of way, in accordance the SSFMC Title 19. Planned Unit Development allowing lot sizes smaller than the minimum requirement of 5,000 square feet and reduced mlnimllm required setbacks, and parking at a rate of 2.25 spaces per dwelling unit instead of 4.25 spaces per dwelling unit, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.78. Housing Agreement restricting twenty percent (20%) of the eight (8) units as affordable dwellings in accordance with SFMC Chapter 20.125. Design Review allowing for the construction a two-story eight (8) unit condominium development, situated at 111 Chestnut Avenue (APN 011-312-090) in the Medium Density (R-2-H) Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.85. Owner and Applicant: Maoe Tjoe, Lila Tjoe & Rudy Sastra Case Nos.: RZ, SA, PUD, DR & M2qD RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission recommend that the City council approve 1). Rezoning of the property at 111 Chestnut Avenue from Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R- Staff R. eport To: Planning Comrnissii)n Re: P02-0020 January 20, 2005 Page 2 of 6 2-H') to Multi-Family Residential Zoning District (R-3-L) in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.87.2.) Tentative Subdivision Map allowing the subdivision creating eight (8) parcels and common area in accordance with SSFMC Title 19. 3.) Exceptions from the SSFMC Title 19 allowing lots sizes less than 5,000 square feet and lots not fronting on a public right of way, in accordance the SSFMC Title 19, 4.) Planned Unit Development allowing lot sizes smaller than the minimum requirement of 5,000 square feet and reduced minimum required setbacks, and parking at a rate of 2.25 spaces per dwelling unit instead of 4.25 spaces per dwelling unit, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.78, 5.) Housing Agreement restricting twenty percent (20%) of the eight (8) units as affordable dwellings in accordance with SFMC Chapter 20.125, and 6). Design Review allowing for the construction a two-story eight (8) unit condominium development, situated at 111 Chestnut Avenue (APN 011-312-090) in the Medium Density (R-2-H) Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.85, subject to making the required finings and adopting conditions of approval. BACKGROUND: Planning Commission Study Sessions The Planning Commission conducted study sessions on April 18, and September 19, 2002. At the meetings the Commlssioners offered mauy comments including, but not limited to, the following: reduce the building height, eliminate the entry arbor or raise the height for emergency vehicle access, utilize pitched roofs rather thau barrel vaults to improve the architectural compatibility w/th the existing neighboring dwellings, increase the landscaping, provide more open areas, and increase the parldng. Two neighbors attending the meeting offered Similar comments. The applicant revised the plans to incorporate the comments. Project Overview The 0.523 acre site has been used as a single-family dwelling. The project includes demolition of the existing one-story dwelling and the conslruefion of eight two to three-story residential condominiums. As many as two of the dwellings will be restricted as affordable units. Parking will be provided on-site in individual un/t garages and several open at-grade visitor parking spaces. The site will be landscaped and will provide decks attached to the units. The site is adjacent to other dwellings including multi-family and the new Oak Farms town home development. -31- StaffR. eport To: Plauning Commission Re: P02-0020 January 20, 2005 Page 3 of 6 DISCUSSION The project site's General Plan land use designation, High Density Residential, allows multiL family development. The project generally complies with the General Plan goals and policies. The present zoning is Medium Dvnsity Residential (R-2-H), which does not allow the proposed density. The applicant is requesting to rezone the site from Medium Density Residential (R-2-H) to Multi-Family Residential (R-3-L) Zone District, consistent with the City's adopted General Plan. As part of the Planned Unit Development the project is requesting exceptions are requested from lot area and setbacks and lot coverage to allow the eight (8) units to be on individual lots. Statistics regardiug the individual buildings and lots are attached to this sta~ffreport. A Tentative Subdivision Map is proposed to divide the lot into eight (8) lots and common area. Exceptions are requested from the City Subdivision requirements associated with the Planned Unit Development exceptions. The project will include two affordable dwelling units in accordance with the provisions of SSFMC Chapter 20.125. The applicant has met with the City Housing Division staffto discuss and initiate the Affordable Housing Agreement between the City and the applicant. The project will necessitate the demolition of a m-of-the-century single-family dwelling, which according to the City Historic Building Survey, is not identified as either a Historic Resource or a Potential Historic Resource. Therefore, the project does not require review by the City's Historic Preservation. Commission. Because the project involves a zone change the project will also be required to be reviewed by the City Council. -32- StaffKeport To: Planning Commission Re: P02-0020 January 20, 2005 Page 4 of 6 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The building generally complies with current City development standards as displayed in the following table: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Total Site Area: 0.523 acres [22,800 SF] Height Maximum: 50 FT Proposed: 35 FT Floor Area Ratio: Maximum: No Max Proposed: NA Lot Coverage Maximum: 65% Proposed: Landscaping: Minimum: 10% Proposed: Automobile Parki,~g Townhome Minimum: 34 Proposed: Multifamily Minimum: 18 Proposed: Setbacks Minimum Proposed Front 15 FT 15 FT (Chestnut) Side 5 FT 10 FT Rear 11.5 FT 10 FT 40% 35% 24 24 Note: Individual lots vary in setbacks and lot coverage. The parking is proposed to provide 2.25 spaces per dwelling which is consistent w/th the multifamily standard. The SSFMC Chapter 20.74 requires as much as 4.25 spaces for townhouse developments (2 garage spaces, 2 driveway apron spaces and 0.25 visitor parldng spaces per dwelling). However, City staff is of the opinion that the 4.25 space requirement is predicated on large developments involving sufficient acreage to provide private streets and driveway aprons such as Terrabay, and many of the developments on "condo hill". For small in~ll sites, without the opportunity to create private roadways mad driveway aprons, such as 111 Chestnut, 2.25 spaces per dwelling is a practical and achievable standard. The applicant has revised the plan to increase parking to 24 parking spaces or a ratio of 3 spaces per dwelling. -33- Staff'Report To: Planning Commission Re: P02-0020 3anuary 20, 2005 Page 5 of 6 The applicant is proposing to reduce some of the minimum required side and rear setbacks for the indiv/dual lots although the overall development generally complies with the minimum setbacks required for a multifamily building- in this regard the front yard and side yards comply and the rear yard comes close to the 11.5 foot yard setback. Units will be provided with private yards and balconies and two play areas shared in common. Lot sizes are reduced in order that the town homes may be constructed on separate lots and sold separately. Common area is proposed and will consist of the shared driveway, the two play areas and the front yard landscaped areas. The common areas will be maintained by the homeowner's association established for the development PUBLIC PARTICIPATION A neighborhood meeting was conducted on February 5, 2003 at 6:30 P.M. and was attended by seven residents, the applicants, the project architect and a representative of the Plauning Division staff. The project architect reviewed the development history, the Planning Commission concerns and the revised plans. The residents expressed many concerns including density, size of the project, privacy, parking, traffic, building height, and architectural details including but not limited to, window sizes, desks, fence, reta~nlng walls and landscape screening. All of the issues were discussed at length. The architect and the residents discussed the privacy and design issues and developed a series of solutions. Regarding privacy, the architext agreed to install mature size trees along the side and rear yards adjacent to the single family dwellings, increasing the perimeter fence height to 8 feet, reducing the size of the exterior upper story deck on unit 4 to 6 feet and utilizing a solid wall rather thau au open rail and increasing the wall height, and reducing the size of some windows facing the adjacent properties so that they are not all view windows. The consensus of the residents was that the 8 units were acceptable with the design changes. These changes are reflected in the plato attached to this staff report. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT City staff prepared and circulated for public comment a Mitigated Negative Declaration for a period of twenty (20) days from April 4 to April 23, 2003, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. No substantive comrnents were received. The environmental document identified a couple of potential impacts including storm water runoff andconstrucfion activities. Mitigation measures are proposed to reduce the identified impacts to less than a si~ificant level. -34- Staff R~port To: Planning Commission Re: P02-0020 January 20, 2005 Page 6 of 6 CONCLUSION: The construction of an eight (8) unit condominium is consistent with the City's General Plan and with the Rezoning, Planned Unit Development and Housing Agreement with all applicable requirements of the City's Zor, fng and Subdivision Ordinances. The Planning Commission should recommend that the City Council approve the fo]lowing: 1).Rezoning of the property at 111 Chestnut Avenue from Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-2-H) to Multi-Family Residential Zoning District (R-3-L) in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.87. 2.) Tentative Subdivision Map allowing the subdivision creating eight (8) parcels and common area in accordance with SSFMC Title 19. 3.) Exceptions from the SSFMC Title 19 allowing lots sizes less than $,000 square feet and lots not fronting on a public right of way, in accordance the SSFMC Title 19. 4.) Planned Unit Development allowing lot sizes smaller than the minimum requirement of 5,000 square feet and reduced minimum required setbacks, and parking at a rate of 2.25 spaces per dwelling unit instead of 4.25 spaces per dwelling unit, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.78. 5.) Housing Agreement restricting twenty percent (20%) of the eight (8) units as affordable dwellings in accordance with SFMC Chapter 20.125. 6). Design Review allowing for the construction a two-story eight (8) unit condominium development. Attachments: Draft Conditions of Approval Draft Resolution of Approval Plann/ng Commission StaffKeports April 18, 2002 September 19, 2002 Minutes April 18, 2002 September 19, 2002 Draft Housing Agreement Mitigated Negative Declaration Plans -35- Planning Commission Staff Report DATE: March 17, 2005 TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: 1. Rezoning of the property at 111 Chestnut Avenue from Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-2-H) to Multi-Family Residential Zoning District ('R-3-L) in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.87. Tentative Subdivision Map allowing.the subdivision creating eight (8) parcels and common area in accordance with SSFMC Title 19. Exceptions from the SSFMC Title 19 allowing lots sizes less than 5,000 square feet and lots not fronting on a public fight of way, in accordance the SSFMC Title 19. Planned Unit Development allowing lot sizes smaller than the minimum requirement of 5,000 square feet and reduced minimum required setbacks, and parking at a rate of 3 spaces per dwelling un/t instead of 4.25 spaces per dwelling unit, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.78. Affordable Housing Agreement restricting twenty percent (20%) of the eight (8) units as affordable dwellings in accordance with SFMC Chapt~ 20.125. Design Review allowing for the construction a two-story eight (8) unit condominium development, situated at 111 Chestnut Avenue (APN 011-312-090) in the Medium Density (R-2-H) Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.85. Owner and Applicant: Best Desi~ Case No.: P02-0020 RECOIVIMENDATION: That the Planning Commiasion recommend that the City council approve 1.) Rezoning of the property at 111 Chestnut Avenue from Medium Density Residential Zoning District ('R- -36- Staff P. cport To: Planning Commission Re: P02-0020 March 17, 2005 Page 2 of 6 2-H) to Multi-Family Residential Zoning District (R-3-L) in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.87, 2.) Tentative Subdivision Map allowing the subdivision creating eight (8) parcels and common area in accordance with SSFMC Title 19, 3.) Exceptions from the SSFMC Title 19 allowing lots sizes less than 5,000 square feet and lots not fronting on a public right of way, in accordance the SSFMC Title 19, 4.) Planned Unit Development allowing lot sizes smaller than the minimum requirement of 5,000 square feet and reduced minimum required setbacks, and parking at a rate of 3 spaces per dwelling unit instead of 4.25 spaces per dwelling unit, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.78, 5.) Affordable Housing Agreement restricting twenty percent (20%) of the eight (8) units as affordable dwellings in accordance with SFMC Chapter 20.125, and 6.) Design Review allowing for the construction a two-story eight (8) unit cOndominium development, situated at 111 Chestnut Avenue (APN 011-312.090) in the Medium Density (R-2-H) Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.85, subject to making the required finings and adopting conditions of approval BACKGROUND: At. the January 20, 2005 Planning Comm i ssion meeting the Commissioners reviewed the proposed develoPment and offered comments involving design compatibility, density, parking and access. The Commissioners established a subcommittee to meet with the applicant to resolve these issues. The Planning Commission Subcommittee met with the applicant on February 10, 2005 and offered several design suggestions. The applicant has revised the plan~ incorporating the comments. Project O~er~iew The 0.523 acre site has been used as a single-family dwelling. The project includes the construction of eight two to three-story residential condominiums. As many as two of the dwellings will be restricted as affordable units. Parking will be provided on-site in individual unit garages and several open at-grade visitor parking spaces. The site will be landscaped and will provide decks attached to the units. The site is adjacent to other dwellings including multi-family and the new Oak Farms town home development. DISCUSSION The project site's General Plan land use desi~tion, High Density Kesidential, allows multi- f~mily development. The project generally complies with the General Plan goals and policies. The present zoning is Medium Density Residential (R-2-H), which does not allow the proposed density. The applicant is requesting to rezone the site from Medium Density Residential (R-2-H) -37- StaffReport To: Planning Commission Re: P02-0020 March 17, 2005 Page 3 of 6 to Multi-Family Residential (R-3-L) Zone District, consistent with the City's adopted Genera/ Plan. As part of the Planned Unit Development the project is requesting exceptions are requested from lot area and setbacks and lot coverage to allow the eight (8) units to be on individual lots. Statistics regarding the individual buildings and lots are attached to thi,q staff report. A Tentative Subdivision Map is proposed to divide the lot into eight (8) lots and common area. Exceptions are requested from the City Subdivision requirements associated with the Planned Unit Development exceptions. The project will include two affordable dwelling units in accordance with the provisions of SSFMC Chapter 20.125. The applicant b~ met with the City Housing Division staffto discuss and initiate the Affordable Housing Agreement between the City and the applicant. Because the project involves a zone change the project will also be required to be reviewed by the City Council.. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The building generally complies with current City development standards as displayed in the following table: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Total Site Area: Height Maximums' Floor Area Ratio: 0.523 ac-res [22,800 SF] 50 FT Proposed: 35 FT No Max Proposed: NA Lot Coverage Maximum: 65% Landscaping: Minim~m: 10% Automobile Parking Townhon~ Minimum: 34 Mulfifltm/ly Setbacks Proposed: 40% Proposed: 35% Proposed: 24 Proposed: 24 -38- Staff Report To: Planning Commission Re: P02-0020 March 17, 2005 Page 4 of 6 M~n~tnum Proposed Front 15 FT 15 FT (Chestnut) Side $ FT 10 FT Rear tl.5 FT 10 FT Note: Individual lots vary in setbacks and lot coverage. The parldng is proposed to provide 3 spaces per dwelliug which exceeds the multifamily standard. The SSFMC Chapter 20.74 requires as much as 4.25 spaces for townhouse developments (2 garage spaces, 2 driveway apron spaces and 0.25 visitor parl~ng spaces per dwell~ug). However, City staff is of the opinion that the 4.25 space requirement is predicated on large developments involving sufficient acreage to provide private streets and driveway aprons such as the newer portions of Terrabay, and many of the developments on "condo h~l~" (generally the west side of Sign Hill). For small ~nfill sites, without the opportunity to create private roadways and driveway aprons, such as 111 Chestnut, 3 spaces per dwelling is an acceptable parking ratio. The applicant is proposing to reduce some of the m~ulmum required side and rear setbacks for the individual lots although the overall development generally complies with the m~n~mum setbacks required for a mulfifamily building - in this regard the front yard and side yards comply and the rear yard comes close to the t 1.5 foot yard setback. Units will be provided with private yards and balconies and two play areas shared in common. Lot sizes are reduced in order that the town homes may be constructed on separate lots and sold separately. Common area is proposed and will consist of the shared driveway, the two play areas and the front yard landscaped areas. The common areas will be maintained by the homeowner's association established for the development ENVIRONMENTAL DOCU1VIE~ City staffprepared and circulated for public comment a Mitigated Negative Declaration for a period of twenty (20) days from April 4 to April 23, 2003, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. No substantive comments were received. The environmental document identified a couple of potential impacts including storm water runoff and construction activities. Mitigation measures are proposed to reduce the identified impacts to less than a si~ fi cant level. -39- StaffReport To: Planning Commission Re: P02-0020 March 17, 2005 Page 5 of 6 CONCLUSION: The construction of an eight (8) unit condominium is consistent with the City's General Plan and with the Rezoning, Planned Unit Development and Housing Agreement with all applicable requirements of the City's Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. The Planning Commission should recommend that the City Council approve the following: 1). 2.) 3.) 4.) 5.) Rezoning of the property at 111 Chesmut Avenue fi:om Medium Density Residential Zoning District ('R.-2-I-I) to Multi-Family Residential Zoning District (R.-3-L) in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.87. Tentative Subdivision Map allowing the subdivision creating eight (8) pameis and common area in accordance with SSFMC Title 19. Exceptions from the SSFMC Title 19 allowing lots sizes less than 5,000 square feet and lots not fronting on a public right of way, in accordance the SSFMC Title 19. Phnned Unit Development allowing lot sizes smaller than the minimum requirement of 5,000 square feet and reduced minimum required setbacks, and parking at a rate of 3 spaces per dwelling unit instead of 4.25 spaces per dwelling unit, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.78. Housing Agreement restricting twenty percent (20%) of the eight (8) units as affordable dwelllngs in accordance with SFMC Chapter 20.125. Design Review allowing for the construction a two-story eight (8) unit condominium development. Ste 4 CarlsofSenior Planner Attachments: Draft Conditions of Approval Draft Resolution of Approval Planning Commission Staff Reports April 1 g, 2002 September 19, 2002 January 20, 2005 -40- Staff Report To: Planning Commission Re: P02-0020 March 17, 2005 Page 6 of 6 Minutes April lg, 2002 September 19, 2002 January 20, 2005 Draft Design Review Board Minutes Maroh 19, 2002 Draft Housing Agreement Draft CC&Rs Mitigated Negative Declaration Plans -41- Recess called at 9:03 p.m. Study Session Maoe Tjoe, Lila Tjoe & Rudy Sastra-owner/applicant 111 Chestnut Avenue P02-0020 (RZ, SA, PUD, DR & MND02-0020) Recalled to order at 9:15 p.m. Rezoning of the property at 111 Chestnut Avenue from Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R- 2-1-1) to Multi-Family Residential Zoning District (R-3-L) in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.87. Tentative Subdivision Map allowing the subdivision creating ten parcels (10) in accordance with SSFMC Title 19. Exceptions from the SSFMC Title 19 allowing lots sizes less than 5,000 square feet in accordance the SSFMC Title 19. Planned Unit Development allowing lot sizes smaller than the minimum requirement of 5,000 square feet and reduced setbacks, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.78. Housing Agreement restricting twenty percent (20%) of the nine traits as affordable dwellings in accordance with SF/VlC Chapter 20.125. Design Review allowing for the construction a two-story nine (9) unit condominium development, situated at 111 Chestnut Avenue (APN 011-312-090) in the Medium Density (R-2-H) Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.85. StaffReport presented by Senior Planner Carlson. He noted that the project arch/tect has redesigned the development to incorporate the Design Review Board comments. TAPE 2 Simon Kwan pointed out that one unit has been removed and landscape has been upgraded as a response to the Design Review Board's comments. Robert La Rocca, La Rocca Architects, noted that the central driveway is to be the courtyard where activities can take place. They have developed canopy with shrubbery, lawn and ground covering at the ground entrance. The main entrance is a trelhs that connects the two elevations together and will have vines. Public comments: Betty Ann Robinson 105 Chestnut Avenue · Michael Winslow 908 Commercial The neighbors were concerned with their views being altered. · They were concerned with traffic issues along Chestnut Avenue. In the past years it has been difficult to back out of driveways because this has become a hectic street. · With the Chestnut widening there will not be parking allowed on the rested and wants to be taken care. Is concerned as to what is going in the area. The project does not look attractive. Is concerned about privacy issues. · They felt that there was a privacy issue because of 3 story buildings looming over a one story home. · This project w/il not look aesthetically pleasing because it does not fit into the neighborhood. Public input session closed. Commission, staff and applicant discussion: · Chairperson Meloni noted that there are no floor plans for the units. He asked how many bedrooms the units would have. There are only three guest parking spaces being provided and this will become an issue. He added that there is a privacy issue because the plans do not show the relation between the buildings and the adjoining properties. He questioned the height of the metal and redwood trellises on either side of the entryway as well as the height of the trees. He pointed out that the drawing shows the trellis is going all the way to the end of the building. He concluded that the design presented is not D:kFinalized Minutesk2002\04-18-02 RPC.doc Page 4 of 7 Approved or _ 4 2 _;oo2 consistent with the neighborhood. Mr. Kwan noted that the units would be 3-4 bedrooms. The building is 35 feet high, the metal trellis is h/gh enough to allow truck access and the redwood trellis is 9 feet high. The trees will be limited to grow to 8 feet depending on the species. Vice Chairperson Romero stated that the district is R-1 or R-2. The staff report indicates that it is an R-2 area. Vice Chairperson Komero pointed that the Commission has the flexibility to determine if it is appropriate with each project. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the zoning is currently R-2-H and is being changed to an R-3-L, high- density district. The project does not max out the potential number of units. The General Plan intends that the high density and the area will be rezoned to an R-3 area. Chief Planner Sparks noted that the zoning area will be rezoned to R-3-L. Commissioner Teglia noted that the Planning Commission envisioned medium density on Chestnut Avenue and high density in the Oak Farms area. He asked that access behind the site be explored. He urged the Commission not to allow the properties facing Chestnut to go higher than their cun'ent zoning. Commissioner Teglia also pointed out that the Planned Unit Development permit application should not be used to throw out all the standards. He asked why the lot is being subdivided into 10 lots and not being kept as one lot with condom'urns, and if the applicant had taken into consideration the difficulty in accessing the site from Chestnut. Mr. Kwan noted that planning staffhad advised them to keep lot 10 as a common space. The complex will have a Homeowners Association and they units will be sold individually. He added that there is access to the site from at the end of one of the adjacent properties. He did not see that there was any difficulty in getting into the site. He spoke to the Engineering Division and the Fire / Prevention Building Division regarding access to the site and they saw that there was no difficulty in access. He noted that this is the only scheme that can be done for the lot dimension and they had to delete one unit in order to allow more the common grounds. Commissioner Honan asked what the driveway apron is? She pointed that there will be two parking spaces per unit but there will not be room to park in front of the unit. Mr. Kwan noted that the garage door is 3 feet from the curb in addition to the 25 feet driveway. Commissioner Meloni asked how the two cars going opposite ways would be able to enter or exit the site. Chairperson Meloni suggested that the applicant work on widening the entryway to the site. Mr. Kwan noted that there is 30 feet from the curb to the face of the building and it will be tight but can be done. Commissioner Honan questioned if there would be a problem with emergency vehicles backing out of the property. She asked if there will be fencing around the play area. She suggested that a fence be put around the play area. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the Fire Department will not need to mm around on the site and the paramedic vehicle will be the only one that will be able to go into the site. There will be fire hydrants at units 3 or 7 to allow the Fire Department to put our a potential fn'e. Mr. Kwan noted that there w/Il not be fencing around the play area and there will be a hedge that will act as a fence from the guest park/ng. D:~Finalized Minutes\2002\04-18-02 RPC.doc Approved m-43 -!002 Page 5 of 7 · Chairperson Meloni asked how high the reta/ning wall on the back of the property is. Mr. Kwan replied that it is about 3-4 feet high. Commissioner Sim asked if the General Plan had envisioned this area to become an urban corridor. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the vision was to take advantage of the vacant lots in the area to provide an oppormuity for more housing units. Commissioner D'Angelo stated that the pictures are a false representation of what is out on Chestnut became it is on a slope and the plans reflect a flat surface. He added that he is against high density in South San Francisco and noted that not accepting the rezoning or PUD keeps the City as it should be. The neighbors are unhappy and the zoning should be kept the way it is and does not have to be changed. Three parking spaces in the area will not satisfy the park/ng needs. He added that he is not in support of the project. Vice Chairperson Ochsenhirt agreed that the project is putting pressure on Chestnut and the mediate neighborhood when there are goals that need to be met, such as meeting the Housing Element and keeping the quality of life that the City has. He is not opposed at looking at a rezone of the areas and the Commission needs to be open to that idea. Chairperson Romero pointed out that this type of architecture and design would be appropriate near the BART station, but it does not fit on Chestnut Avenue. The lot is half an acre and 10 parcels with 9 units are being put into it. He suggested that the applicant go back and lighten the project to fit an R-2 zone, which would be 6 un/ts. He also asked the applicant to have a meeting with the surrounding neighbors before returning to the Commission to get their feedback. Commissioner Teglia agreed with Commission comments. He suggested that the applicant look at the project in context with the area, putting low density in front and high density in the rear. He asked that the applicant try to access the site from the back of the lot and return with an appropriate project for the neighborhood. Recess called at 10:08 p.m. Recalled to order at 10:17 p.m. A_DMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 6. Items from Staff Chief Planner Sparks noted that project 101 would be returning to the Commission after some environmental issues are cleared up. He added that the Commission would have an informational overview on the zoning code update in the upcoming months. 7. Items from Commission Commissioner D'Angelo asked for information on 300 units being proposed near BART. Chief Planner Sparks noted that the TOD calls for 300-350 units on the remainder parcels and mixed use. Commissioner D'Angelo asked what the number of units going in around the courthouse will be? Chief Planner Sparks noted that that area is still under review and final recommendations have not been made with regard to the number of units being proposed for development. Commissioner D'Angelo was D:kFinalized Minutes~2002\04-18-02 RPC.doc ^pprove~ o~ _ 4 4 _:oo2 Page 6 of 7 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Approved October ~, 9.00g on the traffic along Mission Road. He added that tl~e organization needs to look at other areas within the City. Vitae ~drperson Ochsenh/n thanked everyone for be'~at the meeting and noted that his concems were also" parkin g.'H~ded that recently Council approved permit p/ilS~ for the Sunshine Gardens area and will all residents will_Be-~~o .put stickers on their cars. ~ Chairperson Romero noteff~h~it is difficult to consider an application when"~ property has akeady been purbl~sed by the applicant. He ~mes any reuse of the property but this is an"/~ppropriate use for it. He encour~d the applicant to find anoth'hqo,~tion. He asked that Assistant City Attoh~ Johnson for clarification ~ssistant City Att~ohnson deferred the explanatio~ty issues to Sergeant MikeN~ cad t~~r parking and circ~al~n issues and this will caus a although he had partially overlooked the conflicts of~,~ping in front of church it is also a safety issue ,,~ flow of people and potential accidents. The Police DepartmL~also looked at close proximity to neighbors a] td th~ .~e impacts the ~n recommended that~Commission continue the item to allow staff to incorporated public, staffand Commission comments ixl th Findings of Denial. Motion Te~lia / Second D'Angelo to continue the item to October 3, 2002. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Recess taken at 9:45 p.m. - 10:00 e Study Session Maoe Tjoe, Lila Tjoe & Rudy Sastra-owner/applicant 111 Chestnut Avenue UP 00-024, VAR 00-024, PTDM 00-024, DR 00-024 & MND 00-024 Rezoning of the property at 111 Chestnut Avenue from Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-2-H) to Multi-Family Residential Zoning District (R-3-L) in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.87. Tentative Subdivision Map allowing the subdivision creating eight (8) parcels and common area in accordance with SSFMC Title 19. Exceptions t~om the SSFMC Title 19 allowing lots siZes less than 5,000 square feet in accordance the SSFMC Title 19. Planned Unit Development allowing lot siZes Smaller than the minimum requirement of 5,000 square feet and reduced setbacks, and parking at a rate of 2.25 spaces per dwelling unit instead of 4.25 spaces per dwelling unit, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.78. Housing Agreement restricting twenty percent (20%) of the eight (8) units as affordable dwellings in accordance with SFMC Chapter 20.125. Design Review allowing for the construction a two-story eight (8) un/t condominium development, situated at 111 Chestnut Avenue (APN 011-312-090) in the Medium Density (R-2-H) Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.85. Senior Planner Carlson presented staffreport. D:kFinallzed Minutesk2002\09-19-02 RPC.doc - 4 5 - Page 6 of 8 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Approved October 3, 2002 Simon Kwan, project architect and applicant, noted that he has reduced the number of dwelling to 8 units. He gave a PowerPoint presentation to show the surrounding one, two and three story buildings. Bob Rocha, landscape architect, spoke about the design and the landscaping for the proposed project. Commissioner Teglia expressed appreciation for the applicant efforts on the project. He noted that the project needs a complete redraw. Although there are higher density projects in the area, Chestnut is a heavily traveled street and this type of development would cause traffic issues due to the lack of parking. The tower effect is not aesthetically pleasing. He added that there are too many bedrooms and not enough parking. He asked what could be put on the property without any exceptions or a PUD. Mr. Carlson noted that a 14 unit apartment complex with at grade parking similar to 90 Oak Avenue apartments recently approved by the Planning Commission would fit the standards. Commissioner Sim noted that the applicant has improved the project, but it still needed work on landscaping, the plaza, and other design details. Chairperson Romero noted that if the parking is being reduced then the bedroom count should be reduced also. He added that he did not want to see parking flow out on the Chesmut and suggested creating smaller units and keeping the number at eight. He added that there are not driveway aprons and the play areas are near the driveways. Mr. Kwan agreed to work with the number of bedrooms and to protect the play area. Vice Chairperson Ochsenhirt added that there would be a better product by increasing the size of bedrooms. The current design with the tower effect gives the project a cut-up look. The Planning Commission's direction to the applicant was to reduce the number of bedrooms especially the 4 bedroom units, protect the play areas and to rearrange design with regard to towers. Mr. Kwan welcomed the comments and noted that he would respond to them. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 10. k Items from Staff \ Chief Blxanner Sparks announ,c~ed that Day In the Park wagon Saturday the 21~t, the Citywide Garage Sale would 29~.tal~'~e placbxon\ Saturday the 28"' and the Boards and CommiSsiOns appreciation luncheon would take place on~ the He ~dded & are in the process of hiring a telecommunicafion~s c ultant for a smdy that the subcomm/ttee wanted conductel~but negotiations are moving slowly. Staffhas been insi~ed by Council to conduct a subcommittee meel~tg with whatever information available. The subcomm/tte-'L~KAll be contacted within a week to schedule this meefl~ Comm/ssioner Sim noted he wbl{ld be out on a business trip until Octob~ 3, 2002 and would not be~ending that meeting. He also asked that stafl~uble check that the Oakmont Vistas project is complying w/th the ~'~ c(~ntrol Chairperson Romero suggested that staff s]~ak to the appropriate entities to see if the road connecting E1 Camino D:~Fin~liTcd Minutcs~2002\09-194)2 RPC.doc - 4 6 - Page 7 of 8 Planning Commission Meeting of 3anuary 20, 2005 Alfeo Sllvestri, owner, noted that their business has been in South San Francisco for :[5 years and wants to be able to reopen for business. He noted that there will be more parking created than is needed on his property because most of his employees bike to work. Public Hearing dosed. Commissioner Sim asked if the vertical landscaping could be included as the landscape requirements. He asked if the applicant was willing to go with staff's recommendation and pay the in-lieu fee. Mr. Mahar noted that they were in accordance with staff's recommendation. Senior Planner Carlson noted that some jurisdictions have considered similar standards such as tree canopies toward the landscape requirements but South San Francisco has not. Commissioner Giusti asked if the outside storage would be anchored. Mr. Mahar noted that they would be leveled and anchored for the worst-case scenario. Commissioner Zemke noted that there is congestion in the area and there is more parking needed. Notion Sim ! Second Giusti to approve P04-0138:UP04-0037 & DR04-0080. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Recess called at 8:14 p.m. Charles K. Ng/applicant Charles K. Ng/owner 111 Chestnut Ave. P02-0020: AHA02-0001, RZ-02-0002, SA02-0001, PUD02-0002 & ND02-0002 Recalled to order at 8:23 p.m, Rezoning of the property from Medium Density Residential (R-2-H) to High Density Residential (R-3-L), Tentative Subdivision Map allowing 8 parcels and common area, Planned Unit Development and Design Review allowing eight new dwelling units, smaller lots than the minimum requirement of 5,000 sq ft, reduced minimum required setback and a parking rate of 2.25 per dwelling unit, and an Affordable Housing Agreement for the property located at 111 Chestnut Avenue in the Medium Density Residential (R-2-H) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Title 19 and Chapters 20.78, 20.85, 20.87 & 20.125 Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. Simon Kwan, architect, noted that they have redesigned the project and took into consideration the concerns of the neighborhood. He gave a PowerPoint presentation with computer-simulated movie to show the Commission the design and architecture of the project. Public Hearing closed. There being no speakers the Public Headng was closed. The Commission was concerned with the fiat roofs. Mr. Kwan noted that there was a variation of fiat and pitched roofs. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the Commission was previously concerned with the height of the structure and this is why the pitch was lowered in the new design. Vice Chairperson Teglia was concerned with the use of the Planned Unit Development application. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the site is designated high density residential in the General Plan and the developer could put up to 14 apartments on the site with less parking and a bulkier building. The developer has chosen to propose only 8 units and increase the parking on the site to 3 spaces per unit. He added that if the developer chose to return with 14 units there would not be a Planned Unit Development application on the site because they would not be asking for any exceptions. Vice Chairperson Teglia asked if a there could be a bedroom removed and therefore reduce the massing of'the -47- S:\Mi=utes~Fi=alized Minutes~2005\01-20-05 RPC.doc Pa~e 4 of 6 Planning Commission Meeting of.lanuary 20, 2005 project. Senior Planner Carlson noted that this was difficult because the ground floor is taken up by the parking spaces. Commissioner Honan noted that there is a lack of barrier in the play area and this could cause an accident if children went beyond the play area. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the Commission could include a Condition of Approval to have a fence. Commissioner Honan was not comfortable with the project design and felt It was square and boxy. Mr. Kwan noted that the previous design had more curved elements, which were not well received by the Commission. He noted that this was the reason for the straight-line approach. He added that they are exceeding the guest parking and if the Commission would like a larger play area some guest spaces could be removed. Commissioner Romero noted that there are two spaces parking per unit. He pointed out that there are no driveway aprons and there is limited street parking. He was concerned with cars parking in the common area or on City streets due to lack of parking spaces. Mr. Kwan noted that they have one parking space per bedroom as per previous discussions with the Commission at prior meetings and have 3 spaces per unit. Senior Planner Carlson noted that for town home development 4.25 is the required parking but for a small lot s inflll development like this the parking requirement would be that of what an apartment building requirement of 2.25 spaces. He noted that this development is at 3spaces per unit. Vice Chairperson Teglla pointed out that the parking is going to be difficult because the City also had plans to eliminate the parking on one side of Chestnut. He asked what the Commission could do if the site was not rezoned from R-2 zoning to R-3. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the area has been rezoned on a project-by-project basis but the General Plan does not show a reduced density along the lot frontage of Chestnut. Commissioner Romero asked which document takes precedent if they are in conflict. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the General Plan because the zoning code is an implementation measure of the General Plan. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that the project is out of character with the neighborhood. He pointed out that the project is better than what the Commission has seen in previous designs. He noted that the height and parking of the project are main consideration items. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the developer has to see if they can have 2 bedroom unit homes and this becomes a marketability issue. Commissioner Honan asked if the box like design could be changed because it does not fit in the neighborhood. Commissioner Sim asked that the architect show what he has done to the design to break the box like look. Mr. Kwan noted that the buildings in the area, Mr, Kwan noted that he buildings in the neighborhood are all plain. He added that he used a combination of gable and pitch roof to add some design to the buildings, He added that he prefers this proposal rather than a high-density project. Commissioner Honan asked that one of the full bathrooms be tumed into a half bathroom to prevent too many people from living in the home. Mr. Kwan noted that this could be included into the CondiUons of Approval. Robert La Rocha pointed out that the tiny tot lot is seduded from the front of the parking area with hedges. He added that a fence can be included if the Commission felt it was necessary. Commissioner Honan asked that the tot lot be redesigned. Commissioner Romero noted that units 4, 5 and 6 are nice but 2 and 3 appear to be miniature apartment buildings. He added that some improvements have been made to the design and pointed out that tandem parking can add the extra parking space. He noted that the design and parking need to be addressed by the applicant. Chief Planner Sparks noted that the Commission still has concems on the project and asked if they could create a subcommittee to address some of the Commission's issues. Chairperson Teglia appointed Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Romero and himself to the 11:[ Chestnut subcommittee. Motion Oiusti / Second Zemke to continue the item off calendar. S:\Minutes\Finalized Minutes\2005\01-20-05 RPC.doc - ~ 8 - Page 5 of 6 Planning Commission Meeting of 3anuary 20, 2005 ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 6. Items from Staff Chief Planner Sparks noted that the City Council will be holding a second round of interviews for the boards and Commissions vacancies on 3anuary 25, 2005. He added that he put a hold on the building permit for an addition on Park Way, which a concerned citizen brought to the attention of the Planning Commission. He pointed out that the Design Review Board looked at it and the design will undergo some changes. 7. Items from Commission None 8. Items from the Public None 9. Adjournment 9:47 P.M, Motion Zemke / Second Sim to adjourn the meeting in Don Lindsay's honor. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Thomas C, sparks Secretary to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco Marc C. Teglia, Chairperson Planning Commission City of South San Francisco NEXT MEE'I-iNG: Regular Meeting February 3, 2005, Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA TCS/bla -49- S:\Minutes\Fina!ized Minutes\2005\01-20-05 RPC.doc Page 6 of 6 Planning Commission Meeting of March 17, 2005 Charles lC Ng/applicant ChaHes K. Ng/owner 1~! Chestnut Ave. P02-0020: AHA02-0001, RZ-02-0002, SA02-0001, PUD02-0002 & ND02-0002 Rezoning of the property from Medium Density Residential (R-2-H) to High Density Residential (R-3-L), Tentative Subdivision Map allowing 8 parcels and common area, Planned Unit Development and Design Review allowing eight new dwelling units, smaller lots than the minimum requirement of 5,000 sq ft, reduced minimum required setback and a parking rate of 3 per dwelling unit, and an Affordable Housing Agreement for the property located at 111 Chestnut Avenue in the Medium Density Residential (R-2-H) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC 'IiUe 19 and Chapters 20.78, 20.85, 20.87 & 20.125 Senior Planner Carlson presented the Staff Report. Simon Kwan, Architect, gave a histom/of the various changes to the plans and the meetings held with the Planning Commission, Design Review Board and the neighborhood. He added that they responded to the Commission's and the neighbors concems. He added that they added full-grown trees to screen buildings, they also added a metal fence to screen guest parking from play areas, and other design elements to the buildings. He noted that they modified the ground floor level bathroom to be a 1/2 bathroom and in some units took out the bathroom. Public Headng opened. There being no speakers the Public Headng was dosed. Subcommittee Report Commissioner Romero mentioned that the subcommittee tried to find a way of eliminating the boxy look and break up the roofline. He felt that the final design showed all the comments given by the Commission and subcommittee. Chairperson Teglia noted that they were concerned with the presence on Chestnut and the applicant added balconies, windows and extended the overhangs. Commission Comment~ Commissioner Prouty noted that he has reviewed all the information provided at previous meetings and has reviewed the minutes of meetings this item has been discussed and is comfortable with making a decision on the proposal. He pointed out that he liked the 4 in 12 pitch on the roofs but on units 1 and 8 there is not enough slope and appear to be fiat. He noted that he could support the project if units :1 and 8 have a 4 in :12 roof pitch otherwise, he could not support the project. Mr. Kwan noted that he tried to keep a Iow profile on the front of the site but noted that from an architectural point of view the roof pitch can be altered. Vice Chairperson Zemke and Chairperson Teglia concurred with making the roof pitch because it would hide the building mass in the back. Commissioner Honan asked if the play area's metal fence would be landscaped. Chairperson Teglia noted that the subcommittee felt that they wanted a fence that would allow for parents to monitor their children while they are playing and at the same time protect the play area from cars. Commissioner Prouty noted that he walked the neighborhood and noted that one of the neighbors was concerned with privacy and suggested that there be a sound barrier, such as a :10 foot tall fence surrounding the project. Mr. Kwan noted that this would be a massive fence and resolved that they would have full grown trees provide a natural buffer between the properties. Commissioner Prouty asked if the Homeowners Association would maintain the landscaping. He also pointed out that the Association fees are too Iow to allow for the landscaping to be maintained and that the fee should be increased in the CC&Rs. Assistant City Attorney 3ohnson noted that the CC&Rs before the Commission are not the final documents. She pointed out the final CC&Rs will be approved by the Council and any modifications would be made then. Motion Sim / Romero approve resolution #2641-2005 recommending that the City Council approve the proposed project with the additional suggestions of including a 4 and :12 pitched roof for homes 1 and 8, and exploring the possibility of adding a fence to the proposal. Planning Commission Meeting of March 17, 2005 ~'1~ Commissioner Romero added that the fence and the design be discussed with the adjacent property owners. Assistant City Attorney 3ohnson noted that this could be an additional Condition of approval that the developer meet with the adjacent property owners and give their consent for the fence to be installed and then return to the Commission in 6 months. Commissioner Sim and Commissioner Romero concurred with Assistant City Attorney 3ohnson in adding the Condition of Approval to the recommendation for approval. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Chairperson Teglia asked that the final redesign for the roof be forwarded to the Commission. ADMZNZSTRATZVE BUSTNESS ITEMS FROM STAFF Planning Commission update on laws, regulations, and procedures. None ITEMS FROM COMMISSION None ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC None AD.IOURNMENT .~.0:00 P.M. Thomas C. Sparks Secretary to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco Marc C. Teglia, Chairperson Planning Commission City of South San Francisco NEXT MEE'IqNG: Regular Meeting April 7, 2005, Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, TCS/bla PaEe 3 Frank Diokno-owner/applicant 22 Vista Court Project Number: P01-0006 Tentative Parcel Map, Modification of a PUD and Design Review allowing a lot split and new single-~hmily dwelling unit in the Single F~mily Residential Zouing District. (Case Planner: Steve Carlson) The Board had the following cor~ments: Change the fiont entry to a less grandiose~ single-story design more in harmony with the other homes on the street. Raise the view terrace behlud the house to be flush with the lower floor of the house to help reduce the overall height of the rear elevation. Change the roof end on the fight side of the from elevation fiom a gable end to. a hip. Plant trees and ground cover suitable for erosion control on the slope below the home. Consult landscape architect or horticulturist to dete,~Jue which species would be most suitable and effective. Keduce the overall size of the house so that it is closer in size to the other homes in the neighborhoo& Please revise the plans and resubmit them to the Planning Division for fm'ther review by the Design Review Board. Maoe Kian Tjoe-applicant 111 Chestnut Avenue Project Number: P02-0020 Zone Change fiom Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential, Tentative' Subdivision Map allowing an 11-lot residential subdivision, Planned Unit Development and Design Keview of 10 dwelHug units in the Medium Density Residential Zou~ug District. (Case Planner: Steve Carlson) The Board had the followiug comments: Space the homes farther apart so that there is more space between each unit. Keduce the overall density of the subdivision so that there is more usable open space. Provide a sidewalk fiom the interior of the subdivision connecting out to the sidewalk along Chestnut Avenue. Make play areas/open spaces larger and more accessible. Create more usable rear-yard space between the two units by bringing in the rear wall of the larger unit and cantilevering the second story out. Kemove plants from areas in between units as there is not enough light to feed them. Consult a landscape architect to prepare. ~ landscape plan for the entire site; provide more trees/ground cover in the interior - 5 2 -subdivision. DRB Minums March 19, 2002 Page 4 Examine options of homeowners keeping trash/recycling in their garages or prov/rling one centralized trash dumpster/recycling bin location somewhere on site. Show where utility box/water meters will be located; integrate these into the design of the homes ffthey are to be attached to the units. Please revise the plans amd resubmit them to the Planning Division for further review by the Design Review Board. 10. 11. Liberty Bank-owner Eugene Hu, Archite~-applicant 500 Linden Avenue Project Number: P01-000? Revision to the color scheme of an addition to au existing bank in the Retail Commercial Zoning District. The board approved of this design and had no additional comments. 1VIISCELLANEOUS ITEMS: Alfredo & Lolita Flores-owner Sandra B. Jimenez-applieant 653 Chestnut Avenue P02-0003 Variance to construct a second dwelllug unit w/thin the required rear yard setback in the Single Family Residential Zoning District. The Board reviewed the latest plans featuring a garage addition that encroaches into the required front yard setback. The Board recommended that the applicant reconfigure the garage and carport so that they not would encroach into any of the required setbacks. The applicant took their recommendations into consideration and will confer with her clients before proceeding. Respectfully Submitted, Steve Kowalski Associate Planner -53- ATTENTION: THIS AGREEMENT IS A DRAFT AND IS BEING PROVIDED BY THE CITY ONLY FOIl REVIEW AND COMIVIE~, IT IS NOT AN APPROVAL OR OFFICIAL DECLARATION OF THE CITY'S INTENTIONS REGARDING THE PROJECTS MENTIONED HEI~IN; ANY NUM]BEKS AND CONDITIONS CONTAINED IN THIS AGREEMENT ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. RECORDING REQUESTED BY: DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AND COMMIYNITY DEVELOPMENT CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 400 GRAND AVENUE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080 WHEN RECORDED MAr[, TO: DE?ART1ViE~ OF ECONOMIC AND COMMIYN-iTY DEVELOPMENT CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 400 GRAND AVENUE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080 Documentary Transfer Tax $ EXE1V[PT County of San Mateo City of South San Francisco [] Right of Way Agent AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND [insert name] This Affordable Housing Agreement (this "Agreement") is entered into this __ day of __., 2004, by and between the City of South San Francisco ("City"), and [insert name] ("Developer") as a condition of approval of the development of that certain real property in South San Francisco, California more parficulazly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Project Property"). WHEREAS, Chapter 20.125 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code sets forth the requirements for Iuclusionary Housing ("Inelusionary Housing Ordinance"); and -54- WHEREAS, the Developer is planning to construct houses on the Project Property (the "Project") and has submitted a site development plan for the Project; and ~AS, the Developer is required by the Inclusiol~ry Housing Ordinance to set aside twenty percent (20%) of new housing as low and moderate income level housing; and WHEREAS, the Developer proposes meeting this requirement by providing the required number of housing units at an offsite location and renting such un/ts as the required below market rate units; and WHEREAS, the City has reviewed the Project and determined that the construction of below market rate units on the site of the Project Property would be infeasible in light of the project size and site constraints and agreed that providing the below market rate rental units offsite will be sufficient to meet the requirements of the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requires the Developer's plans and the City's conditions regarding inclusionary housing be set forth in an Affordable Housing Agreement; and WHEREAS, this Agreement is required as a condition of future discretionary permits for development of the Project Property and shall be recorded against the Project Property. NOW TI-EEREFORE, the City and the Developer agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. As a condition of developing and constructing eight (8) dwelling units on the Project Property, Developer shall provide two (2) Below Market Rate Units which shall be affordable to households at fifty percent (50%) of unadjusted median-income in San Mateo County as published annually by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The Below Market Rate Units shall be affordable to lower income households and guaranteed by deed restrictions or other enforceable covenants running with the land on which the Below Market.Rate Units are located. 2. The parties acknowledge and agree that the monthly rent payable by a tenant for a off-site Below Market Rate Unit shall be determined in accordance with the unadiusted annual income l~ru~ts published by the Department of Housing and Urban Development at the time the Below Market Rate Units are ready for occupancy, shall not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the applicable tenant's monthly household income, and shall be adjusted annually pursuant to the annual percentage increase in median income for a San Mateo County household in the San Francisco Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area, published annually by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, or a maximum of five percent (5%), whichever is lower. However, in no event shall a below market rate tenant be required to pay rent greater than n~l~ety percent (90%) of the market rate rent for such unit. The parties further acknowledge and agree that rent determ~r~ed in accordance with the preced~r~g sentence shall be deemed "affordable" in accordance with the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and this Agreement and that such formula shall be the manner in which rent is calculated for the Below Market Rate Units Developer is obligated to provide in Section 1 above. 3. The offsite Below Market Rate Units shall be located with~u au area of South San Francisco known as the Willow Gardens Planned Unit Development. Developer and the City acknowledge that the Willow Gardens area is an ideal area for such Below Market Rate Units as it is in close proximity to and has access to employment opportunities, urban services and transportation facilities. 4. Building permits on the Project Property shall be issued only al[er (i) Developer has obtained ownership of the Below Market Rate Units in the Willow Gardens PlAnned Unit Development, (ii) this Agreement and the Rent Restrictions have been recorded against the Below Market Rate Units, (iii) this Agreement has been recorded against the Project Property, and (iv) Developer has submitted au application for a buila~ng permit and complete plans for the Project Property and the Below Market Rate Units and such plans have been approved by the City. The City acknowledges and agrees that it will process the building permits for the Project Property prior to such conditions being satisfied. Upon tramfer of Developer's rights in the Below Market Rate Units and/or a transfer of Developer's rights and obligations under this Agreement, in either case, to a third party in accordauce with Section 19 herein, the building permits for the Project Property shall be issued only upon satisfaction of the above conditions. 5. The Below Market Rate Units shall remain restricted and affordable to the income groups designated in Section 1 above for a period of fifty-five (55) years, which period commences on the date the Below Market Rate Units are placed in service at the eligible income levels. 6. This Agreement shall be recOrded against the Project Property and all Below Market Rate Units On and a~er the date ~at *~'~ against ~e Below M~ket ~te U~ts ~d habitability standards set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and are occupied by income eligible Tenants this Agreement shall have no further force or effect in connection with the Project Property and thereag~er at Developer's written request, the City shall provide Developer with a letter (or a recordable document if so requested by Developer) stating that all obligations and conditions under this Agreement related to the Project Property have been fully and completely satisfied, within thirty (30) days of such written request. 7. The offsite Below Market Rate Units shall meet minimum below market rate affordability and habitability staudards. Said standards shall be determined by the City and set forth in Exhibit B, incorporated herein and attached hereto. In the event of a transfer of Developer's fights in the Below Market Rate Units and/or a transfer of Developer's rights and obligations under this Agreement, in either case, to a third partw in accordance with Section 19 herein, such transferee shall be responsible for maintaining such below market rate affordability and habitability standards. g. Developer shall maintain the Below Market Rate Units in conformance with the te~ms and conditions set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. To the extent applicable, said conditions shall be reflected in all rental agreements for such Below Market Rate Units. In the event of a transfer of Developer's fights in the Below Market Kate Units and/or a transfer of Developer's rights and obligations under this Ag~eement~ in either -56- case, to a fl~ird party in accords_nee with Section 19 herein, such tran.~feree shall be responsibk, for maintaining the Below Market Rate Units in conformance with Ewh]bit C and Developer shall be released from thi.~ respon.~ibilitv 9. If the Below Market Kate unit are sold in whole or in part, whether to a not-for-profit or other private party, Resale Restrictions for Below Market Rate Units shall be recorded upon close of escrow for said Units. The Below Market Rate Units shall remain restricted and affordable to the designated income group(s) for a term of fit-y-five (55) years. The term shall be~n the date the Below Market Kate Unit are sold in whole or in part and shall apply to all subsequent buyers. 10. In the event Below Market Rate Units are sold as individual units, the sale price of the units shall be restricted such that the Below Market Rate Units are restricted and affordable to the income groups designated in Section_l Developer shall work with the City and/or the City's First Time Homebuyer Administrator to identify and qualify a eligible buyers for said Units. At the time of sale Developer shall pay an administrative fee to reimburse the City for all administrative/processing costs and fees incurred in processing the sale of the Below Market Kate Units, which may include First Time Homebuyer Administrator fees and costs, legal and processing fees for First Time Homebuyer loans by the City to eligible buyers. 11. Developer and subsequent buyers shall provide City, or its assigned, a first right of refusal to purchase Below Market Rate Units ifauy of the Lu~;'~-aal units are offered for sale as individual units at any point during the fifty-five (55) year affordability period. The right of~ refusal to purchase the Below Market Rate Units shall be submitted in writing to the Director of the Department of Economic and Comm~lllity Development. Within thirty (30) days of its receipt, the City shall indicate its intent to exercise the first right of refusal for the purpose of providing affordable housing and close escrow within ninety (90) days. ['Klm in addition to right of first, refnsal mentioned aboVe~ We.also.need to !~diCate ~we will be recording a new 55 year restriction.regardless of who buys indiv~ auul :units] If Developer or any subsequent purchaser provided in this Section, sells any Below Market Rate Unit as an individunl unit before the ffft-V five (55) year rental restriction period ends, the City .~hall record a Resale Restriction and a right of first refusal with a term of fifty-five (55) years from the date ofrecora,fion` against said Unit(s) upon the close of escrow for said Unit(s), so that said Unit(s) .~h,ll remain affordable to subsequent income eligible buyers for a tm'm of fifty-five (55) years. Notwithstanding foregoing, in the event cfa sale of all of the Below Market Rate Units to a third party at one time, for purposes of continued rental and managem~ent of the Below Market Rate Units, th~, requirement hereunder to record the fifty-five (55) year resale restriction and righ, of first refusal upon individual units shall not apply. 12. Developer shall indem~ity, defend with couu.~el selected by the City, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers from and against any and all losses, liability, claims, suits, actions, damages, and causes of action arising out of any personal injury, bodily injury, loss of life, or d~m~ge to property, or any violation of any federal, state, or municipal law or ordinance related to the implementation of this Agreement and/or the renting of the Below Market Rate Units. -57- 13. Developer shall pay an admin{strative fee to reimburse the City for all administrative/processing costs and fees incurred in processing th/s affordable housing plan (which may include attorney's fees and cost), and implementing the requirements of the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance with respect to the Proj eot Property (collectively, the "Administrative Fee"). Said Administrative Fee may be waived, at the City's discretion, in. order to further the goal of providing affordable housing. 14. Any material amendments to this Agreement shall be processed in the same manner as an ori~nal application for approval pursuant to Section 20.125.150 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code. The Director of Economic and Community Development shall have sole discretion in determining what constitutes a material amendment to this Agreement. 15. The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement. Inthe event that either party brings any action against the other under this Agreement, the parties agree that trial of such action shall be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of San Mateo or in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. 16. If a party to this Agreement brings any action, including an action for declaratory relief, to enforce or interpret the provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reaSonable attorneys' fees in addition to any other relief to which that party may be entitled. The court may set such fees in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose. 17. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement is invalid, void, or unenforceable, the provisions of this Agreement not so adjudged shall remain in full force and effect. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement. 18. Any notice or demand shall be made by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, or reliable overnight courier to the address of the respective parties set forth below: Developer: city: City of South San Francisco - City Clerk 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 19. Subject to Section 1 above, Developer may at any ~4me or from time to time transfer its right, title or interest in or to all or any portion of the Below Market Kate Units. The burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of this Agreement shall inure to, all successors in interest to Developer. As a condition precedent to any such transfer, Developer shall require the transferee to acknowledge in writing that transferee has been informed, understands and agrees that the burdens and benefits under this Agreement relating to the Below Market Rate Units shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the traugferee. Such written -58- acknowledgement shall include a list of the outstanding obligations under this Agreement and identify the responsible patty for completion of each such outstanding obligation. Upon the completion of Developer's responsibilities pursuant to this section, Developer shall have no further obligations or benefits hereunder with respect to the Below Market Rate Units. Any transfer which does not comply with the requirements of this Section shall not release the Developer from its obligations to the City under this Agreement. 20. The terms of this Agreement shall :be interpreted in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 20.125 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code ("Chapter 20.125"). In the event of any conflict between the term~ of this Agreement and the provisions of Chapter 20.125, the terms of this Agreement shall control. 21. Either party may, from time to time, deliver written notice to the other party requesting written eertitieation that, to the knowledge of the c~g party (i) this Agreement is in full force and effect and constitutes a binding obligation of the parties; (ii) this Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing, or, if it has been amended or modified, specifying the nature of the amendments or modifications; and (iii) the requesting party is in compliance with this Agreement and the Rent or Resale Reslrictions, or if not in compliance, describing therein the nature and monetary amount, if any, of the non-compliance. A party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and return the certificate within thirty (30) days after receipt thereof. The City Manager shall have the fight to execute the certificates requested by Developer hereunder. The City acknowledges that a certificate hereunder may be relied upon by a transferee and/or mortgagee of Developer. IN WITNESS TI~.REOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above. DEVELOPER: CITY: CiTY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO By: Name: Title: Michael A. Wilson, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: Steven T.. Mattas, City Attorney -59- EX]:rl-~IT A '~PROJE~T PROPERTY DES(SRIPTION~ -60- EXHIBIT B Minimum Habit~ility Standards Below Market Rate Units shall meet minimum habitability standards. Develop and/or owner must ensure compliance with all state and local homing codes, licensing requirements and any other standards regarding the condition of a structure and the operation of the housing and/or services. Specifically, each project sponsor must adhere to proper standards regarding accessibility, sanitation, security, illumination, eleclricity, and fire safety. These standard include, but are not limited to: · Effective waterproofing and weather protection of roof and exterior wall,% including unbroken windows and walls; · Functional plumbing facilities, including hot and cold running water, and efficient sewage disposal; · Gas facilities, heating resources and electrical system in good w0rldng order; · Lights and wiring that work and are safe. At least two functioning electrical outlets in every room, with at least one light in the bathroom; · Well-lighted common areas, such as stairs and hallways; · Buildings, grounds and fixtures that are clean, sanitary and free from debris, rodents and vermln~ · Adequate and properly maln~ained trash receptacles; · 'Doors and windows in good repair. Functional outer doors and locks, including a deadbolt lock for the main entry door, and window locks; · Functional smoke detector it's the tenant's responsibility to buy and install batteries for the smoke detector; · Floors, stairways and railings that are safe and in good repair; · Prevention and elimination of mold and mildew; · Interior and exterior paint in fair to excellgnt condition. The developer and/or owner shall allow and make arrangements with tgnants to permit the City, at its discretion, to inspect all units on a biannual basis to monitor compliance with the habitability standards. -61- EXI:ITRIT C P,.ental Conditions for Below Market Rate Units The following conditions shall apply to the rental of all Below Market Kate Units and, to the extent applicable, the conditions shall be reflected in the rental agreements between the Developer and all Tenants of the Below Market Rate Units: 1. Tenants shall be annually certified as to income eligibility for the Below Market Rate Units and the annual certification shall be submitted to the office of Community Development. If Developer fails to perform an annual certification, City shall notify Developer in writing that Developer is in violation of the Affordable Housing Agreement and Developer shall be fined in accordance with the provisions of the Inclusionary Housing Orcl~l~ance, Chapter 20.125 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code. City shall have the right to take steps to assess these fines as a lien against the property where the Below Market Rate Units are located. Notwithstancl~ug the foregoing, in the event any Tenant is not cooperating with Developer in preparing the annual certification, so long as Developer is using commercially reasonable efforts to obtain such annual certification, the ~iues set forth above shall not be assessed agalu.~t Developer for the applicable Below Market Rate Unit. In addition, notwithstanding the foregoing, Developer shall not be obligated to provide an ~uuual certification for any Tenant that Developer is in the process of evicting at the time such annual certifications are due to the City. 2. Developer shall not evict any Tenants occupying the Below Market Rate Units at the time of purchase. Tenants occupying the Below Market Rate Units at the time of Purchase who do not qualify for lower-income or lower-to-moderate income housing shall not be required to vacate the Unit(s) any sooner than as required by applicable state law. In the event vacation of any of thc Below Market Rate Units is necessary in order to do any rehabilitation and/or reconstruction work on the Below Market Rate Units, Developer shall have the fight to evict Tenants occupying the Below Market Rate Units at the time of purchase in order to do such work; provided that Tenants occupying the Below Market Rate Units at the time of purchase shall not be required to vacate any sooner than as required by applicable state law. Nothing, however, shall prevent the Developer from evicting said Tenants for cause such as, includ~nE but not limited to, conducting illegal activities on the propm'ty or failing to pay rent. 3. In the event Tenants occupying the Below Market Rate Units at the time of purchase are income eligible, but are paying rental amounts below the allowable below market rates established by Developer and approved by the City (the "Below Market Rates"), Developer shall be allowed to raise the rental amount for such Tenant no more than five percent (5%), orthe percentage rise in area median income, whichever is higher. This lim~tafion shall apply to the initial and all subsequent rent increases until the Tenant reaches the maximum rental allowance. 4. Once any Tenant reaches the maximnm rental allowance, the Developer shall be allowed to raise the rental amount, in subsequent rent increases, no more than five percent (5%), or the percentage rise in area median income, whichever is lower unless raising such rent would exceed 90% of the market rate rent for such Ul~t. 5. In the event any Tenants occupying the Below Market Rate Units a~ the time of purchase are income eligible, but are paying rental mounts above the allowable Below Market -69- Rates, Developer shall immediately lower the rental amount for such Tenant to the max/mum allowable rent level. In the event Developer receives rental payments in excess of the maximum allowable rent, Developer shall either reimburse the difference to the Tenant or offer Tenant the choice of applying it toward future rent payments. 6. In the event any income eligible Tenants are subsequently determined to be ineligible (or over income tenants), Developer shall be allowed to raise the rent amount for said ineligible Tenant to an amount equivalent to the market rental rate for said Tvnam's unit. Developer shall not evict a formerly income eligible Tenant on the basis the Tenant has become income ineligible. Said Tenant shall be given one (I) year from the date of ineligibility to vacate the Unit. Nothing, however, shall prevent the Developer from evicting said Tenants for cause such as, including but not 'limited to, conducting illegal activities on the property or failing to pay rent. 7. The parties acknowledge and agree that ha the event Developer is not allowed to evict a Tenant because of the conditions descn'bed in Paragraph 2 and/or Paragraph 6 of this Exhibit, (i).Developer shall not be deemed in violation of the Affordable Housing Agreement. aud (ii) solely for the purposes of satisfying the second sentence of Section 8 of the Affordable Housing Agreement, such Tenant shall be deemed an income eligible Tenant, unless both the applicable time periods set forth therein have expired and thereafter, Developer is not using commercially reasonable effort to evict such Tenant. -63- ~hen recorded mail to: Jack Whoiey, Esq. 250 Montgomery Street, Suite 1100 San Francisco, CA 9404 A. P. No. 011-312-090 RECEIVED SEP 1 0 2004 PLANNING DECLARATION OF CONDITIONS, COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS ...... OF A PLkNlqED DEVELOPMENT -64- SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION OF CONDITIONS, COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF ii1 CHESTNUT AVENUE, A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Table of Contents will generate here >> -65- SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 DECLARATION OF CONDITIONS, COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF 111 CHESTNUT AVENUE, A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT THIS DECLARATION is made on the date hereinafter set forth by UNITED NGS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a California Limited Partnership; and CHARLES NG and JUDY NG, husband and wife, collectively referred to herein as "Declarant." Declarant is the owner of that certain real property located in the City of South San Francisco, County of San Mateo, State of California, more particularly described as all of the real property located within the boundaries as shown on the subdivision map entitled "Map for Residential Subdivision, 111 Chestnut Avenue~ a Planned Development,., which Map was recorded in the Office of the Recorder of the County of San Mateo, State of California, on , 200... , in Book of Maps, Pages through , inclusive. ~. ' ' Declar~n't----i~sends to. establish a plarn~-d--d~velopment consisting of eight (8) Lots and the Common Area under the provisions of the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act, providing for separate title to each Lot within the Project, each Lot to have as an appurtenance to it a membership in the 111 Chestnut Avenue Homeowners Association, a California nonprofit mutual benefit corporation, which shall own the Common Area, as defined in this Declaration. The entire development shall be referred to herein as the Project. Declarant intends by this document to impose upon the Property mutually beneficial restrictions under a general plan of improvement for the benefit of all Owners of Lots. · NOW~ THEREFORE, Decl~rant hereby establSshes, t_h~ tb~Property hereinafter described shall be held, conveyed, mortgaged, encumbered, leased, rented, used, occupied) sold and improved, subject to the following declarations, limitations, covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements, all of which are imposed as equitable servitudes, pursuant to a general plan for the development of the Property, for the purposes of enhancing and protecting the value and attractiveness of the Property. All of the limitations, covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements -66- 1 DP-AFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 shall constitute covenants which shall run with the land and shall be binding upon Declarant and the successors and assigns of Declarant and all parties having or acquiring any right, title or interest in or to any part of the Proper~y or the Project. ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS Section 1.1 "Articles,, Shall mean and refer to the Articles of Association of the Association, as amended from time to time. Section 1.2 "Assessments,, Shall mean Regular Assessments and/or Special Assessments which are a portion of the cost of maintaining, repairing, improving, operating and managing the Property, or which are imposed to bring an Owner and his Lot into compliance with the Project Documents', and which are to be paid by Owners as determined by the Association. Section 1.3 ~'Association,, Shall mean and refer to the 111 Chestnut Avenue Homeowners Association, an unincorporated association, the Members of which shall be Owners of Lots in the Project. Section 1.4 "Board,, or ."Board"of Directors,, refer to the governing body of-the-Association. Shall mean and Section 1.5 ~ Shall mean or refer to the Bylaws of the Association, as amended from time to time. Section 1.6 '~Common Area,, Shall mean and' refer to those portions of the Property and all improvements thereon owned in fee title by the Association for the common use and enjoyment of all Owners of a Lot or Lots and described as Parcel A on the Map. Said Common Area shall be conveyed in fee by Declarant to the Association prior to or simultaneously with the recording of the conveyance of the first Lot to an Owner. Section 1.7 f'.Common Expenses,, Means and includes the-actual and estimated expenses of operating the Property and any reasonable reserve-for such purposes, as found and determined by the Board% and all sums designated common expenses by or pursuant to the Project Documents. Section 1.8 "Declarant,, Shall mean and refer to UNITED NGS LIMITED PARTNERSHiP, a California Limited Partnership; and CHARLES NG and JUDY NG, husband and wife, together with their successors and assigns, provided: -67- DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 (a) Such successors and assigns acquire five (5) or more Lots for the purpose of resale to others, and (b) Declarant has expressly assigned to such successor(s) its rights and duties to .all or a portion of the Project. Section 1.9 "Declaration" enabling Declaration. Shall mean and refer to this Section 1.10 "EliGible Insurer or Guarantor,' Shall mean and refer to an insurer or governmental guarantor of a first mortgage who has requested notice of certain matters from the Association in accordance with Section 8.6(g). Section 1.11 "EliGible MortGaGee" Shall mean and refer to a first mortgagee who has requested notice of certain matters from the Association in accordance with Section 8.6(g). Section 1.12 "Exclusive Use Common Area" Shall mean and refer to those portions of the Common Area, if any, set aside for the exclusive use of a Lot Owner or Owners, pursuant to Article II, Section 2.7, and shall constitute "exclusive use common area" within the meaning of California Civil Code Section 1351(i). Section 1.13 "Institutional Lender" Shall mean any bank, savings and loan association, insurance company, or other financial institution holding a recorded morZ~age on any Lot. sect-~6-h-~."i4 "Lot" Shall mean and refer to any plot of land, together with any improvements thereon, shown upon the recorded Map, as defined herein or any subsequently recorded subdivision map, with the exception of those areas defined as Common Area on the Map or on any subsequently recorded subdivision map. Section 1.15 "Lot DesiGnation" Means the number, letter or combination thereof or other official designations shown on the Map. Section 1.16 .."Map" Shall mean that subdivision map entitled "Map for Residential Subdivision !11 Chestnut Avenue, a Planned Development", recorded the day of , 19 , in Book of Maps, pages through , Official Records of the County of San Mateo. Section 1.17 "Member" Shall mean and refer to a person entitled to membership in the Association, as provided in this Declaration. Section 1.18 "Mortqaqe" well as a mortgage. Shall include a deed of trust as -68- 3 DP~AFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 Section 1.19 ."Mortqagee. Shall include a beneficiary or a holder of a deed of trust as well as a mortgagee. .Section 1.20 fMortqaqor,, Shall include the trustor of a deed of trust as well as a mortgagor. Section 1.2] "Owner,, or "Owners,, Shall mean or refer to the record holder or holders of title, if more than one, of a Lot in the Project. This shall include any person having a fee simple title to any Lot but shall not include contract sellers and those persons or entities having any interest merely as security for the performance of any obligation. If a Lot is sold under a recorded installment land contract to a purchaser, such purchaser, rather than the fee Owner, shall be considered the Owner. ~ection 1.22 "Person,, Means a natural person, a corporation, a partnership, a trustee or other legal entity. Section 1.23 ~ Shall mean and refer to the entire real property described herein, consisting of '12, Lots and the Common Area, including all structures and improvements erected or to be erected thereon. Section 1.24 .."Project Documents,, Means and includes this Declaration, as it may be amended from time to time, the attachments, if any, annexed hereto, the Articles, the Bylaws, and the rules and regulations for the Members as established from time to time ..... .. ' Section 1.25 ~-~'ans and includes the real properly' described herein and all improvements erected or to be erected thereon and such additions thereto as may hereafter be brought within the jurisdiction of the Association, and all property, real, personal or mixed, intended for or used in connection with the Project. .Section 1.26 "Reqular Assessment,, Shall mean an Assessment which is a portion of the cost of maintaining, improving, operating and managing the Property which is to be paid by each Owner, as determined by the Association. Section 1.27 "Special Assessment,, Shall mean a supplemental Assessment to meet expenses which is to be paid by each Owner when the total amount of funds, necessary to defray common expenses is determined to be inadequate by the Association. Section 1.28 ."Number and Gender,, The singular and plural number and masculine, feminine and neuter gender shall each include the other where the context requires. -69- DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 ~ection 1.29 "Mandatory and Permissive,, "Shall", "will" and "agree,, as used herein are mandatory and "may" as used herein is permissive. ARTICLE II DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT, DIVISION D,F PROPERTY AND CREATION OF PROPERTY RIGHTS Section 2.1 Description of Project. The Project is a planned development which consists of eight (8) Lots and the Common Area, including the real property and all improvements thereon. Section 2.2 Division of Property. The Property is hereby divided into the individual Lots and the Common Area, as defined in Article I hereof. Section 2.3 Easements. Each of the Lots shown on the Map shall have appurtenant to it, as the dominant tenement, an easement over the Common Area now or hereafter owned by the Association, as the servient tenement, for ingr~S and egress, and for use, occupancy.., and. enjoyment, and where applicable, for the construction, maintenance and operation of uti-titles. All of the easements are subject to the following provisions: (a) The right of the Association to establish reasonable rules for the use of the Common Area; (b) The right of the Association to discipline Members and to suspend the right of an Owner to use the facilities for any period during which any Assessment against a Lot remains unpaid and for any infraction of the rules contained in the Project Documents, as provided for in this Declaration, after notice and a hearing by the Board of Directors. The right reserved herein shall .not be construed to include the power to cause a forfeiture or abridgement of an Owner's rights to the full use and enjoyment of that Owner's indi~iduilly' owned Lot, except Where Suc~ loss or forfeiture results from court judgment or arbitration award or sale under power of sale for failure to pay Assessments; (c) The righ~ of the Association to dedicate or transfer all or any part of the Common Area to any public agency, authority or utility for such purposes and subject to such conditions as may be agreed to by the Members. No such dedication or transfer shall be effective unless an instrument sicned by two-thirds (2/3rds) of -70- -5- DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 the Owners, agreeing to such dedication or transfer, has been recorded; (d) To avoid the necessity of a separate television antenna system for each Lot, a cable television antenna system may be installed and may be hooked up to each residence on a Lot. Said system, if and when installed, shall be maintained by the Association or cable television franchisee. To the extent necessary to effectuate the foregoing plan, there shall be an easement in favor of each Lot for the purpose of connecting the same with the central television service or line. Each Lot shall be subject to an easement in favor of all other Lots and in favor of the entity holding the cable television franchise, to provide for the passage through the Lot and any structure thereon of television connections from any other Lot to the cable system, and shall be subject to a further easement for the placement and maintenance of such connections; and (e) Easements for work necessary to complete development and construction of the Project. The foregoing easements are granted and reserved subject to the .'condition that their use and enjoyment shall not unreasonably interfere with the use, occupancy or enjoyment of all or any part of the Common Area. Section 2.4 Easements to AccomDanV Conveyance of Lot. Easements that benefit or burden any Lot shall be appurtenant to that Lot and shall au~.o-m~ii6ally accompany the conveyance Lot., even though the description in the instrument of conveyance may refer only to the fee title to the Lot. Section 2.5 Deleqation of Use. Any Owner may delegate, in accordance with the Bylaws, his right of enjoyment to the Common Area and facilities to the members of his family, his tenants, or contract purchasers, who reside on the Property. Section 2.6 Conveyance of Common Area to Associatioj,. On or before conveyance of title to the first Lot, Declarant shall deed the Common Area to the Association to be held for the benefit of the Members of the Association. .Section 2.7 Exclusive Use Common Area. Portions of the Common Area shown and-delineated on the Map as "Exclusive-Use Common Areas',, as servient tenements, are subject to exclusive easements in favor of the Lot, as dominant tenement, which bear the same Lot designation. The Exclusive Use Common Areas shall be those portions of the Common Area designated as [ parking areas ] [ storage areas ] [ patios ] [ decks ] [ garden area ] on the Map. Easements for the Exclusive Use Common Areas shall be granted as follows: DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 Lot No. Exclusive Use Common Area The assignment, transfer or exchange, either reciprocal or unilateral, of the right to the exclusive use of an Exclusive Use Common Area from one Owner to another or between two or more Owners, is authorized, provided that the approval of the Board is first obtained, and the assignment, transfer or exchange of such Common Area is evidenced by a recorded document. Section 2.8 Annexation. Any annexation of real property to the Project shall require the vote or written approval of at least sixty-seven percent (67%) of the total votes residing in Members other than Declarant. Section 2.9 Maintenance Easement. An easement over each Lot, as the servient tenement, is reserved by Declarant and is hereby granted to .the Association, for the purpose of entering the Property to perform maintenance for which the Association has a .dutF to perform, in accordance with the provisions of Section 5.1 of this Declaration. .~ Section 2.10 Other Easements. The Common Area and each Lot are subject to all easements, dedications and rights of way granted or reserved in, on, over and under~ahe Property, as shown on the Section 2.11 Riqhts of Entry and Use The Lots and Common Area (including. Exclusive Use Common Areas) shall be subject to the following rights of entry and use: (a) The right of the Association or its agents to enter any Lot to cure any violation of this Declaration or the Bylaws, provided that the Owner has received notice and a hearing (except in the case of emergency), as required by the Bylaws, and the .Owner has failed to cure the violation or take steps necessary to cure the violation within thirty (30) days after the finding of a violation by the Association; (b) The access rights of the Association to maintain, repair or replace improvements or Property located in the Common Area, as required by Section 5.1(a); (c) The easements described in this Article II; and (d) The rights of the Declarant during the construction period, as described in Section 8.12. -72- DR3~FT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 Section 2.12 partition Prohibited. There shall be no subdivision or partition of the Common Area, nor shall any Owner seek any partition or subdivision thereof. Except as provided by California Civil Code Section 1359, as amended from time to time, no Owner shall bring any action for partition of the Project or any part thereof, it being agreed that this restriction is necessary in order to preserve the rights of the Owners with respect to the operation and management of the Project. Judicial partition by sale of a single Lot owned by two or more persons and division of the sale proceeds is not prohibited hereby. .,ARTICLE III ASSOCIATION-ADMT~ISTRATION, M~4BERSHIP AND VOTiN~ RI~aTS .Section 3.1 Association to Manage Common Area~. The management of the Common Area shall be vested in the Association, in accordance with its Bylaws. The Owners of all of the Lots covenant and agree that the administration of the Project shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Project Documents. Section 3.2 ~. The Owner of a Lot automatically, upon becoming an Owner, shall be a Member of the Association, and shall remain a Member thereof until such time as his ownership ceases for any. reason, at whic~'~'time his membership__~_ the Association shall aU'~ically cease. Membership shall'be hel~ in accordance with this Declaration, the Articles and the Bylaws of the Association. Section 3.3 Transferred Membership. Membership in the Association shall not be transferred, pledged or alienated in any way, except upon the sale of the Lot to which it is appurtenant, and then only to the purchaser of such Lot. A mortgagee does not have membership rights until it becomes an Owner by foreclosure or deed in lieu thereof. Any attempt to make a prohibited transfer is void. In the event the Owner of any Lot should fail or refuse to transfer the membership registered in his name to the purchaser of his Lot, the Association shall have the right to recqrd the transfer upon its books and thereupon any old membership outstanding in the name of the seller shall be null and void. Section 3.4 MembershiD Classes and Voting RiGhts. Association shall have two classes of voting membership: The (a) .Class A. Class A Members shall be all Owners with the exception of the Declarant. Each Lot shall be allocated one vote in the Association. When more than one owner holds an interest in any Lot, Association; however, all such co-Owners shall be Members of the the vote for each Lot must be cast as a -73- -8- DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 whole. No fractional votes shall be allowed with respect to any Lot, nor shall more than one vote be cast with respect to any Lot. When more than one person owns a Lot, there shall be one "Voting Owner" for such Lot. The Voting Owner shall be designated by the record Owners of each Lot by written notice to the Board. The designation shall be revocable at any time by actual notice to the Board given by any Owner of record of such Lot or by the death or judicially declared incompetency of any record Owner. The power herein conferred to designate a Voting Owner, and to revoke said designation, may be exercised by the Owner's conservator or by the guardian of his estate, or in the case of a minor having no guardian, the parent or parents entitled to custody of said minor, or during the administration of his estate, the executor or the administrator of a deceased Owner, where the latter's interest in the Lot is subject to administration in his estate. Where no Voting Owner of a Lot has been designated, or the designation has been revoked as provided herein, the vote for such Lot shall be exercised as the majority of the co-Owners of the Lot mutually agree. No vote shall be cast for any Lot where there is no designated Voting Owner or the majority of co-Owners present in representing the Lot cannot agree in their vote as provided herein. (b) Class B. The Class B Member shall be Declarant who shall be entitled to vote as follows: Voting shall be the same as for Class A memberships, except that the Class B Member may triple its vote for each Lot owned. Class B membership shall cease and be converted to Class A membership on the happening of either of the f~wing events, whichever first 6~.curs: i. When the total votes outstanding in the Class A membership equals the total vote (tripled as stated) outstanding in the Class B membership; or ii. On the second anniversary date of the first conveyance of a Lot in the Project. Except as otherwise provided in the Project Documents, any action by the Association which must have the approval of the Members before being undertaken shall require the vote or 'written assent of fifty-one percent (51%) of each class of membership during the time that there are two outstanding classes of membership. Any provision in this Declaration which requires that the vote of Declarant be excluded during any such vote shall be applicable only if there · has been a conversion of Class B membership to Class A membership, and shall be understood to require the vote or written assent of fifty-one percent (51%) of the total voting power of the Association and the vote or written assent of fifty-one percent (51%) of the total voting power of Members other than Declarant. The immediately foregoing sentence shall not apply to those situations governed by Title ~0, California Code-of Regulations, Section 2792.4, governing the enforcement of bonded obligations. Voting rights attributable to -74- -9- DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 Lots shall not vest until Assessments have been levied against those Lots by the Association. ARTICLE IV MAINTENANCE AND Section 4.1 Creation of the Lien and Personal ObliGation of Assessment. Declarant, for each Lot owned within the Project, hereby covenants, and each Owner of any Lot by acceptance of a deed therefore, whether or not it shall be so expressed in such deed, is deemed to covenant and agrees to pay to the Association Regular Assessments and Special Assessments, such Assessments to be established, made and collected as provided in this Declaration. Each Assessment or installment thereof, together with any late charge, interest, collection costs and reasonable attorneys, fees, shall be the personal obligation of the Owner at the time such Assessment, or installment, became due and payable. If more than one person is .the Owner of a Lot, the personal obligation to pay such Assessment, or installment, respecting such Lot shall be both joint and several. The annual Regular Assessments and the Special Assessments provided for in this Article IV, together with interest, late charges, collection~sts and reasonable attorneys' fees, shall be-a-continuing lien upon the Lot against-which the Assessment is madeT-as-provided in Section 4.14 hereof~ ~o Owner of a Lot may exempt himself from payment of Assessments, or installments, by waiver of the use or enjoyment of all or any portion' of the Common Area or by waiver of the use or enjoyment of or by abandonment of, his Lot. ' Section 4.2 purpose of Assessment. The Assessments levied by the Association shall be used exclusively to promote the recreation, health, safety and welfare of the Members of the Association; the improvement, replacement, repair, operation and maintenance of the Common Area; and the performance of the duties of the Association, as set forth in this Declaration. Section 4.3 Reqular Assessment and Reserve Fund. (a) Thc' Board shall establish and levy arihual Regular Assessments in an amount the Board estimates will be sufficient to raise the funds needed to perform the duties of the Association during each fiscal year, subject to the limitations contained in Section 4.5 hereof. Such annual Regular Assessments shall include an adequate reserve fund for maintenance, repairs and replacement of those major components of the Common Area and facilities which the Association is obligated to maintain and that must be replaced -75- -10- DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 on a periodic basis, and shall be payable in regular installments rather than by Special Assessments. (b) Unless the Association is exempt from Federal or State taxes, all reserves shall be accounted for as contributions to the capital of the Association and as trust funds segregated from the regular income of the Association or in any other manner authorized by law or regulation of the Internal Revenue Service and the California Franchise Tax Board that will prevent such funds from being taxed as income to the Association. (c) Failure of the Board to set Regular Assessments shall not be deemed a waiver of Regular Assessments but, rather, the prior fiscal year's Regular Assessment shall remain in full force and effect. (d) The Board shall not expend funds designated as reserve funds for any purpose other than the repair, restoration, replacement, or maintenance of, or litigation involving the repair, restoration, replacement, or maintenance of, major components of the Common Area and facilities which the Association is obligated to repair, restore, replace, or maintain, and for which such reserve fund was established. However, the Board may authorize the temporary transfer of money from a reserve fund to the Association's general operating fund to meet short-term cash-flow requirements or other expenses, provided the Board has made a written finding, recorded in the Board's minutes, setting forth the reasons that the transfer is need~ and describing'when and how .i~'~he money will be repaid. Th~'tr~~red funds shall be restored to the reserve fund within one (1) year of the date of the initial transfer, except that the Board may, upon making a finding supported by documentation that a temporary delay would be in the best interests of the Project, temporarily delay the restoration. The Board shall exercise prudent fiscal management in maintaining the integrity of the reserve account and shall, if necessary, levy a Special Assessment to recover the full amount of the expended funds within the time limits required by this Section. Such Special Assessment is subject to the limitation imposed by Section 4.5 of this Declaration. The Board may, at its discretion, extend the date on which the payment of the Special Assessment is due. Any extension shall not prevent the Board from pursuing any legal remedy to enforce the collection of an unpaid Special Assessment. (e) When the decision is made to use reserve funds or to temporarily transfer money from the reserve fund to pay for litigation, the Association shall notify the Members of that decision in the next available mailing of any nature to all Members (with the Association newsletter, magazine, etc., if there is one) and of the availability of an accounting of those expenses. The Association shall make an accounting of expenses related to such litigation on at least a quarterly basis. The accounting shall be -76- -11- DP_AFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 made available for inspection by Members at the Association.s office. .Section 4.4 Special Assessments. If the Board determines that the estimated total amount of funds necessary to defray the common expenses of the Association for a given fiscal year is, or will become, inadequate to meet expenses for any reason (including, but not limited to, unanticipated delinquencies, costs of construction, unexpected repairs or replacements of capital improvements on the Common Area) the Board shall determine the approximate amount necessary to defray such expenses, and if the amount is approved by a majority vote of the Board, it shall become a Special Assessment. The Board may, in its discretion, prorate such Special Assessment over the remaining months of the fiscal year or levy the Special Assessment immediately against each Lot. Unless exempt from Federal or State income taxation, all proceeds from any Special Assessment shall be segregated and deposited into a special account and shall be used solely for the purpose or purposes for which they were levied, or they otherwise shall be handled and used in a manner authorized by law or regulations of the Internal Revenue Service and the California Franchise Tax Board in order to avoid, if possible, their taxation as income to the Association. .Section 4.5 .~imitation on Board's Authority to Increase and Decrease Assessment~. (a) Any increases in Re~g~lar Assessments shall not be imposed unleS~iBoard has complied with Secti~.~(b) of the Bylaws with respect to that fiscal year, or has obtained, in accordance with Section 4.6 hereof, the approval of a majority of the Owners at a~meeting or election at which a quorum was present. (b) Notwithstanding subsection (a) above, the Board may not, without the approval of a majority of the Owners at a meeting or election at which a quorum was present: i. Increase Regular Assessments more than twenty percent (20%) greater than the Regular Assessments for the Association.s preceding fiscal year, or ii. Impose Special Assessments which ~n the aggregate exceed five percent (5%) of the budgeted 9ross expenses for the ~current fiscal year. ~. (c) Assessment increases are not limited in the case of emergency situations, which are any of the following: order. An extraordinary expense required by court -77- DR3~FT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 ii. An extraordinaryexpense necessary to repair or maintain the Project, or any part of it for which the Association is responsible, where a threat to safety of persons is discovered. iii. Repairs to or maintenance of the Project that could not have been reasonably foreseen in preparing the budget. Prior to imposition of the Assessment, the Board shall make written findings, distributed to the Members, as to the necessity of the expense and why it could not have been foreseen. (d) The'Association may not charge or collect fees or Assessments in connection with a transfer of a Lot in excess of the actual cost to change its records. (e) The annual Regular Assessment may not be decreased by the Board or by the Members by more than ten percent (10%) in any one (1) year without the approval of a majority of the voting power of the Association residing in Members other than Declarant. (f) The Association shall provide notice by first-class mail to the Members of any increase of Regular or Special Assessments not less than thirty (30) days nor more than sixty (60) · day~ prior to the increased Assessment becoming due. Section 4.6 Notice and Quorum for Any Action Authorized Under Section 4.5. Any action authorized under Section 4.5, which requires a vote of the membership, shall be taken at a meeting called for that purpose at which a'~q~orum equal to more than fifty percent (50%) of the total~-~g~power of the Association is present. Written notice of said meeting shall be sent to all Members not less than ten (10) nor more than ninety (90) days in advance of the meeting, specifying the place, day and hour of the meeting and, notwithstanding any other provision of law, shall specify those matters the Board intends to present for action by the Members; but, except as otherwise provided by law, any proper matter may be presented at such meeting for action. The action may also be taken without a meeting pursuant to the provisions of California Corporations Code Section 7513. Section 4.7 Levyinq of Reqular and Special Assessments. Ail Regular and Special Assessments shall be equally assessed to the Owners. .Section 4.8 Assessment Period.- The Regular Assessment period shall commence on January 1 of each year and shall terminate on December 31 of each year, or such other dates as may be approved by the Board, and Regular Assessments shall be payable in equal monthly installments, unless the Board adopts some other basis for collection. However, the initial Regular Assessment period shall commence on the first day of the calendar month following the date on which the sale of the first Lot to a purchaser is.closed and shall terminate on December 31 of the year in which the initial -78- -13- DR3~FT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 sale is closed. The first Regular Assessment and all Special Assessments shall be adjusted according to the number of months remaining in the fiscal year and shall be payable in equal monthly installments unless the Board adopts some other basis for collection. The Association shall not change the obligation of any Lot for purposes of levying Assessments unless all Owners affected and all the mortgagees of such Owners have given their prior written consent. ~ection 4.9 Notice and Assessment Installment Due Dates; DelinGuent Assessment. (a) A single ten (10) day prior written notice of each annual Regular Assessment and each' Special Assessment, specifying the due dates for the payment of installments, shall be given to each Owner of every Lot subject to Assessment; provided, however, in the event of an increase in any Regular or Special Assessment, such notice shall be given not less than thirty (30) nor more than sixty (60) days prior to the increased Assessment becoming due. The due dates for the payment of installments normally shall be the first day of each month, unless some other due date is established by the Board. Each installment of Regular Assessments and Special Assessments shall become delinquent if not paid within fifteen (15) d'ays after its due date. (b) If an.Assessment is delinquent, the Association may recover the following: __. i. Reasonable costs incurred_ .£n_-.'.-icollecting the del~inqUent" ~ssessment, including reasonable attorneys, fees; ii. A late charge .of ten percent (10%) of the delinquent Assessment, or ten dollars ($10.00) whichever is greater; ' iii. Interest on all sums imposed in accordance with this Section, including the delinquent Assessment, reasonable fees and costs of collection, and reasonable attorney,s fees, at an annual percentage rate of twelve percent (12%) interest, commencing thirty (30) days after the Assessment becomes due. Section 4.10 payment of Delinquent Assessments Under P~otest. In accordance with California Civil Code Section 1366.3, an Owner may dispute a delinquent Assessment, as defined in Section 4.9 hereof, by paying to the Association in full the amount of Assessment in dispute, late charges, interest, and all reasonable fees and costs associated with the preparation and filing of a notice of the delinquent assessment, including reasonable attorney,s fees as may be prescribed by statute, and giving written notice to the Association that the amount is being paid under protest. Such notice shall be given by certified mailed not more -79- -14- DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1. 2004 than thirty (30) days from the recording of a notice of delinquent as sessment. Following receipt of such notice, the Association shall inform the Owner that the dispute may be resolved by alternative dispute resolution as set forth in California Civil Code Section 1354, by civil action, or by other dispute resolution procedure available to the Association. The right of any Owner to utilize alternative dispute resolution under this Section shall be limited to not more than two (2) times in any single calendar year and not more than three (3) times in any five calendar years. Section 4.11 Effect of Transfer of Lot by Sale or Foreclosure. Sale or transfer of any Lot shall not affect the Assessment lien. 'However, the sale of any Lot pursuant to a power of sale in a first mortgage shall extinguish the lien of such Assessments as to payments which became due prior to such sale. No sale or transfer shall relieve the Owner of such Lot from liability for any Assessments thereafter becoming due or from the lien thereof. Where the mortgagee of a first mortgage of record or other purchaser of a' Lot obtains title to the Lot as a result of foreclosure of any such first mortgage, such purchaser, including said purchaser,s successors and assigns, shall not be liable for the share of the common expenses or Assessment by the Association char.geable to such Lot which became due prior to the acquisition of title to such Lot by such purchase~-(except for Assessments liens recorded prior to the mo~~3. Such unpaid share expenses or Assessments shall be deemed to be common expenses collectible from Owners of all of the Lots, including such purchaser or the purchaser.s successors and assigns. If a Lot is transferred, the grantor shall remain liable to the Association for all unpaid Assessments against the Lot through and including the date of transfer. The grantor shall be entitled to a statement from the Association dated as of the date of transfer, setting forth the amount of unpaid Assessments against the grantor dUe the Association and the Lot so transferred shall not be subject to a lien for unpaid Assessments in excess of the amount set forth in the statement; provided, however, the grantee shall be liable for any such Assessment that becomes due after the date of the transfer. Section 4.12 EstopDel Certificate. The Board, on not less than twenty (20) days prior written request, shall execute, acknowledge and deliver to the party making such request a statement in writing stating whether or not, to the knowledge of the Association, a particular Owner is in default as to his Lot under the provisions of this Declaration and further stating the dates to which installments of Assessments, Regular or Special, have been paid as to such Lot. A~z ~=rtificate delivered pursuant -80- -15- DR3~FT: SEPTEMBER 1. 200~ to this Section may be relied upon by any prospective purchaser or mortgagee of such Lot, but reliance on such certificate may not extend to any default not involving the payment of Assessments of which the signer had no actual knowledge. ~ection 4.13 RiGht to Enforce. The right to collect and enforce Assessments is vested in the Board, actin~ by and on behalf of the Association. The Board, or its authorized representative, can enforce the obligations of the Owners to pay Assessments provided for in this Declaration by commencement and maintenance of a suit at law or in equity, or the Board may foreclose by judicial proceedings or through the exercise of the power of sale, pursuant to Section 4.15, to enforce the lien rights created. Suit to recover a money judgment for unpaid Assessments, together with all amounts described in Section 4.1, shall be maintainable without foreclosing or waiving the lien rights. Section 4.14 Creation of Lien. If there is a delinquency in the payment of any Assessment or installment thereof on a Lot, as described in Section 4.9 hereof, any amounts .that are delinquent, together with any late charges, interest and all costs that are incurred by the Board or its authorized representative in the collection of the amounts, including reasonable attorneys' fees, sha~ll be a lien against such Lot upon the recordation in the Office o'f the County Recorder of the County of San Mateo of a notice of delinquent assessment, as provided in California Civil Code Section 1367. Before .the ASsociation may place a iie~i~p--~n a Lot to collect a debt which is delinquent under Section 4.9 hereof, the Association shall, at least thirty (30) days prior to recording a lien, notify the Owner in writin~ by certified mail of: (a) The general collection and lien enforcement procedures of the Association and the method of calculation, a statement that the Member has the right to inspect Association records, and the following statement in 14-point boldface type, if printed, or in capital letters, if typed: ".IMPORTANT NOTICE: IF YOUR SEPARATE INTEREST IS PLACED IN FORECLOSURE BECAUSE YOU ARE BEHIND IN YOUR ASSESSMENTS, IT MAY BE SOLD WITHOUT COURT ACTION" (b) An itemized statement of the charges owed'by the Member, including the delinquent assessments, the fees and reasonable costs of collection, reasonable attorney's fees., any late charges, and interest, if any. (c) A statement that the Member shall not be liable to pay the charges, interest, and costs of collection if it is determined the Assessment was paid on time to the Association. (d) The right to request a meeting with the Board as provided hereinbelow. -81- -16- DR3~FT: SEPTEMBER 1. 2004 Any payments towards such debt shall be first applied to principal owed, and only after the principal owed is paid in full shall such payments be applied to fees and costs of collection expenses, attorney's fees, late charges or interest. When a Member makes a payment, he may request a receipt and the Association shall provide it, such receipt to indicate the date of payment and the person receiving it. The Association shall provide a mailing address for overnight payment of Assessments. The notice of delinquent assessment shall state the amount of the Assessment, collection costs, attorneys' fees, late charges, and interest, a legal description of the Lot against which the Assessment and other sums are levied, the name of the record Owner, and the name and address of the trustee authorized by the Association to enforce the lien by sale. The notice shall be signed by the President of the Association or such other person designated by the Association for that purpose, and mailed in the manner set forth in California Civil Code Section 2924b, to all record Owners of the Lot no later than ten (10) calendar days after recordation. A Member may dispute the debt noticed by submitting to the Board a written explanation of the reasons for such dispute. The Board shall respond in writin9 to the Member within fifteen (15) days of the postmark date of the explanation, if the explanation is mailed within fifteen (15) days of the postmark of the notice of delinquent assessment. A Member may request to meet with the Board to discuss a payment p~_f_pr the ~'bt, as provided in California Civil Code Section 136~_.1._ ' .............. Monetary penalties levied by the Association (1) as a disciplinary measure for failure of an Owner to comply with the Project Documents, or (2) as a means of reimbursing the Association for costs incurred by the Association in the repair of damage to the Common Area and facilities for which the Owner was allegedly responsible, or (3) in bringing the Owner and his subdivision interest into compliance with the Project Documents, shall not be Assessments which may become a lien against the Lot Owner's subdivision interest enforceable by a sale of the interest in accordance with the provisions of Section 2924, 2924(b) and 2~24(c) of the California Civil Code. The Assessment lien created by this Section shall be prior to all other liens recorded subsequent to the notice of delinquent assessment, except for taxes, bonds, assessments and other levies, which by law would be superior thereto, and except for the lien of any first mortgage made in good faith and for value. If a lien previously recorded against a Lot was recorded in error, the Association shall, within twenty-one (21) calendar days, record a release of lien and provide the Member with a declaration -82- -17- DPJ%FT: SEPTEMBER 10 2004 that the notice recording was in error and a copy of the lien release. If the Association fails to comply with the procedures set forth in this Section, it shall recommence the required notice process prior to recording a lien, and any costs associated therewith shall be borne by the Association and not by the Member. Section 4.15 Enforcement of Assessment Lien. After the expiration of thirty (30) days following recording of the lien created pursuant to Section 4.14 above, the lien may be enforced in any manner permitted by law, including sale by the court, sale by the trustee designated in the notice of delinquent assessment, or sale by a trustee substituted pursuant to California Civil Code Section 2934(a). Any sale by a trustee shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of California Civil Code Sections 2924, 2924(b), 2924(c), 2924(f), 2924(g) and 2924(h), applicable to the exercise of powers of sale in mortgages and deeds of trust. Trustees fees may not exceed the amounts prescribed in California Civil Code Sections 2924(c) and 2924(d). Section 4.16 Exempt Property. (a) Those Lots having no structural improvements for human occupancy shall be exempt from the payment of that portion of any Assessment which is for the purpose of defraying expenses and reserves directly attributable to the existence and use of the structural improvement. The exemptS'on mg~__i~clude: i. Roof replacement; ii. Exterior maintenance; iii. Cable television; iv. Walkway and carport lighting; v. Refuse disposal, if any; if any; vi. Domestic water supplied to living improvements, vii. Insurance on uncompleted residences. (b) The foregoing exemption shall be in effect until the earliest of the following events: i. A notice of completion of the structural improvements has been recorded; on the Lot; or ii. Occupation or use of the residential structure -83- -18- DR3kFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 iii. Completion of all elements of the residential structure which the Association is obligated to maintain. (c) The Declarant and any other Owner of a Lot are exempt from the payment of that portion of any Assessment which is for the purpose of defraying expenses and reserves directly attributable to the existence and use of a common facility that is not complete at the time Assessments commence. This exemption from the payment of Assessments shall be in effect until the earliest of the following events: i. A notice of completion of the common facility has been recorded; or ii. The common facility has been placed into use. Section 4.17 Waiver of Exemptions. Each Owner, to the extent permitted by law, waives, to the extent of any liens created pursuant to this Article IV, the benefit of any homestead or exemption laws of the State of California in effect at the time any Assessment or installment becomes delinquent or any lien is imposed. Section 4.18 Unallocated Taxes. In the event that any taxes are assessed against the Common Area, or the personal property of the Association, rather than against the Lots, such taxes shall be included in the Assessments made under the provisions of Section 4.1, and, if necessary, a Special KS~essment may be levied against the Lot in an am0u'.n~_e__q~i to such taxes, to be paid. i~_~6~ (2) installments, not less than thirty (30) days prior to the due date of each installment. ARTICLE V DUTIES AND POWERS OF THE ASSOCIATION Section 5.1 Duties. In addition to the duties enumerated in its Bylaws, or elsewhere provided in this Declaration, and without limiting the generality thereof, the Association shall perform the following duties: (a) Maintenance. The Association shall maintain and repair the Common Area, all improvements and landscaping thereon, and all Property owned by the Association, including without limitation, play areas, light fixtures, common driveway, trees and shrubs. Landscaping maintenance shall include regular fertilization, irrigation and other garden management practices necessary to promote a healthy, weed-free environment for optimum -84- -19- DR3%FT: .SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 plant 9rowth. The Association shall immediately remove and replace any dying or dead vegetation on the Common Area. The responsibility of the Association for maintenance, repair and replacement shall not extend to repairs or replacements arising out of or caused by the willful or negligent act or neglect of an Owner or his 9uests, tenants or invitees, 'the cost of which is not covered by insurance. Repairs or replacements resulting from such excluded items shall be the responsibility of each Owner; provided, however, that if an Owner shall fail to make the repairs or replacements which are his responsibility as provided herein, then, upon a vote of a majority of the Board of Directors, and after not less than thirty (30) days notice to the Owner, and hearing (except in an emergency situation), the Association shall have the right (but not the obligation) to make such repairs or replacements, and the cost thereof shall be added to the Assessments chargeable to such Lot and shall be payable to the Association by the Owner of such Lot. The Association shall perform all reasonable maintenance obligations and follow all reasonable maintenance schedules provided to the Association by the developer. (b) Insurance. The Association shall maintain the following policies of insurance: i. A policy or policies of fire and casualty _~ance (Special Form), for the f~l_~acement value, covering: A. Common Area: All Common Area improvements, including building(s) and any additions or extensions thereto; all fixtures, machinery and equipment permanently affixed to the building(s) located on the Common krea; fences; monuments; lightin9 fixtures; exterior signs; recreational facilities, if any; and personal property owned by the Association (but excluding land, foundations, excavations and other items typically excluded from property insurance coverage); and Lots and all improvements located thereon; C. Landscaping: plants located in the Common Area. Lawn, trees, shru~s and The policy or policies shall be primary and noncontributing with any other insurance policy or policies coverin9 the same loss. Each policy shall provide that it shall not be canceled without at least thirty (30) days prior written notice to the Association and to each of the Owners and their mortgagees of record. 'The Board shall review the limits of such insurance at least every year and shall inc~3e or adjust the same, if -20- DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 necessary, to provide the coverage and protection required by this Declaration. Such policy or policies shall provide for a separate loss payable endorsement in favor of the mortgagee or mortgagees of each Lot, if any. ii. A policy or policies of comprehensive public liability insurance, including, but not limited to, general public liability insurance, including coverage for bodily injury, emotional distress, wrongful death, and/or property damage. Such insurance shall insure the Association, the Declarant, the Board, the directors, the officers, the Owners and any appointed manager, against any liability to the public or to any Owner incident to the ownership and/or use of the Project or incident to the use of, or resulting from, any accident or intentional act occurring in or about any Lot or the Common Area. The general public liability insurance required by this Section shall each be in an amount of not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence, or such other minimum amount as may be required by California Civil Code Section 1365.9. The Board shall review the limits and coverage of such insurance at least every year and shall increase or adjust the same, if necessary, to provide the coverage and protection required by this Declaration. iii. Worker's Compensation Insurance to the extent necessary to comply with all applicable laws of the State of California or the regulations of any governmental body or authority having jurisdiction over the Project. i.~'.~i_"[~idelity insurance, in a commer~i'~i, blanket fidelity insurance form, obtained at the discretion of the Board, naming such persons as may be designated by the Board as principals, and the Owners as obligees, in an amount to be determined by the Board in its absolute discretion. v. Flood insurance if the Project is located in an area designated by an appropriate governmental agency as a special flood hazard area. vi. Earthquake insurance only if a majority of the Members vote to purchase such insurance. If the Members elect to purchase such earthquake insurance, the insurance 9ay be subsequently cancelled on a vote of the majority of the Members. If cancelled, the Association shall make reasonable efforts to notify the Members of the cancellation. vii. Board, directors and officers errors and omissions insurance, in a commercial blanket errors and omissions insurance form, naming the Board, directors and officers' as principals, and the Owners as obligees, in an amount to be determined by the Board in its absolute discretion. -86- -21- DP_AFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 Nothing in this subsection (b) [except as provided in subsection (b) (vi)] shall restrict or prohibit the Board from maintaining such additional policies of insurance or endorsements as it, in its absolute discretion, shall deem reasonable and necessary. Any insurance acquired by the Board may be taken in the name of the Board as trustee, for the use and benefit of the Board and all Owners. The Board periodically (and not less than once each year) shall review the Association,s insurance policies and make such adjustments to the policies terms and conditions as the Board considers to be in the best interests of the Association. The review shall include an appraisal by a qualified appraiser of the current replacement costs of all covered property under the Association,s fire and casualty policy unless the Board is satisfied that the current dollar limit of such policy, coupled with the amount of actual reserves on hand, is equal to or greater than the current replacement costs. The amount, term, and coverage of any policy required hereunder (including the type of endorsements, the amount of the deductible, the named insureds, the loss payees, standard mortgage clauses, and notices of changes or cancellations) shall satisfy the minimum requirements imposed for this type of project by the Federal National Mortgage Association ("FNMA") or any successor thereto. .If FNMA does not impose requirements on any policy required hereunder, the term, amount., and coverage of such policy ...... shall be no less than that which~i~j~stomarily carried by prudent owners of similar property in the .County in which the Project is located. Each Owner appoints the Association or any insurance trustee (as defined in Section 8.9(b) (ii) below) designated by the' Association to act on behalf of the Owners in connection with all insurance matters arisin9 from any insurance policy maintained by the Association, including, without limitation, representing the Owners in any proceeding, negotiation, settlement or agreement. Any insurance maintained by the Association shall contain "waiver of subrogation,, as to the Association and its officers, directors, and Members, the Owners and occupants of the Lots (including Declarant) and mortgagees, and, if obtainable, cross liability endorsements or severability of interest endorsements insuring each insured against~the liability of each other insured. Except in the case of earthquake insurance and subject to any restrictions imposed by any Mortgagees, the Board shall have the power and right to deviate from the insurance requirements contained in this Section 5.1(b) in any manner that the Board, in its discretion, considers to be in the best interests of the Association. If the Board elects to materially reduce the coverage from the coverage required in thi~3tion 5.1(b), the Board shall -22- DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 make all reasonable efforts to notify the Members of the reduction in coverage and the reasons therefor at least thirty (30) days before the effective date of the reduction. The Association and its directors and officers shall have no liability to any Owner or Mortgagee if, after a ~ood faith effort, (1) the Association is unable to obtain any insurance required hereunder because the insurance is no longer available; (2) if available, the insurance (except for earthquake insurance) can be obtained only at a cost that the Board, in its sole discretion, determines is unreasonable under the circumstances; or (3) the Members fail to approve any assessment increase needed to fund the insurance premiums. No Owner shall separately insure the improvements on his or her Lot against loss by fire or other casualty covered by any insurance carried by the Association. If any Owner violates this provision, any diminution in insurance proceeds otherwise payable under the Association's policies that results from the existence of such other insurance will be chargeable to the Owner who acquired other insurance. Any Owner can insure his personal property a~ainst loss and obtain any personal liability insurance that he desires. In addition, any improvements made by an Owner within his Lot may be separately insured by the Owner, but the insurance is to be limited to the type and nature of coverage commonly known as · "improvements insurance,,. The Owner shall not obtain such insurance if the policy referred to in Section 5.1(b) (i) will provide covera~.f0r such improvements. (c) Discharqe of Liens. The Association shall discharge by payment, if necessary, any lien against the Common Area, and assess the cost thereof to the Member or Members responsible for the existence of such lien; provided that such Member(s) is given notice and the opportunity to be heard before the Board before discharge of the lien. (d) Assessments. The Association shall fix, levy, collect and enforce Assessments, as provided in Article IV hereof. (e) Payment of Expenses. The Association shall pay all expenses and obligations incurred by the Association in the conduct of its business including, without limitation, all licenses~ taxes or governmental charges levied or imposed against the Property of the Association. (f) Declaration. Enforcement. The Association shall enforce this (9) Account Review. The Association shall review its operatin~ and reserve accounts, their reconciliations and account statements, as set forth in the Bylaws. For purposes herein, "reserve accounts" shall mean monies that the Association has -23- DPOkFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 identified from its annual budget to defray the future rep'air or replacement of, or additions to, those major components of the Common Area and facilities which the Association is obligated to maintain. (h) Notice of Civil Action. The Association shall notify the Members of filing of any civil action by the Association against the Declarant or other developer for alleged damage, as specified in Section 9.7 of the Bylaws. (i) Project Documents and Statement of Unpaid Assessments. Within ten (10) days of receipt of a written request from a Member, the Association shall provide copies of the Project Documents, copies of the documents required by Article IX of the Bylaws and a statement of any unpaid Regular. or Special Assessments, late charges, interest and collection costs which are or may become a lien against his Lot, for delivery to a prospective purchaser of the Lot, pursuant to Civil Code Section 1368. The Association may charge a reasonable fee for such service, which shall not exceed the reasonable cost to prepare and reproduce the requested items. (j) Notice of Assessments and Foreclosure.. The Association shall distribute to the Members the written Notice of Assessments and Foreclosure required by California Civil Code Section 1365.1, during the sixty (60) day period immediately preceding the Association's fiscal year. (k) Inf°rmational~"Nb-~ice to Secretary of Stat~.. The Association annually shall submit to the California Secretary of State a form containing all the information and the fee prescribed by California Civil Code Section 1363.6. (1) Repair and Maintenance Requirements. The Association shall comply with all applicable provisions of Title 7 of Division 2, Part 2 of the California Civil Code, but shall only enforce such statute with respect to repair of Common Areas. The Association shall follow all reasonable maintenance obligations and schedules communicated in writing to the Association by the builder and product manufacturers, as well as commonly accepted maintenance practices. The Association shall make any such maintenance manuals and/or schedules available to the Owners. Section 5.2 Powers. In addition to the powers enumerated its Bylaws, or elsewhere provided herein, and without limiting the generality thereof, the Association shall have the following powers: (a) Utility Service. The Association shall have the authority to obtain, for the benefit of all of the Lots, all water, gas and electric-service; refuse collection; janitorial or window -89- -24- DR3~FT: SEPTES[BER 1, 2004 cleaning service; and fireplace cleaning and chimney cleaning service. (b) Easements. The Association shall have the authority to grant easements, where necessary, for utilities and sewer facilities over the Common Area to serve the Common Area and the Lots. (c) Manager. The Association shall have the authority to employ a manager or managing agent and to contract with independent contractors to perform all or any part of the day to day management duties and responsibilities of the Association, each of whom shall be subject to the direction and control of the Board, provided that any contract with a firm. or person appointed as manager or managing agent shall not exceed a one (1) year term and shall provide for the right to terminate by either party without cause and without payment of a termination fee on thirty (30) days written notice. Any delegation of authority to a~ manager or managing agent shall be subject to Section 5.2 (k) hereof. Notwithstanding the above, no manager or officer may be delegated the power or authority to levy fines, hold hearings or impose discipline, make capital expenditures, file suit, record a claim of lien, or foreclose for failure to pay Assessments. (d) AdoDtion of Rules. The Association may adopt reasonable rules not inconsistent with this Declaration relating to the use of the Common Area, the Exclusive Use Common Areas, if any, and all f~di-~i.~ies thereon, and the cOnduct an~_~.'~fhereof and the conduct of Owners and their tenants and guests with respect to the Property and other Owners. (e) Access. For the purpose of performing the maintenance authorized herein, or for any other purpose reasonably related to the performance by the Association or the Board of their respective responsibilities, the Association's agents or employees shall have the right, after reasonable notice to the Owner thereof, to enter upon any Lot or to enter any portion of the Common Area at reasonable hours. Except in the case of any emergency, forty-eight (48) hours advance notice shall be given to the Owner or occupant prior to any entry of a Lot. (f) Assessments, Liens and Fines. The Association shall have the. power to levy and collect Assessments, in accordance with the provisions of Article IV hereof. The Association may impose fines or take disciplinary action against any Owner for failure to pay Assessments or for violation of any provision of the Project Documents. Penalties may include but are not limited to: fines, temporary suspension of voting rights or other appropriate discipline, provided that the accused Member is given at least fifteen (15) days notice and the opportunity-to be heard orally or in writing before the Board of th~ Amsociation with respect to the -90- -25- DRkFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 alleged violations at least five (5) days before a decision to impose discipline is made. All notices required under this Section shall be made pursuant to Section 8.14 of this Declaration. (g) Enforcement. The Association shall have the authority to enforce this Declaration, as provided in Section 8.1 hereof. (h) Acquisition of Property. The Association shall have the power to acquire (by gift, purchase or otherwise), own, hold, improve, build upon, operate, maintain, convey, sell, lease, transfer, dedicate for public use, or otherwise dispose of, real or personal property in connection with the affairs of the Association. (i) Loans. The Association shall have the power to borrow money, and only with the consent (by vote or written consent) of three-fourths (3/4) of each class of Members, to mortgage, to pledge, to encumber or to hypothecate any or all of its real or personal property as security for monies borrowed or debts incurred. (j) Contract. The Association shall have the power to contract for goods and/or services for the Common Area facilities and interests or for the Association, subject to any limitations set forth in the Project Documents. (k) Dele~. The Assouiation shall have the power to delegate its authority'.a~.iPowers to committees, officers 'o~ .... employees of the Association. The Association may not, howe~a~,~' delegate the following powers: discipline; i. To levy fines, hold hearings, or impose ii. To make capital expenditures; iii. To file suit, to cause a claim of lien .to be recorded, or to foreclose for failure to pay Assessments; or Assessments. iv. To levy Regular Assessments or Special (1.) Use of.Facilities. The Association shall have the power to limit the number of an Owner's tenants or guests who may use the Common Area facilities, provided that any limitation apply equally to all Owners, except in the case of disciplinary measures taken after notice and hearing, as provided in the Bylaws. (m) Appointment of Trustee. The Association, or the Board on behalf of the Association, shall have the power to appoint -91- -26- DR_AFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 a trustee to enforce Assessment liens as provided in Section 4.13 hereof, and as provided in California Civil Code Section t367(b) . (n) Litiqation, Arbitration, Mediation or Administrative Proceedinqs. The Association, or the Board on behalf of the Association, shall have the authority to institute, defend, settle or intervene on behalf of the Association in litigation, arbitration, mediation, or administrative proceedings in matters pertaining to (1) enforcement of the Project Documents, (2) damage to the Common Areas, (3) damage to the separate interests which the Association is obligated to maintain or repair, or (4) damage to the separate interests which arises out of, or is integrally related to, damage to the Common Areas or separate interests that the Association is obligated to maintain or repair, subject to compliance with California Civil Code Section 1354. (o) Other Powers. In addition to the powers enumerated in this Declaration and in the Bylaws, the Association may exercise the powers granted to a nonprofit mutual benefit corporation, as such exist from time to time, under the California Corporations Code. ARTICLE VI USE RESTRICTIONS Section 6.1 Use of Lot. (a) No Lot shall be occupied and used except for residential purposes by the Owners, their tenants and social guests, and no trade or business shall be conducted therein, except that: i. A home office may be maintained to conduct a trade or business provided such office complies with the requirements of local laws and regulations governing the maintenance of offices in residential dwelling units. ii. Declarant, and the successors or assigns of Declarant, may use any Lot or Lots in the Project owned by Declarant for a model home site or sites and display and sales office until the last Lot is sold by Declarant, or, if Declarant elects to retain one (1) or more Lots, three (3) years after the close of the sale of the first Lot. (b) No Lot shall be owned, leased, occupied or rented pursuant to any time sharing agreement of any kind. -92- -27- DR3~FT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 Section 6.~ Nuisances. No illegal or~ seriously offensive activity shall be transacted or conducted on any Lot or on any part of the Property, nor shall anythin~ be done thereon which may be a serious annoyance or a nuisance to or which may in any way interfere with the quiet enjoyment of each of the Owners of his respective Lot, or which shall in any way increase the rate of insurance for the Project, or cause any insurance policy to be canceled or to cause a refusal to renew the same., or which will impair the structural integrity of any building. Section 6.3 si_~_n~. No commercial sign shall be displayed to the public view on any Lot or any portion of the Property. In accordance with California Civil Code Section 712, one (1) ~'For Sale'. or ~'For Rent" sign for each Lot shall be allowed, provided that it is reasonable in size and posted at appropriate locations on the Property. The Board may adopt rules and regulations concerning the size and location of "For Sale', or ~'For Rent" signs. Noncommercial signs or posters that are nine (9) square feet, or less, and flags or banners that are fifteen square feet, or less, made of paper, cardboard, cloth, plastic or fabric may be posted or displayed from the yard, window, door, balcony or outside wall of the Lot improvements, unless prohibited by the Board for reasons of public health or safety or if such posting or display would violate any law. ~ection 6.4 Pets. An Owner shall be allowed to keep domesticated birds, -~a~, dogs, aquatic animals kept within an aquarium, or other animals as agreed~to between the Association and the OWn-~_~'_~ided ~hat no animal is kept, br~_o~..maintained for any commercial purposes, and is kept under reasonable control at all times. No pet may be kept on the Property which is a serious annoyance or is obnoxious to the Owners. No pet shall be allowed in the Common Area except as may be permitted by the rules of the Association. Declarant or any Owner may cause any unauthorized pet found in the Common Area to be removed to a pound or animal shelter under the jurisdiction of the County of San Mateo, by calling the appropriate authorities, whereupon the Owner (upon payment of all expenses connected therewith) may repossess the pet. No dog whose barkin9 seriously disturbs other Owners shall be permitted to remain on the Property. Any decision regarding the condu~t of a pet shall be made only after notice to the Owner and the opportunity t~ be heard before the Board.. Owners shall prevent their pet from soiling any portion of the Common Area and shall promptly clean up any fouling by their pet. Section 6.5 ~arbaGe and Refuse DisDosal' All rubbish, trash and garbage shall be regularly removed from the Property and shall not be allowed to accumulate thereon. Trash, garbage and other waste shall not be kept except in sanitary containers. All equipment for the storage or disposal of such materials shall be -28- DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 kept in a clean and sanitary condition. Ail equipment, garbage cans, wood piles or storage piles shall be kept screened and sealed from view of other Lots, streets and Common Areas. No toxic or hazardous materials shall be disposed of within the Project by dumping in the garbage containers or down the drains, or otherwise, other than those required, in limited quantities, for the normal cleaning of a Lot or any structure thereon. Section 6.6 Radio and Television Antennas~ Data Communication. No Owner shall alter or modify a central radio antenna, television antenna system, cable television system, data communication system or satellite dish, if any, as developed by Declarant and as maintained by the Association, without the permission of the Board. No Owner shall construct and/or use and operate his own external radio, television antenna or satellite dish without the approval of the Board, except that the Board may not prohibit or restrict the construction and or/use of a satellite dish having a diameter or diagonal measurement of one (1)meter or less which is located within a Lot or a balcony area appurtenant to the improvements located thereon. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Board may impose reasonable restrictions for the installation and use of a video or television antenna, including a satellite dish, that do not significantly increase the cost of the system or significantly decrease its efficiency or performance, as set forth in Civil Code Section 1376. If the BOard requires approval for the installation of such antenna or satellite dish, the application for approval shall be processed in the same manner as an application for architectural modification and:~he issuance of a decision on the application shall n~-_~llfullYdelayed. _~.i.~___~_. Section 6.7 RiGht to Lease. Owners shall be entitled to rent or lease their Lot provided that: (a) Not less than the entire Lot is rented or leased. Nothing contained in this Section 6.7(a) shall be construed to prohibit roommates. (b) The lease term is for a period of not less than thirty (30) days. (c) Any lease or occupancy agreement for a Lot shall be in writing and shall specifically provide that it is subject to the Project Documents, and that violation or infraction of the Project Documents shall constitute.a-default thereunder. The. ©wrier shall remain liable for any violation or infraction of the Project Documents by the tenant. Section 6.8 Vehicle Restrictions. No trailer, camper, mobile home, commercial vehicle, truck (other than standard size pickup truck or standard size van), boat, inoperable automobile or similar equipment shall be' permitted to remain upon any area of the Property other than on a temporary basis, unless placed or -94- -29- DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 maintained within an enclosed garage. Commercial vehicles shall not include sedans (or standard vans or pickup trucks) which are used both for business and personal use, provided that any signs or markings of a commercial nature on such vehicles shall be unobtrusive and inoffensive, as determined by the Board. No noisy or smoky vehicles shall be operated upon the Property. No unlicensed motor vehicles shall be operated upon the Property. The Association may install a sign at each vehicular entrance to the Project, containing a statement that public parking is prohibited and that all vehicles not authorized to park on the Project will be removed at the owner's expense. The sign shall contain the telephone number of the local traffic law enforcement agency and shall not be less than seventeen (17) x twenty-two (22) inches in size with lettering not less than one (1) inch in height. The Association may cause the removal of any vehicle wrongfully parked on the Property, including a vehicle owned by an occupant. If the identity of the registered owner of the vehicle is known or readily ascertainable, the President of the Association or his or her designee shall, within a reasonable time thereafter, notify the owner of the removal in writing by personal delivery or first class mail. In addition, notice of the removal shall be .given to the local traffic law enforcement agency immediately after the vehicle has been removed. The notice shall include a description of the. vehicle, the license plate number and the address from where the vehicle was removed. I~~ identity of the owner is''~C~nown or readily ascertainable and the vehicle has not been returned to the owner within one hundred twenty (120) hours after its removal, the Association immediately shall send or cause to be sent a written report of the removal by mail to the California Department of Justice in Sacramento, California, and shall file a copy of the notice with the proprietor of the public garage in which the vehicle is stored. The report shall be made on a form furnished by the Department of Justice and shall include a complete description of the vehicle, the date, time and place from which the vehicle was removed, the amount of mileage on the vehicle at the time of removal, the grounds for removal and the name of the garage or place where the vehicle is stored. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Association may cause the removal, without notice, ~f any vehicle parked (1) in a marked fire lane, (2) within fifteen (15) feet of. a. fire hydrant, (3) in. a parking space designated for handicapped, without proper authority, .or (4) in a manner which interferes with any entrance to, or exit from, the Project or any Lot, parking space or garage located thereon. The Association shall not be liable for any damages incurred by the vehicle owner because of the removal in compliance with this Section or for any damage to the vehicle caused by the removal, unless such damage resulted from the ~ntentional or negligent act -30- DR_~FT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 of the Association or any person causing the removal of, or actually removing, the vehicle. If requested by the owner of the vehicle, the Association shall state the grounds for the removal of the vehicle. Section 6.9 Parkinq. All Common Area parking spaces which are neither Exclusive Use Common Areas conveyed as easements appurtenant to a Lot or assigned by the Association for specific use, shall remain permanently available for guest parking. Parking spaces shall be used for parking of permitted vehicles only and not for the permanent parking or storage of boats, trailers or nonmobile vehicles of any description. Garage or carport space may not be converted into any use (such as recreational rooms or storage areas) that would prevent its use as a parking area for the number of vehicles for which the area was originally intended. The Association shall establish rules and regulations regarding the use of unassigned parking areas in the Common Area. Use by Owners of such unassigned parking areas shall only be valid if established by the Association and such use must be set forth in writing by the Association. Any permission given by the Association pursuant to the foregoing Shall create a license only, said license to be revocable upon five (5) days written notice from the Association. Section 6.10 Window Coverinq. Window coverings on windows visible from the street shall be restricted to drapes, curtains, shutters or blinds of a neutral or white color, unless expressly approved by' the Association. Section 6.11 C16qS~-~--Lines. NO.exterior clothes line's-'~5~I'1 be erected or maintained and there shall be no outside laundering or drying of clothes. No draping of towels, carpets or laundry over railings shall be allowed. Section 6.12 Power Ec~uipment and Car Maintenance. No power equipment, hobby shops, or car maintenance or boat maintenance (except in emergency situations) shall be permitted on the Property, except with prior written consent of the Board. The Board shall consider the following factors in determining whether to grant or deny approval: effects of noise, air pollution, dirt or grease, fire hazard, interference with radio or television reception, and similar issues. Section 6.13 Liability of Owners for DamaGe to Common Ares. The Owner of each Lot_shall be liable to the Association. Eom-all. damage to the Common Area, or improvements thereon, caused by such Owner or Owner's agent, any occupant, invitee, guest or pet, except for that portion, if any, fully covered by insurance. Liability of an Owner shall be established only after notice to the Owner and hearing before the Board. Section 6.14 Hazardous Materials. An Owner shall not use or keep on a Lot any kerosene, gasoline or inflammable or combustible -96- -31- DP-AFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 fluid or material or other hazardous materials, other than those required, in limited quantities, for the normal cleaning or landscaping work. ARTICLE VII .ARCKIT~CTURAL CONTRO?, Section 7.1 Approval of Plans. No building, fence, wall, pool, spa, obstruction, outside or exterior wiring, balcony, deck, screen, patio, patio cover, tent awning, carport, carport cover, trellis, improvement or structure of any kind shall be commenced, installed, erected, painted or maintained upon the Property, nor shall any alteration or improvement of any kind be made thereto, or to the exterior of any residence, until the same has been approved in writing by the Architectural Control Committee appointed by the Board, pursuant to Section 7.2 hereof. Notwithstanding the foregoing, an Owner may' improve or alter any improvements located within the interior boundaries of the building located on such Owner's Lot. Plans and specifications showing the nature, kind, shape, color, size, materials and location of such improvements, alterations, etc., shall be submitted to the Architectural Control Committee for approval as to quality of workmanship and design and harmony with all improvements located in the Project, and as to 1QC~.$ioD. in relation to surrounding sSruqDures, .tOpography and finish-grade elevation. No fence or walt._shall be erected, placed or altered on any Lot nearer to any street than the minimum building set back line. No permission or approval shall be required to repaint in accordance with Declarant's original color scheme previously approved by the Committee, or to rebuild in accordance with plans and specifications previouslyapproved by the Committee. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to limit the right of an Owner to remodel the interior of his residence, or to paint the interior of his residence any color desired. Section 7.2 Architectural Control Committee Action. The Architectural Control Committee shall consist of three (3) members. Declarant may appoint all of the original members of the Committee and all replacements until the first anniversary of the issuance of the original final public report for the Project. The Declarant reserves to itself the power to appoint a mmj~ority of the members to the Committee until ninety percent (90%) of all the Lots in the Project have been sold or until the fifth anniversary of the issuance of the final public report for the Project, whichever first occurs. After one (1) year from the date of issuance of the original public report for the Project, the Board shall have the power to appoint at least one (1) member to the Committee until ninety percent (90%) of all the Lots in the Project have been sold or until the fifth anniversary da*= ~f the issuance of the original -97- -32- DR3~FT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 final public report for the Project, whichever first occurs. Thereafter, the Board shall have the power to appoint all of the members of the krchitectural Control Committee. In the event of death or resignation of any Committee member, said member's replacement shall be appointed by whomever (the Board or Declarant) appointed that member. A majority of the members of the Committee may appoint a single member to act for it. Neither the members of the Committee nor its designated representative shall be entitled to any compensation for services performed pursuant thereto. In the event the Committee fails to approve or disapprove plans and specifications within thirty (30) days after the same have been submitted to it, approval will not be required and the related covenants shall be deemed to have been fully complied with. Section 7.3 Landscapinq. No landscaping of patios or yards or portions of Lots visible from the street or from any Common Area shall be undertaken by any Owner until plans and specifications showing the nature, kind, shape, and location of the materials shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Architectural Control Committee. Section 7.4 Governmental Approval. Before commencement of any alteration or improvements approved by the Architectural Control Committee, the Owner shall comply with all appropriate governmental laws and regulations. Approval by the Committee does not satisfy the appropriate approvals that may be required by any governmental entity with appropriate jurisdiction. ARTICLE VIII GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 8.1 Enforcement; Mandatory klternative Dispute Resolution~ Mandatory Arbitration; Optional Dispute Resolution; Judicial Reference; Civil Code Section 896 Com~!iance. (a) Right to Enforce. The Association, or any Owner, shall have the right to enforce, by any proceeding at law or in equity, all restrictions, conditions, covenants, reservations, liens and charges now or hereafter imposed by the provisions of the Project Documents, or decisions made by the Association p~rsuant to the provisions of the Project Documents, and in such action shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees as are ordered by the Court. Failure by the Association or by any Owner to enforce any covenant or restriction contained herein shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the rights to so do thereafter. (b) Mandatory Alternative Dispute Resolution. Prior to the filing by either the Association or an Owner of a civil action -33- DRAFT: SEPTEMt~ER 1, 2004 related to the enforcement of the Project Documents (i) solely for declaratory relief, or (ii) solely for injunctive relief, or (iii) for declaratory relief or injunctive relief in conjunction with a claim for monetary damages not in excess of five thousand dollars ($5,000), the parties shall endeavor to submit their dispute to a form of alternative dispute resolution such as mediation or arbitration (collectively, "alternative dispute resolution proceedings'.), as required by Section 1354(b) of the California Civil Code. As provided therein: i. The form of alternative dispute resolution chosen may be binding or nonbinding at the option of the parties. ii. Any party to such a dispute may initiate the process by serving on another party to the dispute a Request for Resolution. The Request for Resolution shall include (1) a brief description of the dispute, (2) a request for alternative dispute resolution, and (3) a notice that the party receiving the Request for Resolution is required to respond within thirty (30) days of receipt or it will be deemed rejected. Service of the Request for Resolution shall be.as required by Section 1354(b). iii. Parties receiving a Request for Resolution s'hall have thirty (30) days following service of the Request for Resolution to accept or reject alternative dispute resolution and, if the Request is not accepted within said thirty (30) day period by a party, it shall be deemed rejected by that party. ........... iv. If alternative-di-spt~te resolution is accepted -'~'"a party, it shall be complet~'-within' ninety (90) days of receipt of the acceptance by the party initiating the Request, unless extended by written stipulation signed by both parties. v. The costs of the alternative dispute resolution shall be borne by the parties. Any such action filed by the Association or an Owner shall be subject to the provisions of Section 1354(b), and failure by any Owner or the Association to comply with the prefiling requirements of Section 1354(b) may result in the loss by the Association or any such Owner of the right to sue to enforce the Project Documents. (c) Mandatory Arbitration of Claims AGainst Declarant. Notwithstanding California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1298.7, any controversy or claim between or among Declarant, as the builder of the Project, on the one hand, and either the Association or any Owner, on the other hand, relating to the design or construction of Project, shall be submitted to binding arbitration before the American Arbitration Association ("AAA") or Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Service/Endispute ("JAMS"), as provided in this subsection (c). The entity selected by the parties is hereinafter referred to as the "~krbitratin9 Entity", and if the parties are -99- -34- DR3kFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 unable to agree on the Arbitrating Entity, the dispute shall be arbitrated before i. The parties shall comply with the requirements of California Civil Code Division 2, Part 2, Title 7, Chapter 4, (Sections 910 through 938, inclusive), which are hereinafter referred to as the "Non-Adversarial Procedures", prior to initiating arbitration proceedings under this subsection (c) or reference proceedings under subsection (e) below. ii. The arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the commercial arbitration rules of AAA or the Streamlined or Comprehensive Rules and Regulations of JAMS, as the case may be, modified, in the case of AAA by a written agreement to vary procedures and in the case of JAMS by party-agreed procedures, as follows: A. Declarant shall advance the fees necessary to initiate the arbitration, with ongoing costs and fees to be paid as agreed by the parties and, if they cannot agree, as determined by the arbitrator; provided, however; that the costs and fees of the arbitration shall be ultimately borne as determined by the arbitrator. B. There shall be only one arbitrator who shall be selected by mutual agreement of the parties within thirty (30) days of the administrator of the Arbitrating Entity receiving a written request from a party t~'arbitrate the controversy or claim. The arb~_t~t-6'r~shall be a neutral and imPart~L~7~v~ual, and the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1297.121 shall apply to the selection of the arbitrator. An arbitrator may. be challenged on any of the grounds listed in California Code of Civil Procedure Sections 1297.121 or 1297.124. If the parties are unable to agree on an arbitrator, the Arbitrating Entity shall select the arbitrator. C. The venue of the arbitration shall be the county in which the Project is located unless the parties agree to some other location. D. The arbitrator shall apply California substantive law in rendering a final decision. The arbitrator shall have the power to grant all legal and equitable remedies and award compensatory damages, but shall not have the power to award punitive damages. E. Discovery shall be allowed pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1283.05, and arbitration of any matter pursuant to this Section shall not be deemed a waiver of the attorney-client or attorney-work product privilege in any way. -100- -35 - DR3kFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 iii. The parties agree to be bound by the decision of the arbitrator, which shall be final and non-appealable. Judgment upon the decision rendered by the arbitrator may be entered in any court having proper jurisdiction or application may be made to such court for judicial acceptance of the award and an order of enforcement. If a party refuses to arbitrate, the other party may seek a court order compelling arbitration. (d) Optional Alternative Dispute Resolution. In addition to the requirements of Sections 8.1(b) and (c) above, the Association may perform any act reasonably necessary to resolve any civil claim or action through alternative dispute resolution proceedings, including, without limitation, the following: i. Provide advance notice of the Association's intent to initiate the prosecution of any civil action. ii. After initiating the prosecution or defense of any civil action, meet and confer with every person who is a party. defense of proceedings. iii. Consider any civil action diversion of the prosecution or to alternative dispute resolution iv. Agree to both participate in alternative dispute resolution proceedings and pay costs therefor incurred by the Association. (e) Judicial Referend~'6~-dlaims Aqainst Declarant. In the event that the mandatory arbitration provision of subsection (c) hereinabove is unenforceable for whatever reason, then, after compliance by the parties with the Non-Adversarial Procedures, any controversy or claim referenced therein shall be adjudicated by using voluntary judicial reference in accordance with the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure sections 638-645 or any successor statutes. The parties shall use a general referee acceptable to both parties, or, if the parties cannot agree', any party may petition the Superior Court of the County of San Mateo for appointment of a general referee by the presiding judge. The parties shall cooperate in good faith to ensure that all necessary and appropriate parties are included in the judicial reference proceeding. Declarant shall not be required to participate-in the judicial reference proceeding unless Declarant is satisfied that all necessary and appropriate parties will participate. The judicial reference shall be a general reference. The general referee shall have the authority to try any or all.of the issues in the proceeding whether of fact or of law, and to report a statement of decision thereon. Neither the referee nor any party shall have the right to impanel a jury. Each party retains the same appeal rights of the referee's.decision as if the decision were rendered by a trial court judce. -101- -36- DR3~FT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 (f) Civil Code Section 896 ComDlianc~. For any claim for defective construction filed by the Association or any Owner under subsection (c) above (or subsection (e) where the provisions of subsection (c) are unenforceable), where the claim should seek to enforce compliance by the builder, developer or subdivider with the functionality standards of California Civil Code Section 896 (including any successor statute), the Association shall only have the authority to enforce such compliance with respect to the Common Areas only. The Association or any Owner hereby waives any and all implied warranties with respect to all functions and/or components which are specified in California Civil Code Section 896 (including any successor statute). Section 8.2 Invalidity of any Provision. Should any provision or portion of any Project Document be declared invalid or in conflict with any law of the jurisdiction in which this Project is situated, the validity of all the remaining provisions and portions thereof shall remain unaffected and in full force and effect. Section 8.3 Term. The covenants, conditions and restrictions of this Declaration shall run with and bind the Property and shall inure to the benefit of and shall be enforceable by the Association or the Owner of any property subject to.this Declaration, their respective legal representatives, heirs, successors and assigns for a term of thirty (30) years from the date that this Declaration is recorded, after which time, these covenants, conditions and restrictions shall be automaticall~xtended for successive periods of ten (10).L.~s.,' unless an instrument in wri~i~ /.signed by seventy-five percent (75%) of the then Owners of the Lots (and approved by first mortgagees in accordance with Section 8.6.) has been recorded within the year preceding the year of each successive period of ten (10) years, agreeing to change such covenants and restrictions, in whole or in part, or to terminate them. Section 8.4 Amendments. This Declaration may be amended only by the affirmative vote of seventy-five percent (75%) of each class of the Association Members, if the two class voting structure is still in effect. Under the single class voting structure, amendment of this Declaration shall require both the affirmative vote of seventy-five percent (75%) of the total votin9 powe~ of the Association Members and a bare majority (51%) of the votes of Members other than Declarant, each Lot having one (1) vote. In no event,~ however, may any clause, provision or Section of this Declaration be amended by a percentage of votin9 power of the Association which is lower than the percentage of affirmative votes prescribed for action to be taken under that clause, provision or Section. All such amendments must be recorded and shall become effective upon being recorded in the Recorder's Office of the County of San Mateo. -102- -37- DR3kFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 Section 8.5 Encroachment Easements. Each Lot, as the dominant tenement, shall have an easement over adjoining Lots and Common Area, as the servient tenements, for the purpose of accommodating any encroachment due to foundations, exterior wall, windows, roof overhang and fences or walls which are built in accordance with the original design, plans and specifications of Declarant, or due to engineering errors, errors or adjustments in original construction, settlement or shifting of any building, or similar causes. There shall be valid easements for the maintenance of said encroachments as long as they shall exist, and the rights and obligations of Owners shall not be altered in any way by said encroachment, settlement or shifting; provided, however, that in no event shall a valid easement for encroachment be created in favor of an Owner or Owners if said encroachment occurred due to the intentional conduct of said Owner or Owners, other than adjustments by Declarant in the original construction. In the event a structure is partially or totally destroyed, and then repaired or rebuilt, the Owners of each adjoining Lot agree that minor encroachments over adjoining Lots and Common Area shall be permitted and that there shall be valid easements for the maintenance of said encroachments so long as they shall exist. In the event that an error in engineering, design or construction results in an encroachment of any building into the Common Area, or into or onto an adjoining Lot, or into a required setback area, a correcting modification may be made in the Map. Said modification may be in the form of a certificate of correction executed by Declarant (so long as Declarant is the sole owner of the Property) and by Declarant's engineer and b~- the city engineer. If the correction occurs after t~tl~_~.o ~h~ Common Area has been conveyed ~_.i~'~ to the Association, the Association shall execute the certificate of correction. The Board of Directors may, by vote or written approval of a majority of the directors, authorize the execution of the certificate of correction. Section 8.6 Mortqaqe Protection Provision. (a) Mortqaqe Permitted. .Any Owner may encumber his Lot with a mortgage. The Exclusive Use Common Areas, if any, are a part of the Project and are covered by the mortgage at least to the same extent as are the Common Areas. All such areas are fully installed, completed, and in operation for use by the Owners. (b) Subordination. Any lien created or claimed under the provisions of this Declaration is expressly made .subject and subordinate to the rights of any first mortgage that encumbers any Lot, made in good faith and for value, and no such lien shall in any way defeat, invalidate or impair the obligation or priority of such mortgage, unless the mortgagee expressly subordinates his interest in writing to such lien. The transfer of ownership of a Lot as the result of the exercise of a power of sale or a judicial foreclosure involving a default under the first mortgage, shall extinguish the lien of Assessments which were due and payable prior -103- -38- DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 to the transfer of the ownership interest. No transfer of an ownership interest, as the result of a foreclosure or exercise of a power of sale, shall relieve the new Owner, whether it be the former mortgagee or beneficiary of the first mortgage or another person, from liability for any Assessments thereafter becoming due or from the lien thereof. All taxes, assessments and charges which may become liens prior to the first mortgage under local law shall relate only to the individual Lots and not to the Project as a whole. (c) Amendment. No amendment to the Project Documents shall affect the rights of any mortgagee under any mortgage made in good faith and for value and recorded before the recordation of any such amendment, unless a mortgagee either joins in the execution of the amendment or approves it in writing as a part of such amendment. (d) Restrictions on Certain ChanGes. i. Unless sixty-seven percent (67%) of all first mortgagees of Lots (based on one vote for each first Mortgage owned) and sixty-seven percent (67%) of Owners (other than Declarant or.sponsors, developers, or builders) have given their prior written approval (unless a higher percentage is required by a specific provision of this Declaration), neither the Association nor the Owners shall be entitled: A. By act or"~Omission to seek to abandon or terminate'._~'Project, except for abandonment_provided by statute in case of substantial loss to the Lots and the Common Area. B. To change the obligations of any Lot for purposes of levying Assessments or charges or allocating distributions of hazard insurance proceeds or condemnation awards. C. To partition or subdivide any Lot. D. By act or omission to seek to abandon, partition, subdivide, encumber, sell or transfer the Common Area. The granting of easements for public utilities or for other public purposes consistent with the intended use of the Common Area by the Association or the Owners shall not be deemed a transfer within the meaning of this subparagraph. E. To use hazard-insurance-, proceeds for losses to Lots or Common Area for other than the repair, replacement or reconstruction of improvements, except as provided by statute in case of substantial loss to the Lots or Common Area of the Project. ii. A. Unless a higher percentage is required by a specific provision of this Declaration, the consent of sixty- seven percent (67%) of Owners and the approval of Eligible -104- -39- DP~KFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 Mortgagees holding mortgages on Lots which have at least fifty-one percent (51%) of the votes of Lots subject to mortgages held by Eligible Mortgagees shall be required to add or amend any material provisions of the Project Documents which establish, provide for, govern, or regulate any of the following: (1) voting; (2) increases in Assessments that~ raise the previously assessed amount by more than twenty-five percent (25%), Assessment liens or the priority of such liens; (3) reductions in reserves for maintenance, repair and replacement of the Common Area; (4) insurance requirements; (5) reallocation of the interests in the Common Area or the Exclusive Use Common Areas or rights to their use; (6) responsibility for maintenance .and repair; (7) expansion or contraction of the Project or the addition, annexation, or withdrawal of property to or from the Project; (8) the redefinition of boundaries of any Lot; (9) restoration or repair of the Project (after damage or partial condemnation) in a manner other than that specified herein; (10) convertibility of Lots into Common Area or of Common Area into Lots; (11) imposition of any restriction on the leasing of Lots; (12) imposition of any right of first refusal or similar restriction on the right of a Lot Owner to sell, transfer, or otherwise convey his Lot; and (13) any provisions which are for the express benefit of Eligible Mortgagees or Eligible Insurers or Guarantors. B. An addition or amendment to such document shall not be considered material if it is for the purpose' of correcting technical errors, or for clarification only. Any Eligible Mortgagee who receives ~- written request to aP~r.0~_e additions or amendments ~w~_~d-~e~ not deliver or .post to__the requesting party a negative response within thirty (30) days shall be deemed to have approved such request. iii. Unless the prior consent of sixty-seven percent (67%) of Owners and approval of Eligible Mortgagees holdin~ mortgages on Lots which have at least sixty-seven percent (67%) of the votes of Lots subject to mortgages held by Eligible Mortgagees has been obtained, neither the Association nor the Owners shall be entitled to terminate the legal status of the Project as a planned development; except that the approval of only fifty-one percent (51%) of Eligible Mortgagees shall be required to terminate the legal status of the Project after substantial destruction or a substantial takin9 in condemnation. (e) RiGht toIExamine.Books and Records. The Association shall make available to Owners and first mortgagees (and insurers or guarantors of any first mortgage), current copies of the Project Documents and the books, records, and financial statements of the Association. "Available" means available for inspection and copying, upon request, during normal business hours or under other reasonable circumstances. The Association may impose a fee for providing the foregoing which may not exceed the reasonable cost to prepare and reproduce the request~3uments. Any first mortgagee -40- DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1. 2004 shall be entitled, on written request, to have an audited financial statement for the immediately preceding fiscal year, prepared at its expense if one is not otherwise available. Such statement shall be furnished within a reasonable time following such request. (f) Distribution of Insurance and Condemnation Proceeds. No Owner, or any other party, shall have priority over any right of first mortgagees of Lots pursuant to their mortgages in case of a distribution to Owners of insurance proceeds or condemnation awards for losses to or taking of Lots or Common Area. Any provision to the contrary in this Declaration or in the Bylaws or other documents relating to the Pro~ject is to such extent void. All applicable fire and all physical loss or extended coverage insurance policies shall contain loss payable clauses acceptable to the affected mortgagees naming the mortgagees, as their interests may appear. (g) Notice to Mortqagees of Record. On receipt of written request to the Association from any Eligible Mortgagee or Eligible Insurer or Guarantor, identifying both its name and address and the Lot number or. address of the Lot on which it has the mortgage, the Association shall give written notice to each Eligible Mortgagee or Eligible Insurer or Guarantor of the following: i. Any loss to any Lot covered by Such mortgage, if such loss exceeds one thousand dollars ($1,000), or any taking of such Lot; ' ii. Any loss to the Common Area, if such loss exceeds five thousand dollars ($5,000), or any taking of the Common Area; iii. Any default by the Owner of any Lot covered by such mortgage under any provision of this Declaration or any other provision of the Bylaws or rules and regulations adopted by the Association, which default is not cured within sixty (60) days after written notice to such Owner (such notice to include the fact that said sixty (60) day period has expired); iv. Any lapse, cancellation, or material modification of any insurance policy or fidelity insurance maintained by the Association; and v. Any proposed action which would require the consent of a specified percentage of Eligible Mortgagees as specified in Section 8.6(d) (ii). (h) Effect of Breach. No breach of any provision of this Declaration shall invalidate the lien of any mortgage on any Lot made in good faith and for value, but all covenants, conditions -106- -41- DR3kFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 and restrictions shall be binding on any Owner whose title is derived through foreclosure sale, trustee,s sale, or otherwise. (i) Foreclosure. If any Lot is encumbered by a first mortgage made in good faith and for value, the foreclosure of any lien created by any provision set forth in this Declaration for Assessments, or installments of Assessments, shall not operate to affect or impair the lien of the first mortgage. On foreclosure of the first mortgage, the lien of Assessments, or installments, that have accrued up to the time of foreclosure shall be subordinate to the lien of the first mortgage, with the foreclosure-purchaser taking title to the Lot free of the lien for Assessments, or installments, that have accrued up to the time of the foreclosure sale. On taking title to the Lot, the foreclosure-purchaser shall only be obligated to pay Assessments or other charges levied or assessed by the Association after the foreclosure-purchaser acquired title to the Lot. The subsequently levied Assessments or other charges may include previously unpaid Assessments; provided all Owners, including the foreclosure-purchaser, and his successors and assigns, are required to pay their proportionate share, as provided in this Section. (j) Appearance at MeetinGs. Because of its financial interest in the Project, any mortgagee may appear at meetings of the Members and the Board to draw attention to violations of this Decl'aration that have not been corrected or made subject to remedial proceedings or Assessments. (k) ~iGht t~ FurnishAn¥I~formation. Any mortgag~y furnish information to the Board concerning the status of any mortgage. (1) Inapplicability of RiGht of First Refusal to MortGagee. The Project Documents contain no right of first refusal or similar restriction on the right of an Owner to sell, transfer or otherwise convey the Owner's Lot. No such right of first refusal or similar right shall be granted to the Association in the future without the consent of any mortgagee of the Lot. Any right of first refusal or similar right that may be granted to the Association (or other person or entity) shall not apply to any conveyance or transfer of title to such Lot, whether voluntary or involuntary, to a mortgagee who acquires title to or ownership of the Lot, pursuant to the remedies provided in its mortgage, or by reason of foreclosure.of_ the mortgage or deed (or assignment) in lieu of foreclosure. In addition, said right of first refusal or similar right shall not impair the rights of a mortgagee to sell or lease a Lot acquired by the Mortgagee. (m) Payment of Taxes or Insurance by MortGaGees. First mortgagees may, jointly or singly, pay taxes or other charges which are in default and which may or have become a charge against the Common Area, and may pay overdue oremiums on hazard insurance -107- -42- DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 policies, or secure new hazard insurance coverage on the lapse of a policy, for such Common Area; provided such first mortgagees making such payment have 9iven notice to the Association prior to the making of such payment(s) and the Association has failed to pay the same. Section 8.7 Owner's RiGht and Obligations to Maintain and Repair. Except for those portions of the Project that the Association is required to maintain and repair, each Owner shall at his sole cost and expense, maintain and repair his Lot and the improvements thereon, including landscaping, keeping the same in good condition including structural repairs to his residence, including, without limitation, the foundation, walls and roofs. Each Owner shall keep those portions of Exclusive Use Common Areas, if any, to which ke has an exclusive easement or license, clean and neat. In the event that an Owner fails to maintain his Lot and the improvements thereon, includin9 landscaping, in a manner which the Board deems necessary to. preserve the appearance and value of the Property, the Board may notify the Owner of the work required and request that it be done within sixty (60) days from the giving of such notice. In the event the Owner fails to carry out such maintenance or-repair within such sixty (60) day period, the Board may 9ire notice and hold a hearin9 and cause such work to be done and may specially assess the cost thereof to such Owner and, if necessary, place a lien on his Lot for the amount thereof. Section 8.8 Entry for Repairs. The Board or its appointed agents may enter upon any Lot when ~cessaryin connection with any ~nte~ance, repair or construction ~6~-~ch the Association is responsible. Such entry shall be made with as little inconvenience to the Owner as is practicable, and any damage caused thereby shall be repaired by the Board at the expense of the Association. Except in the case of any emergency, forty-eight (48) hour advance notice shall be given to the Owner or occupant prior to any such entry. Section 8.9 DamaGe or Destruction. If any Project improvement, including a residence, is damaged or destroyed by fire or other casualty, the improvement shall be repaired or reconstructed substantially in accordance with the original as-built plans and specifications, modified as May be required by applicable buildin9 codes and regulations in force at the time of such repair or reconstruction and subject to such alterations or upgrades as may b~-approved by the Architectural Control Committee, unless either of the following occurs: (1) The cosz of repair or reconstruction is more than fifty percent (50%) of the current replacement costs of all Project improvements, available insurance proceeds are not sufficient to pay for at least eighty-five percent (85%) of the cost of such repairs or reconstructions, and three-fourths (3/4tbs) of the total votin9 power of the Association residin9 in Members and their first mortgagees vote against such repair and reconstruction; or (2) -108- -43- DRkFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 available insurance proceeds are not sufficient to substantially repair or reconstruct the improvements within a reasonable time as determined by the Board, a Special Assessment levied to supplement the insurance fails to receive the requisite approval (if such approval is required) as provided herein, and the Board, without the requirement of approval by the Owners, is unable to supplement the insurance by borrowing on behalf of the Association sufficient monies to enable the improvements to be substantially repaired or reconstructed within a reasonable time. In the case of damage or destruction of improvements located on a Lot, whether by fire, earthquake or other causes, the Owner of that Lot and improvements is responsible for the cost of reconstruction that is not covered by insurance or is within the deductible amount. If an Owner fails to pay the cost of reconstruction, the Association may elect to pay for the uninsured portion of the cost and shall have the right to assess the Owner for the cost thereof and to enforce the Assessment as provided in this Declaration. If the Project improvement is to be repaired or reconstructed and the cost for the repair or reconstruction is in excess of twenty-five percent (25%) of the current replacement cost of all the Project improvements, the Board shall designate a construction consultant, a general contractor, and an architect for the repair or reconstruction. Ail insurance proceeds, Association monies allocated for the repair or reconstruction, and any borrowing by the Association for the repair or redonstruction shall be deposited with a commercia~'i~ending institution experienced." ~-ni~'- the disbursement of construction loan funds (the "depository,.), as selected by the Board. Funds shall be disbursed in accordance with the normal construction loan practices of the depository that require, as a minimum, that the construction consultant, general contractor and architect certify with ten (10) days prior to any disbursement substantially the following: (a) That all of the work completed as of the date of such request for disbursement has been done in compliance with the approved plans and specification; (b) That such disbursement request: (1) represents monies which either have been paid by or on behalf ~f the construction consultant, the general contractor or the architect and/or are justly due-to contractors, subcontractorsi material men~ engineers or other persons (whose name and address shall be stated), who have rendered or furnished certain services or materials for the work; (2) gives a brief description of such services or materials for the work and the principle subdivisions or categories thereof and the respective amounts paid or due to each of said persons in respect thereof; and (3) states the progress of the work up to the date of said certificate; -109- -44- DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 (c) That the sum then requested to be disbursed, plus all sums previously disbursed, does not exceed the cost of the work insofar as actually accomplished up to the date of such certificate; (d) That no part of the cost of the services and materials described in the foregoing subparagraph (a) has been or is being made the basis of the disbursement of any funds in any previous or then pendin9 application; and (e) That the amount held by the depository, after payment of the amount requested in the pending disbursement request, will be sufficient to pay in full the costs necessary to complete the repair or reconstruction. If the cost of repair or reconstruction is less than twenty- five percent (25%) of the current replacement cost of all the Project improvements, the Board shall disburse the available funds for the repair and reconstruction under such procedures as. the Board deems appropriate under the circumstances. If the Project improvement is not repaired or reconstructed in accordance with the foregoing, all available insurance proceeds shall be disbursed among all Owners and their respective mortgagees in the same proportion that the Owners are assessed, subject to the rights of the Owners' mortgagees. ......... If th~ failure to repair or re~-8~-St_.zLu_.c~, results in a material ..... ~iteration- of the use of the Project from its use immediately preceding the damage or destruction, as determined by the Board (a material alteration shall be conclusively presumed if repair or reconstruction costs exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the current replacement cost of all the Project improvements), the Project shall be sold in its entirety under such terms and conditions as the Board deems appropriate. If any Owner or first mortgagee disputes the Board' s determination as to a material alteration, the dispute shall be submitted to arbitration, pursuant to the rules of the American Arbitration Association, and the decision of the arbitrator shall be conclusive and binding on all Owners and their mortgagees. If the Project is sold, the sales proceeds shall be -distributed to all Owners and. their, respective, mortgagees in proportion to the respective fair market values of their Lots, as of the date immediately preceding the date of damage or destruction, as determined by a qualified independent appraiser selected by the Board. For the purpose of effecting a sale under this Section, each Owner grants to the Association an irrevocable power of attorney to sell the entire Project for the benefit of the Owners, to terminate the Declaration and to dissolve the Association. In the event the Association fails to take the -110- -45- DR-AFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 necessary steps to sell the entire Project as required hereunder within sixty (60) days following the date of a determination by the Board or arbitrator of a material alteration, or within one hundred twenty (120) days following the date of damage or destruction if the Board has failed to make a determination as to a material alteration, any Owner may file an action in a court of appropriate jurisdiction for an order requiring the sale of the Project and distribution of'the proceeds in accordance with this Section~ Section 8.10 ~ondemnation. If all or any part of a Lot (except the Common Area) is taken by eminent domain, the award shall be disbursed to the Owner of the Lot, subject to the rights of the Owner's mortgagees. If the taking renders the Lot uninhabitable, the Owner shall be divested of any further interest in the Project, including membership in the Association. If all or any part of the Common Area is taken by eminent domain, the proceeds of condemnation shall be used to restore or replace the portion of the Common Area affected by condemnation, if restoration or replacement is possible, and any remaining funds, after payment of any and all fees and expenses incurred by the Association relating to such condemnation, shall be distributed among the Owners in the same proportion as such Owners are assessed, subject to ~he rights of mortgagees. If necessary, the remaining portion of the Project shall be resurveyed to reflect such taking. The Association shall participate in the negotiations, settlements, and agreements with the condemning authority, and shall propose the method of division of the proceeds of condemnation, where Lots are not valued separately by the condemning authority or by the court. The Associati0n~!~'-represent the Lot Owners in an~'-~'~'n--demnati0n proceedings or in negotiations, settlements and agreements~With the condemning authority for acquisition of the Common Area or any part thereof. ' Section 8.11 ~wners' Compliance. Each Owner, tenant or occupant of a Lot shall comply with the provisions of this Declaration, the Bylaws, and the decisions and resolutions of the Association or its duly authorized representative, as lawfully amended from time to time. Failure to comply with any such provisions, decisions or resolutions shall be grounds for an action to recover sums due for damages or for injunctive relief. Ail agreements and determinations lawfully made by the Association, in accordance with the voting percentages established in this Declaration or in the Bylaws, shall be deemed to be binding on all. 0wners .of. Lots, their successors and assigns, Section 8.12 Limitation of Restrictions on Declarant. Declarant is undertaking the work of constructing a planned development and incidental improvements upon the Property. The completion of that work and the sale, rental, and other disposal of Lots is essential to the establishment and welfare of said Property as' a residential community. In order that said work may be completed and said Property be established as a fully occupied -111- -46- DR3kFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 residential community as rapidly as possible, nothing in this Declaration shall be understood or construed to do the following: (a) Prevent Declarant, its contractors, or subcontractors, from doing on the Property or any Lot, whatever is reasonably necessary or advisable in connection with the completion of said work; or (b) Prevent Declarant or its representatives from erecting, constructing and maintaining on the Property (except upon Lots owned by others)', such structures as may be reasonable and necessary for developing said Property as a residential community and disposing of the same by sale, lease or otherwise; or (c) Prevent Declarant from conducting on the Property (except upon Lots owned by others) its business of completing said work and of establishing a plan of residential ownership and of disposing of said Property in Lots by sale, lease or otherwise; or (d) Prevent Declarant from maintaining such sign or signs on the Prop'erty (except upon Lots owned by others) as may be necessary for the sale, lease or disposition thereof; or (e) Subject Declarant to the architectural control provisions of Article VII for construction of any residence or other improvements on the Property. The foregoing rights of Declar~ht shall terminate upon sale of Declarant's entire interest in t~_~ject. So long as Declarant, or its successors and assigns, own one (1) or more of the Lots described herein, Declarant, or its successors and assigns shall be subject to the provisions of this Declaration. Declarant shall make reasonable efforts to avoid disturbing the use and enjoyment of Lots and the Common Area by their Owners, while completing any work necessary to said Lots or Common Area. Section 8.13 Termination of Any ResDonsibilitV of Declarant. In the event Declarant shall convey all of its rights, title and interest in and to the Property to any partnership, individual or individuals, corporation or corporations, then and in such event, Declarant shall be relieved of the performance of any further duty or obligation hereunder¥- and such partnership, individual or individuals, corporation or corporations shall be obligated to perform all such duties and obligations of the Declarant. Section 8.14 Notices. Any notice permitted or required by this Declaration or the Bylaws may be delivered either personally or by mail. If delivery is by mail, it shall be by first-class mail and shall be deemed to have been delivered seventy-two (72) hours after a copy of the same has been deposited in the United -112- -47- DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to each person at the current address given by such person to the Secretary of the Board or addressed to the Lot of such person if no such address has been given to the Secretary. Section 8.15 Required Documentation. Declarant hereby agrees to furnish the Association with copies of all documentation required by California Department of Real Estate Regulations Section 2792.23(a) within ninety (90) days after the close of escrow of the first interest in the subdivision. Members shall furnish subsequent purchasers with all documentation required by California Civil Code Sections 1367.1, 1368 and 1375, as well as purchase documents and any maintenance manuals, schedules and procedures as referred to in Title 7, Part 2, Division 2 of the California Civil Code. Section 8.16 ObliGations. Special Provisions for Enforcement of Bonded (a) SDecial Procedure~. Because certain Common Area improvements may 'not have been completed prior to the date of execution of this Declaration and by the date of the issuance of a final public report covering the Project, and because the Association is or may become obligee under a bond or other arrangement (hereafter "Bond") to secure the completion of such Common Area improvements, there are hereby created special procedures for the initiation of adt~on to enforce the obligations of ~the De. cl~.~iand the~surety under any such b~_~%_~.d_~'~'_~' (b) Action by Board. The Board is hereby directed to consider and vote on the question of action by the Association to enforce the obligations under the Bond with respect to any improvement for which a Notice of Completion has not been filed within sixty (60) days after the completion date specified for that improvement in the planned construction statement appended to the Bond. If the Association has given an extension in writing for the completion of any Common Area improvement, the Board shall consider and vote on the aforesaid question if a Notice of Completion has not been filed within thirty (30) days after the expiration of the extension. (c) Meeting of Members to Override Decision by Board. A special-meeting of Members of the Association for the.purpose of voting to override a decision by the Board not to initiate action to enforce the obligations under the Bond, or on the failure of the Board to consider the question, shall be held not less than thirty-five (35) days nor more than forty-five (45) days after receipt by the Board of a petition for such a meeting signed by Members representing five percent (5%) or more of the total voting power of the kssociation. -113- -48- DR_AFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 (d) Vote by Members at Special Meeting. At any meeting held under the provisions of section (c) above, a vote shall be taken by Members of the Association other than the Declarant. A vote of a majority of the voting power of the Association residing in Members other than Declarant to take action to enforce the obligations under the Bond shall be deemed to be the decision of the Association, and the Board shall thereafter implement this decision by initiating and pursuing appropriate action in the name of the Association. (e) Release of Bond. Upon satisfaction of the Declarant's obligation to complete the Common Area improvements, the Association shall acknowledge in writing that it approves the release of the Bond and execute any other documents as may be necessary to effect such release. The Association shall not condition its approval of the release of the Bond on the satisfaction of any condition, other than the completion of the Common Area improvements, as described on the planned construction statement appended to the Bond. Any dispute between the Declarant and the Association regarding the completion of the Common Area improvements shall be submitted to binding arbitration under the commercial rules of the American Arbitration Association and the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being the Declarant herein, has executed this Declaration this day of , 200 "'*' UNITED NGS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a California Limited Partnership By: Name Typed: Its CHARLES NG NGCHi~c~CCRs.gA4 JUDY NG -114- -49- DRAFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) COUNTY OF ) SS. On Public in and for before me, the undersigned, a Notary said State, personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(les), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature Name (typed or printed) (Th/s area for official notarial seal) -115- DR-AFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF On Public in and for before me, the undersigned, a Notary said State, personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature Name (typed or printed) (This area for official notarial seal) -116- DR_AFT: SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 STATE OF CALIFOR/qIA ) ) COUNTy OF ) On Publ i c in and for ss. before me, the undersigned, a Notary said State, personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence.) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/%hey executed the same in h'is/her/their authorized capac!ty(ies), and that by his/her/their signature (s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon be~half of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature Name (typed or printed) area for official notarial seal) -117- PROFORMA OPERATING BUDGET/ IRE 623 (Rev. 2/00) Form ID# 62300200B015 STATEMENT OF GENERAL INFORMATION This budget is provided as a Good Faith Estimate based on building plans available at the time of preparation which is generally 3rior to construction and/or completion for new projects or from a combination of existing building plans and/or site inspections '*or existing projects. For existing projects Actual Operating Experience and other historical data may have been used to :tevelop certain projected soumes of Income and/or Expenses. I'he subject Associaton must adopt an Operating Budget in accordance w~h applicable California Civil Codes to obtain a ~ubdivision Public Report issued by the State of California Department of Real Estate. If the Operating Budget provided to you as a Buyer is less than 10% or greater than 20% than the Budget amount referenced in the Subdlvislon's Public Report you should contact the Department of Real Estate. 'he Association, through its Board of Directors, may increase or decrease its Annual Operating Budget. It should be expected hat the costs of operations will increase as the Development ages. It should be further understood that it is the responalbllty of '~e Association, through Its Board of Directors, to review both the Operating Expenses as well as the Initial Reserve Fund ~rojections after the first, year of operations to consider any changes which may have taken place during construction and initial ales. ;UBDIVISION IDENTIFICATION AND LOCATION DRE FILE NUMBER (if known) NAME AND/OR TRACT NUMBER 111 CHESTNUT AVENUE STREET ADDRESS (if any) Undetermined MAIN ACCESS ROAD(s) Commercial Avenue to Chestnut Avenue DEPUTY ASSIGNED File {if known) ,--,I~IAME TO BE USED IN ADVERTISING Same CITY South San Francisco NEAREST CITY/TOWN NA COUNTY San Francisco MILES FROM CITY/TOWN NA ESCRIPTION OF SUBDIVISION NUMBER OF TYPE LOTS/UNiTS PUD 8 PHASE TOTAL NUMBER PREVIOUS DRE NUMBER NUMBER IN PROJECT FILE NUMBER OF ACRES NA 0.52 ~JDGET PREPARED BY JOHN H. BEATTY & ASSOCIATES ADDRESS One Annabel Lane, Suite 100 CFrY Arden Anderson San Ramon 925-277-8178 ZIP CODE 94583 "RTIFICATION declare under penalty of perjury that the representations provided in this document and all documents bmitted as a part of this Proforma Annual Operating Budget are true and complete to the best of my owledge and belief. e undersigned certifies that this electronic recreation of Department of Real Estate form RE 623 contains at :st the same information as the DRE approved form ID 62300200B015. ~NATURE -119- DATE September 7, 2004 RE 623(Rev. 2/00) - 62300200B015 IMPROVEMENTS WORKSHEET 1. Number of buildings containing residential Units. 2. Estimated completion date for the residential Units included in this Phase. 3. Estimated completion date for the Common Area and facilities included in this Phase. 4. Type of residential building for this project (i.e. high-rise, cluster, garden, etc.). 5. Type of construction for these buildings (i.e., steel, concrete, wood frame, etc.). 6. Type of roof (i.e., shake, etc.). 7. Type of paving used in the project. 8. Type of exterior wall for residential buildings. ' 9. Number of residential Units per building. 10. Number of floors per building. 11. Number of bedrooms per Unit. 12. Square footage of units (List number and size of each Unit type). 13. Type of parking facilities and number of spaces (i.e., detached garage, tuck-under, subterranean, carport, open, etc.) 14. 15. PHASED CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS ONLY Have you submitted budgets for all Phases to be completed within the next three calendar years and a built-out budget? If this .condominium project involves phasing with a single lot, submit a budget for each Phase plus a budget which will be used if future Phases are not completed. (Commonly referred to as a worst case budget). -120- Page 2 of 18 NA NA November 2005 NA NA NA Interlocldng concrete bricks with concrete 'bands NA NA NA NA NA Each Residence will have its own two (2) car garage. Additionally there are eight (8) uncovered Guest Parking spaces. N/A N/A /07/2004 111 Chestnut Avenue RE623(Rev. 2/00) - 62300200B015 Page 3 of 18 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET 111 CHESTNUT AVENUE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION Annual Budget ....................................... First Fiscal Year Number of Units ......................................................... 8 INCOME ASSESSMENTS AND OTHER ASSESSMENTS Interest- Reserve Fund TOTALINCOME EXPENSES PER UNIT MONTHLY ANNUAL $189.29 $1,514.31 $18,172 0.00 0.00 0 189.29 1,514.31 $18,172 ADMINISTRATIVE Management Services' Accounting Services - Annual Printing and Postage Memberships and Publications Legal and Professional State and Federal Taxes Insurance - Package Miscellaneous Administrative TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE 25.00 200.00 2,400 3.65 29.17 350 1.75 14.00 168 1.88 15.00 180 7.81 62.50 750 0,00 0.00 0 24.74 197.92 2,375 1.94 15.56 187 66.77 534.14 6,410 GENERAL MAINTENANCE Maintenance Services and Supplies Pest Control Service 7.81 62.50 750 0.00 0.00 0 09/07/2004 111 Chestnut Avenue -121- RE$23(Rev, 2/00) - 62300200B015 Page 4 of 18 GENERAL MAINTENANCE (continued) Window Washing Services Miscellaneous General Maintenance TOTAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE PER UNIT 0.00 0.23 8.05 MONTHLY 0.00 1.88 64.38 ANNUAL 0 23 773 LANDSCAPING Landscaping Services - Monthly Landscaping Services - Annual Miscellaneous Landscaping TOTALLANDSCAPING 40.63 4.06 1.34 46.03 325.00 32.50 10.73 368.22 3,900 39O 129 ' 4,419 UTILITIES PG&E - Natural Gas PG&E- Electricity Water and Sewer Refuse Collection Cable Television Service Miscellaneous Utilities TOTAL UTILITIES 0.00 19.58 5.68 0.00 0.00 1.26 26.52 0.00 156.63 45.42 0.00 0.00 10.10 212.15 '0 1,880 545 0 0 121 2,546 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSE $147.36 $1,178.89 $14,147 RESERVECONTRIBUTION $41.93 $335.42 $4,025 TOTAL OPERATING AND RESERVES $189.29 $1,514.31 $18,172 09/07/2004 111 Chestnut Avenue -122- RE 623(Rev. 2/00) - 82300200B015 Page 5 of 18 BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS INCOME Income for the 111 CHESTNUT AVENUE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION is derived primarily from monthly maintenance assessments paid by the eight (8) Unit Owners that are members of the Association. An additional source of income for the Association is: 1. Interest from the Reserve Fund ASSESSMENTS - $18,172 The Owner assessment of $189.29 is computed to equal the amount of income necessary to meet all common Operating and Reserve Expenses less income from other sources. INTEREST-RESERVE FUND-SO Interest from the Restricted Reserves is' directly reihvested into the Reserve Account to help offset the impact of inflation, This Income soume therefore is not considered as a source of additional Operating Income which would reduce regular assessments. ' OPERATING EXPENSES ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGEMENT SERVICES - $2,400 This category provides for the cost of management consulting services for the Association's ongoing operations and corporate affairs. This projection is based on preliminary information provided by The Bridgeport Company, a management company firm that specializes in the management of Common Interest Develop.ments. ACCOUNTING SERVICES . ANNUAL - $350 This category provides for the costs associated with the filing of State and Federal tax returns. Even though the Association is a non-profit corporation it is required to pay taxes on non-assessment income, e.g. interest earned on reserve accounts. This information was provided by Bautista & Company, of Millbrae. 09/07/2004 111 Chestnut Avenue -123- RE 623(Rev. 2/00) - 62300200B015 Page 6 of 18 PRINTING AND POSTAGE - $168 This category provides for the printingl reproduction and mailing costs of the Association. This includes, but is not limited to, the Annual Meeting notice and provision of the Annual Operating Budget/Reserve Fund Analysis as well as all routine communications of the Association. MEMBERSHIPS AND PUBLICATIONS - $180 This item i~cludes a membership in an organization such as the Community Association Institute (CAI), a national organization for the dissemination of information to Owners' Associations. Provision is also made for the purchase of pertinent pamphlets and materials for use by the Board of Directors and Management as well as attendance at applicable seminars, etc. LEGAL AND PROFESSIONAL - $750 Periodically the Association will seek opinions and advice of legal and technical counsel. STATE AND FEDERAL INCOME TAXES - $0 While the regular assessments paid to the AssociatiOn are exempt from State and Federal income taxes, all other revenue is basically nonexempt and ther~ore subject to taxation. During its first year of operations it is anticipated that the Association will not accumulate sufficient funds in its Reserve and Operating accounts to have taxable interest income. INSURANCE - PACKAGE - $2,873 T, bis category provides for the fire and casualty insurance coverage for the Association as specified in the Association's Enabling Declaration. Included is property, liability, fidelity and Directors and Officers coverage. Projected premiums are based on preliminary information provided by Greg Norris Insurance Agency, of Mill Valley. MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE - $187 This is a contingency provision for unscheduled expenses in the administration of the Association and is calculated at 3% of the total Administrative category, GENERAL MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE SERVICES AND SUPPLIES - $750 As the Association has no maintenance employees, this category provides for the periodic use of trades and services for the general maintenance requirements of the Common Areas. Included would be such activities as maintenance services for relamping, litter control, etc. 09/07/2004 -124- 111 Chestnut Avenue RE 623(Rev. 2/00). 62300200B015 Page 7 of 18 PEST CONTROL CONTRACT. $ There is no provision for regular pest control service as it is the responsibiliity of the individual homeowner. WINDOW WASHING - $0 There is no. provision for a common expense as each Unit Owner will be responsible for the washing of the windows in their Unit. MISCELLANEOUS GENERAL MAINTENANCE. $23 This is a contingency provision for unscheduled expenses in the maintenance of the Common Area and is calculated at 3% of the total General Maintenance category. LANDSCAPING LANDSCAPING SERVICES - MONTHLY - $3,900 The landscaping will be maintained by an outSide,landscape maintenance contractor. This service includes all personnel and equipment necessary f(~r the routine maintenance of the plantstock and irrigation system. LANDSCAPING SERVICES AND SUPPLIES - $390 This category provides for any additional costs associated with the maintenance of the landscape for any work requested by the Association that is beyond the scope of the routine maintenance agreement. MISCELLANEOUS LANDSCAPING . $129 This is a contingency provision for unscheduled expenses in the maintenance of the landscaping and is calculated at 3% of the total Landscaping category. UTILITIES PG&E - NATURAL GAS - $0 There is no provision for a common expense for Natural Gas as each Unit will be individually metered and each Owner is responsible for contracting separately for service. PG&E. ELECTRICITY - $1,880 This category provides for the electrical usage for the Common Areas. Calculations are based on O9/07/2O04 111 Chestnut Avenue -125- RE 623(Rev. 2/00) - 62300200B015 Page 8 of 18 projected usage as indicated in Schedule 1 at the rates as published at the date of publication of this budget. WATER AND SEWER . $545 This category provides for the water usage necessaty to irrigate-the Common Area. Calculations are based in the usage indicated on Schedule 2 at the rates as published at the date of publication of this budget. REFUSE COLLECTION - $0 There is 'no provision for a common expense as each Owner will contract individually for trash collection services. CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE - $0 Each Unit will be prewired to receive cable television service as provided by the local franchised operator. Each Owner/Resident will be individually billed for this service by the local operator. MISCELLANEOUS UTILITIES . $121 ~This is a contingency provision for any unanticipated Utility eXpenses and iS calculated as 3% of the. Utility category. ' RESERVES RESERVE CONTRIBUTION . $4,025 The reserves for the Association are those monies set aside in a "sinking fund" for the purpose of defraying the cost of the replacement and/or repair of major components of Common property. The line by line breakdown of the various components are presented in a separate report - The Reserve Study. 09/07/2004 111 Chestnut Avenue -126- RE 623(Rev. 2/00) - 62300200B015 Page 9 of 18 SCHEDULE 1 111 CHESTNUT AVENUE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION Utility ..................... ~ .............................. Electricity Company ............................................. PG&E Rate ........ ~ ............................................ $0.16 Lighting Average Lamps/ Hours KWH/ Annual Type Location Wattage Fixture Number Dally Year . ExPense Bollard - Landscaping 150 1 8 12 5,256 $863.40 Bollard - Tot Lots 100 1 6 12 2,628 431.70 Entry Lighting 100 2 2 12 1,752 287.80 Subtotal 9,636 $1,582.91 Average Hours KWH/ Annual Equipment Wattage Number Dally Year Expens~ Irrigation 'Timers 115 1 24.00 1,007 $165.49 Subtotal 1,007 . $165.49 Annual Other Charges Rate Expense City Tax 7.5% $131.13 Subtotal -' $131.13 TOTAL ELECTRICAL EXPENSE $1,879.52 09/O7/2004 - 1 2 7 - 111 Chestnut Avenue RE 623(Rev. 2/00) - 62300200B015 Page 10 of 18 SCHEDULE 2 111 CHESTNUT AVENUE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION Utility water Company ....................... California Water Service Rates ................................................... As Shown Square Annual 100 cf Rate/ Annual Irrigation Footage Feet /Year 100 cf Expense Ground Cover 1,726 Turf 897 4.5 78 1.92 . $148.93 5.5 49 1.92 94.60 Subtotal $243.53 Number Rate/ Annual Meter Charges Size Meters Month Expense Irrigation Meter 1 inch 1 25.13 $301.56 Subtotal $301.56' TOTAL WATER EXPENSE $545.09 09/07/2004 111 Chestnut Avenue- RE 623(Rev. 2/00) - 62300200B015 Page 11 of 18 RESERVE STUDY This report documents the results of a Reserve Study performed by JOHN H. BEATTY & ASSOCIATES for the 111 Chestnut Avenue Homeowners Association. It provides an analysis of the repair and replacement requirements for the Association's major- components and recommends a Funding Plan to meet those obligations. This Reserve Study was pedormed in compliance with California Civil Codes §1365 and §1365.5. The essential elements in performing the Reserve Study are: 4. 5. 6. 7. ' 8. 9. 10. A review of the Association's Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) to identify the common area which the Association is obligated to maintain; An estimate of the projected Useful Life of each those components determined to be included in the Study; An estimate of the projected Remaining Life of each of these components; An estimate of the Replacement Cost'of each of these components; Projection of the total Annual Contribution necessary to maintain these components; An estimate of the amount of Cash _R?. _s.?rves necessary to maintain these components; Disclosure of the current amount,* if any, of AccumUlated Cash Reserves actually funded; Disclosure of the Percentage of the P~0jected Reserve Requirement actually funded; Disclosure of 'any determined or anticipated Special Assessments; A general Statement of Methodology.. SCOPE This study is aligned with the Association's fiscal year and establishes the pedod of time for which Reserve Expenditures and Reserve Fund Balances are projected as a thirty (30) year period beginning with the Association's First Fiscal Year of which the first twenty (20) years are presented herein. METHODOLOGY A Cash Flow' Methodology versus a Straight Line MethodOlogy was used to determine the Annual Reserve Contribution. These different methods may result in different funding balances.The underlying premise of ti'ils reserve funding approach is to establish a contribution level that will allow the Association to maintain a positive balance in the Reserve Fund while meeting determined maintenance obligations. The Cash Flow method allows the Association to achieve this goal without the unnecessary overfunding of Reserves. Also, as the interest earned on the reserve fund will not totally offset inflation, projections were made using the current inflation factor and an average interest rate on fully insured certificates of deposit. In preparing this Reserve Study, a comprehensive list of major components was developed by JOHN H. 09/07/2004 111 Chestnut Avenue -129- PROJECTED EXPENDITURES Page 14 o! 18 RESERVE COMPONENTS Assumed Annual Inflation Rate.. 3.0% Current Estimated Repai~'/Replace Usfl Rmng Cost Life . Life LANDSCAPING: 1 - Irrigation Timers 1,250 2 - Irrlgallon Valves 500 3 - Plant Stock 2,000 4 - Tree Maintenance 850 5 - Backflow Device 2,000 LIGHT FIXTURES: 6 - Bollard Lighting 13,300 7 - Entry Lighting 1,200 PAVED SURFACES: 8: Driveway Pavers 10% 4,853 g - Concrete Walk Repair 15% 772 10 - Storm Drain Repairs 3,000 RECREATION FACILITIES: 11 - Play Struclures 1,700 ' - Picnic Tables 4,200 r~o - FIBAR Play Surface 2,113 C I~ ER: ;,r - Reserve Study 1,500 UNSCHEDULED ........................... 5.0% 201 TOTALEXPENDffURES 12 12 6 6 4 4 6 6 20 20 20 20 20 20 10 10 5 5 20 20 20 20 15 15 7 7 3 3 Fiscal Yr. I 2 3 4 5 6 201 -201 · 207 · 207 7 8 9 10 2,185 580 985 2,460 6,332 869 1,007 2,522 1~591 1,739 1,900 214 220 227 233 240 248 255 263 · 1,805 2,405 1,095 3,537 2,763 2,707 2,155 7,602 09/07/2004 111 Chestnut Avenue PROJECTED BALANCES Page 16 of 18 3,843 7,839 10,395 "~ 12,502 16,079 17,374 19,602 22,052 25,231 23,121 BEGINNING BALANCE EXPENDITURES (Inflated $) RESERVE CONTRIBUTION Per Unit Per Month (8 units) Percentage Increase to Reserves SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS INTEREST AFTER TAX ENDING BALANCE 09/07/2004 Fiscal Yr. 3.0% 1.0% 0 201 4,025 41.93 0.0 0 lg 3,843 2 3,843 207 4,146 43.18 3.0 0 58' 7,839 3 7,839 1,805 4,270 44.48 3.0 0 91 10,395 4 10,395 12,405 4,398 .45.81 - 3.0 0 114 12,502. 5 6 7 8 9 10 12,502 16,079 17,374 19,602 22,052 25,231 1,095 3,537' 2,763 2,707 2,155 7,602 4,530 '4,666 4,806 4,950 5,099 5,252 47.19 '48.60 50.06 51.57 53.11 54.71. 3.0 : . 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 142 166 184 207 235 241 16,079 17,374 19,602 22,052 25,231 23,121 111 Chestnut Avenue PROJECTED BALANCES BEGINNING BALANCE EXPENDITURES (Inflated $) RESERVE CONTRIBUTION Per Unit Per Month (8 units) Percentage Increase to Reserves SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS INTEREST AFTER TAX ENDING BALANCE Fiscal Yr. 3.0% 1.0% 49,175 40,191 42'211, 31,371 J "' 28,517 30,527 . -~ 25,636 · · 5,608 11 12 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 23;121 28,517 25,636 31,371 34,210 30,527 33,688 40,101 42,211 49,175 270 8,722 287 3,308 10,094 3,429 323 '5,043 343 50,897 5,400 5,572 5,739 5,911 6,088 6,271 6,450 6,653 6,852 7,058 56.35 58.04 ~ 59.78 ' 61.57 63.42 65.32 67.28 '69.30 71.38 73.52 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 257 269 284 326 322 31 g 368 410 455 273 28,517 25,636 31,371 34,210 30,527 33,688 40,101 42,211 49,175 5,608 09107/2004 · ' 111 Chestnut Avenue COMPONENT QUANTIFICATION ~'age IU ol IU Current Estimated RESERVE COMPONENTS Repalr/R. ePlacs Usfl Rmng Assumed Annual Inflation Rate 3.0% Cost Life Life Quantity Unit of Measurement Unit Cost Remarks LANDSCAPING: 1 - Irrigation Timers 2 - Irrigation Valves 3 - Plant Stock 4 ~ Tree Maintenance 5 - Backflow Device LIGHJI' FIXTURES: 6 - Bollard Lighting 7 - Entry Lighting PAVED SURFACES: 8 - Ddveway Pavers 9 - Concrete Walk Repair 10 - Storm Drain Repairs RECREATION FACILITIES: 11 - Play Structures ~ '. - Picnic Tables r..o ~ - FIBAR Play Sudace i O~ ER: ~4 - Reserve Study 10% 15% 1,250 12 12 500 6 6 2,00O 4 4 850 6 6 2,000 20 20 13,300 20 20 1,200 20 20 14 2 4,853 10 10 5,709 772 5 5 735 3,O0O 2O 20 I 1,700 20 20 2 4,20O 15 15 3 2,113 7 7 845 1 timer I fund 1. fund' I fund I device 1,500 3 3 fixtures fixtures square feet square feet fund structures tables square feet study 1,250.00 500.00 2,000.00 850.00 2,000.00 950.00 600.00 8.50 7.00 3,00.0.00 850.00 1,400.00 2.50 1,500.00 09/07/2004' 111 Chestnut Avenue IN/TIAL STUDY AND PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DE~TION Application Number P02-0020 CI.TY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO. 111 CH-ESTNUT TOWNHOM ES l>aEPX~r~ ~¥ CrrY o~ SouT~ SAN F~Nc~co ' ?~G D~ION 315 So~ S~ ~~co, ~ 94080 FEBRUARY 1, 2003 -138- TABLE OF CONTENTS Page -140- INITIAL STUDY/Mm~^"r~ N~r_.A'nv~ D~Cb~RA'nON 1 'J 1 cHEsTNuTTOWNHOMES PAinE i -141- INITIAL ~"I'UDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION "l 1 1 CHESTNUTTOWNHOMES PAGE TABLE 01~ CONTENTS 2~ag~ LIST OF ~'IGL.IRES 2. I:T.O/~Cr Srr~ PLA~ ....................................................................... . 1/ TABLES -142- INITIAL STUDY/MiTISATED NEC-.-.~TIVE DECLARATION 1 '~ 1 CHESTNLITTOWNHOMES PA~ iii MITIGATED "N EGAT 'DEC ON APPLICATION This Mi~ated Negative Declaration (Application N, rml~ar: P02-0020) is for the proposed 111 Chestnut Townhomes development. The Project obiective is to subdivide the 0.52 acre' lot into S lots and common.area, and Consm~ detached s/ngle imm]7 dw~_ll;ngs and 2 attached single/am;ly dwellings w/th landscaping and on-site LOCATION PROJECT DF. SCRIPT~ON The Proiect ~,ohres subdividing the site into 8 lor. s and common area, ~ng +.tie will be provided w/th small prrv~e yards and g~rage pa~.~2A~s i~6 ~he' ~&,~l ~'~ be Francisco Municipal Code 20.125. The applicant h~s ~entativety a~eed to provide on-ske affordable POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS I~EQUIRING MITIGATION more defied discussion o£ these impa=s. cre~rlng air pollutxms ~ia dust ~mi.~siorm. -144- INITIAL .STUDY ! MI'n~,ATED.NEGATIVE DECLARATION ' .~':I 1 CHESTNUTTOWNHOMES · '~AGE 5 MITIC~TION MF_~UI~$ FOK POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS The fon~ 2 ~ ~ of ~fion m~ for potm~l~ ~;~ Pro}e~ ~p~. 1. PSorm ~e ~ce of ~yp~ ~e a~t ~bm~ ~ co--on p~ · e ~'s CMff phnn~. ~ foH~ m~es' ~ rec°mmm~d ~or ~on h co--on con~ to co~l ~e ~ ~m;~iom: ~ ~ m~ek~ ha. llng so~ sm( md o~ loose ~~ or r~e ~ ~ to ~ 1~ ~o fe~ of ~eebor~ -. l'~ior m fl~ issue.n ce of any permit, the applicam .~hall .s~mk a StormW==' Pollmion .. si:~ll iar. k~l~ ~em M,~e.m~'r ~-'acfices i~ accoz~=~ee with &~ reg-l~6om o~-I~ ed ~..the shall abo i~dud~ s~orm wa~er ~oltu~ion comro! devices ~c~ ~.kers to'be'~:alled ~o _.m'evem .poii,~-~ eom emed~ ~e C~'s morro &ai~ ~em. md $~ ~cisco ~. The ?1~ -145- INmAL STUDY I Mm~ATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION :11 '~ .CHESTNUTTOWNHOMES · PAGE 3. Prior to ~e ~ce of ~ B~ P~: ~e ~H~t ~~e ~ q~ed ~o~c . 1~ of 45 ~ ~ md comp~ ~.poHdes con~ed ~ ~e ~'s No~e El~mt ~ ~ P~ ~e proposed ~o~ ~ be;robie= to ~e r~ md a~roved M~or ~o~c me~~= N ~e ~~. md ~bm a repo~ to ~ ~'s 4. hos.t~ i== of :~'p~:~=. appfcmt.~ pro~ ~=.~ ~h a co--on · m indues ~es ,to re'ce co~on no~=.~e.p~:~-he ~bje=m. ~d appm~ of the ~'s c~i~ bio& (0 w=e ~i~ed ~o be potm~ ~emed ~e Proje~ Nvol~ at leto one ~ n Aes~elics Hazards and Hazardous Materials ·, .u PopulalJon and Housing, [] Agriculture Resources · Air Quality [] Biological Resources [] Cultural Resources r~ Geology and Soils · Hydrology and Water Quality [] Land Use and Planning r~ Mineral Resoumes .· Noise ~.-'~,: Public,Services ,.':.....,.. '= Eecrsa~0n '. '.' . i' :"-' · ~=. TranSp0rmli0n and cimiit~on ..... ":' n' Utilities ~d' Se~s "'". t/:"" " ' '":' !' ~:" " CHIEF PL&NNER'S DET~ATION ' ::':.' ':,, .~., :,. v :,...:i.,i Afl:= due comidemtion, the C:.~;e5 Planner of the City o£ South San Frmc~sco ]:~'foUnd that w/th the impleme, nmtion of mitigation measures identified in thi.~ Mifi~ated Neg'arive Declaration, the proposed Project will not ~]aave 'a';si~ni~q cam :effect'on the environm~mt:' There:fore, ,rdaeProject will not require the .preparation' of.an Environmental Impact' Report, and.the requirements of the California Env/ronmeatal Qxmli.,ty ~ (QEQA) will be met 'bythe preparation, of,thls ~v'x~ecl, Ne~tive Declination. This decision is supported bythe following find/ngs: '..'.":. ', "-' :: - " The Project does nor have the potential to ctegra& the quality of the enviro~m~ substantially redme the h.xbitat, of fish or w/ldlife species., cause,a fish or,wilde poptflzfion to drop bdow sel/-sus~n{ng levels, threazen t°~allrnln,re a planz or animal corem,ruby. It . does nm recluce the number or restrict the range o£ a rare or endangered pl,mlt or unim,l~ It does nor ellrninure important examples of ~e m-jot periods o£,Cal{qorni~ 4istory or pre- history because: there is no identified area at the Project site which is habkat for rare or -146- INrnAL STUDY/MmGATED NEGATIVE DEOLAPATION -1 1 '~. CHE,.~UT TOVVNHOMES · PAGE 7 endang~r6d species, or Whi~ represents uizique ~Wiples of California history or Pr/'hFtozy. ha addin'on, the Project is w;,hi,~ r. he scope o£ use contemplated in the General Plan; and the Project does not have any.ui~hqcam~, unavoidable adverse impacts. Implemmtazion of sped/ied mivi~on.meam~es .,wfll avoid or reduce the effects 6f:the Project on the emfironm~nr'andtherebyavoid.a=y~hqe=n:impacts. ""-'i .: .' .': ," - ' :." '. ','. ~'.' .'- ..... ~' "' :'. i"-=..' . ::,..i,... :.'i'. '~'' :'.<:, . ' '"':" " b. The Project does not have the potential to .achieve shou-ierm :enViroi~n~n~=i goals to the disadwv,=~ ofiong~:e-tm mm ~-,-,~1 go~ 5 ..... ' ~l'rl~ ' . ' 5: i _'." .."~: ;" ."' ":5' · '" '-', -.~ '. · : .~ '. "7'". ,:" ,~"'".'] : 2 · '. c. The Project does no~ involve impacts that are individually llmlved, bm cnm,,h~vety co-~demNe, bemuse the clesca'ibed ?roject will incorporate both Project-spedfic mitigation measures md.mmaulative mi~u'aiion'meam=es to aV°id'~iSimrrt, impacts of ~he Project in · e colin of Continued growth and clevelopmm: in the CAy of Souzh San .Frandsc0. · d. The Project does no: have enviro-rn~nral effects that wiJl cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, eizher directly~orindirecfly, because rhe.proposed:develolam~:wfll enhance the mfi~n5 resicl~nv~=l:buik emdronmenz md.improve the appearance of the area, and all adverse'' ~effec-~._:. 0~.tl~ Prgject ~ be~.m. ~gam. {5o.m in~i~cant.level... ,.. ". ': ' :.'/::' 7:' '7" ' ',.-' ?". :.,5:'.'.~' ?i'.~'~.:'.:,-'.','., .-."i '·.:: ii·;' ::.:.i?'... /'" I'*LVBLtC .t~v~.EW.-.- :, .. ....... -,..-. ?:.:.C. :.,.: :i:-5,, .:? :"--..--....' -', '. · The Inivlal Szmtsr.una Proposed 1Waxdg'ated.Negazive De~l~c~on ~Bl~be cirm,lured fora 30,day l:nablic review perioci Written oomm~ms rn~ be mxbmkv, ed.to the follo_w;ng =aa-em . 5' - - szeve 'carlson, S~vilor' Planner Cizy of South San Frandsco Deparv~W. 0f Economic and Co~,~,,-~y Developmmz 315 Maple _Avenue SourJa San Francisco, CA 94083 Telephonm 650.877.8535 Adoption of thelVFul, g-ated N%~ative Declaration does not .consdrme approval olde'Project which is a separate action to,be token N/the planning Commission and the South:Sm.Francisco.City Council. Appro.w2 or.d,nl,l of the Pa-oject can rake,place OLab~y aft= the.lVl',~u-ated Negative .: Ded,razion has been adopted. . " :~-. '" ." .... i..!-~::. ..... ..~. .,.- "-' LEAD AGENCY ': ~:"~ :"': "' The Lead Agency for ,_hk IVFvfisated Nega~re Decl=mtion is r. he City of' Somh san Francisco Depmu.uern of Economic md Commmi~ Developmerm :.~ ' ' ?-- ?: ' -147- INmAL STUDY / Mmr_~'m_~ NEGATIVE DECLARA'nON 111 CHE~TNUTTOWNHOMES PAGE On the basis °£.the evaluation in thi.~ Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study: I t~aad they the proposed Project COULD NOT have a sight'cant effect on the env/ronrn.~% and a/NEGATIVE DE(22_RATION will be prepare& I find rh~r akhough the proposed Project could have a si~i~qcant 'effect on the 'enVironmeah" there will not be a .~5;~m effect in ~ case because revisions in the ~oject have been m~le by or agreed m by r. he Project proponem. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DE~.&R/kTIONw~l be prepared. ' ".. · ' ,:... -.! :,. I find ~h~r the proposed ?roject MAY have a ~i~{Sir~m; effect on the environm~vw; and an ENVIRO~AL IMPACT REPORT is required. . : :' ~::i,., :'.';."..'-" :. I findtha~ the proposedProiect MAYhave a pot~rm~llysign~eant anpact or..potenml}7 sidle,am unless r~i~ed~ impm on the env/ro~,m, bm z leas~ one eft'e: 1) haS'been adequard7 md in an earlier doo~_~, pummm to.~plieable.legal s~andard~'ma 2)'has been addressed by mifi~on measures based on the earlier ~ as desmbed on madaed sheets. A~ ENVI~O~AL IMPACT I~POKT/s required, Ix~ k mu~' ~nalyze onlTthe effects ~ rem~inl:o be addressed. ·. i ..... 5 ".':.-i. '. · '. I ~d th,? a~rhO~,~ T~ prop0sec~ Project could have a ~q~cant eHect on the environme~ became all pc~nvi,lly'~;4~eam effects .(a) have been ~ulyzed adequarelTin ma earlie~ EIR or 'NEGATIVE DECLAK~TION p~ ~o applicable stmdarch, and (b) havebem avoided or mh4gated purse,ute m *h,r earl/er EIR orNEGATIVE DECLARATION, indu~'refi.~ionS' or mifi~afion meamres rh~, are imposed upon the proposed Pr0je~' n0rhlns flirflaer is'require& Thomas C. Sparks, Chef Phnn~r -148- STUDY/Nlm~TF_D NEGA11VE D~Cb~P~'nON 111 CH~TNUTTOWNHOMES · PAGE 9 The ske topognphy slopes north to .south md w~l require minor gzarl;ng. The ~e is bordered by single f,~ dwo_ltbgs and apmmems. The site h~_~ i~odmecl Iancbcaping co~ o£ groundzover and shrubs throughom the si~ C~~TION CHARA~TICS The Project site is prlm,nly accessible from Chesmuz Avenue. Zolq]2qG The Project site is curremt7 zonedMed~m DensityResidenrbl District (R-2-H). The application involves rezo~ng the site to I-rtgb Den~ty Residential (R-3-L) in ~,lf~llm~nr of the CkT's adopted C-eaeral Plan. GENERAL PLAN The site's General Plan Land Use &signadon is High De~V ResH~l: Srr The Project site is owmd byMaoe Tjoe, I .~% Tjoa and l~udy Sastra. I>ROJ'ECT CONTEXT AND DESCRI?TION The Project Ske Pbnis show,~ in F~tre 2. The Project would imrolve subdivi~g the site into 8 lots and common area and consmz~on of 6 detadaed and 2 aztached ~ngle f~m~ dwellln~ ~ -149- It]mA' .~TUDY / Mmr~A'rF_D NEGATIVE DEOLARATIDN '1 1 1 OHESTNIJTTOWNHOMES · F~AGE 10 provided on ~ke in ~o.mr,~es. The site will be hndscaPed wkh phy are~ and small pri~tc -150- INmAL STUDY/ MITI~TED NEGATIVE DECLARATION '~1 '~ ~1 C;HESTNLITTOWNHOMES · PAGE · "-INITIAL STUDY CI-IECI~IIST Th~ ~e~_k~c pO=iQ,, of the !,,ki,,t Smay be~ bdo~, wlm ~~o= Of impac~ re.oma ~s, for ~I~ ~ no ~em~t of m &e Proje~ bede no ho-6ng ~ n~ ~ ~hln &e Pmje= ~e ~ ~ need r© be moved m ~le ~e Pmje= to pm=e& A ~less than si~ifica~' respome · ~e m~ be pmm~ for m m~nm~t~l mp~ ~e ~e p~e, or o~ f~es o~ ~e Projem ~ ~pose~ wh& w~d llmk ~e ~t o~ ,hk imp~ m a l~d of "le~s ~an significa~.~ ~omes ~ ~e ~ ~e ~= of ~e Pmje= wo~d be ~le~s .tban si~ifi~nt ~ miHga~on' N~e ~ ~m m~es, re.ce potm~ Pmjem-~ed m~om ~em m a 1~ Envimnmantal Factors and Focused Questions for Potentially Less Than Less Than Detarminafion of Environmental impact Significant Significant $ignh~cant ..................... Im. Pagt ...... with .... !mp_a~ U~gation AESTHETICS -- Would the'Project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic [ ] vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, [ ] including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual [ ] character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or [ ] glare, which would adversely affect day or ni[lhttime views in the ama? No _ Impact. ........ [ ] [ ] ['x] .[ ] [ ] ix] [ ] IX] [ ] [ ] ix] [ ] Seuing~ South San Francisco's urban d~rs~r h one ot: conmasts wlrhln a visuallywelI defined serdng, San Bmo MOlmmlrl [0 T.~le north, the ridge along Skyline Boulevard to the west, and the San Francisco Bay ro r. he east FroM& the C~with distinctive edges. The CAy is contained in almost a bowl h'ke ~ashiom by hflk on th.rea sicbs. The terrain mn=~s fzom r. be flatland~ along the water ~o hi11.~ east and north. I~lk are vimTble ~om all parts o~: the Cky, and Sign I-~ and San Bruno Mountain (which is ourxide CAy 1links) b ~e diszance ~re ~ b. dm,&.~. M~ch o£ the CAy'$ ~opography is rolli~ retaking in ~mm: views from many nei~horhoods. Geographically, r. be CAy is reladv~ small, exmncting apprmHmutely ~wo miles in a north-somh direction and abouz free ~fl~s ~om east ~o west_ Souzh San Francisco's in~ roo:s are rezflected in ks urban character, espedal~y in ks eas~em -151- I~Jrr' ~' ~'m r'~,, I :V-']~A'T~_D NF_.GATIVE DECLARATION 11 'I CHESTNUTTOWNHDME.~ · PAGE.'12 parts. Almost 20.perCent of Sou..San. ~rmxcisco's. ]and ~.oc~pi~d ~ ~d~ ~ ~o~g Ske Description. a) Scenic~¥istas . Impact T~.sho/dofS'~. For the purpose of assessing impacts of a proposed Project on scmic vistas, the threshold o£ si~ific:mce is exceeded when a Project would resuMn the: obstruction.oLa: ~ "~, designated.public ~, .or in the placement of an arguably offensive.or nega~e-appe~ object '. · with~ such a ~ Any dear con~llct with a General Plan policy or other.adopted pknning policy regarding scenic vistas.would.also be consideredapotentialllxi~iSieant:adverse environment.."~. impact. · 5 . · · .--.:-.. · · : : .. .... . .:::: . .... .... '5 .". ':' 't i,. :'v,(.. :,..... i .-~:' ~. The Project site is not located w/thin any formally designated scenic ~ Therefore, the proposed ' .Proj ect would have no.:~impacti~ja' a-s~;enic'.,AS~ i'~. ......... : ,~... ".. :,:~ .:: ':-':' 'i:. 7 :..' .": i:7 ',.';: .'7: ':.'~ 'i.":: ¥ 7-'.. :, :'. "7: ...... : ..... . · ' ' ' ' :': ': :'~' ~" .:.:*~i' ": ": ;:'?'.':: ':.:i. '. b') Scenic ResourCeS' :":: ' "'~ :"-:"::'- ..... .... ': '- -"-: ",.::.v.-- ........ Th~esho/d of $~~. Any-Project-related ~cfion that would substantially d~rn~e scenic resources 'regarded as a sig~qcant environm~_~tal impact. '"-;' '.. :."~: .' :.'?;~:' ;. '.,i....:~, ~;. ,....;' :."/',...,.'. "~, · The Project would have ~o impact on scenic resources ~itS~;n a' stat~ 'Scenic ~;'fin~e itisnot located on a state scenic highway - ' : c) Visual Character Inzpact ' ..., "· ~':'..':: -~,"- . :",i',:-'.:, ::'.: · .. ',..~... :. -,~...,...,..' .:. , .: substantially degrade.the ex/sting v4_s~,~I character or quality;of, the ,site and its sunoundings. :'.:"~:[. i'" .~,-.-".,i::-', :.' The proposed lh'oject would be located in an area ~hose visual ~'.h~'act~c~'tPrimadty, Conl_~i~ o£ residen~] uses. Bu~rti~gs in the ~mwediate project vicinity:are one-to three stories in helot. The ?roject, consisting o£ 8 new. detached two md three, story single family dw~1tln~ anfltw6 amc&ed single fam~ ctw~l~inEs unit attached 3 stories in heigtm The new development would continue the trend toward increased number of dw~11i.gs per lot and fi:eased h~i~r, as provided in the City's adopted General ?lam The proposed devdopnaent would ha,Te no adverse effect :'. ' ' · - '~.5 '.'.. F:' . ~ Dyett & Bh=~=~.So~h &m.F'rar~m C-~ra2P~. £xL~ngCo~6~ca~ar~P~g~, 1997, p:4-2, 4-10, 4-15. -152- INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION "J 1 1 .CHESTNUT TOWNHOMF_..S" F3AGE 13 chara~er of the si'ce or ks surrounding. The new.building'harm"been designed to refle~ the.gm~ral resident/al developm~m pattern and will add mbsranfial landscaping. The d~velopmem has been redesigned to be compazi~le wkh the =bred neiEhhorhood arr-hi*ecrure. Views rJxu the si~e will be par~l}y of fully bb~_l~_d by n~ighhoring properties:However, ~ao sc=lc vistas wD be'blocke& Therefore, the Proje= would have less than a significant impact on Visual &~racter. '~: ' d) Light or GIare ' .:' Impact ~of$i~' The Project related creation of mynew source of mbmmfia/]i~t or glare *.ha* would adversely affect day or -.ighwlm~- views.in the areawould be regarded as a 6~ific_am " ''. ' i . ,' : : '5'..'. :.::.: ;: 1: '.',':.> : ~. : '). "' i' '5 i......''. The South San Fmcisco Police Department wfllrequire tha~ the lighting be-provided for.the ~eet, plaTground and.ou=:Bor'l~,t&,s areaz. :T',igh~-g ite6~ ~ be r .e~ired would caxt-liglx'in a dow==rd direction.to ~ off-site glare Givm compll,nce ~ Police Depart=em require=mr=, the.umoum of Ii. md glare emanm~ fi'om'the Project site is .... ..' con6dered less than significant. Ir is nor ~-pected tha~ sources of dayfim,.~e would be ."" ~ ~sso~ared wkh the Project. .. ......: .... '. . . .:-:..._ !t. . '. :' ..." ." ',,~',-.>..}[..' '. "-,:.~.",: ..:":: '..'.:[." ,-. ii. .' .... }. :. : I1. Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for Potentially ,. r.':Less Than .... 'vLess Than '" '" Determination of Environmental Impact Significant Significant Significant No Impact with Impa~., :: <imPact.: M~ation AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining '- .' whether:impacts to a, gdcultural resources are: .,,. -.-.....- ~. :-.: ',?.: :.:-.-: .::'~ ~..:', .:--..:' ~. ;," .:'~. .... :.~, .':.: %"..;i: .: '.: signi~cant,environmental, ef~cts, lead agencies may, refer to the california Agricultural Land EvaluaUon and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to usein assessing impacts on agdm!ture and. i. -- farmland. WOuld the Project: a) Convsrt Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Stetewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use?':-:. b) Conflict.with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) involve other changes in the existing . environment'which, due to'their 10mti0n: Or . naars, could =suit in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? · ] [ ] :" [ ] "['X] [ ,..,] .-.,[ :,] ..[ .,] · x] :.[ 3.... :.[...].. l.x] a) Convea~-g Prime Farmland . . The Project area is in =he mid~ o£ an urbm area that h=: alreacly been developed in a ~i~ of' in~ and commerelal uses. No p~qrne Farmlands, Unique Farmlands or Farml~cls Importance have bm idenfi~d at the Project ~ite. Project develOpmezrt would not resmk in the -153- ,~.,r-- w ~--' ,,-~v I ~/,--ma ---=~ \'=~t'"V--_ DECLARATION q '1 '[ OHESTNUTTOWN[..qr)~'~ · ~"m: ~/' conver~on of ~LU7 Prkne Fro'roi.nde, Unique Farml.nck or Fm'ml.nck non-agricu[unml,uses. The project does not involve any fmmtmd, therefore, no,impact w~.o¢cur. b) Conflict with Agricultural Zoning There are no areas in the vicinity of the Project site that have been zoned for agrimla=al uses and no parcels near the Project site,are, currently under Willi~rmon Act contracts. Project development would not result in the conversion of any land currently zoned for agricultural use ~or.in Act contracts to non-agricultural uses. The project does.not involve,any :~armtand, 'therefore.. ho.impact ..will'occur. ~ ..... c) Non-Agricultural Use.Farmland Conwrsion . . The Project involves no activities that would remit in conversion of farmt~nd or Other land in agricultural to non-agrimkt uses. The project.does.,no.~ involve any£armi,nd, therefore :no..impact '..w;21 occur.. :..5.':~? :?'.~-. ,. :.. i-::.. :. Environmental Factors. and Focused Questions far.". '.-Potentially.. , 'Less Than Determination of Environmental Impact Significant Significant -. Impact with Miti~lafion · t.sssInan. ...... '- Significant. ~ No .. Impact Impact · AIR QUAI:ITY--'Where available, the significance · ':..:' [ ] criteria established by the applicable airquali~.y · management or air pollution .control dis~ct may be relied upon to make.the'following dete~inations. Would the-Project: : :.{':" "': ': .... ' ........... · a) ,, ~Conflict with.or obstruct implementation of the...: .. applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air qualityviotati0n? ...: ~.~ .... ,;' - ...... c) . .Result in a cumulatively considerable net... 'increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed .quantitative.thresho ds .for ozone" precursors)? :'".'::':-.~ :,: {'::..' "'"~. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substential' .- pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? . , :ix] ..: .[ .[ ..] .:[.x] .] ...[ x] [ ] [ ] Set'ting "' The arnoum of a given pollutant in the atmosphere/s determined by'the rate of release and the atmosphere's ability to transport and dilute the pollutant..The major determ;n~nts of transport and clilurion are wind, atmospheric stability, terrain and, for photochemical pollutants, sunshine. -154- INmAL STUDY/MmGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 11 1 r:HE. aTNUTTOWNHOMES · PAGE ~e p~~ ~& ~ So~ S~ F~co re~ ~ a r~ 1~ po:m~ ~or ~ poH~o~ ~Q~ ~orccs ~ md r~om .r~ng ~ ~n. so~des md ~ ~e p~ AlE QU~ DATA SU~Y FOR a~ ~CISCOAND ~OOD C~, 19~2~ ... · Pollutant Standard Monitoring Site Days Standard ExGoeded 1998 . -1999 . '.-2000 Ozone Federal 1-HourSan Francisco 0 0.... ' .... .-.O Redwood C~ 0 ....... 0.. ....... 0 Ozone Smt~ 1-Hour San Francisco 0 :..~0 .... :0 · ..... Redwood O~ "0 " 0 0 Ozone Federal 8-Houfl San Francisco Redwood Cit7 0 0 ' 0 PM~0 Federal 24-Hour ,.San'Francisco -0 .'0 :0 · Redwood City ,t) ; ':0 ::. 0 PM~0 Stat~ 24-Hour San Francisco -155- INITIAL STUDY/MmGATED NEGA1W'E DECLARATION :"[11 CHES'rNUTTOVVNHOMES; PAGE 16 = · ~ '" 'Rectwooa City Carbon.Monoxide ..Stata/Fecteral .... San ~Francisco. B:Hour Redwood' City 0 0 0 Nitrogen'Dioxiae" State 1;Hour .... ,San Francisco ·'0 t "'O "" 0 ' · '"-~' :" '""t-:;' '. ~l'~edwoodClty ' :;,:;0 "t '"'"0'' ' 0' ''.'; ureas Board, Aeromatric Dina Analysis and Management (ADAM), 2001, Si~ ~lds. The CEQA ertvironmea~ checldirc provides five Claerdons regard/ng air q~..'ty imp .a~ .si~!~c~c.e. '~z~e ~v~l%flae..fi~iRcmce crkeria.estabJi~ed by,.flae.app~c,~ble ~,.." o£ s,~,~caace.'£A.AQMD CEQA G~.~a provide the ~ollow~ng-defir~fiom;.o£ a Sj~;5;ca~'air A project,conm~.. ~ tg,:,,c~..bpn moaozi& (CQ)., coac.~t~om czceedJ~,g't}zc, ~ St~e.Amh;=t ~r, ~ Strand of 9 p~ p= mO~;0n' ~pm) ~v~ged ov~ 8 ho~ °r 20 pp= for 1 'ho~ wo~d co~i~ed to ~ve a ~~t ~pa~. . ..~ proje~ ~ ~e pot~ ~ ~e~ ~ose ~~s o5 ~e ~bEc to obje~o~ odors ' ~ . ."'."]- ~'. ..... . ~'...', :~ " ; . ~ ,.. m~es ~or co~ou ~;,~on o5 PM~ ~ ~e approve co~on con, ok ~e to be The San :Frmcisco :Bay.Area'3.ir,:Basirt is 'currmtt~.nor~.atT. ai=a== :Jar ozou~ (st=e ~d ~deral ambiertt standards) and PM~ (stare ambient.stmdarcl). While air quality plam,exi.~ for ozone, .none exists (or is currm~ required)/or ?M~. The/%~o~F~ San Frano~ Bay A~ Ozone : ]3ayhxeaAirQualiryM~nu~ntDistricr, BA.AQMD CEQA G-wT/d'_,neg1996 (revised 1999). -156- INITIAL STUDY/mm~A'm_D NEGATIVE DECLARATION CHESTNUT TOWNHOMEB . PAGE 17' Federal Clean Ak Act. The suate-rn~ntt~ed regional air ~I.'.W' pl~,~ is the Z~y'~lfez 2000 ~ 54'ir P/ar~4 These plans contain mobile source controls, stmio~s°urce.controls and ~o. rtation control measures to be implemented in the region to ~ the rmte and federal ozone standards 'w-kb'in the Bay A.rea Air Basin. .......... : ": "": :-:' :.7:'-'i.,.':. '.'i77...-'_::i.'.5 i:'7-~.. -:~:. ~"'~':i.. 1.1;7 .:': .... .'/ The Project would have no impa~t on any of the ~ as~mptiom nm& in fl~ Feparation..o£ these pl,n~.nor' 0bstr~'imp]~ ~t~ion'0f any df ~e'proPose8 control ~asures 'Co~=i"e8 in th~se ' ' ' ' · .... ' ' "'' "; "i..L;.' '. f. - ' '..., ' . . ..'. , · . L.; " ".'. qmti sm m ..,~..::c.:', '. '.,..'.'~ ",:' '"'-. '..~;'' :',! :?" :i.' ' ";..' ~i~ '". ' : · '..:"..':....'..:b "" ," [] .tlVlPACT.I: :Constmetion~.,'-.The proposed Project would require some,.mi,~or-site · gr~ing and. possible ~-i,,°r soil;importation.: Gr~li,,g md:soil ~,,,li,,g ~cfivities :have a ,~.ig-'~ potezngal,for,cre~-g air pol],,r*r~.'tn.ad.didonto ..'the .A',',~t createcl.durlns.gr~rli~g, substantial dust emissiom coutdbe crmed as?Soil,is loaded,intO :u~&s for remo.val.'.This would be a potentially significant impact of theProject. The Califomla Heakh and Safety Code requires local agencies-not to issue 'grading permits. unul an applicam has demonstrated compliance wir. h notification requirements under applicable~ederalregulmions. TheBayAreaAirQ~l~Ur~,n,~m~ntINzm~'isveStedby · :...:.. the CaI~on~ LegMature with authority ro re~,!ate airbomerpollumnts through both ': inspection and law enforcement, and is.~o:be ~otified ten days.in advance of any proposed gr~dlng and must.provide in~onn~on on the ,mount and nature of pl-nned wonk and methods ~o be employecl.::The purpose'-o£BAAQMD reg,~l~om-is the mlnlm~-,%n.o£, '" ..~ . .~: .i..-:;.: ..-. · ~,r(...:.::,:~.:,',, "".,.: ';:':.' :":~: "5';'" "i · '::" -:..;..'i'..:,::'cv' .,' ..... : ..... q :" '.': -Construction acfiviies ,.would generate extmmt. ~mi~sions fromw~ides/-eqUipment and -.' fl,~ive particulate mutter ~mi.*sions r_h~r_ would af/ect local air q,,~li,y. ~ .... Construction acxivifies would temporar~ aEect local air quality,'c~,~i=g:a temporary ." · incr=ase in particulate dust and other pon=m=. :Dm emksion during p~ods of . consm~on-wonld increase :p .attiazl~e conc~nu~ons at m4~horlng properties...This :... Bay Area.&Sr Quality:M==%~emm= Dimict, Proposed Final Sau Francasco Bay Area Ozone A_~,~em Plan ~or tlae 1-Hour Nmfiomal Ozone Smudm~ June 2001. Bay Area Air ~,=!~y Munagemeu= Dimim,-. ~.4r~ 2000 ~ A/r P/~ and Tri~v~ Au~r~ De~-~ker 20, 20O0. -157- BA_~IQ~/D C2~Q/i G~ provide ~eshol~ of si~c¢ for ~ ~r ~pa~. ~e B~Q~ 6~ce ~eshol~ ~or co~on ~ ~p~.~e b~ed on ~e ~ppro~ass of co~on d~ con~oh.-.~ B~Q~ ~es pro~ ~e~ble .. consol m~cs'for coma ~on ~on of PM~.:.~ ~e appro~:e-co~on con~o~ co~edless-~-s;~c~ .: · · ' :....:.,. ~:.. -. .... . · tVIITIGATION RIEASURE l:.Dust Suppression Procedures. Prior to the isstmnce . of mY permk.the applicam, stroll submit a co~n. plau including mem~es to control ~gkive dust ~mli~,~g measures approved .by the .Bay.~-ea (~,~IO ~enet District (B~QMD). The.pla~ sba/1 be subject zo the review.and approval o£ the.C.i'ty's Chief Pl,!7~.=i The foll~"m~asures are' ree00m,;~&d~f0r indu~On in Waz~ng should be used zo conu'ol dm generation during demolition of mucuzres and ' ."< :' break-up o£ pavement. Cover sll tmc]~ tm, ling soil from the eke. Water'all a~e i0Zc6°~i:' ar~s ailel nviCe' d,;i~: " .,. .. , .. .. ~ "! . ."... -, . .i ',., ~ , ; '.. , '.. or cover stockpiles soil, sand or or.t r rerials can be blow by the Cover all u'ucks h~,]i~g soil, smd, and other, loose matmS~ 9r~equire allmmks ~o maintain .. areas at constructi°n roes. '. Sweep ~eets ct,;.ty.(pmCerablywith water ~e,eper .s) i/_ visible soil m~m-lal is carried.omo adjacent public streets: W~r_h the impbmemadon.0£appropriate ~on.measure.s, impacts on sen~..dve .rece~on.related.~.. to construction'emissions would be reduced to a less than Signifieant levaL ' ' ~ ....... .7 ......... or contribute substantially to au emisfing or projected air quatky violation through vehicle u'ip gauemdon. New vehicle, trips add to carbon m0no~,'d~.:..c0n, gen=adons, near streets th~, rovide access to the site. ' ' .... ' ........... · " ' ' P s Bay Area .65r Quality~~em Dismict, BAg. OR,E) CEOA Guid~lln-s~ 1996 (Revised 1999). -158- INITIAL STUDY/MmGA'r~ NEGATIVE DECLARATION 11 1 CHESTNUT.TOWNHOMES · PAGE' ~ 9 ho~ n~ ~p ~on ~om ~e Proje~ w~ be hss ~ g ~ps. ~Hp ~o~ 4~ Z~o~ ~ ~ = ~ ~ for'~bon mOno~ (&e ~e '~d fe~.~'m~ =e ~) md ~ So~ Sm Fresco ~ r~ 1~ b~omd 1~ of ~°n mono~& ~mP~ed to o&~ p~ of ~e B~ ~ ~e ~o~sed ~je= ~ not ~ve ~ 6~;~r ~ on lo~ ~bon mono~& concm~om. ~or~ Pm~e~ ~on mono~ ~am wo~ be ~ss tb~ r~on-] .~i~om. ~e D~'~ recomm~d*d ~ ~0 d,i~v~de.~ps be reed ~ a ~e~otd for ~,~mfiom ~oje= ,mi~om %=6ore w~d.be bd~ %e B~Q~.~ol& 55 ~ S o~t. .... ~ B~Q~ ~es ~o~e of.s~e rec~ ~0 tO~c ~ COnmmlnamS md~ of i~s. W.=,mples of s~e mc~m'Ndu&"S~OOh, hoW~, rei~ =~ ~ md con~esc~ ~s.. tN~ S~DY / M~ NEeA~ DEC~ON 't 11 C~ T~H~ · PAGE 20 retirement home~, convalescent homes, hospitals md medic~I =l~.ic~. The dose~ s~.~e rece~Ors ~e ~e adjacm~ re~ces, ~ c~e ~d ~e ~].~i& Ei~~ S~ooL -" ~e proposed Proje~ ,co~d ~ose ~e :~fies to .on-si~ ~s~om Proje~'s lo~don ~ea~duces ~e pot~d~ for ~o~e to s~ce e~~ ~t co~d ~ ~m~.~om ffom~e rite to ~e oc~ o~2.9% of~e ~e on ~je~ to ~es, re.om md proce~es of ~e B~ea p~ of its po~ ro ~con~ol.zo~c ~ COntaminant em~siom. ~e: D~ .~ .embl~h ed proce~es for e~mamg ~e ~ ~so~ed ~ ~o~e. ~e me~o~ ~ed ~e combative, ~ ~e ~ ~ep of a ~o:~ep pro'de~s,' ~e'~ ~mates h~ mu~ Of.a'con~m~nam ~o~d be io~d ~ ~e ~ at a spe~c loc~o~ ~e e~mate &pm~ upon produ~on md ~ loc~om ~e second ~ ~volves contaminant ~ ~o~ to ~ose ~osed to k ~ d~~on ~s'~ ~m of bo~ ~o~e p~o~ md ~ not re~ ~ non-cmc~ he~ ~e~ acce~ ~d~ ~e pres~ce of conwo~ on ~ a m~l~ion ~e not approve& Non-approved proje~s pe~ r~ process for ~ ~e ocmpmr of ~ Proje ~p~s ~e ro h~dom or rotc ~ contaminant em~don wo~d be re~ed ~o a l~d of less than dgnificant ~ ~e dose~ se~i~e rece~or md o&~ rece~o~ dos~ ro &e Proje= sire. -160- I NITIAL'STuDY/MITIG^'r~D NEGATIVE DECLARATION t '~ 'J CHF-,.~TNUT TOWNHOMES o. PAGE 21 Impact JT~.~o~of$~. ~ ]~.A_A_QMZ) dcJ~mes Fu]:)l;c c~posu~e to o~e o~ ~ ~ pot~ =~e odors. ~,se odors ~ t~o~ md not ~ to be ~odc~l, ~e Proje= wo~ not'~m '~ o~rs md ~=8ore-w~d not ~ve IV. .b) Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for · Determination of Environmental Impact BIOLOGICAL'RESOURCES-- Would the'Project -- a) d) e) Potentially ' 'Less Than .:Less.Than ' . . Significant Signfficant Signfficant , .No Impact with Impact Impact Mitil~ation Have a subStan"dal adverse effeCt, either directly .or..throu. gh habitat modifica~ons, on any species identified as a card dat~, sensitivs~ or special, . status species in local or regional plans, 'policies, Or regdla~ons, or-by the California Department ofiFish and Game:o~:.U.S..Fish and Wildlife Service? Have a substantial adverse effect on.. ap.), hpa~an hal:Jltat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or.regional planS, policies, regulations orby.the California . Department of Fish and Game or. US Fish and .... . ;.~ .-.':.'._!'~. ,..:~ .. Wildlife Serv ca? :'Have a substantialadverseeffeCt 6n federally protected wetlands as' defined by Section .4.04 of.the Clean Water Act [including, 'but not ... .... limited to, marsh, vernal pool, COastal, etc.) through direct removal', filling, hydrological interruption,.or Other means?.....: ,~. Interfere substantialjy with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildrrfe · species or with established naive' resident or migratory wildlife COrridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resourCes, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Conflict with the provisions of an adopted [ ] Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural. Communit7 Conservation Plan, or other approved -regional, or state habitat conservation plan? "[ '3 "[ .... ] '[' i"] '.[ x] i' ] [ ] [ :.] Ix] [ .X] ,_.[ ,] [ x] [ .] [ ]. ..[ x] [ ] ix] INITIAL STUDY/Mmc.~'ra:) NEG. I~TIVE DECLARATION -161- 111 CHESTN~T~HOM~.~ · PAGE 22 Item¢ z) through d) , . Impact . . .:. The Project site is loc=ed in a krgely residendaI area flnat is for the most part developed While the site is vacant it ]nas been inh-bked by ~ound dw~ltlng rodenrz. The Project wo~d have no impact on any mdangered, threatened or raze species corridors. · f..:.' .... ii':'.. .:' .'.: .'.? ..( '..! i :.. . . :'"..' :-.i: , i'..'.: '" Setting The Project site is surrounded by V~LriOm types of landscaping, including low ground covers, Thresho/d ofY~...-Thd~roject wo~d have a 6~Ficant mvironmeaxal.impact if it were to conflict with any local policies or ordln,nces protecting biological resources, such as a tree pr es arvadon policy' or. orcl in =~ ce,' 'I-hbkat .Conservation Plan,'N ezra-al 'Corem, m ~)r Co13servaI:iolx. The Project ske supports non-native grasses and skmbs. The proposed· project.will imroduce ornamental non-native gro~md covers, .~hrtzbs and zrees. The Project does not conflict with a~ of the above refermced pi=m, policies, requirements or programs. Th~efore~ no impact would occur. Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for Determination of Environmental Impact ''~. .... ,' .: :' : .: , .. , :..~¥ CULTURAL RESOURCES --WOUld the Project:. a) "Cause'a' substantial adverse Change in the Significance.of a-historical resource as.defined in {}15064.5? . :. ........ .: .'., b) Cause.a.silbs{a~lJal adverse changei~ the significance Of an .archaeological resourCe pursuant.to.{}15064.5? ...=:. :~.~i.~..,; .:~ c) ,Directly.or indirectly~destroy.a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geoiogicf~atuie? .' : .:-....... .... d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? [ Potentially",.Less'Than.-, :: Less Than ", ,. 'Significant Significant Significant No impact . with . .! Impact impact 'Mitigation · .' .'.-: ( ' .'~. '. :.'.. '~,......: .:.'.. '.:i. .: .-,. '..., · -.-. .:-[ '"',"~. ~'. '..i.' ' i . ' ".' · [ ] [ ] [ ] ix] a) Historical Kesources Impact 7hresholdofSi~' The Project would have a .~qcant environmental impact if k were to cause a subsr~ti~] adverse change in the si~i~cance o£ a historical resource as defined in 515064.5. -162- }NmAL STUDY / Mmc.-,ATE~ NEGATIVE DECLARATION { 1 1 CHES"I'NuT TOWNHOMES · PAGE 23 The site h~ no historical importance. The ?roiect would not cause a substantial advene change in the si~nhqcance o£ a historical resource as cl~;dned in ~15064.5, since the ~ has no historical value. The Proiect would have a no impact. b) Archaeological Resources · .. Impact · Thrm~/d ofS'~. The..Project would have a' si~i~_mnt enviro~mental:.impact if ii were to cause a substantial adverse change in the .~i~icauce o£ an archaeolo~ resource as de/reed in $15064.5. The ?roiect site is a previously disturbed, developed site where no known arc-b~eological sites.are located and no other sites are idmtified in the. Project's vicinky. The Project would have no impact. c) ?al¢ontolo~cal K~sourc=s/Uniqu¢ G~ologic Features, :... ... Impact directly or in6irecdy ~ a.,,ni~ue paleontological:resource or:~e or No -,,ique paleontological or geologic reran'es have.been nor are ~pe~ted zo 'be iS~-~ied ut the Project site. Therefore, the Project wonld be expected m have no impact on paleomologicaI d) Dismrb~ce of Human Kemains ' · ..... . ~. :.... .. Impact Threshold~Si~' The Project would have a ~i~icant envirmmm,=l impact ilk were.~o remit encountered during site preparation associated wir. h the construction at'.the PrOject' ~ite, all Work shall be halted in the vicinity, and the San Marco County Coroner .~hall be.;in/omaed to d~ea an inve~on o£ the cause of death is required, und to determine if the'-r~malns are:of N~ive _A~_ficau ori~. If such remains are o~.N~ive ~ origi~ the neares~ trial relativ%,as recommend=rlons for u'e~g or removal of such r,maln.% inch~dlng grave goods, with approl:w~e dignity, as required =der Public R~sources Code Section 5097:98.::T~. '. ~...w.0-ule! re.~e ~¢.po~emial It is expected th~ there WOuld be no impact '~.om'the Project ~-dated"i0 r-he disturbance o£ INmAL STUDY/Mince'nm NEe, ATIVE DECLAI~,TION -163- '111 OHEIS'rNLITTOWNHOMES · DA~E 24 VI. Environmental Factors and Focused Questions fo[, .c.'.PotentJa!!y : ..Less Than..:., Less.Than Determination of Environmental impact Significant Significant Significant No Impact .with !mpact Impact ', ' ' '~:. -:" '~ ' :'Mitigation ' '~ GEOLOGYAND SOILS--:V~ould the Project: ~ - ........ ·: .... :.' '.:':-' : .... ' .,,"' a) c) ':Result in :substan~al soil ere'Sion or ~he'l°ss Of topsoil? Be located on a geologic unit or soli that is Expose people or structures 'to potential substantial .adverse .effects., including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent AJquist- .,:Priolo Earthquake FauLt Zo. niBg,Map..: . issued by the StateGeol0gist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of · ~:a known fault?.Rsfei"t0:Division of.MineS' · ,and Geology Special:Publication 42; · ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii)Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? . 'Landslides? . :,...., .',': '."-,. i..'., - .. [ ] [ ] [ ] · [ ] [ ] [ ] tx] [ ] [ ] · [ ] ] [x] ' .[ 'x] ": ;[ x] !... ~.:: ii,:'. ' :'.~'5~ ~ [ ] [x] unstable, or that would become unstable as a .'result of the Preject, andpotentiallyresultJnon- .. .'~' ,. ::.~.'.'.:, :....',. :.;..:.:: .:i-~:.-; .::.:..:.'/ ...... .:";..-' or off-site landslide, lateml'.spreading,;~.. ",'-~": · .".: · .... ' .'~ ~ ~:'f :..: ',": ..' ';" ~'.:.:::. '. :'--.' '.:' ':-" :'~ "~.: :'.: :" subsidence, liquefa~on or collapse? Bslocatad on expansive, soil, as detined in ..... :.....[ ,~:.:] . ,.... ~.;:[. ,.]. ,,.i.:,[., .!']. ~ ,-,,:~.:[ .-'X...] ..,..:: .'.... "'Table iSJi-B of the"Unlform~uildin9 Cod~' ' '" ' ' '. '" ' ' '": ' .... .{199~), creating substan~al risks to lifeor · ..,i' :~ .... .!.i:::': , ",' ,..i :;.:, ', ...~ ...... .,.): :.,: "::. :.. "t .: '.~ ..' ·" .-;property? .-..~.;..-,~: L,~',~: i!~..'~: .,;:.',;.; t::.:-":.,' · '"',-:.':.':.-' ~' . :...":'::~. ,,.: c_:: ::".. ~': :, .~:,,v..:::, "~ ',::~. :.,:: ,:.; ,. ~'":-, :Have.soils incapable of adequately.supporting. : el' ] ... : ,.,... :.:.[ :: ] ...-:'.:.:[ .,~ ;] . ' .:[ ..-X] .:,:: ~,. :...5 the Use of Septic tanks or altemativi~ waste " ". ~ :; ~7, ~ '.;' :"; '~ ". L~ " '"'[. ' ' ' .'~ 'i;-: ' water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of .waste water? Setting .... ': :..:...!... '~. :.. ?:,.. '. .' ~ ... ;: : ..... .' '.~."'..' ~, :!.:'-.': .' '.1'.:~....:".'! '.'.:, .~" :':~...'.~".. :"..'-',:'" The relative stability and 'composkion.'o£ :different-zYPes o£ soils can, conm'bute .to : 'hazard ~4~lr.~ :.by.'. '. amplgyJng earthquake waves, in=easing susceptibilk'y to liquefaction and landslides, and affecting-"': flood lev'els. South San Fmcisco occupies three §enm'al ~:opographic zones: r. he lowlmd zone, the uplund zone-and.r.b.e'~..zone.~'-.`:The.Proj~ct sMis located .wk.h{,~ the Uplund Zone. "- ' "' -' .... : :/5. ;..: ',-" ~:'"i' .. :" · ' '- . The Upland Zone is comprised o.f.§enr, ly.~:o mocleratdy.::sloping:areas located throughout'the Central south central, and'eastern pon:ions of. theCk'y, gen~between 30 and 200~feet above mean sea ,' l~e], and between $i~.H. ill and the' sour. hem flank of San Bnmo Mounmin."Slopes are commonly between 3 and 15 percent g-,-adien~:. This zone includes the alluvial plain of ColmaCreek, which bisects the area fi-om norr. hwerc ~:o southeast. ,'~ , -,., .. .... - : ."';'~ . -164- INITIAL STUDY / Mm~ATED NEGA'nVE DECLARATION :~[ rl 1 CHESTNUT TOWNHOMES · PAGE 25 The C2W's Upland Zone conasts, p~m:n]y of the':Colm~ and'Merced soil form~om: :. · .... .: '. .. .. .~ ...:,{[.':..~ ."~ -... 2. ~e M=ced Fo~on (~s~ed QTm on geolo~'m~ps) ~':om~ed.of p°or~ co~oS~d to s~-comoH~ted smd md mU ~M~ ~c~ to poor fore.on con.om ~m~..on ~ape md lo~ ~e site ~ vacmt ~e ~te slopes ~om so~ to no~ 6 f~ to 10 feet ~e Proje~ woMd A ~eHm~v So~ ~o= ~ not pr~ for ~e p~ojec~':HO~,.meB~g~Om~ ~y Se~ng ~ordi. g to fie U~d S~es ~olo~c S~ ~olo~c ~p of ~e So~h S= F~ " In 1868 an earthquake web an estknated Mo~t rn=~itude o£ 7.0 on the Kichter scale occurred on the southern segmem of the ~d Fault be~we~ San Leandro and Fremom Since 1800, fora' -165- 18rr~. E~Tor~¥ / MmC~T~ N~,'m~ D~l.A~ou '1 '~ '~ ~H~m'~t.rr'tow~8o~-~ · .I~^oE 2{5 from 6.9_5 to 7.9. in 1999, the ~rork~ng Group on Califom~ Earthquake ProbabiI~ies az the United States Geologic Survey predicted a 70 percent probability of z ma~de 6.7 ~or gremzer earrAquake oc~inthe San Francisco BayArea-by203D. ~'. , · ..' . ::- ':' .- . "~- . Impact ' ' ' Thrvsho/d of S'~' The Project would have a si~ifiemnt environmental impact if it were to expose people or.mumares .tO potential substantial adverse e~ects, associated with the rapture of a known earthq, ml~ fault ' ' '.. ' :.' '" The Project size.is .not within an :Earrhqua~ Fauk Zone, as ,deEmed by the Atquiu-Priolo Earth~ Fault Zoning Act, md. no:known active'or potentially active faults.o-ri~ on the site. The closest Special Srady Zone is the. San-Andreas 'Rift Zone located 3.'75 miles, southwest of the Project site. Therefore~ the'risk:of, sudaze..-fauki-g,is ,considered:to be less:tban"~gnificant.' · ' a)(ii) Exposure o£People or Strucxxtres to Strong Seismic Shaking Impact '~ ' Thm~tdof$i~. The Project would have a ~ificant environm,ntal impact if k were to ':' expose people'or..smactm~$ to pozentiat.mbstantial adverse eHects associated with song'sei.~mlc-. " Impact The prqposed builct~-g!s.occupants 'could be .exposed :madvers'e e~ects rel~ed.to.s,i~rnlc ground sh~Mng_:Conqorm~qnce to the .UniJ~orm B,,ildlng Code would result in rnlnlmi~ng.damage ~ the · building, and occupants. This measure would reduce the impact of s~_i~ic ground sh,18ng to.people who would occupythe builctin~ az the Project site to a level a)(iii) Seismicrl~elated.GroundFailUre~ 'Including Liquefaction~ Thrm~oldof$i~' The Project would have a si~ificant en'dronmental impact if h were to expose people, or.~s .to potential substantial adverse.e~ects associated with ;s~.~mic,rela~ed ground fait=re, inducting lickinG= Saturated, cohesionless soil can liquefy as it exp~ences a temporary loss of shear strengri due to a iron,ant rise in excess pore pressure generated by strong It is ~mt;t~_ly that .loose, samrated.cohesionless soil:is present at the. Project rite,-given ks location. Therefore, no impact~ould occur. ".-,~: .. '.. . .'. :. ':..", '~" a)(iv) Exposure of People or Structures to Landslides Impact . ' .... · ::. .~ Thre~ldofSi~' The Project would have a si~i~icant environmental impact if k were located on a geologic unit or soil ~kaz is unstable, or th= would become unstable as a result of the Proje~ and poten~lly result in on- or oE-ske landslide, lateral spreadi~5 subsidence, liqueSaction or collapse. -166- INITIAL STUDYJ MITIGATED NEGA'nvE DECLARATION 11.1 CHESTNUT.TOWNHGMES · PAGE 27 ~q~e Project s~e slopes Erom som~ zo.norch ~kh,a.C~ The risk o£ landslicli~g on the Project s~te is ,mt~e. ly and is com-idcred b) SubsmmiaI Soil Erosion or Loss o£ Topsoil Impact ' ~~Y~' ~ Project would resuk in a ~fleanr elzwironrnoq~l irn~l; if it were to result in substantial soil erosion or in the loss of topsoil ,i- ,.'. · Size sOils, with the. excepfionO£ Landscaped areas,, are covered with either, asph~k paving or concrete · and have no.exposure'to water 'or wind'erosion forces,, though r~mporary erosion m~.occur cheung constructio~ However, standard.erosion control measures can'be 'employed m reduce thi.~ erosion to negligible levels &uing constructior. Local jurisdizfiom1'rules governing erosion prote~on should be followed during consm~on in order to ensure no impact from the l:~'oject. ."~,. "::' ::" ".!,' 7~ .'. -,'/'.i" . : '. "" ~.!.~ .:.;ii:: ~' ';:: ' ' ',: ... c) Unstable Geological Conditiom Imp ' ' ~C~ :" ,- '...'" 7' "':5.. ' 7 ~.~':"" ' · ' .?" . ' .'".. - ' ..... T/we~/d of S'~&mm..'The Project would have a .6~;~am.environv,~l impact if located on a geologic unit or soilthat is unstable, or thor would become ~,-~r~ble as a resuk of the Project, and pozemially result in on- or off-site lanc{~llde, lateral spresging~ subsidence, liquefaztion or collapse. There wouldbe.no impact;since r. he-Project'w-a2l be requiredz6 adhere ~o the.Uzdform Building Code and.r..he site .is norknown'.to .,be'underlain byunstab!e s0~-o~ geologic.ut&s. ' :.'.-:.. '"-, · :-.'.: Impact Thre~ldofSi~. The Project would'have a si~iSicant mvironrnenrd impact ff located on expansive soil, cre~fi~g subramiaI r~.&~ to life or property. The ?roject site.soils:are ncrc knoxen to be susceptible to..expansion,.and therefore would.have no e) Soils Umuitable for Septic Tanks Impact Threshold of Si~' The Project-would have a.-6~ifi _rant environmemal impact if ir involved' ¢onsmaction of septic systems ha soils incapable of adequately supporting the..use of :septic ranks or alter~e waste water disposal systems. The proposed Project does not include a proposal for septic systems at the Project site, representing INmAL ,STUDY/MmGA'T'ED NEGATIVE DECLARATIDN -167- 111 CHES'TNUTTOWNHOblES · PAGE 28 '.Environmental. Factors andEocused..Questions for :; .dPotentjally .,.. !Less Than VII, Determination of Environmental impact HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -- Would the Project: a) Create a.s~ignificant.hazard to.the public or the. environment through'the rou~ne'tmnsport, usa; · Significant ...Significant L]mpact 'wilh Mitigation ~Less ·Than ..... ;.., ;, ,Significant. Nc .. .. Impact impact ;or'dispOSal df hazardous materials? : : '.:', b) Create a signifioant hazard to the public or ths [ ] [ ] :[~X]. ": ,,[...:.] .. ... environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involviqg the '" '. relaase Of hazardous ~iatefiais intO.the:?v '.'.." . ,.envirOnment?....:.i.:...-~.:;?/-.,~..,,i.-i.:?;,.. ...:~.. .... :.~. ;: ...':...,. .... ~ .,. ,;... _.:: .,:.....,.~ c) Emit hazardous emissions or hand!~.h .:a~. dous , . or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? -. ' - · ' ... d) Be located on a site which is included on a list [ ] [ ] [ .] [ X] ':'.': . .....of hazardous.materials sitesRompiled,.p~rsu, ant 'to'Government 00de Sebtion 65962.5 ~d, as a ': :';: ~' .... "' ': .... '"'-"~ ' ':"' "" ',i, es~]t'Wouldit'Create a:sigtiificanthazard.to the. "¥' · ' public or the'environmant?¥;; :..:.-.:.:;~ ,:., :.:.', ':.,~ -' .. ..... :.,i..:,:. ;,.; ~.,. ;..,. · ~ ....... : .... e) For a Project located within an airport'land use .[ ] [ ] .[ ] [X] ~, plan or where such a plan has not been . :;~:~ }":' '"i-adol~t~Q, Within: tw~ miles of a p,~biib:~iirp~'rt or ..... '.'%~publio:use airpOrt,~,would -the"Proje~,result.in a -':' '~' . **' · . ........ ' *~.;..,.{.~ ~:':: ,..*.:~i..~ .~ ~?,.'..,',",~, "- ..... ...... '", '_..':-'. ..... * ~ ' '~: ..... safe,tE-,hazard for~p.e.,0ple residing,or.worJdng i~, . . · .- .,......,.~...~, - ..:........ ,,.. ';..;,~.~ ;',A .... - ..... ............. ~ ';.:' L ..'~ .~;'; ".' '-"..-..' .';'F."/'~ ' .'.......v .... ". , ,th..e..Project.area? :;'... '.,.," ,..,,.' ....... . - · '~:!'~' c" "'Fof~'Proje~within the vicifi~ 6f a'l~i:i'V~,~e ' ' " ' ":' -" '" ~' ''~ :.. ,, ... ...... . ,,, ...... ~ . ,,-: :: .; ::..!.: ,. : ...: :'- . . , = . airstrip, would the Project result in a safety .... ~) hazard for people residing or working in the Project area? Impair implementation of or physically interfere [ with an adopted emergency response plan or ',emergency.svacua~on.plan??c>!,-,:~,::., ~": -,-~'. ' .... '.. "'- . ~.Expose people or- s~ctures to :a significant dsk.. -~- .~[. of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildiands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? .:' ;-~." ,-~:.- ....... .... · Setting . :...,~ :.- ,-... .. , . . ,,...,,.:.: The use of the site for dwellings will likety resul~ in small c~,~ndt~e'; of'nr%oulated household- type hazardous materials (de~;~g agents, solvents) will be..stored~M~,eac~~. ,~r: ...-..: .. -.... A review of ~sto~cal documents.for...the,subject property-indicate that:the site was,.apparenfly utilized as part.of.£a~nlng, -The existing dwe]ling, consmacted at-the :mm. of the.century mea~s that the builr~g may contain 'asbestos.'in-the plaster and/or:lead based p~t' or. materials. Because of the known adverse human-effects ~of. such materials were they,to become airborne -168- INmAL"~-'TLJDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION .:-~111 CHESTNUT.TOWNHOMES · PAGE 29 if fotmd removal will be required'in conformanoe with Fexlcral; state and local regulations. a) Hazardous Mat=ials ..... :7: ';.:~ '..i .i :. Impact '.: ~ofS'~. The' Project would have a,s.;~Ficant en~"m'~ml ~:'if'ii W~e zo create a siNFicant hazard to the pubic orthe environment through theX. °mine.trausp°rt, .re. eh or,.disposal o£ hazardous materials. '. ' ~-., ..,':.. ". ,:. ': '.. :.'-.; ?, :.'...'¥' '~.. . , :..':,'..." · "7 :'~ 52'f~ 3 ~ . ".7i'~; '"..'~" :~::: ...." ". , :. U;'.' ." '. Provided that the business couform, to Uniform B,,,qalng Code r%~latiom applicable to:the use, rramportandctsposalo£hamrdomm=r~aknoimpact.Wodldocd=/"' ::.' :"~:.'~'"':',: · :':'-'.:i:7:'..': r .=~:.:. 7, ? .' ::'?.:'[5:'.'.'i)"'.:!:':'. ".i;:.' ,..' :.. - .' :: b) Upset and Accident Conditions Impact ,.- .,::,--:...: .;.,..-,: .... i -~: ¢':., ,.. :: :..:: .'..c :( ." ~ofS'~' Th~ Project would havea s,~,ficam.mvn'o,m~n=lm:~.~.' ' "=" :":"- .... "' .... '" '"':'""" "if~.were"'"" .... ' to create accident conditions involving the r~ease o£ h,==,dous materials into the envir0,~m~,_-' - ' -' ..:U'.~: ' '~.";(: ;;;...~E-i!,.: ,?,,),'.2~t }~ ':'<,-.-'..~'-'.;.........-:': ','"..., :: de.n;-g, and g-arriving supplies th= would'be comid=ed.hazardom.if, not,h=odled wt:rrot:~h~ely. In such an mvircmm~nt, thm'e is some potential for accidents -rd ~cuE ~el-ea~ ~xSU~o~ Bm]ding Code r%mlla=ions pert-i-i-s to hazardous n~zmdals wo-!A h{R.pr .~y_. ~en,t:~ the impact of the Project to a level of less than SignificanEi:.:, ":-.:":-:i.'7'7.~5:.. · ~ 5: ?, ?":','i"i. ':.Yq(.,:"." .7.:.?:.:!" c) Hazardom Materials and Schools ,. -:i ,. :.';:73-, ,.5. ', i=:: ~ - .:'~?.,.,::v .:<.%' '>,.- .-f:: ': Imp act .',,,:.,. ';.:.:-'-;r:~,. ,'., ..:...-f ,-.,>(:i::~ :'.:.:;.' ....:::.., Thlm~ldofSi~ The ?roject would have a .6~Ficarrc environment~! impact:it:it-were:tO emit h~,~trdous emi,siom or hmdle hazardous or acutely h~,~dous ~n.~t~l% SUbStmces,"O a quarter m;le of an ex/st;n~ or proposed school- ..... ' ' ::'":':'"'~"::"" "~' '"'~" The Project. site ~.~ocate.d..wlth!~ one,.~ ~ils.o.f..a.privaze kchooL`. [': '~. Howevor, because the site is vacant it is mad no record of any activities whish may indicate the presence of hazardous or toxic there would be Impact Th~.shold of $i~' The ~r0jec~would have'a.~F;c-ant mvir0nmeatal impart'if located on a she whlda is included on a' list of h=7~vdous mutuals sites'compiled pursuant tO"GOV~nm~nv Code Section 65962.5 ( Cortese ~ .,~t )..& rew~w, of Cky records indicates.th-t the site is noz near, any apparent Uncter~und Storage Tanks or other, ms with h,7=rClous materhl~. · INITIAL STUDY / Mmc~TED NEGA'nvE DEC:I.ARA'nON -169- 111 CHES'rNU'r.TOWNHCadES · PAGE 30 e/f) Safety H~-ards IN~'to l~Tcarby&ir~ort or'~p ..... . . ...." ': .v..'. Impact - -... ~~ofSi~. ~ Projem wo~d ~e a ~ifim= ~ommt~ ~pam'ff it w~e located ~ ~ ~on ~d~e p~ (or, wh=e m~ a p~ ~ not-be~ a~pte~ ~thin ~o re;les of a wor~ N ~e Proje= =e~ or ff k w=e locked ~ ~e ~ 8nO of a ~ ~, ff i wo~d re~t N a s~eW ~d for people rei~g or wor~g %e Proje= ~te is lomed ~hln aborn 2.5 re;les ~omSm ~ N a ~doped ~ea md ~ Ntmded for proposed w~d nm =e~e ~ Nordln~e a~fione~ed wN~ ~~ ~s N ~e ~ of So~ Sm F~co N ~e ~ea'~o~d Sm Fresco ~t~o~ ~o= %e=fore ~e Proje= wo~d g) Confli~ ~ ~n~ Re~onse PI~ or Emergen~ Eva~fion ~g¢Si~' ~ Proje= wo~d ~ve a ~mt =~onm~4~"~a~ ff k w~e.to ~p~ ~pl~mmt~on of, or p~~ Nt~=e ~ m ~pted ~m~ r~0me p~ or D~opm=~ of ~e proposed Proje= wo~d not ~t~=e ~'~d m=~ore ~-ne,impact on · e ~Pl~nt~on of ~ adored ~m~ respome p~ or,~~ ~on pl~ pro~d k coMom to ~e spe~o= fo=d p~. %e Proje= wo~d Nye no impact r~ted to .... ', ." .' ..:-" i'¥ .. ;., . .. ...; '.- ,. '. ~= ~o~h ~ is dose ~o Si~ ~ a ~d Environmental Fairs and Focused Questions for DeterminalJon Of Environmental Impact HYDROLOGy AND.WA] I::R.QUALITy..-~Yould.the Project: . , a) Violate any water'qUality standards br waste' discharge requirements? .... Poten~ally LeSs Than Less Than Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Mitigation · "~" ~; .i '; 'L:.' '.:. '.',: ": .] .ri .[ .'] No Impact [ X] -170- INITIAL STUDY / MmGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION '~ 1 '~ CHESTNUTTOWNHOMES · PAGE 31 b) c) d) e) Environmental Factors and Focused QuestJons-fo~ DetarmJnation of Environmanta] Impact h) -Potentially ' Significant Impact Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or · integra substantially with groundwater . recharge such that them.would be a.net deficit m aquifer volume or a Iowedng of.the, local. groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a .'level which would .not support existing land :uses or pl~nad uses for.which permits have been granted)? .' ': ;~'' .... -~ :;' ' ~'~ '"-":'":" '':~'" :'"" 'Substantially a]ter.'the e'"xisting 'drainage ;Pattern .[ of the .site .or area, including .through the alteration of Ihs course of a stream or,dver in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Substantially alter' the existing,drainage palm of the site or ama, including through the alteration of Ihs course of.a stream or river, or substantially increase the ra~ Or'amount of ,surfs~e.runoff~na manner,· Which would result in flooding on- or off-site? Create or contribute runoff water which would ~ [ exceed the capacitY of existing or planned. · st0r~watsf dniinage.sy~items .Or pi;0vide substantial.additional soumes.OfpOilutad runoff?· : Otherwise substantially degrade water qdality? Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard ama as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? .Place within .a 10D-year flood h~=~rd ama structures, which Would 'im~de or redirect' fl~d · flows? ~'"'-:",-,": '~'- '-':~': ...... -" · ~ Expose people or structures to a significant risk · of loss, injury.or death involving .floodi0g, ..:... including ~oodin{i as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? '[ · Less Than ' · Significant Mitigation 'Less Than Significant No · 'Jmpact Impact !] ..] ] :[ x] .[ I 'x] ] .[ ] ..[ [ ] [ ] [ ] [ .] :[ x]. · [ x] [x] Setting .~ about 16.3 square rna~_s those trends in a roughly southeasterly direction .through. the cmxer o'~ the C_~. The Colma C,m& watershed is one o£ r. he three ]ar~st ~u the Coum7. ~ basin/s bounded on the nox'cheam by San Bruno Mountain and on the west by a ridge traced by Skyline BouIevar& Dominant topographic ieatures of the ckainage basin Jncl-cte two reJadv~ ~ mom ridges that diverge toward the so~theast that are connected by a low ridge at the nor:hem boundary o~ the INmAL STUDY / Mmc~'r~ NEG&TIVE DECLARATION i -171- 111 CHESTNUTTOWNHOMES o PAGE 32 area. The valley enclosed by the ridges widens toward the southeast where.it dr~i-.~ imo San Francisco Bay. · a) Violation of W~' Qualky St2nd~ds .or-.Waste Discharge .Requirements Impact 27,~ldofSi~' The Project would have .a si~iflcaut enviro-m~ntal impact if k were to result in any violation o£ ~d.~ing water qaalitT'gr~dards, or waste.dischar~ requirements.' . ?rovichd that the future residents occupying the site. adhere to ~-~d.~ng waste discharge reguladom, the?rojectwould, presentnoimpact...~ .. . ~ .... ,. : .....:: . ..... ~ . .5 .... ':""." b) Deplete or hterfm. Substan~y~ Groundwater .- .:. ..' - : Impact :.~ . ,...: .... ::.,.,. ,:..: .. ' : .. ~ ofSi~' Th~ Project would have a $ignificaat enviromeurml:impactif it substantially depletes groundwater supplies or interferes substangallywith groundwater ree_h~rge such r. Mt there would be a net chick, in aqui{~ ..volumeor a !owering of.the local groundwater table level. -: .... .. ".,:',,.'... · ,:: i '., .,.')....,,'. · ::',": ! "~': .-::".:, ' '-"' -"' '~"5' !.i .' '," ':' . . The proposed project.would be located in an urban area and would receDe'ks water supply fi.om existing local in~, thereby. :not depleting the local grotmctwater suppty. :The proposed building structure .would be an impervious surl'ace over the land ~ would to. some degree impide recharging o£ local groundwa~er. How. ever, since groundwater resources are not.meal,in theProject ,:-; .... '"~ '[.'j.."; :':?~:':.":.':." ;.. ~.. i 7.:, .'" ."" "'".... -.':..:.. c) Alter l:.~.~,g Drainage Patterns/Erosion and Siltation Effects:.. ~..... Impact Thrvsboldof$i~' The Project would have a significant eaviron~nt~l impact if irwere to substantially alter the ~i.~ing drain,ge parcem of the ske in a rn,nner, which would resuk in substantial erosion or sikation. ' The proposed Project would be built on a site that is vacant and surrounded by fully developed parcels. The proposed project will not. alt=.drainage parterre. The project will be'required to collect- and convey storm water runoff into the Cky's storm drainage system. There would be:no.impa~t. related to akered dr~in~e patterns or siltation at the Project site. d) Alter Exi~ng Dr=in,ge Patterns/Flooding. Effects: .. ........ :... Impact · ' · . . .: .' :~ ': .... . . , .. Thw.~ldofSi~' The Project would have a si~flcam mvironmenml ~mpact'if k were substanr~.lty aker the exit-§ drainage pattern o~ the site or area or sub~.nri~!lTincrease the raze or amount of surface runoff in a m~-ner thor, would result in-floodi-~ on- or off-ske. It is not m~pected tt~ut, the proposed Project would alter the exisfi-g drainage pattern of the ske, nor would it subsranri=lly in=ease the amount.of sur{ace nmoff, since the ske.is currently par~ -172- INITIAl. STUDY/Mm(~ATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION · 11 1 CHESTNLIT TOWNHOM,F.~ · PAGE 33 developed with knpervious ~uffac~s and the :om] .~ze area is only 1.~ acre~. Becaus~ the Proiect sk~ is only 1.4 acres, no impact relazed m substantial increased surface runoff. : e) 1Kunoff Exceeding Drainage System Capacity/Increase 'Polh~ed Runoff Impact 7hmshddqFS'~. The Project would have a .~ificant environm ~ml impact ff kwere to'creaze or conmqmze runoff water, which world'exceed the eapacky o£ existing or Pla-~ed storm water drainage systems or provide subsranzhl addifionfl sources 0£ polhted nmoS. [] IMPACT 2: Storm nmoff. The project wfl] be required to collect storm water on-~e and convey k to the C~'s storm drainage system The drainage system is adequate to accommo3~re the increase runoff."Soils az the Pr0jec~ rite wfll'be suscePu~le to erosion .during consm~on activities th~ could re~t in apotentiagly significant impact during [] MITIGATION MEAS~ 2: .SWPPP. ?riorto theissUance'o£anypma~.the applicam ~h~ll submk a Storm Water Pollmion Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and an 'Erosion Conuol Phn to'the Cizy Engineer,: The SWPPP shall include Ben M~n~ent ~ractices in accordance whh the reg~l~ons o-fl;ned in the AssOc3~on of Bay Area · Go~em~n~g Erosion.and Sediment Control ?~mdbook 2~he plan: Shall. also · 'storm ,wazer,pollmion conzrol devices and'f:fl~erS:zo be ~-,~lled m prevem.pdlbr~ts fi-om entering the Cizy's storm drain system and San ~Francisco ~ay. The :Plan .~4l be subject re'review and approval o£ the Cky ]~.n~neer and the C_~'s Szovm Water With implementation o£ th~.~'mi~oafionmeasure,.the ~oject would have a'less than a signifi~nt impact. f) Oth~e Degrade Water Quality Impact .... ;: ":¢ ': '. .: ~-, .... oject world a ! w=e' to' degrade water quality. ' The proposed Project would create impervious mfface area on the Projec~ site and w~l drain into the C_~'s storm drainage systenz Because the site.is retaziveI7 .,rnall~ ~23 .acres, :and ~m~qar/n' ' character and use as the other nearby residences, there would be no impact on water ~,alky fi-om poinz source water pOllution at the Project ~e. ' g) Place Housing ~rxthin A 100-Tear Flood Hazard Area . Impact Thre~td of Si~' The Project would have a slgn~qcant environmental impact if it were ~o place any housing.maizs w ;~h~n a designazed 100-year flood hazard area. " INITIAL ,-~I"UDY/MIT1GA'rED NEGATIVE DECLARATION I -173- 1 11 CHE. S'rNUTTOWNHOMES · PAGE. 3~. The Project she is not 'wkh~n the lO0-year flood h~,~rd area ~lood Insurance Rate Map [FIRM] Panel 1 of 12, Cornmun~rPand # 065062 O0002B, dazed Setxember 2, 1981 prepared bythe Federal Emergency Management Agency). Ther~ore, theproject would have no. impact. h) Place Structures Which Would Impede .or RedirectFlood Flows.... structures, in a manner, w~ch would impede, or.redirect flood flows. The Project site J~ not located in a 100-year flood hazard zoneT~ and therefore would have'ho.impact rel~ed to the placement of a structure in such a way~a~ it would impede or redirect flood flows. i) Expose ?eople or Structures.to Flooding Hazards Impact ~ofS'~. The ?roject would have a sidle;cam environmental 5mpact,'ffk were to remk in the exposure..0f..people or structures t0.flooding hazards. - . Development of.the proposed Project would.not expose any people or SnUcmres j) Inundation by Seiche, Tsunami or Mudflow Imp TbrmboJd of $igr~mm. The Project would have a signhqcant en'dronmemal impact if it were to resuk irt the exposure,of, pec~P!e, or. sm/c~..es mhazards'kom seiche, ~s, mrnl or mudflow. .. :. Development of the proposed Project would not'.expose any people, or sm/m/res zo.hazards from seiche, ~s~marn~ or rnud~ow alid ~erafore wouidhave no impact. Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for, .....-.Potentially ;. :. ,Less Than. ,. --..,Less Than. Detam~ nation of Environmenta impact Significant :.'. ' ',;~ ..:.:. ~' .: ' -"L,~ ~ ~.,'~ ,' L,, ..L!" ~-;;:" · impact ' · . '..'.'~ . .~ , ;~" '" .", . ,, . '.-.i. "-"-~. '. LAND USEAND PLANNING --.Would the:Project: ..... a) ....Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any.applicable, land use,plan, [' poli~J, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the Project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted · for.the purpose of avoiding or.mi~gaiJn~ an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation [ ] 'plan or natural community conservation Dian? Significant ': Mitigation · Significant . No.. :l .m.?,act' . ':'Impact · "[ .] .[ x] · ..[ :] .-[ x] [ ] ix] 7 Brady ardAssoci,~.~s, £~rt ofloi 21r~P/a=, adolx~July 1994, p.106. -174- INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE.DECLAP, ATION ~ 11 CHESTNUTTOWNHOMES · PAGE 35 Settinod ' .. i Sourt S~ Fmadsco has a distinctive had ~e p~em th~ reflects ~e clec~ion zo ~d]7 lo~e homes and businesses west of the indus~es suppo~-g the town in order ~o Take advantage o£ topolsraphy and westerlywinds.-Another.devdopment trmd,th~..shaped the ar~,,ement of uses was the extensive residmtial devdopment thaz occurred during the 1940s and 1950% creating lin'ge areas almost en6rdy i*vdoped with ~,~e-famfly housing. As a resul% South San Francisco is largely comprised o£ single-use areas, with industry in the eastern end"southeastem Portions of the Ci~, single f~m~ homes to the north and west, commerdal uses along a few wa--~portation corridors, and multiple 6m~ housing clustered in those same corridors and on a) Dividing an Established Commnnity The proposed Proje= would have no impact related to the division of an. establi.~h ed Comrr, mity. b) Conflict with Land Use Plan :' .. :. The Projec~ site is currendyzoned Medium Densi~Residentld District (R:2:I-1) and is part of the S,,-.~h~e Gardens pl~,~i,g Sub-.A.rea as deemed bythe Cky of Sonth San Francisco Gene~,fl. Plan. The site's Gene~ Plan c~.~on is ~h Density l~,_4e~rrci~]: This &si~on mmmo~es single f~m~ and townhome devdopmem Ail devdopmem is.subject ~o d~ and sx~ndards? "!-".?..,. "d ~ ' ". .... ~'" '.' ..... :' .... .>.'.~" The proposed Project is consis~em with the ~ollowing General Plan p61ides: -:' .. -' "' ~.....: ' : ::.2.; .'-..-'i ..... ' -:::. f:': . "'. "i5'7!~.';-.~' '" :"<:' : ' ':.. ... 3.10-G-1 · 4Vizintaln the-character, of the Sunshine Get, ns'neighborhood and promote.new, clevdopment in remain~g vacant sites at internees .suitable to proximity to'transit and employment .centers.' ..... i. "-; ~ '~.~ t'.~ - '- ... -~ ',':':: '. The site's Froposed.!ffigh Demsity Residential (R-3-L) zoning al!gws both the proposed density md type ofbuildiag: The proposed dmsity.of 15.3 units per net acy.¢ ~mpares with the m mum sa-mit/ed dmsity 3 0,uuits per aUow th "O= md the density of 30 unitS p~r net acre of.as.provided in the City's Zoning Ordimmce. The building is sim~]~r to. develoFmdnts in the ~mmecIiate vicinity and has bee~:favora~ly reVieWed by the City's Design Review Board. The project is consisteaat with the Cityof SomhSau FranCisCO Gea~eral Ptau laud use policies, and Zon~n$ requirements, thereby constituting,no ~m~aet. · . '~- .!; :,.'~ -,. .: .- .. ,- . c) Conflict with Conservation Plan , .:: C~~on ~ the Project ~e would not ¢o~fl~t wir, h an~ ¢ons~eation plan, 'therefore no im£act would occur. '": ' "' ~ C_ky of Souri' San Frandsco, Sou~ San F'rar,-/,~, C.-enmz/P/an, 1999. u fbk/., p.43. -175- INmAL ,.~TUDY / Mm(3ATED NEC_~A'nVE DECLARATION '~ '~ 1 CHE;~TNUT TOWNHOME~ · P^GE-36 Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for. Determination of Environmental Impact ... Potentially Significant impact MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the Project a) Result in the loss of availability of.a known [ .] mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-[ ] important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? '- Less Than 'Significant Mitigation [ · :'Less Than Significant No impact Impact x] x] Setzing No mlneral resources of value to ~e re,on ~d ~e msi~ of P~je~ she. ~e Pr0je~ she ~ not be~ ~e~d. ~. ~ ioc~,~po~ mln~ recov~ eke on N ~e loss o~ a~~ of a ~ mi~ res0~ce ~ woad. be of vim ,~o ~e, re,on, md ~e . refidm= o{ ~e ~ or ff iz w~e to re~ h ~e loss o{ a~;h~ impact on ~ ~ min~ reso~ or re~= N ~e loss of reso~ce recov~ eke. : . . . .: - Xi. Environmental Factors.and Focused Questions for . Potantia y · DeterminatiOn Of EnvirOnmental Impact: ':" "' Significant -': '"'. impact NOISE -- Would the Erpject;., :: .:.:.. , .:..,.: ..... .. a) Exposure.of persons to.or:generation of noise. levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance,or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of [ ] excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome ·noise levels? · ' c) A substantial permanent increase in.ambient [ ] noise levels in the Project vicinity above levets existing ~thout the Project? d) A substantial temporary.or periodic increase in [ · ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levets existing without the Project? · Less .Than Less Than 'Significant Significant . No'. "-with' ..... ilmpact"' '. Impact Mitigation ...:,[ .] .:,[ x] IX] [ ] [ ] [ '][ ] "'[ X] [ x] ~[ ] [ .] -176- INIT]AL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ~111 CHESTNUTTOWNHOMES · PAGE 37 Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for - Potentially Determina~on of Environmental Impact Significant · " Impact e) For a Project located within an airport land use [ ] plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, wi~in two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project expose people residing or working inthe Project area to excessive noise tevels? f) For a Project within the vicinity of a pdvate [ .] airstrip, would the Project expose people · residing or wo~ng in l~e Project area to excessive noise levels? Less Than .',:Less Than · : Significant · Significant with Impact Mrd~ation No Impact ] [x] · ] ... [ x] Setting ....... ' ': ~ md d~o~ W~ or ~ co~m% ~e~,l~) md h~ in~ve k ~ ~e b~~ ~mce ~ re~ome of people to ~m, md n{~m~ no~. ~ng nigh~m~, ~or b~o~d noN= ~e ~~.1~= ~ ~m~ 1~ ~~, mo~ hom~o~ none. ~o ~e~es at night ~ :~0r n0N~'bec0ms more ~O~ce~le.'F~,.m°~ · ... ,:..~ ":... -::.h:'.:'5~.~ :-'.'~.:..(,',: . ':' .' '.'....'.' '.'. .5 [ ',~:,'.[.; ;.....: :~5 ":;"..'".':. '.: .'~ ': -'. ' '. .: ' · .. . - ....:.....- , '- · . ..-- = .}.: . .::.?.'% .. ':' :..~:. '/. ~.-'.5,.,.'~':-:5L,.: '::5.:J'T't ;".:: .... :. '-. ,'~':..' '" ''. '"" ~ for noNe-linseed ~e~. %=e ~ ~n~ ~e ~le ~ noie '~o=e 0f ~om ~d roes N =aaron to cm con~on.l~ acce~le 1~ con~ng~ ~n · :.:...: : . '. . :' . .'~ .. -.. , · .::'-.. ·: .' =~,:..'.'-,.. . ~e So~ S= FreSco N°ise ~di...ce .(~.~= S.32, NoNe ~e~=s ~e ~ p~i~a~le so=d 1~ for r~~ com~' md ~ ~d roes. '.. ' -177- INITIAL STUDY / Mme~ATE~ NEGAT. IVE DECLARATION I 111 CHESTNUTTOWNHOMES · PAGE 38 this zone .is 50-60 dBA (Ls0).~ Shorter periods o/: noise levels higher than these' ]~m~rs .are allOwed, but only for speci~ecl p~iods of time. Specifically, the standard +SdB for more than 15 minutes, the smnd~rd + 10 dB for more than 5 .m~u~es, and the standard + 15 dB.for more than one m~ute in any hour are use& The standard +20 dB cannot be exceeded for any period o~tkne. However, where the existing ambient noise level already exceeds-the above noise llm~s, the ~mhierrr noise level becomes the standarcl , ·.: ': ~, ~ The South San Francisco Noise Ordinance (C_2mp~er 8.32, Sec6on 8.32.050) restricts consrru~on activities ~o the hours of 8:00 ~ to 8:00 p~n. on weel~d~ys,'9:00.a.m.'m':8:00 pz~ 'on Samr~, and 10:00 ~.n~ m 6:00 pz~, on Sundays and holidays. This.or~i=~ce also ];~k~ noise.;§en ~ ...at. on of anyindividud.pi~c~ o~.equipmenr re.gO ·dBA az 25 fee~ or.a~:the properryline,: :.: :~.: i' ~:... a) Exposure of P~rsons To or.Gem~o..n .,of Noise Levels in ~cess of'Stander&. :~ ~. ~ ofS~I The Project would have a si~canr environmental impact if:ir ~ere ~o resuk in exposure of persom ~o or generation of noise levels in excess o~ standards established in the City Traj:fic... Imping,radon o~ r. he proposedProjecr would increase mutdSc noise levels along local due ro I~rojecr-generared traffic. Ir is anricipared.thaz.rmffic rda~ed noise increases .associared.wiri Project ~w°uld be minimal due ~o the low level of Pmject-re!_~ed ~-d/:ic increases on local roadways. In general, a doubling of.traffic vol,,mes would, be'required to resuk in a 3-dBA noise ~increase ina ". rraffic-dom~n~ed noise en~L,-onmen% -md a 3-dBA ~noise/ncrease :is hardy·perceptible m most- people. ?roject-rela~ed =affic increases on local roadways (well below a 100 percent increase) ~.ould result in traffic noise increases wall below 3 dAk. Mechanical Equipment..Irnplem~nr~on.d the.proposed Project could increase.~rnhi~_nr noise ' levels in the Project vicinity dm to the operati°n of me&,nleal equipmmt.such as air. condirioners...The impact of the mechanical devices would be considered less than significant.Frovided th~ rh~ noise level proO_~ced byir co~orms to the C_&y of South San Fmcisco Noise b) Exposure of ?ersons To or Generation of Excessive Groundbome V~3~rations or Impact ' Thre~Idof$i~' The Project would have a si~i~cant environmemal effect if.it were people to, or generate, excessive groundbome vibrations or groundbome noise lev~. I= is not expected that the development would generate excessive'groundbome v:~rarion or groundbome noise. However, bemuse the development is adjacem to Chestnut Avenue, an arterial roadway, it is expected r. hat the Project residents would be exposed m groundbome vfbrafion and roadway noise. The Cir_7's General Plan Noise elemem.ia~-~i~;,s.thar.th~.a-dflc ,along n The noise llmk rt~ mnno= be ~c~ed=d ~or more ~h=- 30.minmes in.anyhour· (50 p~rcmar of any giwm hour). -178- INITIAL ~;TUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION '11:1 CHE...~TNUTTOWNHOMES · ·PAGE Avenue Ecnmmtes up to 6$.dB Co~TNoi¢.Eq~alcm Level (~). IMPACT 3: The future reS~den~ will be .eXposed to. high dec~%el lev~ remlt~-g in a potentially 6$m~cant impact. MITIGATION Mtn: '&SURE 3: (Prior to the ismance, of a BuJldin¢ Permk the applicant shall.have a q, m1'i6ed acoustic ~eer review the com'mac~on plans and identified methods to ~hieve an interior acous6c level of 45 dB CN"FT ;.and comply wkh the polities contained in the C~s Noise Element o£ the General Plan. The proposed consultant shall be subject to the r~le~ and approved by the:Cky's Chiff P~r. 'Prior to the Final Inspe~on, the apl:~icant's consultant ahall take interior acoustic : m~amrements ~n the cl~,_ll;~ and subm;t a report to. the C~'s Ch;,./Planner. · ' .'::'" :' '; · '"' - : L'; 'i: : "... :' ':"'~ ,'.:::: ~ ' · With ;mplcmemafion o£ the ~on measure, the.impact ¢hall be reduced to less tbas signifi~nt. . ' ~~ ~te ~~on md ~e i%~l~~m o~ ~e proposed Pmje= w~d be d) Sub~-! Tempo~ ~ P~o~c ~==~e N Amhi~m NOise ~~Si~' ~ Proje= wo~d ~e a ~ifi~t m~onmm~ ~ ~.k.wm m re~t N a mb~ t~~ or p~o~c N~e N ~imt no~e 1~ N ~e Pmje= ~6.~ ~ove ~ ~t= pr~on md co--on = ~e Proje= ~ op~on of hcaW e~~ m~d ~t N a ~m~ t~po~ N=~e N ~imt noke 1~ N ~e ~ o$~e Proje= ~te. · ~ACT 4: .~~~on ~d NoNe. Proje= co~on w~d r~ r~po~ to~-t= noie N~es ~e to ~e op~on of h=W e~~u ~d be apoten~y dgnifi=nt impact ~so~ed w~ Projem ~~on none so~c= ~e ~om ~om g2 m 90 ~A ~ ~ fe~ for mo~ INITIAL STUDY [ MmGATED NE¢~TIVE DECLARATION -179- 111 OHE..WTNUTTOVVNHOMES · PAGE 40 [] MITIC~TION 1VIEAS~ ~.. ~on Of ConstrUetioxi"H°urs/Noise Abatement Prior to issuance o£ anypexmk the.app .Iimm.shall~provid~ ~e.Ciry.~ a comm'uction plan r~a= includes measures to reduce construction noise. The plan shall be' Ass~min..5 .co~truc~o~ noise, levels .comply-with the %,d5t noise .llmk md.hourly =strietions .,-.- specified in the City.Noise Ordin~n ce and complywith rtz mkig'afion measure, consm~onealatad noise impacts could be reduced.to a level o£ less doan signiji:ant. Items eand 0.. LaCati°nin..Vic~.ty:.0fa Publi¢..~or Private .Air.'..mTip ...... .:. :,,:..:.. Threx~g of S'~' The Project would have a si~Ficant environmentalimpact.-~ k wer~:locazed within an airport land use plan (or, where md: a pla~ h,~ not be= adopted, wjrhln two m,%s o£ a l~blic airport or public.uSe airpox!) ~ k.w0~d ~0se peopletesiding or wovl~i"5'iii' thi Pr0je~t' area to excessive noise tevel% or if k were,:,lomed ~khln the ~elnlW iSfa private ~iirstrip, if-it Would expose peOple reising or worklng'in the Proje~' area to excessive none levels. The Sour. h San Fmcisco Noise EI~ (1999) conr~i~.~ ~.~h?. g.~.~e,.,(200,6)..airport noise comours associated ~ Sm Fran~co Imemazional Airport,.iocated;solYl'h.;(~}f,:~-l'le ~ ~'e tudicaze-the Project eke is located ounsi~ the 6S-dBA (CN~) ~g aud ~ :~ort'nS.ise ' contours. Proj:cted contours {or road and railroad noise are also indued i i=,~0isi.El'~m These contours indic~e that ~e Project ~ is located in an area ~here n0ise-.-l~als:genar~ed ~ air ov.~ noise sources wil continue to be less rtmn 60 dBA (CN~).'Based ~ ~he'Gi~% ~ .me ,roStra-ia, the proposed Project would be compau"~le with furm'e noise level Pr0}e6iiCm' in me less th~ 60 to 65 dBA(CNEL), therebyrepres~_n~ing no impact. ':?:. :.~,5 .::.., ,- '": Xli. Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for -Potentially Less Than Less Than Determination of Environmental impact .Significant SLgnificant. SignifiCant No ,. ............... '~' ." ........... i."!'"L ."i~i..: ..... : _. i . -impact wi~' .... !.:ilrnp!~,.. ",t.m.p~= , ................ Miti~atJ'~n ......... POPULATION AND HOUSING --WouLd the Project a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposiqg new · "-homes and businesses).,or in~imctiy'(for', ;..examPle,- through extension of roads or.other , infras~cture)?.' ,;:..;.. ':~ .'.~ ....:,..: , . .. b) Displace substenfiat numbers of existing .. i housing, 'necessitating the'construction of -replacement housing elsewhere? ' c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitatin, g the constru~on of replacement housin~ elsewhere? £ ] .... 1..x], [ x] -180- INITIAL STUDY / MmGATED NEGATIVE DECLARA'noN 1 1 I. CHESTNUT~FOWNHOMES · PAGE-~.I Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for :'. :.Potental!y · ..Less.Than'...~ Less Than Determina~on of Environmental Impact Item.~ a thru c) ?opulafion.~ud'Housing · .Significant .Significant Significant No Impact with impact Impact Mitigation · f:' '.' '.-"~;/i':,' - ".:' : ;:.. '-.i .: '.._'. i,?. - .: ... .'-.~.: ~ . ..?.. -..: Thmsho/d of S'~v~. The Project wOuld.have a ~i~i~ant en~iror/m~! im~act ff ~ w~' to ~e ~~ po~on ~ or ~e proposed P~je~ w~d not ~ md he.me ~e rite ~ ~t k wo~d not re~t ~ ~ ~~ ~¢ffo~ ~ P~je¢ wo~d Environmen~ Fac'~ and'Focused Questions'/or .... .'Potentially , hess Than "' ,Less'Than ':' .' .... ,,. ';" .... Determinaiiono~'Envir0n..me, n.tal:tmpact:.:,::~, .... Significant .. :;8.ignificant ~.': Significant. ·. :. 'No · Impact,, - _.'wl'bh..~ ....... 'Impact ...... Impact . .. · .:.?,: ....,:,..,....::vi, .v.. .... . v Xlll. ' puBLIc SERVICES -- : .'.physical impacts~soaiatad-~th-~e;pmvision.:. -......~';,,': .-{ .... :. r.,... ,.~-,,,::,.:..,....,;:7 ... ¢-.:." ..'i:.-..:,. :-.:'i .'.v:..:- ', ';., .'. '.- .ofnew.c![physicallya.l~mdgovemmenml- 4 ..-...-,. , ~,-i!;:,: : · ; ;:.'' ::" .,...,.:',;'.';; ~ (- ::.' .... .-.'.':i. :.. :., '- ':...' ,.:. '.-.facilities, need for new or ph~ical!y altered' ' :'govei~mental'f~ciIi'des, the'construclion"of "'"'" "'""~ ;'; :.' '.::'? :' ''~' , .. . f~.~-,..~ .: -.'-?..'..(,.:.- . .:.:. ~.,.... ." ',' ... ,..which oould cauSe.significant environmental' ': :.:impactsrin orde~:maintain accaptableservice. '. ,:: .;.:'..., ::, 5-...: :..,.: ...:. ', -. ...... .-. l.[,.: .:. · .!, : .' .. ,..: ratiOS res. POnse.times or ot~er performance ... : :.',:,',' .,.' .::i;. '. objectives f~r any of ~e publicsen~ices: ' · ,., ...; :.";: ,...'. : .:s.-'-, :......~.- i) Fire protecUon? - ii) Police protection? iii) Schools? iv) Parks? ~'' '"'".'" :-~-' v) Othe~.~'~blic faciiiii~S'~ ':: .[ ] [ ] IX] [ ] .... , ...... , ~.~.-.[: ...] ......... [ ...... j .......... -f x.] ..... [. ] '['" 2'.].";'('"":":'t:.,X]"' ;. ] ..?: [ ] IX] [ ] [ ] Impact '.' ":'"'".:'.' ~-'':'' :-- ':'" ": ...... ~ '. Thmsho/d of $i~- The ?roject would have a ~i~i~cam enVi~onmm~..~,act ff~were zo resuk in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision o~ new'or physically akered governmental f~u:ilities, the construction o/which could cause si~ificam environmmm1 izrko, acts' in protection, police protection, schools, parks and recreational fadli6es, or other, g°w~nmem ffacqlM~. The proposed Project, due to in s~l~ size, would generalb~place a'le~s' than:~ignificant increased demand on CAy o£ South San Francisco public services." -. ..... '.. ":.:..... v' .- - -181- INrnAL STUDY/Mmc, ATED NEeATIVE DECLARATION 111 CH~-~NLrr'rowNH(:~aF.S · .PAGE 42 XIV. Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for Determination of Environmental Impact RECREATION -- a) Would the Project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other . recreational facilities such that substantial physical detedorafion of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Does the Project include recreati0.n..a!facilifies or require 'the construction or-expansion of recreational facilities, ,which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Potentially Sign, ificant Impact [ ] ¸[ ,] Less Than ..Significant.. 'Mitigation Less Than Significant 4~pact .. '.'~ 'No impact · [ x] Items a an on ' Impact [u an lncre~e'in the use o£ ex~xfi~ p~ °r recre~'oh~l faH]kle'S ~UCh th~ S~'st.~l PhYslc~ ' "' ' '"' de~eriora~on of these f~cilides co~d be ~ddpaze4 or ff k w~e zo ~du~ re~o~ ~es,'~e :'" co~on ofwN~ might ~e advme p~ ~e~s on ~e ~onm~t " Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for. Determination of Envirdnmantal Impact ..... "- TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would.the Project: a) Cause an i'~crease:in t~aific,'Whlchis'substantial in relation to the existing traffic Icad and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle tips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersectiofis)?" ': ..... ' ' ':'"~ '" b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service stanctard established by the count)' congestion management agency for designated roads Or' highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safet~ risks? Potentially Less Than ,Less Than "" · ' ' Significant ~Significant ' Significant '" Impact with Impact Impact : Mitigation [ ] [ ] "[x] [ .] [ ] -[ ] .[ I[ '] [ ] [x] -182- INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION '1 1 1 CHF--STNUTTOWNHOMES - PAGE 43 Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for Determina~on of Environmental impact d) Substantially increase hazards due t~ a desjgn feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous' intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., .farm equipment)? e) Resultin inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporling altema~ve transportation Potentially Less Than Significant Signif}cant -lmpact~... ~ '; :.--with.:. Mitigation' [ ] ix] [ ] . ;[ ,] [ .] .~ :[ .:] Less Than 8ignificant No · Impact. ..Impact [ ] [ ] ".':[ ..] [ x] .. Ix]. [ ] ..,.-[ ..] .. [x] (e.g., bus turnouts, bier'cie racksl? .... ~ ...... ... ......... .... : .... ~ ~.. ~. ~ ~ ?...7. ,. ..*-:: . : .:!'.: ~' ~.;..,... Setting " "' .... A Pazking and Cirm~tatlon Smdy~ not prepared for the Project .o~ m it$ .~m~ll size, and less than 0.52 acres. The Project site is served directly Chesmut Avenue wk!!e regiozm!.access is provided by the U.S. ~-Sghway 101 and S.R. 280. · Th~ Project would exceed 100 net n~w peak hour trips on rl~e localro~ .sYs?ml · Si~t;=.ed Mtme~on o~on wo~d ~ge ~om LOS & B, C or D.to LOS E.or F. · ~~== or a~ro~es ~ ~,-~,ll,ed ~t=s=~°m wo~d ch~ze'~omLOs.& B, C, D or · Proje= ~c wo~d ~=~e B=e ~e vo~ = m ~ea ~e~n zo me= p~ INITIAL STUDY/Mm~,TE~ NEGATIVE DECLARATION -183- 111 'CHEN'TNUTTOWNHOMES · PAGE 4.4 · The proposed Project would increase traffic entering an intersection by tWo p~rcent 'or'm°m with a signalized or ail-way stop operation already at a Base Case LOS E or F, or whan.'the intersection is a stop sign controlled and.already-operating m: LOS F, · ~" .. -".. ' :' .. · The proposed Project .would inca~,ase in mfffic- erecting an unsignalized intersection by u~o percent or more with Base Case ~'zffic levels already exceeding signal warrant critmSa levels. : · The Project worsens tra~c, pedestrian or bicycle saf~y. '..~.~'. '. ' '.': Impacts at Project Driveways..-The Project will be ,served by mo driv~.'The' pfimmT'entry will be on Chesmut Avmue. The driveways met.city standards forwidrh and deptk Sight.line be adequate. Internal Ch'cxflafion. :The internal driveway.would accommodate tWo,~ay-l:ra~c flow. The drNewaywil,be 23 feet wida.Paflfing for .visitors will be proVided on ske..Parklng forthe will be provided on the individual lots in ground floor garages. Overall, the internal circulation plan meets C~ developmmt standards. The proposed 8 new clw~ll{ngs are e~m~red to generate a net increase o5 g0 A]DT and 8 vekide " trips during%he corem, rte peak.l~-~-~ic-hour~. 'The.CaPacity of'me exgxing.=rem is e. stim=ed Ci7 .. staff a'c-1,200+ :vehicles per hour and '28,800+ ~rehides per day.'Based.on C_,kyrecords and field '." .'. observation conducted by City stall, the streets are far underme design.md capacky. The net in=ease in tmf-fi¢ ~ resuk in a less than significant impact. b) Direct.or Cumulative 'Increase in Traffic Which"Causes. a Congestion lVlanagement 77z-es/m/d of 3'~' _.The Project would'havea ~cam environm~mI:impact if it ~ere t0 result' in a direct ,increase'.in traffic that Would cause a Congestion'Management. Agency stan~iard to be exceeded, or conm%ute substantially t.o.. a cumulative increase in traffic that would cause a Congestion Xamagement Agency ff~mdard to be exceeded. "v; ?. '::. .:.::.'," · .. ::. :'.;' ~, . ..: The Project would'have.~o impact related zo an.exceedance of aCongestion/Vrari~gemenz'.Agency level of service standard. c) Change inAir Traffic ?attems ' ' ' ',-"-' - ...' .... Impact ' ' ' ~k/ofS'~n~z' The Project would have a si~Fimmt environmental impact if it were:to'result in a change in air n-rifle patterns that resuks'in substanri,1 safety ri~k~. · .- - .. The Project would have. no ·.impact on ~ir ~mS~c. pa=ems. " -184- INmAL STUDY/Mm~Av~ NEGATIVE DECLARATION 11 '1 CHEETNUTTOWNHOMES · PAGE 45 d) H~z~-ds Du~ to Dasig-n.Fcatm-~s Impact .. .: .. ~ed to C~ ~, ~ore ~.~ nor ~. nor. ~ no impa~. ' .... . ..1 ....... e) Emerg=ncy Access Impact ~of$'~. The ?roject would have a .4~Ficant en~iro-'~l i.?~.ifkw=eto provide iuadeoi,=te ~mergency access:to the.Project cite.- ..... The proposed Project would involve commmc~on in a rn~n, cr CO~6~.Ut with ~ o£ Sour~ San Fmcisco building codes. The dw~_llln~ and.ctreet will be consm~ed in accord.n= with .Cky smudar& iuO~a!-g ire access. There would be no '.impaet.re. lat~d to i-=a~quate emm'gcncy.aece~s to the site. .. · ..· .... · .. ...,: . :.....~..:' i'.,~,.~': ':i: '~ ' '"" .......... ~ .... · · ;',~' '..'...'-,i'".'..'i'.'=.... v 0 Parking Capacity Impact , .:': .. : ..,:. ' '... ., ;'... ~ ... - -. ~ T~_~/d of$~. :.-Th~ .Pt'oject,s.~rnpact on.pazking-~h,ll be.conmdered-:~gn,~nt if the'Projaet does not me~t the C_~ o£. SourS:San Francisco's:p-ring space,.r= .quirements and/orrhe proposed parking pt,n iz ~t~q,,,te~ud meets ~ standards..,. -,~.: ..-,... ,.,: .: .,-!': ':-.-. ~.: .-...... .,,, ,.,.. ? · ..,- - ~ . ... On-street p~rk~ng is allowed on Chem~m Avenue abutting the developmmt ske, The development would result in r. he:loss,o£.appro~imurely 1 ,on,mreet ;p-vk-lng,~paces d~.to ~e,:crm~ian :o{: a :standard two way driveway. The p,rking along Chestnm Avenue is reed by neighborhood're-~idmts."The .. "." development wfll provide on-site parl~g for all oi the new dwellings and ~itor l~rlSng in confoi-mance .wir. h the City's. p,rklng rcxtuir~m ~r~_~ ;(SSFMC Ch%nter.,.2OY4:). The loss ,of. one.p-a~in g ... space is not con.~dered a ~ificam.~ ;Therefore, the impact .,will.b= less, than ~ignifieant...; .. · : .... ~ '3.;. ";,' ;'d, ', · : .':','. ' ":. :',:'' '.'.:~....! ..'Q ..... 71 ; . ,. ! . .'.~ :'."!'-.[','.'J'~ g) Akcmative Transport~on ,:' .-.. ,.,/:...~ ::........:.:.- .!: ,.' Setting Tmusit service, in,the.cindy area includes local bus sm'vice, ¢hm*.l¢ service md.regional.rail service. Bus Service. The Sau Mateo County Transit DimSct (SamTr~0 provi&s bus service in the mxiy area along the following mmm Kou~esl30, 131, 133 and 32, 34, 35 and 36..Bo~:Romes-130 and 131, providing service to BART stations, operate with 30-mlrraze peak pm-iod headways and 60- minute non-peak headways on we~l~d~/s and 60-mlmrre headways.on Smu'dxys. 'The routes provide community service, and opm'ares ~ llrnlred se,_rvice &,ring tl~ Caltzaim Cattrain provides train service between Gilroy, San Jose and San Francisco. The nearest station is located on the comer of Dubuque _Avenue and East Grand Avenue in South San INITIAL STUDY/MmC, A'm_~ NEC-~kTIVE DECLARATION -185- :.91.1 CHEEI'NUTTOWNHOI~tEE. P^eE46 Fr~dsco. Tmim opar~ oyez7 15 ~o 20 ~;~s alu_4=¢ co~m¢ pariock ~=cl hourIT midd~ .... , ...:. ,.,..! .. : Sidewalks. Sidewalks are i~ place alo=g. Chesmm_A_vmue aburti~ ~e Project ~ke. Bicycles. The closea bicycle routes are alortg I--~ll~cle Boulc~'d Md C.,hesmm: ~mpact :. ... ' .... .,.... - , ;...- .. T~.~/dofS'~. :The Project would trove a Si~mificam eglvironm e. llr~l impact if i were. to conflict wire adopted polities, plans, or programs supporting alternative zransportation. As proposed, the Proie= would be required ~:o re-comma= the si&~alk alo=g the ?roiect ske's ~omage. The proiect ~/ml:rovepedesr. fi~ access aad safety. Ther~ore, the l:rroie~ would have no impact ....... , .. XVi. Environmental F.a~'ors: and FocusedQuestions for · ,Determinaljon of Envimnmen.ml Impaq. Potentially :Less Than Significant .. Significant Impact with Miti9afion ;UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS- Would the ~roject: :, Lc...'. .:... ..... ~, '-. .... - - a) Exceed westewater treatment requirements of .:[ ,:.]. the aPPlicableRegion~l Watsr'Qual ty Control Board? - ' - " - "'".'";'. ......... ..:,b) ..~Require or result.in,the.constru~on of new ,.[ ] :,Less Than. Significant '.'No Impact- Impact -... [x.] o) d) e) g) .water or.:westewater treatment facilities or; expansionof existing faCiliti~, the construction of-which could cause significant environmental effects? . . '".:. -._:.,.5~. ':',z~::. ;' Require or,,result in the cons~ction.ofnew storm water.drainage facilities or ejqD.ansion of existing facilities, the construction of Which could cause significant environmental effects? Have sufficient water supplies.available to serve[ the Project from existing entitlements and · . resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?-:.' v; ~ :-".k.-,', -~ ,' 5~:: y .-~'~;; ~ ,. :. .... ..~ . -. : ',,' Result in. adeterminafion by..thewastewater ~'[ ~tmatmen. t provider, which serves or.may serve ...... the Prpject that it has adequate capacity to serve the'Proje~s,projected demand in " '" addition to'the provider's,existing ": -. commitments'? · Be served by a landfill with s~cient permitted [ . ] capacity to accommodate the Project's solid waste disposal needs? .... ' '-~ :" Comply,with federal, .state, and local statutes [ and regulations related to solid waste? [ ] -.[ ,.] -:[ x] .[ ×] ,[ ] [ x] [ ] -[ ] [x] -186- INITIAL STUDY/Mm~ATED'NE~'nvE DECLARATION cJ 11 CHESTNUTTGWNHOMES · PAGE 47 a) l~e~o~a! Wastewater Treatment Standards Impact ~ofSign/fiamm. The Project woUld have.a, sign~cam environm~,al impact if it were to exceed wastewater zreammat requkements o£ the applicable Kegional Water Quality Control Boar& Due to the small size of the project and the recent upgrade and expansion of the Waster Water Treatment Plant the Project, due to it's small size, would have no impact related to an exceedance of w~.~'~= ~'v~z~ ~'~cs of the Regio,~.l .Water Q,,=I~ Control BOard. b) Water and ~Vastewat. er Treatment Facilities Water. ?ozable water is provided for the City of Somh San Francisco and m,.zda of San C_oungr by the Califomh Water Service Company (CWSC), wkich pur~_t,,.~es most of in supply fi.om the San Frandsco Water Deparmaem (S2WD). In 1999, average war. er use throughout CWSC'$ average of 7.85 mgd. For the la~c.:few years, mtalwazer use in tl~'~.~ ~1~}' exceede~l CWSC's. "average d~ma~d' scenario." " The Civ/s 1994 East o£ 101 Area Plan e~,~ed th-? water use east o~ the :h'eeway would increase t,y z67s mgct by 20w. This is more tim ¥- es CWSC' ay ...... ' 'a m .'a.pr0je=i0n' or growth, in w~.er use throughout the Somh San Francisco District.fr°m 1994 zb 2010. The Water Company's estimates are based on past wazer use, AI!~G growth, predictiom ~and a combln,tion of co,=~er~,!, indumial and residential developmem th,¢ differe&/:ron/'some.0~r..~e~C~.. land uses incorporated into the Area Plan. In a~l~tifon, the'Area Pla,~i'.S:pr6jeetions indudei:l an allowame for the potentially hi~erwater a~,,~d associated with the 3Br. D x;adlkies and ::. ph,mm~entical-man~ firms thaz were b~n,~i,,g zo,move imo'Smuh Sm .FrandsCO~ This Francisco E)imSct declined by 57 perce, m fi.om 1981 ~:o 199,9,.blllr~g.~0m 3$.per¢ent to'i3 percem service area. The Calfforn~:~ Water Service Company's contract withte 'SFWD calls for. a maximin delivery' rate of 42.5 mgd, so approximately 8mg, d ~ould be a4ailable z0"~'~pateii water supply needs that exceed ks 2010 projected d~mand o~ 34 mgd. As a resuk, th~-e.are eturmtly no restrictiom on service conne~ons for new deve!opmenr. ". ' ' ' ~astewater. Allwastewazer produced w;,3,1, the City of S0"~ Sm Frands~ u tr~ed at the C_~'s Water Q,=ll,y Conzrol Plant (W~), whic.~ is located az the:end of Belle Air Road, near the m l~=r~ouse ks~oci~es, Brkanr~ ~ Or~r~Pm~ £~/m/m=R~z,'t. p.14-1, Oc~ob=r 2001. -187- INmAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION · :~ 'I 1 CHE.5'"TNUTTOWNHOME~ · PAGE 48 edge o£ San :Francisco Bay. ~lae WQCP is joke.owned bythe C_,~as,.o£ South San Francisco..and San Bruno, and it treats all wastewater ~enerat~d wk_~;~ the two cities. The ~QCP also has contracts to treat most o£ the wastewater produced bythe City of Co]rn~ and a portion o~c the produced by the Cky of Daly C~. These latter two m-~cipalkies ha~e..a.comhimd dryw~her. · Uoca~on of z00,00o ganons.~er dz~ (~c~ at the To accommodate continued d~velopment ..with;~ thc,.WQCP~s, service.area, md ~o to 4low plum operators to:discontinue the use o£ exp. ms[ye ch.~ical~iaiffees in,.the trear~t :process, the plant .. is being upgraded to a drTwe~ther capa&7 o£ ~3 rog& Constru~on was completed in late 2002..0~ the a.$ ~sd of additio~l dryweather capacityt~;., w~l ~e ~wi!able (~bove currem ~ow rates), 03 ~d is reserved ior.Sau ~runo.and fo~,Colm~/9~ Ci~. ~ds. ~ te~v. e.appro~~,:2.$ mgd ..- available above current dryweather itow roes to suppo~t.continued- growth in S~uth.$m Fmucisco.. When this upgrade w~s designed in 19~5, the City's wa~ew~er consultants projected it would meet the service ~rea's ne~ds until 20~5. However, development and wastew~ter ,/lows :have incre~uing more rapidly than mpected in recent years, so adcIidor;~] improVemmts may be needed before that dat- ~ ' '. Thr~ddofSi~. Tt~ Project would have a si~F;cant mvironmental impact if k were to require.,,.he, co--on of new water ..or wastm~ater treatment:/acilkies.or.expan.~on.of ~.~n= . ..... ..... . xCacilkie.% the constmcuon o£which could cause s~fflcant environmental eHecm ;.,~ :..:,i-.'. /: =' The wazer and sankary lines in the project vicinity ha%.:.ade.qu,~t., e...ca, pacity.to ,.a:commndate.::the .-:.:: proposed 8 dw~]l~ugs. There£ore~ no impact will occur. .:': i' ::.i ~'. Impact· . Thm~/dofS'~- .,The.Project would have a si~iCicant e. uvironm,~t~limpact if k w. ere.to :.::5 ~..-.. require or result iu the.-comm-uc~on ofnewistom water dmimge.facilkies,oriu.the expansion o£..~ :~:: :.. ~i~ng £a~es, the construction o£ wkich could cause si~Ficant environm~r~ ed~ects. The Project ~ould-have-no impact ril~ed to the.construction orlexpau~on o~f storm war-er drain,ge facilities; since the pr°posed ?roject.~ould be'implemmted in au area largely built out in an ar~a ~of$i~. The Project wouldhave a.si~Fican: =vir°~rrim~.knisact'~.it w~r~ to require additional water supply beTond that available Irom-.e~isting entitlements aud resources. -188- INmAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION '~ 1 '~ CHF--STNUTTOWNHOMES · PAGE 49 e) Wastewater Treatment :Facility Capacity Impact Thrv. ddd of S'w~anm The Project would have a ~;~q~,~ emfronm~ntal impact ii: it were to resuk in a deter~;~on bythe wastewazer.treatmenz provider which may serve the Project that'it has ;-:~l~qua~e capackyto .serve'.the Pr6ject's Fr0jected d~rna,~d, in. ~Acl~on to' the Provider'.$ commivmelll~, .. " '""' .:' '. '". ::" ', "' ' :- :""' :' '"" . . . .: : - .;i ~ . ..;. The Project would place.a 'no.impaet fl_~rn~4d on the area's :wastewazer Zrearrn~nt provider and would noz"prevent it :~'om .bd4;ll;ng:~ ~,ri~ng comrnkm.~nts.'' .. " ~ ~ ' , i .' .'.."... ' ;'~.:,."'.,,'"'. · .'.' " f) Solid Waste Dis~saI 'Capacity' '. ':: ' '~ · Impact '" .: ': ~/dofS'~. Th~ Project would have a fi~i~q_~,,t environ m mr, al impact if it were to be served by a landfill ~ inadequate pen:ni~d capacity to acco-~moa~e the ?roject.'s solid waste disposal needs. Comm~on.and operation.of:me Proposed'Project would generaze solid waste bm'd~ sizewould gener~ no impact, "'" ::.".'.,' · .... .'.~.'"."' ..... "':..'"." ..: ~':"~ ~ .... "" ': :::'.,' '.'''~ :' "'-.".'-":": '. g) Compliance .W'Tfl~. SoIid.:.Waste Regailafiom .-: -': .-' ' ~ :, '. · Impact " ' Thnd~.d of S'~' The Projecc would have a fi~i~cam emriro~rn~ntal ;.mpact [xally comptywir, h ~edeml, st. aze, andlocal stam~ and regulaziom rdateSt0.S0lidwaste~ ' ':' '": ¢" "'" ' Operation of'the .proposed Project would be =I-%ted to be in full complimce With all federil, and local .sr,2nv~ and reg~latiom relazed ~:o .solid waste, thereby having no ,impact.. :.,:'.:'. ?,, .... ;..'~."...'.' .v,...:.:~-~,~.... · '. . .'.. :'..{')'.' : ~5~... , Environmental Factors and Focused Ques~ons for Poten~ally ...-. :OelermJnafiOn Of Epvimn~en~ !mpa~ · .'..,: ~: :.Signffie~nt ~. :~ /.:....:. : ...,.' .....-i. , .~.> ..---:.lin. pact. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- " a) Does the Project have the potenUal to degrade the qualrty of the environment, substanUally reduce the h~itat of a fish or wildlife specie, cause a fish or wildlife populalion lo drop . below self-simtnining levels, lhmaten lo .... · 'eliminate a plant or animal communily, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Less Than Less Than :S!gnificant.. ,S}gniflcant .,.-No with . .... Impact ....!re, pact M~gation ' [x] [ ] [ -189- I~rn&~ ~ tm',,' / MITIE-~TED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1 1 1 CHES"rNUTTOWNHOMES · PAGE 50 Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for Potentially Less Than Less Than Determination of Environmental Impact b) Does the Proiect have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable' means that the incremental effects of a Project are considerable.when viewed in connection with the effects of past Proiects, the effects of other current Projects, and the effects of probable future Projects.) c) Does the Project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse e~cts on human balnFs, either directly or indirectly? Significant Significant Significant No Impact wif~ Impact Impact Mitigation [ ] [ ] ix] IX] .[ ] [ ] a) Quality of the Environment lmplem .enmfion of the Project does no: have the potential to degrade the quality o£the en-dronment, substantiak~ reduce the h~hitat o£ a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildtife population to drop below self-~.levels, threaten to e];m;m~e a plant or animal cornm, mity, reduce the number or r~rict the range o£ a rare or mdangered plant or animal or el;~;-:te important examples o£ re=jot periods of Californ;= history- or prehistory. There are no Project- related enVironmmtal impacts that would not be reduced m a level of less than significant through the .knp]ern~-*~XiOn Of the mifiga6on measures identified above. b) Cumulative Impacts does , ot. in-¢olTe en,eo,,,,en co~z~le wh~ ~ed m come.on ~ ~e effems of p~ ~ojems, ~e eHems of o&~ ~t projems, md ~e ~ems o{ ~obable ~e proje~. ~e ~e no ~oject-re~ted cgmg~e impacts. c) Adverse Environmental Effects on Human Beings The Project would not have environmental effects, wE& w/Il cause substantial adverse affects on hum= beings, akh~ directly or indirectly, because the Project is con~mt and compau'ble v~ .agri .~ct~.. land uses in the surrounding area. The implementation of the mitigation measures ~dmr~ed above would reduce potentially si~i~caut Project-related ell~I'onrn~llt~l impacts to a level o~ less than significant. -190- INITIAL STUDY / ~VIITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 11 1 CHES'rNUTTOWNHOMES · PAGE BIBLIOGtLkPHY .:.REFERENCES Bay Area ~ Quality Management District, BAA QMD C£Q.A ~: Assess~. t~ Mir In3uacts of~ ardp/am, .April 1996. ' Bay Area Air Quality Management Distri~ B.4_4QMD C£QM Cwdde/b~, p.23,24. Bay Area ~ Quality Management District, ~BayArea Attainmem Smms' April 1999 (obtained at BAAQMD website: www.baaqm&gm[). Bay Area Air Quality Management. District, S~mavy of Air Zb//u~ ~ the Bay Area, bdividu~ sheets for 1995-1999; and various Press l~e. leases, C)~c¢ .of P ublic Information, Education I)ivision~ August 1997 through January 2001. Brady and Associates, East off01 Area P/an, adopted J~4y 1994. City of SoUth San Francisco, South San Franc~ Mm~d Caak' Tree Pres~ adopted June 2'8, 2000. ' ]:)yen: & Bhada, C&y o/So, ah San Franc/~ C,v~d P/an, adopted October 1999. the C~ of Soufla Sm Frandsco, September 1997. Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 4~ Edifiom, 1987. Project Plans, dazed December 30, 2002, prepared by KIDA Arehkects, In~ REPORT AUTHOR Steve Carlso~ Senior Planner -192- INmAL STUDY,/Mmc.~TED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ".'11,1 c'HEsTNUT TOWNHOMES · PAGE 53 : Br~-~o~53 ' ~LrrHOt~. 53. ... APPENDICES F_2d~OFd BOOKMARK NOT D~. INmAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECI.AP, A'T1ON -193- ~111 CHES.'TNUTTOWNHOMES PAGE ii HOUSE5 HOUSE6 HOUSE 7 HOUSE 8 LOOKING NORTH HOUSE1 HOUSE 2 HOUSE 3 HOUSE 4 LOOKING SOUTH KDArchitects, lnc. 111 Chestnut Ave. south east Roof north 2nd Floor BEDROOM 1st Floor west Key Plan KDArc h ite ct s, In( 111 Chestnut Ave A.P.N 011-312-090 House 1 A4.1 ./ west ] Roof south north 2nd Floor 1st Floor east KDAr c h ite ct s, Inc. 1 1 1 Chestnut Ave. South San Francisco, CA A.P.N. 011-312-090 House 8 A4.8./ EXISTING BLDG. LOT 26 ,. ,,,¥- ~, LOT 9 /? LANE LOT 12 House SUBDIVIDER NAME AND RECORD OWNER STATEMENTS GRAPHIC SCALE ~--J '" _T 111 CHESTNUT DESIGN CONCEPTS 4.22.05 lnG, ~D REGULAnON$ OF ~ GOVERNING 111 Chestnut Ave. South San Francisco, CA A.P.N 011-312-090 STREET VIEW 111 CHESTNUT DESIGN CONCEPTS 4.22.05 tDArc h ite cts, Inc, 111 Chestnut Ave. South San Francisco, CA A.P,N. 011-312-090 PERSPECTIVE STUDIES HOUSE HOUSE8 HOUSE4AND5 HOUSE6 HOUSE 1 HOUSE 2 HOUSE 3 111 CHESTNUT DESIGN CONCEPTS 4.22.05 111 Chestnut Ave, South San Francisco, CA A.P,N. 011-312-090 PERSPECTIVE STUDIES F- L L F 111 Chestnut Ave. South San Francisco Subdivision Design Proposal PROJECT DATA ,/,,/.~ ,u~,.~ ~ ,~, r c h i t e c t s, inc. 111 Chestnut Ave. COVERS.EET A0.1 PROPERTY LINE House 5 House 4 House 6 House 7 PLAY AREA PLAY AREA House 2 PROPERTY LINE House 8 House 1 KDArchitects, [nc. 111 Chestnut Ave. South San Francisco, CA A.P.N. O11-312-O90 FIRST FLOOR PLAN A2.1.1 PROPERTY LINE KOArchitects, Inc. 111 Chestnut Ave. South San Francisco, CA A.PN. 011~312-090 SECOND FLOOR PLAN A2.1.2 House 4 House 3 House 2 KDArchitects, lnc, 111 Chestnut Ave. South San Francisco, CA A.P.N 011-312-090 THIRD FLOOR PLAN A2.1.3 House 5 House 6 House 4 House 3 ROOF PLAN House 7 House 2 House 8 House 1 111 Chestnut Ave. South San Francisco, CA A.P.N. 011-312-090 ROOF P:AN A2.1.4. B HOUSE 1, east OPTION A: ROOF SLOPE OF 4:12 (HOUSES 1 & 8) HOUSE 8, east HOUSE 1, east OPTION B: ROOF SLOPE OF 1.5:12 (HOUSE 1) ROOF SLOPE OF 2:12 (HOUSE 8) CHESTNUT STREET ELEVATION LOOKING WEST east HOUSE 8, east [~rchitects, lnc. 1 1 1 Chestnut Ave. South San Francisco, CA A.P.N, 011-312-090 CHESTNUT STREET ELEV^T,ON A3.1 HOUSE 5 HOUSE6 HOUSE 7 HOUSE 8 LOOKING NORTH HOUSE 1 HOUSE2 HOUSE3 HOUSE 4 LOOKING SOUTH KDArchitects, lnc. 111 Chestnut Ave. South San Francisco, CA A.P.N. 011-312-090 INTERIOR DRIVEWAY ELEVATIONS A3.2 south east north west Roof 2nd Floor ENTRY 1st Floor Key Plan KDArchitects, lnc. 111 Chestnut Ave. South San Francisco, CA A.P.N. 011-312-090 House 1 A4.1 .B south Roof 3rd Floor east no~h 2nd Floor west DINING 1st Floor Key Plan 111 Chestnut Ave. South San Francisco, CA A.P.N. 011-312-090 House 2 A4.2 K~Architects, Inc. south east nodh west Roof 3rd Floor 2nd Floor House 3 GUEST BEDROOM 1st Floor Key Plan 111 Chestnut Ave. South San Francisco, CA A.P.N. 011-312-090 House 3 A4.3 west south east Roof 3rd Floor 2nd Floor 1st Floor north Key Plan * KDArchitects, lnc. 1 11 Chestnut Ave. South San Francisco, CA A.P.N. 011-312-090 Houses 4 & 5 A4.5 west south east ENTRY~ north Key Plan 111 Chestnut Aw north east south west Roof 3rd Floor 2nd Floor CE 1st Floor Key Plan 1 1 1 Chestnut Ave. South San Francisco, CA A.P.N. 011-312-090 House 7 A4.7 west south east Roof nodh 2nd Floor BEDROOM I FAMILY 1st Floor Key Plan IDArc h i te ct s, Inc. 111 Chestnut Ave. South San Francisco, CA A.P.N. 011-312-090 House 8 A4.8.B Staff Report AGENDAITEM #I2a [I DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: April 27, 2005 The Honorable Mayor and City Council Elaine Yamani, Interim Director of Human Resources RESOLUTION APPROVING PERSONNEL CHANGES INCLUDING CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTION AND PLACEMENT ON THE AFSCME SALARY SCHEDULE RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council, adopt a resolution, approving the classification description and salary placement for the proposed reinstatement of the Public Works Inspector classification within the AFSCME salary schedule. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department has determined to best meet its specific needs for inspection services that the position of Public Works Inspector should be reinstated to the salary schedules. The position of Public Works Inspector had a long-standing history within the City until it was removed from salary schedules in the mid nineties in favor of modifying position descriptions including Construction Manager. The employee who held the Construction Manager position retired at the end of 2004. Previously, this position resided in the Engineering Department, however, with the department reorganization in 2004, the inspection function now resides in the Public Works Maintenance Department. The Public Works Maintenance Department has performed inspections with an acting inspector since January 2005 and wishes to return to the basics of the position to insure projects are properly inspected and encroachment permits are closely monitored. Construction management will reside with the City Engineer' s office, allowing the Public Works Inspector to focus on the primary task of plans and specification compliance. The job description, last revised in 1970, has been updated to current requirements. The salary is comparable to the Building Inspector position. Attached is the salary schedule (Exhibit A) for the classification and the job description (Exhibit B). New Classification: pUblic Works Inspector ....... ' .... I New classification as a result of an organizational change. CB-04/21/05 S:Lq~R StaflXElaine\Staff Reports~Public Works Inspector~Kesolution PW lnspector-Rev.doc Staff Report Subject: Personnel Changes - Public Works Inspector Page 2 By: ff[~ ~_ (.~4~~ jEfi~e-gamani/~ -- . Director of Hui'fian Resources Bae~y'~. ~agel City Manager Attachments: Salary Range (Exhibit A) and Class Description (Exhibits B) for Public Works Inspector City of South San Francisco Exhibit A Below is the salary range for the classifications listed in the staff report to which this is attached. AFSCME Salary Schedule :Title Monthly Salary Range Public Works Inspector ............................................................ $5,238 to $6,368 SP-04/21/05 S:'~-IR Staft~Elaine~taffReportsXPublic Works InspectorXExhibit A-PW Imp.doc Exhibit B Attachment Class Description for: 1. Public Works Inspector CB-04/21/05 lO:lO AM S:~'tR StaffilElaine~Staff Reports~Publie Works laspeetor~xhibit B-PW Imp.doc City of South San Francisco Human Resources Department Public Works Inspector Class Description Definition Under general supervision, inspects and participates in all phases of construction projects to insure conformance with approved plans, specifications and departmental regulations; maintain records and prepare reports pertaining to projects inspected; and performs other related duties as assigned. Distinguishing Characteristics This single-position class performs full range of duties assigned including the performance of the entire range of field inspection work requiring knowledge of construction inspection principles and practices. Typical and Important Duties 1. Reviews and interprets plans and specifications of assigned project; attends bid openings and preconstruction conferences. 2. Inspects various public works constructions such as utilities, storm sewers, sanitary sewers, streets, sidewalks, gutters and other off-site construction; check line, grade, size, elevation and location of structures for conformance with specifications and regulations. 3. Observes work in all stages of progress to assure conformance with standards; ensures that safety procedures are followed; consults with contractor's supervisory personnel as to methods of construction to determine their adequacy in relation to standards. 4. As appropriate, approves contract change orders and ensures completion of changes. 5. Inspects and tests, or coordinates and reviews the tests of construction materials such as concrete, aggregates, soils, pipe and building materials, reviews workmanship and sequence of operations. 6. Prepares and reviews inspection reports; prepares progress payments and responds to and/or processes claims. 7. Performs basic survey functions to confirm alignments and grades. 8. Indicates location of various appurtenances on plans. 9. Inspects adjacent properties for damage from construction activity. 10. Prepares periodic reports regarding the status of all projects. 11. Responds to complaints, problems and questions from concerned parties and, as necessary, takes action to remedy them. 12. Maintains effective communications with other departments and City staff, contractors, other agencies and the community. 13. Perform related duties as assigned. City of South San Francisco Public Works Inspector Class Description Page Job-related Qualifications Knowledge of: · Principles and practices of construction management and public works inspection. · Materials, methods, and practices used in public works construction, including streets, gutters, sidewalks, drainage systems, underground lines, streetlights, and related facilities. · Principles and practices of engineering as applied to construction inspection. · Safety principles, practices, regulations, and procedures related to the work, including OSHA regulations. · Applicable federal and state laws, codes, and regulations. · Applicable mathematics including algebra, geometry and trigonometry as applied to construction inspection work. · Basic computer systems and applications related to the work. Ability to: · Inspect construction projects to ensure compliance with plans and specifications. · Reviews public works construction plans and specifications. · Accurately interpret, apply and explain applicable laws, codes, regulations, and ordinances. · Detect and locate faulty materials and workmanship and determine the state of construction during which defects are most easily found and remedied. · Understand and interpret engineering plans and specifications and prepare accurate engineering records. · Prepare designs, specifications and cost estimates in specified areas. · Make engineering calculations of quantities and grades; operate survey instruments. · Prepare concise and accurate reports, correspondence, change orders, specifications, and other written materials. · Communicate effectively in writing, orally, and with others to assimilate, understand, and convey information, in a manner consistent with job functions. · Establish and maintain effective relationships with those contacted in the course of work. · Develop good public relations. · Represent the City, the department, or the organizational unit effectively in meetings and in contacts with representatives of other agencies, City departments, private organizations, individuals, and the public. · Take a proactive approach to customer service issues. · Make process improvement changes to streamline procedures. · Acquire a thorough knowledge of applicable department policies and procedures and a working knowledge of related City policies, regulations, and procedures. · Work in a safe manner, following City safety practices and procedures and modeling correct safety practices; enforce adherence to safety policies and procedures; identify, correct, and report safety hazards. · Maintain confidentiality regarding sensitive information. Skill in · Using a personal computer and related software. City of South San Francisco Public Works Inspector Class Description Page 3 Experience and Training Any combination of experience and training that would provide the required knowledge and abilities would be qualifying. A typical way to obtain the knowledge and abilities would be: Experience: Three years of public works construction experience with one year as a construction foreman or public works inspecting and surveying experience. College-level coursework in an engineering or construction technology may also be substituted for the initial two years of experience on a year-for-year basis to a maximum of two years. Training: Equivalent to graduation from high school supplemented by applicable technical engineering and inspection coursework. Registration as a California construction inspector is highly desirable. Licenses and Certificates All licenses and certificates must be maintained as a condition of employment. · Possession of, or ability to obtain, an appropriate valid California driver's license, and a satisfactory driving record. Special Requirements Essential duties require the following physical skills and work environment: Physical Skills: Able to use standard office equipment, including a computer; sit, stand, walk, kneel, crouch, stoop, squat, crawl, twist; climb ladders, stairs, and scaffolding; walk on rooftops; lift and carry 35 pounds; use standard office equipment, including a computer; vision to read a computer screen and printed materials, including maps and plans and to discern different colored materials; hearing and speech to communicate in person and over the telephone. Work Environment: Mobility to work in standard office environment or field setting; exposure to cold, heat, noise, outdoors, vibration, con£med workspace, chemicals, explosive materials, vibration, mechanical hazards, electrical hazards, traffic, and work in attics and crawlspaces; walk on pitched and flat roofs. Ability to: Travel to different sites and locations; locations; drive safely to different sites and locations; maintain a safe driving record; maintain a neat and clean appearance; work extended hours or off-shift work for meeting attendance or participation in specific projects or programs, and take call during non-business hours. Approved: Revised Date: Former Titles: Abolished: Bargaining Unit: ADA Review: DOT: Physical: Status: EEOC Category: Job Code: January1970 April2005 ConstmctionManager-Apfil2005, EngineeringProjeet Coordin~or - June 2003, Senior ConstmctionInspector-June 2001 AFSCME 3/2005 No Class 2 Classified/Non-Exempt EF9~EJ3 City of South San Francisco Public Works Inspector Class Description Page 4 ADA Documentation of Essential Duties 1. SDE 2. SDE 3. SDE 4. SMA 5. SDE 6. SDE 7. OAE 8. SDE 9. SDE 10. SDE 11. SMA 12. SDE RESOLUTION NO. CITY COUNCII,, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE JOB SPECIFICATION AND SALARY PLACEMENT FOR THE NEV~TLY DEVELOPED PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTION CLASSIFICATION WHEREAS, staff desires approval of the job specification and salary placement for the newly developed Public Works Inspector classification as shown in the attached Exhibit A and B. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City Council approves the job specification and salary placement for the newly developed Public Works Inspector classification. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a meeting held on the ~ day of 2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: S:\Current Reso's\4-13-class.discrip.public.works.res.DOC ATTEST: City Clerk II DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: April 27, 2005 Honorable Mayor and City Council Elaine Yamani, Interim Human Resources Director AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 3.12 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RECOMMENDATION Waive reading and introduce the ordinance, which amends Chapter 3.12 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code, to implement Council-approved position title additions, deletions, and/or changes. BACKGROUND The Municipal Code, Chapter 3.12 is updated during the budget process and periodically as positions are renamed, reclassified, developed and/or deleted from the competitive and non-competitive service. The following changes to the Municipal Code are recommended. Delete from the Municipal Code: ';:5' Title::::~ ReasOn ~ :' ; :: Construction Manager .............. Classification being deleted as a result (~f an OrganizatiOnal I change. Add to the Municipal Code: ~: .i[ ,: i ReaSon . Public Works InSpector ............ I Position added to the classified service. By: HumanElaR~s~urY ace~irector ')("~c~.~~el City Manager CB-04/21/05 S:hHR StaftkElaine\Staff ReportskPublic Works Inspector~Mmendment-Const~uction Mgr-Rev.docAm~adment To Chapter 3.12.do¢ ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 3.12.010 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE The City Council of the City of South San Francisco does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. 1. SECTION 3.12.010 IS HEREBY AMENDED AS FOLLOWS: SUBDIVISION (a)(4) 1. Delete the position title "Construction Manager." 2. Add the position title of "Public Works Inspector." SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY In the event any section or portion of this ordinance shall be determined invalid or unconstitutional, such section or portion shall be deemed severable and all other sections or portions hereof shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 3. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall be published once, with the names of those City Councilmembers voting for or against it, in the San Mateo Times, a newspaper of general circulation in the City of South San Francisco, as required by law, and shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its adoption. Introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of South San Francisco, held the __ day of ., 2005. Adopted as an Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting of the City Council held the __ day of ,2005 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: City Clerk As Mayor of the City of South San Francisco, I do hereby approve the foregoing Ordinance this __ day of ,2005. S:\Current Oral's\4-13-05positon.doc Mayor FIRST AMENDMENT TO CITY/CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND G.E. CHEN CONSTRUCTION, INC. TO INCREASE TOTAL COMPENSATION FOR EXPANSION OF AIRCRAFT NOISE INSULATION PROGRAM This First Amendment to the City/Contractor Agreement ("First Amendment Agreement") is made and entered into as of __., 2005 by and between G.E. Chen Construction, Inc., a California corporation ("Grantee") and the City of South San Francisco, a municipal corporation ("City"), organized and existing under the laws of the State of California. RECITALS WHEREAS, on March 10, 1999, the City Council adopted a Resolution awarding a construction contract to G.E. Chen Construction, Inc. in the amount of $2,563,000 to complete Phase XVIII of the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program ("ANIP"),; and WHEREAS, since the execution of that contract, City has completed noise insulation work on over 6000 single-family and 860 multi-family residences within the original noise footprint; and WHEREAS, the City, through ANIP, has now completed noise insulation work on all homes located within the area that qualifies for Federal grant funding through the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA"); and WHEREAS, in 1995, the City entered into a Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") with the San Francisco International Airport ("SFIA") under which SFIA agreed to provide approximately 45 million dollars in funding to assist with noise insulation; and WHEREAS, City and SFIA have jointly interpreted the terms of the MOU, and agree that accrued interest on the original MOU funding belongs to the City and may be used to provide sound insulation for homes within the noise footprint and homes immediately adjacent but outside of the original 1983 ANIP noise footprint; and WHEREAS, City wishes to provide funding for continued insulation work on approximately 70 homes within the AN1P area including the areas of Village Way and Camaritas Boulevard; and WHEREAS, City and Contractor wish to amend the original City/Contractor Agreement in order to provide funding for the completion of insulation of these approximately 70 homes. All work specifications as contained in Contractor's original bid shall remain in effect. NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: AGREEMENT AMENDMENT 735360-1 1. The City/Contractor Agreement was entered into March 10, 1999. 2. The first paragraph of Section 5 "Contract Price" is amended to read as'follows: "5. Contract Price. City shall pay, and contractor shall accept, in full payment for the work to be done the sum of Three Million, One Hundred and Sixty Three Thousand, three hundred ($3,163,300.00)." 3. Contractor shall perform insulation work for approximately 70 additional homes within the Aircraft Noise Insulation Program ("ANIP") area including the areas of Village Way and Camaritas Boulevard, consistent with the plans approved by the City and attached hereto as Exhibit A. All other terms and conditions in the City/Contractor Agreement, entered into March 10, 1999, remain in full force and effect to the extent they are not in conflict with the aforementioned revised language. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement on the day and year first above written. CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO DATED: BY: Barry M. Nagel, City Manager G.E. CHEN CONSTRUCTION, INCORPORATED DATED: BY: Its: ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: 735360-1 A~GEND,4 ITEM #13 12. Report on "Every Fifteen Minutes Program" two day seminar at El Camino High School - Police Chief Raffaelli and Police Corporal Mike Rudis