Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-02-27 e-packet@6:00Wednesday, February 27, 2019 6:00 PM City of South San Francisco P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA Municipal Services Building, Council Chambers 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA Special City Council Special Meeting Agenda February 27, 2019Special City Council Special Meeting Agenda 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, February 27, 2019, at 6:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, California. Purpose of the meeting: Call to Order. Roll Call. Agenda Review. Public Comments - comments are limited to items on the Special Meeting Agenda. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS Study Session to present opportunities for a Community Facility District (CFD) financing strategy for the East of Highway 101 Area. (Mike Futrell, City Manager) 1. Report regarding an overview of City’s progress towards meeting September 2019 deadline for Green Infrastructure Plan in accordance with requirements of the Municipal Regional Permit. (Matthew Ruble, Senior Civil Engineer, Keith Lichten from Regional Water Quality Control Board) 2. Adjournment. Page 2 City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/17/2019 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:19-159 Agenda Date:2/27/2019 Version:1 Item #:1. Study Session to present opportunities for a Community Facility District (CFD)financing strategy for the East of Highway 101 Area.(Mike Futrell, City Manager) Attachments: 1.CFD Study Session Staff Report 2.CFD Attachment A - Comparable CFDs 3.CFD Attachment B - Possible CFD Boundary 4.CFD Powerpoint Presentation City of South San Francisco Printed on 2/22/2019Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of South San Francisco powered by Legistar™ City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #: 19-159 Agenda Date: 2/27/19 Version: 1 Item #: 1. Study Session to present opportunities for a Community Facility District financing strategy for the East of Highway 101 Area. (Mike Futrell, City Manager) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council consider and provide guidance on next steps to establish a Community Facility District generally within the East of 101 Area. BACKGROUND The San Francisco Bay Area has experienced unparalleled economic success since the end of the Great Recession. Approximately 660,000 jobs have been created in the region since 2010, and the unemployment rate in San Mateo County as of December, 2018, was at 2%, reflective of our robust economy. South San Francisco and its residents have benefited from this economic success in the form of greater job opportunities, increased home values and elimination of blighted sites in the city, replaced by modern buildings. This economic growth has not come without a cost, however, and traffic in South San Francisco has increased with the growing number of jobs and associated commuters. Much of the increased traffic is associated with growth in the City’s biotechnology and industrial area, centered along Highway 101 and East of Highway 101 (E101 Area.) To understand traffic patterns and the impact of future economic growth, the City began developing a new E101 Area Traffic Master Plan. The City will develop a new master traffic plan for areas West of Highway 101 in 2019. Once complete, both traffic master plans will become part of the new General Plan for South San Francisco. The City hired the firm of Fehr & Peers, well-qualified transportation experts, to develop the master traffic plan for the East of Highway 101 area. Fehr & Peers held multiple public meetings to gain information, feedback and ideas; studied existing travel patterns, roadway congestion, bicycle and pedestrian gaps; and evaluated the transit service within the E101 Area. Fehr & Peers then studied and projected future growth in the E101 Area, modeled that growth in light of existing transportation conditions, and concluded continued growth will increase the stresses on the City’s transportation systems to an unacceptable level. In light of the conclusion that continued growth would negatively affect transportation systems, Fehr & Peers explored and modeled possible improvements to transportation. What emerged were five initiatives, which, if successfully implemented, would improve transportation to an acceptable level even with the projected future growth. The Fehr & Peers study is known as Mobility 2020. Mobility 2020 identifies major capital and operating investments for the E101 Area which improves the transportation system; however, the plan requires an investment of approximately $356 million for construction, and an annual operating revenue stream of approximately $7 million for operation and maintenance. There are insufficient local, regional, state, or federal funds available to cover the cost of the needed improvements, requiring that City Staff look to other solutions to fund the needed improvements. Page 1 of 13 City of South San Francisco powered by Legistar™ City Staff, in conjunction with many companies in the E101 Area, have explored the establishment of a Mello- Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) as a means to raise needed funding. Essentially, upon formation of a CFD, businesses in the E101 Area would pay a special tax of a specified amount, with those funds going towards improving transportation in the E101 Area. Discussion of the CFD formation process and costs/benefits is the focus of this study session, with City Staff seeking the City Council’s guidance and direction to continue pursuing a CFD as a means to finance the identified transportation improvements. DISCUSSION Current and Future Growth East of the 101 Area The E101 Area is an international hub for the biotechnology industry as well as a regional center for industry, logistics, and travel. Presently, the E101 Area serves approximately 28,000 employees across 21 million square feet of office/R&D, industrial, commercial, and hotel uses. Office/R&D and industrial space is in very high demand, with vacancy rates under five percent. Over the next two decades, the City expects to add over 13 million square feet of mostly office and R&D space in the E101 Area, doubling its daytime population to up to 55,000 employees. Approximately half of this growth is already approved or under construction and most will be office/R&D uses along with new hotels, retail, and employer amenities. Figure 1 graphically displays the projected growth in the E101 Area. Figure 1 – Current and Future E101 Growth Current and Future Transportation Challenges The E101 Area faces several challenges in accommodating expected growth: Regional congestion on US-101, 280, 380; Limited road access into the district via Oyster Point Blvd, Grand Avenue, Produce Avenue or South Airport Blvd; Physical barriers created by US-101, the Caltrain Corridor and the San Francisco Bay; and Future environmental concerns related to wetlands and sea level rise. Today, the East of 101 Area experiences an extended peak travel period with local traffic congestion spanning multiple hours. On a typical weekday, the busiest commute times are 7:00-10:00 AM (inbound) and 4:00-6:00 PM (outbound). Approximately 80 percent of trips occur via driving alone. Most trips originate in San Mateo County,  ‐ 10,000,000  20,000,000  30,000,000  40,000,000 2016 2040 Industrial Office/R&D Hotel Commercial Page 2 of 13 City of South San Francisco powered by Legistar™ but a growing number of commuters travel from the East Bay given the Peninsula’s worsening jobs-housing imbalance. Figure 2 - Inbound and Outbound Trips by Time of Day Traffic congestion is especially prevalent during the evening commute period. Access to the East of 101 Area is constrained to four major gateways accessing US-101 and I-380: Oyster Point Boulevard, East Grand Avenue, and South Airport Boulevard (north and south). These corridors experience daily backups, often extending several blocks. Furthermore, the mode split, or way that employees travel to the E101 Area, is skewed heavily towards trips by driving alone originating within San Mateo County (shown in Figure 3). This is primarily a result of convenience for San Mateo County based employees and a product of challenging last mile connections. Although several transit operators have identified the E101 Area as a near-term service expansion opportunity, including Caltrain, SamTrans, and the Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA), the Area’s limited shuttles, disconnected sidewalks, and lack of bicycle infrastructure limits the accessibility of these services. Absent a reliable transit option, the vast majority of workers in the E101 Area drive a car to work, and they drive alone. Figure 3 - Peak period mode split and trip origins  ‐  1,000  2,000  3,000  4,000  5,000  6,000  7,000  8,000  9,000 121234567891011121234567891011 Person Trips In (Eastbound) Person Trips Out (Westbound) Page 3 of 13 City of South San Francisco powered by Legistar™ Without any improvements, the E101 Area will experience extended peak period congestion and diminished regional competitiveness in the future. With its current infrastructure and services, the E101 Area can theoretically absorb approximately 10,000 new employees – equivalent to the amount of development currently under construction. However, this growth (and any growth beyond it) will result in worsening congestion along key corridors such as Oyster Point Boulevard and East Grand Avenue. Recent traffic studies suggest that sixteen E101 Area intersections will operationally break down if all projected growth materializes by 2040. Potential Traffic and Transit Solutions New roadway capacity and reduced solo driving is necessary to maintain an efficient and effective transportation network in the E101 Area given future growth. This requires new street connections, stronger Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs, transit service expansions, and walking/bicycling investments. The Mobility 2020 study focuses on five major projects within the E101 Area to enhance access and provide viable options to travel to and from work while reducing delay. Combined, these projects are intended to increase roadway throughput capacity by approximately 20-30 percent and support a reduction in drive alone trips to 60 percent of all commute trips. These projects will also improve traffic West of Highway 101 by reducing the number of cars commuting through South San Francisco en route to major job centers East of Highway 101. The five recommended initiatives include: 1. Utah Avenue Interchange with US-101 a.Description: Extends Utah Avenue from South Airport Boulevard to San Mateo Avenue with a new southbound onramp and off-ramp. b.Cost Estimate - $100M c.Mobility Improvement: Provides a new east-west crossing of US-101 and a more direct path to the US-101 southbound onramp, alleviating a bottleneck at South Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue intersection. Enables traffic to bypass East Grand Avenue and helps maximize underutilized capacity of Utah Avenue. d. Status: This project is on the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and is currently in design utilizing a $3.8 million grant from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). This Caltran supported project will finish design in early 2020, and then move into the environmental phase, costing an additional $4 million and lasting approximately 24 months. If placed on the fast track, this project could start construction in 2023 and open in 2025, pending funding. This project is also on the list of projects associated with the recently passed Measure W sales tax measure. Being on the STIP and the Measure W list, this project is eligible for funding from multiple sources. Figure 4 – Highway 101/Produce Avenue Project Alternative 1 Page 4 of 13 City of South San Francisco powered by Legistar™ Figure 5 – Highway 101/Produce Avenue Project Alternative Page 5 of 13 City of South San Francisco powered by Legistar™ 2.I-380 Connector to Haskins Way/Littlefield Avenue a.Description: Connects I-380/North Access Road directly to the E101 Area via either Haskins Way or Littlefield Avenue b.Cost Estimate - $130M c.Mobility Improvement: Provides direct connection to I-380, US-101, and I-280 via presently underutilized freeway stub. Enables traffic to travel I-280 to I-380, then directly into the E101 Area, bypassing US-101 completely. d.Status: This project is in the South San Francisco FY18-19 CIP project for conceptual design. This project is also on the list of projects associated with the recently passed Measure W sales tax measure. Figure 6 – Highway 380/Haskins Way or Littlefield Avenue Causeway Alternatives Figure 7 – Highway 380/Haskins Way Causeway Notional Design POTENTIAL  ALIGNMENT TO  LITTLEFIELD POTENTIAL  ALIGNMENT  TO HASKINS  Page 6 of 13 City of South San Francisco powered by Legistar™ 3. Grand Avenue/US-101 Northbound Off-ramp Flyover a.Description: Realigns northbound US-101 off-ramp to Grand Avenue by routing traffic above the new Caltrain Station. Figure 8 shows the current and proposed road alignment. Figure 9 is a rendering of the eastern Caltrain Plaza with the Off-Ramp Flyover in place. b.Cost Estimate - $35M c.Mobility Improvement: Removes barrier to accessing Caltrain station and supports more efficient connection to Grand Avenue for eastbound and westbound off-ramp traffic. d.Status: This project is in conceptual design. Figure 8 – Grand Avenue/Highway 101 Northbound Off-Ramp Flyover Page 7 of 13 City of South San Francisco powered by Legistar™ Figure 9 – Grand Avenue/Highway 101 Northbound Off-Ramp Flyover Notional Design 4. Street Operations, Safety, and Active Transportation Improvements a.Description: Modernizes street infrastructure to provide more efficient intersection operations, on-street bus stops, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, and new trail connections, creating safer links to Caltrain, Ferry Terminal and BART. See Figure 10 for a visual summary of projects. Below is a summary of project areas and cost estimates: b.Cost Estimate - $91M c.Mobility Improvement: Supports improved circulation within E101 Area and enhanced connections to transit, Bay Trail, and Centennial Trail. d.Status: In planning. Page 8 of 13 City of South San Francisco powered by Legistar™ Figure 10 – Street Operations, Safety, and Active Transportation Improvements Summary  5.Increase in Commuter Shuttles a.Description: The City is well served by transit – two nearby BART stations, Caltrain Station and Ferry Terminal – but cannot effectively use these assets due to the severe lack of “last mile” commuter shuttles. Increasing the number of shuttles, and operation and maintenance of same, is required to reduce the number of employees driving to work. b.Cost Estimate - Purchase shuttles, plus $6 million per year for operation and maintenance. c.Mobility Improvement: Maximizes ridership to promote a mode shift to transit. d.Status: In design. Page 9 of 13 City of South San Francisco powered by Legistar™ Benefits of the Five Point Solutions in Mobility 2020 The Five Point Solutions described above will enable the East of 101 Area’s transportation system to keep pace with growing demand. These improvements will help expand the Area’s peak period street capacity by approximately 20-30 percent and support a quadrupling of transit and bicycle ridership. Specifically, these improvements will enable the following area- and city-wide benefits: Traffic Benefits: The Five Point Solutions would improve traffic operations at freeway interchanges and on major arterials such as East Grand Avenue, Oyster Point Boulevard, and South Airport Boulevard, keeping most intersections operating within the City’s level of service (LOS) standards. They provide a more resilient transportation network providing two new east-west street connections providing additional circulation options and rerouting commuter and freight trips away from downtown, East Grand Avenue, and the Caltrain station area. By providing better non-auto commute options, they support continued compliance with employer trip reduction requirements described in the City’s TDM ordinance. These solutions will also provide ancillary benefits to the areas West of Highway 101. More transit users equates to fewer commuters driving to work, equating to fewer cars on major arterials such as Westborough Boulevard, Hillside Boulevard and Sister Cities Boulevard. Construction of the I-380/Littlefield Flyover allows vehicles to bypass South San Francisco all together, travelling to work via I-280 to I-380 and directly into the industrial area East of Highway 101. Transit Benefits: The Five Point Solutions would help create a more competitive transit service to efficiently funnel riders to transit and support the extension of SamTrans to the East of 101 Area. By bridging the first/last mile gap for transit riders, they help increase demand for transit services and the Area’s regional competitiveness for bus, rail, and ferry trips. Active Transportation Benefits: The Five Point Solutions would improve active transportation connections to increase walking and biking. By seamlessly connect residents, employers, transit hubs, and the Bay Trail, the Five Point Solutions supports growth of the citywide bicycle network and more walking trips within the East of 101 Area. A Note About the East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee The East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee was first established in 2001 and updated in 2005 through resolution 101-2005 and updated again in 2007 through 84-2007. The East of 101 Traffic Impact fee is used to fund traffic improvements that help mitigate increased traffic generated from new developments in the East of 101 Area. The fee is paid by developers of new projects. Each land use category has a different generated fee paid per square foot. Commercial use has the highest fee, followed by Office/R&D, hotels, and industrial. The fee is paid as part of the building permit issuance. Completed East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee funded projects include adding additional Northbound US 101 exit lanes on South Airport Boulevard and Grand Avenue; adding additional turn lanes on Dubuque and Oyster Point Boulevard; and improving the Utah Avenue and South Airport Boulevard intersection. Page 10 of 13 City of South San Francisco powered by Legistar™ In the fiscal year 2018-19 Capital Improvement Program, the East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee is funding the design of intersection improvements at East Grand Avenue and Gateway Boulevard and Oyster Point Boulevard at Gateway Boulevard and Veterans Boulevard. A total of $3,729,452 is allocated for these projects, leaving a current unallocated balance in the East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee fund of $12,127,761. Receipts into the East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee fund over the past five years are shown below: FY13-14: $1,886,962 FY 14-15: $1,411,850 FY 15-16: $1,637,445 FY 16-17: $ 109,867 FY 17-18: $5,698,648 The revenue generated by the East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee is helpful; however, it is not adequate to address the five recommended solutions in Mobility 2020. Creation of the South San Francisco Industrial Area Community Facilities District (IA-CFD) A common tool used in California to raise revenue for defined projects is formation of a Community Facilities District (CFD). Pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (“Mello-Roos Act”), a CFD is a defined geographic area in which the City is authorized to levy annual special taxes to be used to either finance directly the costs of specified public improvements and/or public services, or to pay debt service on bonds issued to finance the public improvements, as well as to pay costs of administering the CFD and for maintenance and operation of assets acquired through the CFD. The formation of the CFD requires consent of 66.7% or more of the affected landowners. Numerous CFDs have formed in the Bay Area. For example, the City of San Mateo formed a CFD in the Bay Meadows project, and the City of Redwood City formed a CFD around the One Marina project, both to fund public infrastructure. Recently formed CFDs are listed in Attachment A. Utilizing this tool, staff recommends pursuing creation of the South San Francisco Industrial Area Community Facilities District (IA-CFD) to provide financing for the eligible project areas in the Mobility 2020 plan. The proposed IA-CFD boundaries would include all non-residential parcels in the East of 101 Area, plus certain non- residential parcels extending to San Mateo Avenue and Airport Blvd, located to the west of Highway 101. A map outlining the proposed IA-CFD boundaries is provided as Attachment B. In total, the IA-CFD would be comprised of approximately 493 taxable parcels with 348 unique property owners, made up of a total land area of 1,124 acres containing approximately 20 million building square feet. Note that publicly owned parcels are excluded from the proposed IA-CFD area. A special tax rate of $1.00 per building square foot per year is proposed, for a 30 year term. At this rate, the IA- CFD will raise approximately $19.83 million per year in special tax revenue.i Additionally, future building square feet developed through new construction or up-zoning will be subject to the tax, and the additional funds will be able to use to secure additional bonds. Conceptually these funds could be used to implement the recommendations of Mobility 2020 as follows: Maintenance and Operation of tangible property (i.e. shuttle busses) identified in Mobility 2020 and purchased with CFD funds: $6 million annually Bond Out Revenue for Construction: $187 million (estimated $13 million debt service) Administration and Contingency: $1 million per year Page 11 of 13 City of South San Francisco powered by Legistar™ This funding allocation provides a large part of the construction dollars needed to move forward the four construction oriented elements of Mobility 2020, an acquire additional shuttle buses or other assets needed to provide last mile transit solutions. Additional funding from federal, state, regional and local sources will bridge the gaps to move projects to completion. How to Form a Community Facilities District (CFD) The process of establishing a CFD requires at least four City Council meetings: Meeting Number One: Adoption of two resolutions: a Resolution of Intention (ROI) setting forth the City’s intention to establish the CFD, designating the name of the CFD, identifying the services and facilities to be funded by the CFD, stating the City’s intention to levy a special tax annually on property within the CFD to pay for these services and facilities, and approving the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax (RMA) for the CFD, which details how the special tax will be levied on properties within the CFD and sets the maximum special tax rates that can be levied within the CFD. The ROI also sets the date for the required public hearing (30 to 60 days later) on the matters set forth in the ROI. The second resolution a Resolution of Intention to Incur Indebtedness, sets forth the Council’s intention to issue bonds supported by the special taxes. This resolution also sets a public hearing for the same date. Meeting Number Two: Hold the noticed public hearings at a City Council meeting. Following the public hearings, the City Council is presented with two resolutions: a resolution forming the CFD, and a resolution calling the special tax election (90 to 180 days later) by the landowner voters within the CFD. Meeting Number Three: Opening and counting of ballots. If the CFD gains the required number of votes for passage, the City Council will adopt a Resolution Confirming Results of Special Election, and introduce an ordinance ordering the levy of special taxes within the CFD Meeting Number Four: Hold a second reading to adopt the special tax ordinance ordering the levy of special taxes within the CFD. After formation of the CFD, a special tax is levied annually on taxable properties that are located within the boundaries of the CFD. Outreach and Next Steps Over the last several months, City Staff have met individually with 27 landowners, tenants and others in the E-101 Area to gauge interest in supporting the IA-CFD, at the noted rate of $1.00 per square foot per year. In general, all those met with appreciated the City’s proactive approach to finding traffic solutions, and agreed that pursuing a CFD to fund those solutions was appropriate. Assuming City Council likewise agrees that continuing to pursue a CFD makes sense, City Staff will, over the next five months, continue to meet with landowners and tenants in the proposed IA-CFD area to gain user input on both the Mobility 2020 plan and the CFD as a financing tool. Provided a sufficient coalition of landowners comes together behind a shared vision and plan to improve transportation, City Staff can bring to City Council at a future meeting the formal resolutions needed to move the IA-CFD forward. FISCAL IMPACT Staff estimates that the CFD will generate approximately $19.83 million in annual special tax revenues with a range of bond proceeds between $160 million to $286 million to pay for public facilities and improvements, depending on the special tax revenue allocation towards operations, maintenance, and services. Page 12 of 13 City of South San Francisco powered by Legistar™ RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN Exploring the creation of a Community Facilities District (CFD) in the East of the 101 Area meets Strategic Plan Goals #3 Public Safety, #4 Financial Stability, and #5 Economic Viability. The improved mobility and transportation options East of the 101 ensures that South San Francisco remains a viable economic hub with a full range of employment options and a diverse mix of industries while preserving strong city revenues resistant to economic downturns (#4 and #5). A CFD East of the 101 Area will also provide improved accessibility to first responders during times of emergency or natural disaster. CONCLUSION Both new roadway capacity and improved transit to reduce solo driving is necessary to maintain the economic viability of the East of Highway 101 industrial area. Anticipated economic growth will increase the stress on existing transportation infrastructure and systems, requiring action today to meet those anticipated challenges. Taking meaningful action requires substantial financial investments well beyond the current capability of City finances. City Staff seeks City Council direction and guidance as staff continues to explore a Community Facilities District for the industrial areas around Highway 101 and East of Highway 101 as a means to finance the needed transportation improvements ATTACHMENTS A.Comparable CFDs B.Proposed Boundaries of City of South San Francisco Industrial Area Community Facilities District No. 2019-01 i Note that certain parcels in the Oyster Point area are also a part of Community Facilities District No. 2017-01, and as such, these parcels would only pay the difference between its existing special tax for CFD No. 2017-01 and the proposed $1.00 rate. Page 13 of 13 Project Name Project Location Purpose Bond Series Amount of Bond Issue District Name Year of Bond Issue Base Year Maximum Special Tax (Residential)Base Year Maximum Special Tax (Non-Residential)Total Effective Tax Rates 2018 Maximum Special Tax Rates Bay Meadows City of San Mateo 2012 $31,800,000 City of San Mateo CFD No. 2008-1 2012 Bay Meadows City of San Mateo 2013 $26,000,000 City of San Mateo CFD No. 2008-1 2013 Bay Meadows City of San Mateo 2014 $28,475,000 City of San Mateo CFD No. 2008-1 2014 Transbay City and County of San Francisco 2017A $36,975,000 City and County of San Francisco CFD No. 2014-1 2017 Transbay City and County of San Francisco 2017B $171,405,000 City and County of San Francisco CFD No. 2014-1 2017 Alameda Landing City of Alameda Public Infrastructure including: Roadways, Sanitary Sewer, Storm Drain, Parks, Street Lights and Traffic Signals, Wharf Improvements, Floating Dock 2016 $15,415,000 City of Alameda CFD No. 13-1 2016 $4,915 per SFD Residential, $3,348 per MF Residential $1.63 per BSF Non-Residential 1.81% - 1.83%$1.70 per BSF Non-Residential One Marina City of Redwood City Public Infrastructure including: Blomquist Bridge Extension, Highway 101 Pedestrian Undercrossing, Grading, Sanitary Sewer, Walkways, Landscape, Erosion Control, East Bayshore Road Pavement 2011 $5,760,000 City of Redwood City CFD No. 2010-1 2011 $3,080 per Residential Unit, $1,540 per BMR Unit $86,820 per Non-Residential Acre 1.71%$99,730 per Non-Residential Acre Mission Bay South City and County of San Francisco 2013A $81,775,000 City and County of San Francisco CFD No. 6 2013 Mission Bay South City and County of San Francisco 2013B $19,635,000 City and County of San Francisco CFD No. 6 2013 Mission Bay South City and County of San Francisco 2013C $21,601,256 City and County of San Francisco CFD No. 6 2013 Northern California - Bay Area - Community Facilities Districts Bonds $1.99 per Office SF, $0.58 per Retail SF Public Infrastructure including: Streets, Roadways, Avenues, Parks, Storm Drain, Sanitary Sewer, Utilities, Mitigation Fees Public Infrastructure and Public Services, including: Open Space, the Train Box, Salesforce Park, Street and Sidewalk Improvements, Maintenance $1.77 per Office SF, $0.52 per Retail SF 1.69% - 1.70% Unchanged Public Infrastructure including: Streets, Walkways, Landscaping, Open Space, Parks, Utilities, Fire Station, School Site 1.25% - 2.71%$8.61 per Residential SF, $5.88 per Rental SF $5.74 per Office SF, $3.72 per Retail SF $5,719 per SFD Residential, $1,658 per MF Residential $114,000 per Acre of Developed Property $125,865 per Acre of Developed Property, $0.55 per Retail BSF1.54%$114,000 per Acre of Developed Property, except $0.50 per Retail BSF AIRPORT BLVDE GRAND AVE PARK WY SHAW RDMAPLE AVE4TH LN 2ND LN AIRPORT BLVDS A I RP ORT B L V DLINDEN AVEDUBUQUE AVE1ST LN SISTER CITIES BLVDHEMLOCK AVE U T A H A V E S LINDEN AVETAMARACK LN POLETTI WYUS HIGHWAY 101RAILROAD AVE LOWRIE AVEGATEWAY BLVDDNA WYN ACCESS RD GULL DR3RD LN SPRUCE AVEGRAND AVE S MAPLE AVESAN MATEO AVEECCLES AVELARCH AVE ROCCA AVE SWIFT AVE VIOLA ST E JAMIE CTALLERTON AVEPECKS LNMITCHELL AVEASH AVEOLIVE AVEE BASIN RD LAWRENCE AVE ALLE Y BEACON ST VICTORY AVE DOLLAR AVEE HARRIS AVEGARDINER AVESYLVESTER RDO Y S T E R P O I N T B LVD B E L L E A I R E R DRO EBLING RDWEST WY CFD Boundary Area SFO Brisbane San Bruno O y s t e r P o i n t M a r i n a INTERSTATE -3 8 0 City Hall San Bruno MountainCounty Park Lege nd CFD Boundary Other Parcels in SSF City Limit Partnering to Solve the E101 Area Mobility Challenge by 2020 Mobility City Council Study Session Industrial Area Community Facilities District February 27, 2019 New E101 Master Traffic Plan Development 22.1 MSF 35.1 MSF 12.9 MSF Growth April 2018 –Hired Fehr & Peers Study Growth & Traffic Sept 2018 –First Public Meeting Understand Input and Explore Options Dec 2018 –Second Public Meeting Understand Feedback, Narrow Options & Cost Estimates ~March 2019 –Full Draft Plan to Staff Internal Review and Finalization ~April 2019 –Final Public Meeting Plan Finalized Feedback Summary “Improve traffic light timing to reduce unnecessary backups.” “More Caltrain service!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!” “Better bike lanes – I want to stop driving, but I don't feel safe biking.” “Make it easier and safer to walk -intersections are really wide” Growth E101 22.1 MSF 35.1 MSF 12.9 MSF Growth - 5,000,000 10,000,000 15,000,000 20,000,000 25,000,000 30,000,000 35,000,000 Existing Land Use Existing + Entitlements Existing + Entitlements + Growth Office/R&D Industrial Other In S.F. Travel Patterns Employee Home Origins Drive Alone, 81% Carpool, 10% Transit , 8%Bike, 1% San Mateo, 57%San Francisco, 25% East Bay, 9% Santa Clara, 6%North Bay, 2% Commute Mode Split - 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Person Trips In (Eastbound) Person Trips Out (Westbound) Trips In and Out of East of 101 Area E101 Traffic Modeling with Investment •Existing Conditions support 28,000 employees in E101 area •In Year 2040, with no investment: 55,000 employees expected with severe traffic conditions •In Year 2040, with completion of recommended projects: 55,000 employees with moderate traffic conditions Requires reducing solo driving from 80% to 60% Action is Required to Save E101 as a Viable Economic Center $125M in Local Work Already Underway •New Caltrain Station $59M •Street Rehabilitation $9M •Utah Ave./Hwy 101 Design $3.8 •New Smart Signals $3.6M •Shuttles $1.8M •Bike Paths, Sidewalks, Bridges, etc. $16.6M •New Parking Garage $16M est •Oak Avenue Extension $15M est Transportation Challenges Topic Challenge Potential Solutions Bottlenecks at Gateways Only four street connections across US-101 Spillover of regional congestion on US-101 into district New street connections New or reconstructed US-101 interchanges Insufficient Transit Service Infrequent Caltrain/ferry service and circuitous BART connection Limited funding for Commute.org shuttles Capitalize on regional upgrades to Caltrain, BART, and ferry services Expand shuttle service Poor Internal Circulation and Connectivity Aging infrastructure Operational and safety concerns Upgraded streets, signals, sidewalks, and bikeways Jobs-Housing Imbalance San Mateo County added one home for every 19 jobs over the past five years More housing near transit hubs Transportation Constraints •The East of 101 Area is highly constrained •Regional congestion •Local access bottlenecks •Physical & environmental barriers •Regional jobs-housing imbalance •Solutions •Expand east-west connectivity •Reduce district-wide drive-alone rate from 80% to 60% External Connectivity Provide new street connections to access 101, 380, & west of 101 area Concepts •Utah Avenue Interchange •I-380 Connection •101 NB/East Grand Off-Ramp Redesign •Sierra Point Connection •Railroad Avenue Extension Transit Service Capitalize on regional transit to maximize ridership Concepts •Leverage regional transit improvements •Caltrain Business Plan •Ferry service expansion •SamTrans local service extension •Improve first/last mile services •More shuttles to BART, Caltrain and Ferry •Leverage employer partnerships for expanded express bus services to Glen Park BART and East Bay Internal Street Network Modernize major arterials to optimize safety, operations, and person throughput Concepts •Improve signal operations & address unmet signal needs •Right-size roadway capacity •Provide on-street bus & shuttle stops along key transit corridors •Enhance sidewalks, crosswalks, and bikeways Active Transportation Improve access to transit, amenities, and downtown for walking and biking Concepts •Prioritize walkability around major activity centers •Connect Caltrain and Ferry to employers via trail network •Connect Bay Trail with Centennial Trail and BART via bridge across 101 •Potential to expand shared e-bikes and introduce shared e-scooters Bay Trail TO CENTENNIAL TRAIL •Utah Avenue/Hwy 101 Interchange -$100M est. •Hwy 380 to Littlefield Ave Connection -$130M est. •Eastern Caltrain Access Improvements -$35M est. •Improve Connections: Caltrain & BART & Ferry -$90M est. a.Expanded shuttle service b.Improved shuttle stops (cut outs, shelters,etc.) c.Expanded public right of way along Grand d.Better bike/ped circulation throughout E101 area Transportation Recommendations Project Cost estimate is $355M and unfunded Utah Avenue/Hwy 101 Interchange -$100M Hwy 280 to Littlefield Avenue -$130M POTENTIAL ALIGNMENT TO HASKINS WAY POTENTIAL ALIGNMENT TO LITTLEFIELD AVE Hwy 280 to Littlefield Avenue -$130M Hwy 280 to Littlefield Avenue -$130M E. Grand Avenue/Hwy 101 Off-ramp -$55M E. Grand Avenue/Hwy 101 Off-ramp -$55M Improve Internal Connections -$90M Bike/Ped Paths, Shuttle Lanes/Passenger Amenities Bicycle Connections Pedestrian Safety More “Last Mile” Shuttles Moving Forward with Funding •Total Parcel Owners Hwy 101 Commercial Core: 348 •Total Square Footage Hwy 101 Commercial Core : 20M sq ft •Requires 66.7% Vote of Parcel Owners to Pass •Votes Based on Lot Size –one vote per acre of parcel •Governed by City Council with E101 Advisory Panel Fund improvements, operation & maintenance with local, state and federal transportation funds, plus a Community Facilities District (CFD) Typical Public Infrastructure CFDs CITY TAX AMOUNT AMOUNT RAISED San Mateo $1.77 per sq ft $86,000,000 San Francisco $5.74 per sq ft $208,380,000 Alameda $1.63 per sq ft $15,415,000 Redwood City $86,820 per acre $5,760,000 San Francisco $114,000 per acre $123,011,256 SSF Industrial Area CFD Annual $ Per Sq Ft Monthly $ Per Sq Ft $1 8.3 cents Notional $20M Budget Shuttles Operations & Contingency $6M year $1M year Debt Service Bonded Amount $13M $187M Upcoming Milestones •One-on-One Meetings with Major Landowners –Jan & Feb 2019 •City Council Study Session on East Hwy 101 CFD –Feb 27, 2019 •Continued Meetings with Landowners –February to June 2019 •CFD to City Council ~ July 2019 •Mail Ballot Vote ~ November 2019 Bringing the Mobility 2020 Plan to Life! City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:19-44 Agenda Date:2/27/2019 Version:1 Item #:2. Report regarding an overview of City’s progress towards meeting September 2019 deadline for Green Infrastructure Plan in accordance with requirements of the Municipal Regional Permit.(Matthew Ruble,Senior Civil Engineer, Keith Lichten from Regional Water Quality Control Board) RECOMMENDATION This is for informational purposes only. It is recommended that the City Council receive the report. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Municipal Regional Permit (MRP) regulates pollutants in stormwater runoff from municipal storm drain systems throughout San Mateo, Santa Clara, Alameda, and Contra Costa Counties. Provision C.3.j of the MRP requires each jurisdiction subject to the MRP, including City of South San Francisco, to develop a Green Infrastructure Plan that demonstrates how each permittee will gradually shift from traditional “gray” storm drain infrastructure-which channels polluted runoff directly into receiving waters without treatment-to a more resilient and sustainable storm drain system comprised of “green” infrastructure, which captures, stores and treats stormwater using specially designed landscape systems. In addition to managing runoff in a more sustainable fashion, the Green Infrastructure Plans must be designed to collectively achieve specific reductions in mercury and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in stormwater runoff by 2020 and 2040, per Provisions C.11 and C.12 in the MRP. The Green Infrastructure Plans must: ·Include a mapping and prioritization mechanism to identify and prioritize both private and public green infrastructure project opportunities; ·Identify locations and timeframes for implementing green infrastructure, including numeric targets for retrofitting impervious areas to achieve mandated pollutant load reductions; ·Utilize a regionally consistent process for tracking and mapping completed projects to ensure progress towards meeting the pollutant load reduction targets; ·Include and/or reference design and construction guidelines and standard specifications and details for green infrastructure to guide and enable the completion of projects; ·Integrate with other planning efforts, including updating other relevant City of South San Francisco plans policies, codes, and ordinances to incorporate green infrastructure for stormwater management to support the implementation of project opportunities; ·Evaluate long-term funding options, including for design, construction, and long-term operations and maintenance, from the City and other sources; ·Incorporate any necessary legal mechanisms to enable implementation of the plan and projects within and by the City of South San Francisco; and, ·Include public outreach on development and implementation of the plan. The City of South San Francisco’s Green Infrastructure Plan must be developed and submitted to the Water City of South San Francisco Printed on 2/21/2019Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:19-44 Agenda Date:2/27/2019 Version:1 Item #:2. Board by September of 2019. The City is currently working on updating conditions of approval for private development to encourage more green infrastructure. In addition, the City received grant funding from CalTrans to design a regional green infrastructure project at Orange Park. While the short-term costs to develop a Green Infrastructure Plan are known and were presented in 2017 with a Workplan,the potential long-term costs to retrofit existing urbanized areas with green infrastructure at levels necessary to achieve the required pollutant load reductions may be significant.C/CAG and its consultants are working with member agencies to develop projections of future development patterns to estimate how much green infrastructure will be implemented on private sites (under separate MRP requirements that have mandated since 2005 on-site stormwater management for most new and redevelopment projects).Once these development pattern projections are known,projections of additional public green infrastructure that would be needed to meet the mandated pollutant load reductions can be developed.C/CAG anticipates initial estimates of public vs.private green infrastructure needs for both short-and long-term load reduction requirements will be available to its member agencies soon. FISCAL IMPACT Part of the Green Infrastructure Plan will identify options for funding future green infrastructure development. The specific amount has not been allocated,but is anticipated to be in the millions of dollars over the next 20 years. RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN Receiving this presentation will contribute to the City’s Strategic Plan outcome of improved Quality of Life by advancing the City’s Green Infrastructure Plan. CONCLUSION This presentation is intended to provide Council with an overview of City’s progress towards meeting September 2019 deadline for Green Infrastructure Plan in accordance with requirements of the Municipal Regional Permit. City of South San Francisco Printed on 2/21/2019Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ South San Francisco Green Infrastructure Plan Working together to build a Green Infrastructure Plan that is implementable and funded Objectives Overview of GI Permit GI Requirement Plan Components Document Update Current GI Planned GI O & E Funding Mapping of 26 How Stormwater is Regulated In 1990, the US EPA established the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater program The NPDES Program has been delegated to the State Water Resources Control Board and the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards 2 of 26 Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP) In 2015 the Water Board issued one Municipal Regional NPDES Permit (MRP) for the San Francisco Bay region The City of South San Francisco is one of 22 San Mateo County Permittees The MRP includes requirements for Municipal operations New Development and redevelopment Construction Sites Public Outreach 3 of 26 Pre-Urban Development 4 of 26 Urban Development 5 of 26 Balanced Development 6 of 26 GI Examples Bioretention Pervious pavements Rainwater harvesting Green roofs Landscape based systems 7 of 26 Green Infrastructure Benefits 8 of 26 Green Infrastructure in South City Orange Memorial Park Bioretention areas on private development Safe Routes to School Grants 9 of 26 Pollutants of Concern Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) Mercury Trash/Litter 10 of 26 GI Plan Requirements Establish targets for the amount of impervious surface to be retrofitted over time Prepare design guidelines and standard specs Map green infrastructure projects Integrate GI Plan with other documents Evaluate funding Conduct public outreach 11 of 26 Progress to Date Workplan Developed in 2017 Consultant on board to assist with Plan development Green Team formed internally to assist Consultant Attending San Mateo County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SMCWPPP) meetings and collaborating and coordinating with this regional effort to develop the required documents Plan due by September 30, 2019 12 of 26 Next Steps Continue to participate in Regional effort Update City Council Develop GI Plan main sections Implementation Plan Funding Mapping Plan/Policy updates 13 of 26 Questions 14 of 26 Implementation “Recipe”Insert recipe 15 of 26 Implementation Plan What large developments are coming online with GI Construction already underway Develop street plan for updating streets 16 of 26 Green Street Prioritization 17 of 26 GI Plan Cost Implications ~$10-$20M 18 of 26 Funding Offline discussion on Funding Report by SCI Consider policy updates 19 of 26 GI Map www.Burlingame.org\GI 20 of 26 Add GI to Development Map 21 of 26 Policy Updates Does City want to put more green infrastructure on developers? Consider Frontage Greening Requirement ? (Redwood City) Allow developers to use right of way? City take on green infrastructure requirements 22 of 26 Document Updates 23 of 26 Outreach Does the City want to do more Develop Green Infrastructure Web page Reference SMCWPPP Website on City web site (ECD) https://www.flowstobay.org/blog/greeninfrastructure 24 of 26 Burlingame Green Infrastructure webpage 25 of 26 Next Meetings (smaller groups) Implementation Plan Financing Mapping Outreach 26