HomeMy WebLinkAbout04.26.2023@600 RegularWednesday, April 26, 2023
6:00 PM
City of South San Francisco
P.O. Box 711
South San Francisco, CA
Municipal Services Building, Council Chambers
33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA
City Council
BUENAFLOR NICOLAS, Mayor (District 3)
MARK NAGALES, Vice Mayor (District 2)
MARK ADDIEGO, Councilmember (District 1)
JAMES COLEMAN, Councilmember (District 4)
EDDIE FLORES, Councilmember (District 5)
ROSA GOVEA ACOSTA, City Clerk
FRANK RISSO, City Treasurer
SHARON RANALS, City Manager
SKY WOODRUFF, City Attorney
Regular Meeting Agenda
1
April 26, 2023City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
How to observe the Meeting (no public comment):
1) Local cable channel: Astound, Channel 26, Comcast, Channel 27, or AT&T, Channel 99
2) https://www.ssf.net/government/city-council/video-streaming-city-and-council-meetings/city-council
ZOOM LINK BELOW -NO REGISTRATION REQUIRED
Join Zoom meeting: https://ssf-net.zoom.us/j/88636346631 (Enter your email and name)
Webinar ID: 886 3634 6631 Join by Telephone: +1 669 900 6833
Teleconference participation is offered in the meeting via Zoom as a courtesy to the public. If no
members of the City Council are attending the meeting via teleconference, and a technical error or
outage occurs on the teleconference feed, the City Council will continue the meeting in public in the
Council Chambers.
How to submit written Public Comment before the City Council Meeting:
Members of the public are encouraged to submit public comments in writing in advance of the meeting
via the eComment tab by 4:00 p.m. on the meeting date. Use the eComment portal by clicking on the
following link: https://ci-ssf-ca.granicusideas.com/meetings or by visiting the City Council meeting's
agenda page. eComments are also directly sent to the iLegislate application used by City Council and
staff.
How to provide Public Comment during the City Council Meeting:
COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES PER SPEAKER
1. By Zoom: When the Clerk calls for the item on which you wish to speak, click on "raise hand."
Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak.
2. By Phone: Enter the conference ID fund on the agenda. When the Clerk calls for the item on which
you wish to speak, Click *9 to raise a hand to speak. Click *6 to unmute when called.
3. In Person: Complete a Digital Speaker Card located at the entrance to the Council Chamber ’s. Be sure
to indicate the Agenda Item # you wish to address or the topic of your public comment. When your name
is called, please come to the podium, state your name and address (optional) for the Minutes.
American Disability Act:
The City Clerk will provide materials in appropriate alternative formats to comply with the Americans
with Disabilities Act. Please send a written request to City Clerk Rosa Govea Acosta at 400 Grand
Avenue, South San Francisco, CA 94080, or email at all-cc@ssf.net. Include your name, address, phone
number, a brief description of the requested materials, and preferred alternative format service at least
72-hours before the meeting.
Accommodations: Individuals who require special assistance of a disability -related modification or
accommodation to participate in the meeting, including Interpretation Services, should contact the
Office of the City Clerk by email at all-cc@ssf.net, 72-hours before the meeting.
Page 2 City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023
2
April 26, 2023City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
AGENDA REVIEW
ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM STAFF
PRESENTATIONS
Certificate of Recognition honoring Lori Huang, Jizelle Oliva, and Mia Tolentino for
receiving Honorable Mention in C-SPANS’s StudentCAM documentary competition.
(Flor Nicolas, Mayor)
1.
Proclamation recognizing May as Older Americans Month. (Flor Nicolas, Mayor)2.
Proclamation recognizing April 30 - May 6, 2023, as the 54th Annual Professional
Municipal Clerks Week. (Flor Nicolas, Mayor)
3.
Proclamation recognizing May as Hepatitis Awareness Month. (Flor Nicolas, Mayor)4.
Proclamation recognizing April as Arab American Heritage Month. (Flor Nicolas,
Mayor)
5.
Presentation on Partnership for the Bay’s Future Breakthrough Grant Fellowship
(Danielle Thoe, Housing Manager)
6.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Under the Public Comment section of the agenda, members of the public may speak on any item not listed on the
Agenda and on items listed under the Consent Calendar. Individuals may not share or offer time to another
speaker. Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the
agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to
investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting. Written comments on
agenda items received prior to 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting will be included as part of the meeting record
but will not be read aloud.
If there appears to be a large number of speakers, the Mayor may reduce speaking time to limit the total amount
of time for public comments (Gov. Code sec. 54954.3(b)(1).). Speakers that are not in compliance with the City
Council's rules of decorum will be muted.
COUNCIL COMMENTS/REQUESTS
Page 3 City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023
3
April 26, 2023City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
CONSENT CALENDAR
Matters under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and noncontroversial. These items will be
enacted by one motion and without discussion. If, however, any Council member(s) wishes to comment on an
item, they may do so before action is taken on the Consent Calendar. Following comments, if a Council member
wishes to discuss an item, it will be removed from the Consent Calendar and taken up in order after adoption of
the Consent Calendar.
Motion to approve the Minutes for April 12, 2023 and April 19, 2023. (Rosa Govea
Acosta, City Clerk)
7.
Report regarding a resolution authorizing acceptance of $26,433.40 in donations from
Tri Counties Bank and local residents via the South San Francisco Public Library
Foundation, appropriating the funds and amending the fiscal year 22-23 Operating
Budget via Budget Amendment 23.062 to support the capital improvement project for
the new Library, Parks and Recreation Center. (Valerie Sommer, Library Director)
8.
Resolution authorizing acceptance of $26,433.40 in donations from Tri Counties
Bank and local residents via the South San Francisco Public Library Foundation,
appropriating the funds and amending the fiscal year 22-23 Operating Budget via
Budget Amendment 23.062 to support the capital improvement project for the new
Library, Parks and Recreation Center.
8a.
Report regarding a resolution authorizing the acceptance of $3,500 in grant funding
for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 from the Quality Improvement Grant from Quality Counts
San Mateo County for the Big Lift Little Steps Preschool at the Community Learning
Center, and amending the Parks and Recreation Department’s Fiscal Year 2022-2023
Operating Budget pursuant to budget amendment #23.064. (Greg Mediati, Director of
Parks and Recreation)
9.
Resolution authorizing the acceptance of $3,500 in grant funding for Fiscal Year
2022-2023 from the Quality Improvement Grant from Quality Counts San Mateo
County for the Big Lift Little Steps Preschool at the Community Learning Center, and
amending the Parks and Recreation Department’s Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Operating
Budget pursuant to budget amendment #23.064.
9a.
Report regarding a resolution approving Budget Amendment Number 23.066
appropriating $50,000 from the City’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund (Fund 205) to
advance relocation payments, recover relocation costs, and any related administrative
expenses pursuant to Chapter 8.70 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code
Related to Property Owner Obligations with Respect to Tenants Displaced from
Unsafe or Substandard Units and authorizing the City Manager to execute documents
related to relocation assistance payments. (Nell Selander, Economic & Community
Development Director)
10.
Page 4 City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023
4
April 26, 2023City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
Resolution approving Budget Amendment Number 23.066 appropriating $50,000
from the City’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund (Fund 205) to advance relocation
payments, recover relocation costs, and any related administrative expenses, pursuant
to South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.70 Related to Property Owner
Obligations with Respect to Tenants Displaced from Unsafe or Substandard Units and
authorizing the City Manager to execute documents related to relocation assistance
payments.
10a.
Report regarding a resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute
a purchase and sale agreement with the City and County of San Francisco for the
acquisition of property currently used for Mission Road and Antoinette Lane for the
Community Civic Campus Project (Sky Woodruff, City Attorney, and Jacob
Gilchrist, Director of Capital Projects)
11.
Resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute a purchase and
sale agreement with the City and County of San Francisco for the acquisition of
property currently used for Mission Road and Antoinette Lane for the Community
Civic Campus Project
11a.
ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS
Report regarding a resolution authorizing the acceptance of $15,000 in grant funding
from Smart Growth America to support the City of South San Francisco’s
participation in the Complete Streets Leadership Academies program with Caltrans
and amending the Economic and Community Development Department’s Fiscal Year
2022-2023 Operating Budget via Budget Amendment #23.053. (Christopher Espiritu,
Senior Transportation Planner)
12.
Resolution authorizing the acceptance of $15,000 in grant funding from Smart
Growth America to support the City of South San Francisco’s participation in the
Complete Streets Leadership Academies program with Caltrans and amending the
Economic and Community Development Department’s Fiscal Year 2022-2023
Operating Budget via Budget Amendment #23.053.
12a.
Report regarding a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consulting
Services Agreement with Kitchell CEM for the 840 West Orange Avenue and
Westborough Preschool Projects. (Jacob Gilchrist, Director of Capital Projects)
13.
Page 5 City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023
5
April 26, 2023City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consulting Services Agreement
between the CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO with KITCHELL CEM, of
Sacramento, California for Program and Construction Management Services for the
840 West Orange Avenue (Project No. pf2301) and Westborough Preschool Project
(Project No. pf2101) in an amount not to exceed $1,353,609.
13a.
Report regarding a resolution approving budget amendment 23.065 appropriating
$9,000,000 in the City of South San Francisco’s Fund 280 for Fiscal Year 2022-2023
for the development of Community Civic Campus Phase 3: Fire Station #63 (Project
Number pf2306). (Jacob Gilchrist, Director of Capital Projects)
14.
Resolution approving budget amendment 23.065 appropriating $9,000,000 in the City
of South San Francisco’s Fund 280 for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 for the development of
Community Civic Campus Phase 3: Fire Station #63 (Project Number pf2306).
14a.
ITEMS FROM COUNCIL – COMMITTEE REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
CLOSED SESSION
Conference with real property negotiators
Property: 226-230 Grand Ave., 232-238 Grand Ave., and 240-246 Grand Ave
Agency negotiator: Nell Selander, ECD Director; Danielle Thoe, Housing Manager;
Sky Woodruff, City Attorney
Negotiating parties: To be announced prior to closed session
Under negotiation: Price and terms
15.
ADJOURNMENT
Page 6 City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023
6
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-297 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:1.
Certificate of Recognition honoring Lori Huang, Jizelle Oliva, and Mia Tolentino for receiving Honorable
Mention in C-SPANS’s StudentCAM documentary competition.(Flor Nicolas, Mayor)
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™7
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
Certificate of Recognition
XXXXXXX
The City Council of South San Francisco does hereby congratulate
xxxxx, for receiving an Honorable Mention
in C-SPAN’s StudentCAM
national and annual documentary competition.
Over 1,500 applicants, only 150 videos received this recognition.
You are an inspiration for all youth and those pursuing their passions!
Presented on this 26th day of April 2023 by the City Council of South San Francisco.
Buenaflor Nicolas, Mayor
Mark Nagales, Vice Mayor Mark Addiego, Councilmember
James Coleman, Councilmember Eddie Flores, Councilmember
8
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-259 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:2.
Proclamation recognizing May as Older Americans Month.(Flor Nicolas, Mayor)
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™9
Dated: April 26, 2023
RECOGNITION OF MAY AS
OLDER AMERICANS MONTH
WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco includes a growing number of older Americans who
have built resilience and strength over their lives through successes and difficulties; and
WHEREAS, South San Francisco benefits when people of all ages, abilities, and backgrounds are
included and encouraged to share their successes and stories of resilience; and
WHEREAS, South San Francisco recognizes that communities benefit when people of all ages,
including our older adults, are welcomed, celebrated, supported, and thrive; and
WHEREAS, South San Francisco can foster communities of strength by: creating opportunities to
share stories and learn from each other; engaging older adults through education, re creation, and service;
and encouraging people of all ages to celebrate connections and resilience; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the hundreds of seniors served by the Parks and Recreation Department
and Library Department through classes, activities and events, the South San Francisco Parks and
Recreation Department’s Senior Services Program serve s over 500 residents per month through the senior
programs offered at the Roberta Cerri Teglia Center, including an Adult Day Care Program that enables
frail and/or impaired older adults with disabilities to remain in the community; and
WHEREAS, the Senior Services Program has continued to play an essential role in serving older
adults throughout the COVID-19 pandemic by: serving as a central resource and referral hub for older
adults; providing 550 free and nutritious meals for seniors per month as part of the City’s Congregate Meal
Program launched in 2023; and supporting the delivery of food boxes from Second Harvest Food Bank to
South San Francisco seniors and surrounding communities; making weekly wellness calls to program
participants and Adult Day Care clients; delivering activity packets ; and partnering with the AARP Tax-
Aide Program to provide free tax assistance to 400 older adults each year.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco
do hereby proclaim May 2023 to be Older Americans Month. We urge every resident to recognize older
adults and the people who support them as essential contributors to the strength of our community.
___________________________________
Buenaflor Nicolas, Mayor, District 3
___________________________________
Mark Nagales, Vice Mayor, District 2
___________________________________
Mark Addiego, Councilmember, District 1
___________________________________
James Coleman, Councilmember, District 4
___________________________________
Eddie Flores, Councilmember, District 5
10
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-321 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:3.
Proclamation recognizing April 30 - May 6, 2023, as the 54th Annual Professional Municipal Clerks Week.
(Flor Nicolas, Mayor)
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™11
Dated: April 26, 2023
RECOGNITION OF 54th ANNUAL
PROFESSIONAL MUNICIPAL CLERKS WEEK
(APRIL 30 – MAY 6, 2023)
WHEREAS, the Office of the Professional Municipal Clerk, a time honored and
vital part of local government exists throughout the world; and
WHEREAS, the Office of the Professional Municipal Clerk is the oldest among
public servants; and
WHEREAS, the Office of the Professional Municipal Clerk provides the
professional link between the citizens, the local governing bodies and agencies of
government at other levels; and
WHEREAS, Professional Municipal Clerks have pledged to be ever mindful of
their neutrality and impartiality, rendering equal service to all; and
WHEREAS, the Professional Municipal Clerk serves as the information center
on functions of local government and community; and
WHEREAS, Professional Municipal Clerks continually strive to improve the
administration of the affairs of the Office of the Professional Municipal Clerk through
participation in education programs, seminars, workshops and the annual meetings of
their state, provincial, county and international professional organizations; and
WHEREAS, it is most appropriate that we recognize the accomplishments of the
Office of the Professional Municipal Clerk.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
South San Francisco does hereby recognize the week of April 30 through May 6, 2023, as
Professional Municipal Clerks Week, and further extend appreciation to our Professional
Municipal Clerk, Rosa Govea Acosta and her staff and to all Professional Municipal
Clerks for the vital services they perform and their exemplary dedication to the
communities they represent.
_____________________________
Buenaflor Nicolas, Mayor, District 3
______________________________
Mark Nagales, Vice Mayor, District 2
_________________________________
Mark Addiego, Councilmember, District 1
___________________________________
James Coleman, Councilmember, District 4
_________________________________
Eddie Flores, Councilmember, District 5
12
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-327 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:4.
Proclamation recognizing May as Hepatitis Awareness Month.(Flor Nicolas, Mayor)
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™13
Dated: April 26, 2023
RECOGNITION OF HEPATITIS AWARENESS MONTH
MAY 2023
WHEREAS, viral hepatitis related illness takes the lives of 1.1 million people
worldwide each year. More people die in California from hepatitis B and C related liver
disease than in any state, and over a third of the liver transplants each year are
performed for liver disease or cancer caused by viral hepatitis; and
WHEREAS, in the United States, one in 12 Asian Americans is chronically
infected with hepatitis B in comparison to one in 1,000 non-Hispanic Whites; and
WHEREAS, greater than half of people living with viral hepatitis are unaware
they are infected, thereby increasing their risk for severe health problems such as
cirrhosis, liver cancer, liver transplant, and death; and
WHEREAS, Californians can protect themselves and their loved ones from viral
hepatitis by learning about the vaccines available against hepatitis A and B, the simple
steps to get screened from chronic hepatitis B and C, and the highly effective treatments
that could prevent complications and death; and
WHEREAS, this is especially important for Asian and Pacific Islanders, African
Americans, Native Americans, and Latinos, who are more likely to die from hepatitis
liver disease than Caucasians; and
WHEREAS, in California, hepatitis B and C screening according to the U.S.
Preventive Services Task Force recommendations and antiviral treatment for hepatitis B
and C are covered by Medi-Cal, Medicare and by ACA compliant health plans.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
South San Francisco does hereby recognize May 19, 2023, as Hepatitis Testing Day and
the entire month of May as Hepatitis Awareness Month in the City of South San
Francisco and urge all citizens to join in this special observance.
_____________________________
Buenaflor Nicolas, Mayor, District 3
______________________________
Mark Nagales, Vice Mayor, District 2
_________________________________
Mark Addiego, Councilmember, District 1
___________________________________
James Coleman, Councilmember, District 4
_________________________________
Eddie Flores, Councilmember, District 5
14
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-326 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:5.
Proclamation recognizing April as Arab American Heritage Month.(Flor Nicolas, Mayor)
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™15
Dated: April 26, 2023
RECOGNITION OF ARAB AMERICAN HERITAGE MONTH
APRIL 2023
WHEREAS, April has been designated as a time to celebrate the valuable
contributions of Arab Americans in the United States; and
WHEREAS, the first immigration of individuals of Arabian descent to the United
States dates back to the late 1800s and has continued for more than 200 years; and
WHEREAS, during this time, Arab Americans have been making valuable
contributions to virtually every aspect of American society: in medicine, law, business,
education, technology, government, military service, and culture; and
WHEREAS, since migrating to America, men and women of Arab descent have
shared their rich culture and traditions with neighbors and friends, while also setting fine
examples of model citizens and public servants; and
WHEREAS, Arab Americans brought with them to America their resilient family
values, strong work ethic, dedication to education, and diversity in faith and creed that
have added strength to our great democracy; and
WHEREAS, Arab Americans have also enriched our society by sharing in the
entrepreneurial American spirit that makes our nation free and prosperous; and
WHEREAS, Arab Americans join all Americans in the desire to see a peaceful
and diverse society, where every individual is treated equally and feels safe; and
WHEREAS, during Arab American Heritage Month, it is imperative to increase
awareness about key issues and priorities within the Arab American community and
combat harmful stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
South San Francisco does hereby recognize April as Arab American Heritage Month and
commemorates the essential contributions, sacrifices, and accomplishments that Arab
Americans have made to our society.
_____________________________
Buenaflor Nicolas, Mayor, District 3
______________________________
Mark Nagales, Vice Mayor, District 2
_________________________________
Mark Addiego, Councilmember, District 1
___________________________________
James Coleman, Councilmember, District 4
_________________________________
Eddie Flores, Councilmember, District 5
16
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-318 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:6.
Presentation on Partnership for the Bay’s Future Breakthrough Grant Fellowship (Danielle Thoe, Housing
Manager)
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™17
z Partnership for
the Bay's Future
Breakthrough Grant Fellowship Update
Wednesday, April 26, 2023
18
z About the PBF Breakthrough Grant
Fellowship
▪San Francisco Foundation is the funder and
"parent" organization of the fellowship which is
run by Coro Northern California
▪11 jurisdictions around the Bay participating
▪Receive a mid -career Housing Policy Fellow
▪Applied in partnership with Community Partner
▪2-year commitment to work on housing policies +
+
19
z
Current
Status of
Fellowship
▪Initial fellow has applied to and accepted the City's
Housing Manager job
▪The San Francisco Foundation and Coro teams
have developed a new job posting
▪Have taken input from the South San
Francisco/HLC team into what specific skills
would add to the existing team
20
z
Work Plan –
Policy
Priorities
▪Explore and propose an Opportunity to
Purchase Act Policy
▪Develop Affordable Housing Spending
Plan
▪Explore and propose Anti-Displacement
Policies
▪Undertake land acquisition for affordable
housing
21
z
Work Plan –
Status
Updates
▪1:1 listening sessions held with each Council
member
▪Provided input to AFFH sections of City's Housing
Element
▪Relationship between City & HLC strengthened
▪Thursday memo re. Opportunity to Purchase Act
delivered April
▪Next steps: stakeholder and community
engagement
▪Anti-Displacement Policy consultants added to
2023-24 budget proposal
22
zHousing Leadership
Council
▪Founded: 2001
▪Origins: Founded by a group of nonprofit
leaders and service providers who
had begun discussions about the housing
crisis and obstacles to affordable housing
development throughout San Mateo
County.
▪Mission: Housing Leadership Council of
San Mateo County works with communities
and their leaders to produce and preserve
quality affordable homes.
23
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-315 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:2 Item #:7.
Motion to approve the Minutes for April 12, 2023 and April 19, 2023. (Rosa Govea Acosta, City Clerk)
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™24
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Nicolas called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Councilmember Addiego, present
Councilmember Coleman, present
Councilmember Flores, present via zoom -Hyatt Regency 1209 L Street Sacramento, CA 95814
Vice Mayor Nagales, present
Mayor Nicolas, present
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Leslie Fong led the pledge.
AGENDA REVIEW
No changes.
ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM STAFF
• Leslie Arroyo, Deputy City Manager
• Tamiko Huey, Management Fellow
PRESENTATIONS
1. Proclamation recognizing April as Volunteer Appreciation Month. (Flor Nicolas, Mayor)
Mayor Nicolas read the proclamation into the record. Recipient of the Lifetime Presidential Volunteer
Service Award, Steven Firpo, accepted the proclamation and thanked the Council.
2. Proclamation recognizing April 23 - 29, 2023 as National Library Week. (Flor Nicolas,
Mayor)
Mayor Nicolas read the proclamation into the record. President of the Library Board of Trustees,
Mary Giusti, accepted the proclamation and thanked the Council.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 12, 2023
6:00 p.m.
Municipal Services Building, Council Chambers
33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA
Via Zoom
25
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 12, 2023
MINUTES PAGE 2
3. Presentation on City Internship and Summer Work Opportunities for Youth (Leah Lockhart,
Human Resources Director)
Human Resources Director Lockhart provided an overview of the program to the Council.
PUBLIC COMMENTS – NON-AGENDA ITEMS
The following individual(s) addressed the City Council:
In-Person:
• Leslie Fong
Via Zoom:
• Anthony Montes
• Danielle Lacampagne
COUNCIL COMMENTS/REQUESTS
Councilmember Flores shared he was in Sacramento attending a League of CA Cities meeting with
policymakers to discuss issues affecting South San Francisco and its residents. He congratulated Dr.
Moore for receiving the Superintendent of the Year award at the South San Francisco Unified School
District. He also recognized WQCP Plant Superintendent, Brian Shumacker, for winning the
wastewater treatment plant of the year award. He also provided an overview of the City events that
he attended. Additionally, he shared that the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors awarded
$100,000 to the South San Francisco Every Kid Deserves a Bike initiative which will be expanded in
May 2023.
Councilmember Coleman thanked the volunteers of South San Francisco for their hours of improving
the City. He shared that he attended various events and provided an overview, including a visit from
Congressman Mullin. He expressed his sadness about the recent passing of another cyclist. He
discussed that in 2021 the city council adopted a Vision Zero resolution to achieve zero roadway
fatalities by 2025. He would like to have the council prioritize roadway safety and create protected
bike lanes, including physical barriers.
Councilmember Addiego thanked Councilmember Flores for creating Every Kid Deserves a Bike
program and including Sunshine Gardens Elementary School. He noted Earth Day is on April 22nd
and shared an event will be held in the Willow Gardens area of Susie Way and Nora Way for general
park and area cleanup. He invited the community to join on Saturday, April 22nd, at 9 a.m. In addition,
the City will also be hosting a cleanup event at Colma Creek. He also provided an update on his
participation in the SFO Roundtable and noted the flight increase. Additionally, he recognized a
resident of District 1, Gordon Wong, who highlighted concerns about roadway improvement
surrounding the 101 area near Oyster Point and Dubuque. He requested the City Manager and staff
follow up on roadway markings for the turn lanes at Industrial Park as there need to be delineations
to determine the lane.
Vice Mayor Nagales shared that he enjoyed the Easter Egg Hunt hosted by the Parks and Recreation
Department and congratulated them for their work. He thanked the Mayor for organizing the
Volunteer Gala and suggested it be held annually. He noted a huge tree at Orange Memorial Park by
the Fernekes Building that was down and requested that staff expedite the removal process. He also
shared news surrounding the Caltrain station funding deficit in the upcoming ten years and noted that
long-term financial implications might affect South San Francisco.
26
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 12, 2023
MINUTES PAGE 3
Mayor Nicolas highlighted public safety staff for providing important services to the community and
expressed appreciation for their services. She shared that she also attended various city events and
provided an overview of the events. She congratulated South San Francisco and San Bruno Water
Quality Control Plant for being awarded the Wastewater Treatment Plant of the Year. She also shared
Congressman Kevin Mullin's visit to the city and his experience with the Youth Government students.
She also highlighted the Cultural Diversity Award awarded by the National League of Cities,
recognizing the city's innovative program and congratulating staff. She noted the deadline for
affordable housing is approaching, and information can be found at mysmchousing.com. Lastly, she
requested the meeting be adjourned in memory of Flordeliza Hernandez Yamat and Gloria Ingo Lim.
CONSENT CALENDAR
The City Clerk duly read the Consent Calendar, after which Council voted and engaged in discussion
of specific item as follows. Item No. 8 was pulled for further discussion by Councilmember Addiego.
4. Motion to approve the Minutes for March 22, 2023, March 28, 2023, and April 4, 2023. (Rosa
Govea Acosta, City Clerk)
5. Motion to accept the construction improvements of the Caltrain Access & Bay Trail Gap
Closure Project (st2003) as complete. (Jeffrey Chou, Senior Civil Engineer)
6. Report regarding Resolution No 52-2023 authorizing the acceptance of $2,500 in grant
funding from NASA in partnership with Twin Cities PBS, Space Science Institute, National
Girls Collaborative, and NASA Langley Research Center to support networks advancing
gender equity and youth involvement in STEM through mentorship and programming at the
Grand Library Makerspace and amending the Library Department’s Fiscal Year 2022-2023
Operating Budget via Budget Amendment 23.059. (Valerie Sommer, Library Director)
7. Report regarding Resolution No. 53-2023 approving the Second Amendment to the service
agreement with Du-All Safety for safety program consultant services for an additional
$75,000 for a total contract amount not to exceed $250,000. (Leah Lockhart, HR Director)
8. Report regarding Resolution No. 54-2023 determining the existence of an emergency and the
need to make emergency repairs in response to the February 2023 flooding event at the
Roberta Cerri Teglia Center, and authorizing the City Manager to enter into an agreement for
said work. (Greg Mediati, Director of Parks and Recreation)
9. Report regarding Resolution No. 55-2023 authorizing the City Manager to sign a Letter of
Local Acknowledgement supporting the County of San Mateo’s Encampment Resolution
Funding Program (ERF) grant application. (Sharon Ranals, City Manager)
Item No. 8: Councilmember Addiego requested an update on the status of repairs and timeline. Parks
and Recreation Director Mediati provided an update on the status of repair for the building.
Motion – Councilmember Addiego /Second – Councilmember Coleman: To approve Consent
Calendar 4-9 by roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Addiego, Coleman, and Flores, Vice Mayor
Nagales, and Mayor Nicolas; NAYS: None; ABSTAIN: None
27
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 12, 2023
MINUTES PAGE 4
ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS
10. Report regarding Resolution No. 56-2023 naming the Third Floor Adult Library in the New
Library | Parks and Recreation Center as the Jackie Speier Library Wing, after former
Congresswoman Jackie Speier in honor of her lifelong support of public library programs,
services and collections in South San Francisco. (Valerie Sommer, Library Director)
Library Director Sommer presented the report. Vice Mayor Nagales noted Congresswoman Spears’
contributions and strong roots to South San Francisco.
The following individual(s) submitted an electronic comment:
• Darryl Y., District 2 resident
Motion – Vice Mayor Nagales/Second - Councilmember Coleman: To approve Resolution No. 56-
2023 naming the Third Floor Adult Library in the New Library | Parks and Recreation Center as the
Jackie Speier Library Wing, after former Congresswoman Jackie Speier in honor of her lifelong
support of public library programs, services and collections in South San Francisco, by roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Addiego, Coleman, and Flores, Vice Mayor Nagales, and Mayor Nicolas;
NAYS: None; ABSTAIN: None
11. Report regarding Resolution 57-2023 approving a sponsorship agreement with the West Coast
Farmer’s Market Association for the reopening of the South San Francisco Farmers’ Market
at Orange Memorial Park. (Leslie Arroyo, Deputy City Manager)
Deputy City Manager Arroyo presented the report. Jerry Lami with West Coast Farmers provided an
overview of the market and noted the difficulty with seasonal farmer’s market. The council requested
clarification, provided direction, and engaged in conversation.
Motion –Councilmember Addiego/Second Vice Mayor Nagales: To approve Resolution No. 57-2023
approving a sponsorship agreement for the operation of the South San Francisco Farmers' Market at
Orange Memorial Park by West Coast Farmers’ Market Association by roll call vote: AYES:
Councilmembers Addiego, Coleman, and Flores, Vice Mayor Nagales, and Mayor Nicolas; NAYS:
None; ABSTAIN: None
Meeting Recessed: 7:39 p.m.
Meeting Resumed: 7:49 p.m.
12. Report regarding Resolution No. 58-2023 approving a first amendment to the amended and
restated employment agreement between the City of South San Francisco and Rosa Govea
Acosta for service as City Clerk and approving an amendment to the City’s salary schedule
for the position of City Clerk. (Sky Woodruff, City Attorney and Leah Lockhart, Human
Resources Director)
City Attorney Woodruff presented the report.
Motion –Councilmember Coleman/Second Councilmember Flores: To approve Resolution No. 58-
2023 approving a first amendment to the employment agreement between the City of South San
Francisco and Rosa Govea Acosta for service as City Clerk and amending the Fiscal Year 2022-23
Salary Schedule to reflect changes in the salary for the City Clerk position by roll call vote: AYES:
Councilmembers Addiego, Coleman, and Flores, Vice Mayor Nagales, and Mayor Nicolas; NAYS:
None; ABSTAIN: None
28
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 12, 2023
MINUTES PAGE 5
13. Report regarding a Resolution No. 59-2023 awarding a construction contract to McGuire and
Hester of Alameda, California for the Grand Boulevard Initiative Phase III Project (Project
No. st1807, Bid No. 2658) in an amount not to exceed $3,257,557, authorizing a total
construction contract authority budget of $3,925,300, and authorizing the City Manager to
execute the agreement on behalf of the City. (Jeffrey Chou, Senior Civil Engineer)
Vice Mayor Nagales inquired about the proposed planting of trees alongside El Camino Real and
noted the importance of parking spaces.
Motion – Councilmember Coleman /Second –Vice Mayor Nagales: To approve Resolution No. 59-
2023 awarding a construction contract to McGuire and Hester of Alameda, California for the Grand
Boulevard Initiative Phase III Project (Project No. st1807, Bid No. 2658) in an amount not to exceed
$3,257,557, authorizing a total construction contract authority budget of $3,925,300, and authorizing
the City Manager to execute the agreement on behalf of the City, by roll call vote: AYES:
Councilmembers Addiego, Coleman, and Flores, Vice Mayor Nagales, and Mayor Nicolas; NAYS:
None; ABSTAIN: None
14. Report regarding approval of Resolution No. 60-2023 authorizing the Mayor to sign a letter
of support for Assembly Bill 311 (Santiago) “Food for All” to expand access to the California
Food Assistance Program (CFAP). (Tamiko Huey, Management Analyst II)
Management Analyst Huey presented the report. Councilmember Addiego requested data be shared
with the Council.
Motion – Vice Mayor Nagales /Second –Councilmember Coleman: To approve Resolution No. 60-
2023 authorizing the Mayor to sign a letter of support for Assembly Bill 311 (Santiago) “Food for
All” to expand access to the California Food Assistance Program (CFAP), by roll call vote: AYES:
Councilmembers Addiego, Coleman, and Flores, Vice Mayor Nagales, and Mayor Nicolas; NAYS:
None; ABSTAIN: None
ITEMS FROM COUNCIL – COMMITTEE REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
CLOSED SESSION
Entered into Closed Session: 8:18 p.m.
15. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Pursuant to Government Code of
Section 54956.9(d)(1)) Name of case: In re: National Prescription Opiate Litigation (United
States District Court, Northern District of Ohio, Case No. 1:17-MD-2804) (Sky Woodruff,
City Attorney; Leslie Arroyo, Deputy City Manager; Tamiko Huey, Management Analyst)
Resumed from Closed Session: 8:48 p.m.
Report out of Closed Session by Mayor Nicolas: Direction given. No reportable action.
ADJOURNMENT
Being no further business Mayor Nicolas adjourned the City Council meeting at 9:29 p.m.
29
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 12, 2023
MINUTES PAGE 6
***
Adjourned in Memory of
Flordeliza Hernandez Yamat and Gloria Ingo Lim
***
Submitted by: Approved by:
Jazmine Miranda Buenaflor Nicolas
Assistant City Clerk Mayor
Approved by the City Council: / /
30
CALL TO ORDER Mayor Nicolas called the meeting to order at 5:06 p.m.
ROLL CALL Councilmember Addiego, present
Councilmember Coleman, present
Councilmember Flores, present
Vice Mayor Nagales, present
Mayor Nicolas, present
AGENDA REVIEW
None.
PUBLIC COMMENTS – comments are limited to items on the Special Meeting Agenda.
The following individual(s) submitted electronic comments:
• Cynthia Marcopulos
• Samir Elmojahid
ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS
1. Continued Study Session regarding proposed amendments to the City Council Handbook.
(Sky Woodruff, City Attorney and Rosa Govea Acosta, City Clerk)
City Clerk Govea Acosta presented the report. The council engaged in discussion and proposed
revisions to a portion of the City Council Handbook.
Meeting recessed: 6:45 p.m.
Meeting resumed: 7:03 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
Being no further business Mayor Nicolas adjourned the meeting at 8:30 p.m.
Submitted by: Approved:
Rosa Govea Acosta, MMC, CPMC Buenaflor Nicolas
City Clerk Mayor
Approved: / /
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
TUESDAY, APRIL 19, 2023
5:00 p.m.
City Hall - City Manager Conference Room
400 Grand Avenue, South San Francisco, CA
31
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-303 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:8.
Report regarding a resolution authorizing acceptance of $26,433.40 in donations from Tri Counties Bank and
local residents via the South San Francisco Public Library Foundation,appropriating the funds and amending
the fiscal year 22-23 Operating Budget via Budget Amendment 23.062 to support the capital improvement
project for the new Library, Parks and Recreation Center.(Valerie Sommer, Library Director)
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the acceptance of $26,433.40 in
donations from Tri Counties Bank and local residents via the South San Francisco Public Library
Foundation (SSFPL Foundation),appropriating the funds and amending the fiscal year 22-23 Operating
Budget via Budget Amendment 23.062 to support the new Library,Parks and Recreation Center as part
of the Community Civic Campus project.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The City and the Foundation have led a robust fundraising campaign to support our new Library,Parks and
Recreation Center as part of the Community Civic Campus project.Previous donations transferred to the City
to support the project total $4,101,387.53 and include $3,000,000 from Genentech,A Member of the Roche
Group,$500,000 from Amgen,Inc.,$150,000 from South San Francisco Rotary Club,$75,000 from Sunrise
Giving Foundation,and donations from local residents,businesses and organizations in the amount of
$376,387.53.The current funding approval request in the amount of $26,433.40 includes $25,000 from Tri
Counties Bank and $1,433.40 from local residents.
Additional project funds received by the City include a $1,000,000 donation from South San Francisco Friends
of the Library (FOL),$1,500,000 in federal earmark funds via Congresswoman Jackie Speier and $4,492,310 in
California State Library Building Forward Grant funding.The successful fundraising total of $11,120,130.93 is
thanks to four years of community connections and outreach by the City fundraising team comprised of City
Manager Sharon Ranals,former City Manager Mike Futrell,Library Director Valerie Sommer,Parks and
Recreation Director Greg Mediati,Director of Capital Projects Jake Gilchrist,Assistant Library Director Adam
Elsholz and Business Manager, Parks & Recreation Department, Erin O’Brien.
As part of the opening day celebration,all donors will be acknowledged.Donations of $1,000 and greater will
be highlighted on a donor wall to be located inside the entrance area of the Community Theater/City Council
Chambers.Donors of less than $1,000 will be thanked in a separate acknowledgement vehicle such as online or
in an opening day brochure.
These funds have been donated to the SSFPL Foundation,a 501(c)(3)nonprofit organization,and specifically
directed to support the new Library,Parks and Recreation Center.City Council’s previous approval of a
Memorandum of Understanding between the City and SSFPL Foundation formalizes the fundraising
relationship between the two parties and allows for the transfer of such funds to the City.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™32
File #:23-303 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:8.
FISCAL IMPACT
$26,433.40 has been donated to the SSFPL Foundation,a 501(c)(3)nonprofit organization,with the stipulation
that the funds be transferred to the City to support the new Library,Parks and Recreation Center project.City
Council must approve the corresponding resolution for these funds to be accepted by the City.Once approved,
the $26,433.40 will be appropriated as restricted funds to be used to offset the cost of the new Library,Parks
and Recreation Center project.
RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN
Building a new Library,Parks and Recreation Center as part of the Community Civic Campus is an action item
in the City Strategic Plan under Priority #2: Quality of Life. This funding will support the project.
CONCLUSION
Acceptance of this resolution will support the new Library,Parks and Recreation Center project.It is
recommended that the City Council accept and appropriate $26,433.40 and amend the fiscal year 2022-23
Operating Budget via Budget Amendment 23.062 to support the capital improvement project for the new
Library, Parks and Recreation Center.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™33
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-304 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:8a.
Resolution authorizing acceptance of $26,433.40 in donations from Tri Counties Bank and local residents via
the South San Francisco Public Library Foundation,appropriating the funds and amending the fiscal year 22-23
Operating Budget via Budget Amendment 23.062 to support the capital improvement project for the new
Library, Parks and Recreation Center.
WHEREAS,the City and the Foundation have led a robust capital fundraising campaign to support the New
Library, Parks and Recreation Center; and
WHEREAS,the South San Francisco Public Library Foundation (SSFPL Foundation)is a 501(c)(3)nonprofit
organization focused on fundraising efforts to support the new Library, Parks and Recreation Center; and
WHEREAS,the SSFPL Foundation and the City of South San Francisco have a contract confirming the
fundraising relationship between the two parties and authorizing the SSFPL Foundation to accept grants to be
transferred to the City; and
WHEREAS, SSFPL Foundation received $25,000 in donations from Tri Counties Bank; and
WHEREAS, SSFPL Foundation received $1,4330.40 in donations from local residents; and
WHEREAS,the SSFPL Foundation desires to provide the donation funds to the City to support the new
Library, Parks and Recreation Center project; and
WHEREAS,the City Council has previously approved donations totaling in the amount of $11,120,130.93 to
support the project; and
WHEREAS,the funds will be used to amend Fiscal Year (FY)2022-2023 Operating Budget via Budget
Amendment 23.062.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City
Council hereby accepts $26,433.40 in fundraising via the South San Francisco Public Library Foundation,
appropriating these new funds to support the new Library, Parks and Recreation Center.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that the City Council does hereby approve Budget Amendment 23.062 to
amend the fiscal year 2022-23 Operating Budget in order to reflect an increase of $26,433.40.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that the City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute the
documents necessary to accept the donations and take any other actions necessary to carry out the intent of this
resolution on behalf of the City Council, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™34
File #:23-304 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:8a.
*****
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™35
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-305 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:9.
Report regarding a resolution authorizing the acceptance of $3,500 in grant funding for Fiscal Year 2022-2023
from the Quality Improvement Grant from Quality Counts San Mateo County for the Big Lift Little Steps
Preschool at the Community Learning Center,and amending the Parks and Recreation Department’s Fiscal
Year 2022-2023 Operating Budget pursuant to budget amendment #23.064.(Greg Mediati,Director of Parks
and Recreation)
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the acceptance of $3,500 in grant
funding for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 from the Quality Improvement Grant from Quality Counts San Mateo
County for the Big Lift Little Steps Preschool at the Community Learning Center,and amending the
Parks and Recreation Department’s Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Operating Budget pursuant to budget
amendment #23.064.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The purpose of this staff report is to recommend that the City Council authorize the acceptance of $3,500 in
grant funding for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 from the Quality Improvement Grant from Quality Counts San Mateo
County for the Big Lift Little Steps Preschool at the Community Learning Center.
The City of South San Francisco’s (City)Little Steps Preschool is funded by the Big Lift grant from San Mateo
County.The grant requires that Big Lift preschool classrooms meet and maintain a Tier 3 or higher rating on
the San Mateo County Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS).QRIS represents a partnership
between the San Mateo County Office of Education (SMCOE),First 5 San Mateo County,and the Child Care
Coordinating Council (4Cs)to implement a system to measure and guide quality improvement in early learning
centers and family childcare homes in San Mateo County.QRIS is administered by the San Mateo County
Superintendent of Schools (County Superintendent).In the most recent evaluation,the Little Steps Preschool
received a Tier 4 rating, with Tier 5 being the highest score.
The City previously entered into an agreement with the County Superintendent for the Little Steps Preschool
located at the Community Learning Center to participate in the QRIS from July 1,2020 through June 30,2023.
As part of this agreement,the City receives training and support services,regular review of Little Steps’QRIS
rating, and grants or other resources depending on the availability of funding.
As part of the QRIS effort,the City is eligible for a Quality Improvement Grant in the amount of $3,500 to help
staff create an action-oriented quality improvement plan for Little Steps Preschool and provide resources to
implement those plans in 2022-2023.The Little Steps Preschool plans to use the QRIS Quality Improvement
Grant to purchase supplies such as outdoor play equipment to help children with their social emotional growth
as well as gross motor development.
FISCAL IMPACT
Acceptance of the QRIS grant in the amount of $3,500 will allow for the purchase of training and support
services for preschool teachers as well as classroom supplies that are intended to improve and maintain a Tier 3
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™36
File #:23-305 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:9.
or higher QRIS rating for the Little Steps Preschool as required by the Big Lift grant.
RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN
Acceptance of this funding will contribute to the City’s Strategic Plan under Priority #2 by helping build active
recreation, learning, and childcare programs.
CONCLUSION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the acceptance of $3,500 in grant
funding for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 from the Quality Improvement Grant from Quality Counts San Mateo
County for the Big Lift Little Steps Preschool at the Community Learning Center,and amending the Parks and
Recreation Department’s Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Operating Budget pursuant to budget amendment #23.064.
The Parks and Recreation Department appreciates contributions from individual community members,local
organizations,and State and Federal partners that help continue and enhance the Department’s mission to
provide opportunities for physical,cultural and social well-being;protect and enhance the physical
environment; and ensure the effective and efficient use of public facilities and open space.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™37
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-306 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:9a.
Resolution authorizing the acceptance of $3,500 in grant funding for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 from the Quality
Improvement Grant from Quality Counts San Mateo County for the Big Lift Little Steps Preschool at the
Community Learning Center,and amending the Parks and Recreation Department’s Fiscal Year 2022-2023
Operating Budget pursuant to budget amendment #23.064.
WHEREAS,the City of South San Francisco’s (City)Little Steps Preschool is funded by the Big Lift grant
from the Silicon Valley Community Foundation; and
WHEREAS,the San Mateo County Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS)represents a partnership
between the San Mateo County Office of Education (SMCOE),First 5 San Mateo County,and the Child Care
Coordinating Council (4Cs)to implement a system to measure and guide quality improvement in early
learning centers and family childcare homes in San Mateo County; and
WHEREAS,QRIS is administered by the San Mateo County Superintendent of Schools (County
Superintendent)and the City has entered into an agreement with the County Superintendent for Little Steps to
participate in the QRIS from July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2023; and
WHEREAS,the City is eligible for a Quality Improvement Grant from the County Superintendent in the
amount of $3,500 to create and implement an action-oriented quality improvement plan for Little Steps
Preschool in 2022-2023.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby
authorizes the acceptance of $3,500 in grant funding for Fiscal Year 2022-2023.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that the City Council amends the Parks and Recreation Department’s Fiscal
Year 2022-2023 Operating Budget pursuant to budget amendment #23.064.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that the City Council hereby authorizes the City to execute the documents
necessary to accept the grant funding and take any other actions necessary to carry out the intent of this
resolution on behalf of the City Council, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney.
*****
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™38
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-329 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:10.
Report regarding a resolution approving Budget Amendment Number 23.066 appropriating $50,000 from the
City’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund (Fund 205)to advance relocation payments,recover relocation costs,and
any related administrative expenses pursuant to Chapter 8.70 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code
Related to Property Owner Obligations with Respect to Tenants Displaced from Unsafe or Substandard Units
and authorizing the City Manager to execute documents related to relocation assistance payments.(Nell
Selander, Economic & Community Development Director)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends City Council adopt a resolution approving Budget Amendment Number 23.066
appropriating $50,000 from the City’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund (Fund 205)to advance relocation
payments,recover relocation costs,and any related administrative expenses pursuant to Chapter 8.70 of the
South San Francisco Municipal Code Related to Property Owner Obligations with Respect to Tenants
Displaced from Unsafe or Substandard Units and authorizing the City Manager to execute documents related to
relocation assistance payments.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
In 2019,City Council adopted Ordinance 1584-2019 adding Chapter 8.70 “Property Owner Obligations With
Respect to Tenants Displaced from Unsafe or Substandard Units”to the South San Francisco Municipal Code
(SSFMC).In doing so,the City set up a form of relocation assistance available to residential rental tenants
displaced due to unsafe or substandard living conditions.Specifically,relocation assistance is triggered when a
code violation is issued by the City and the tenant household is required to vacate the unit whether temporarily
or permanently.If the landlord is unable to pay or refuses to pay the relocation assistance at the time it is
required,the City,in its sole discretion and subject to funding availability,is able to remit the relocation
assistance directly to the tenant(s)and bill the landlord for the amount of payment,plus any administrative and
other direct and/or indirect costs that it would not have incurred without the failure of the landlord to make the
required payment.The landlord is then required to reimburse the City.If the landlord does not make full and
timely payment to the City,the City is also entitled to recover an additional amount,as specified,as a penalty
for failure to make timely payment. The City may also place a lien against the property to recoup the funds.
Since adopting SSFMC Chapter 8.70 very few code violations requiring vacating tenants have occurred.And in
cases where they have occurred,the landlord has generally provided relocation assistance once made aware of
the City’s Municipal Code,or negotiated a separate agreement acceptable to the tenant(s).Recently,though,
several households were displaced by a code violation and relocation assistance has not been provided by the
landlord.The City has not made a final determination on the amount of the relocation assistance or heard a final
appeal from the landlord,which is still pending.Once a final determination of the amount has been made and
all appeals have been heard,if the landlord still does not make the relocation payments,then the City may step
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™39
File #:23-329 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:10.
all appeals have been heard,if the landlord still does not make the relocation payments,then the City may step
in,make the payments to the tenant(s),bill the landlord for the payments and administrative costs,and place a
lien on the property.
When City Council adopted SSFMC Chapter 8.70 in 2019 it also adopted Resolution 101-2019 appropriating
$35,000 to advance relocation payments and cover related expenses.However,this appropriation was not
subsequently set up as a recurring budget appropriation.Now that funds may be needed to advance relocation
payments,staff are seeking a budget amendment to reestablish this line item within the City’s Fund 205 budget.
Fund 205 is funded by affordable housing in lieu fees and other developer contributions.A decision package
has also been entered for the upcoming budget,which will establish this as a recurring budget line item in
future years.
FISCAL IMPACT
Adopting this resolution will not impact the General Fund.If this resolution is adopted and a property owner
cannot or will not pay the relocation assistance required by SSFMC Chapter 8.70,the City could use Fund 205
to advance relocation payments to displaced households and recover the relocation costs,and any related
administrative costs,by placing a lien on the property.Fund 205 is expected to have an unencumbered cash
balance of $395,000 at the close of fiscal year 2022-2023.
RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN
Supporting affordable housing is in line with the City’s Strategic Plan Priority #2:Quality of Life,providing a
full range of housing options.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends City Council adopt a resolution approving Budget Amendment Number 23.066
appropriating $50,000 from the City’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund (Fund 205)to advance relocation
payments,recover relocation costs,and any related administrative expenses pursuant to Chapter 8.70 of the
South San Francisco Municipal Code Related to Property Owner Obligations with Respect to Tenants
Displaced from Unsafe or Substandard Units and authorizing the City Manager to execute documents related to
relocation assistance payments.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™40
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-330 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:10a.
Resolution approving Budget Amendment Number 23.066 appropriating $50,000 from the City’s Affordable
Housing Trust Fund (Fund 205)to advance relocation payments,recover relocation costs,and any related
administrative expenses,pursuant to South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.70 Related to Property
Owner Obligations with Respect to Tenants Displaced from Unsafe or Substandard Units and authorizing the
City Manager to execute documents related to relocation assistance payments.
WHEREAS,the City Council desires to appropriate fifty thousand dollars ($50,000)from the City’s Affordable
Housing Trust (Fund 205)to advance relocation payments to displaced tenant households,recover the
relocation costs,and any related administrative costs pursuant to Chapter 8.70 of the South San Francisco
Municipal Code (SSFMC)related to Property Owner Obligations with Respect to Tenants Displaced from
Unsafe or Substandard Units; and
WHEREAS,some residential rental units in South San Francisco have severe code violations which threaten
the life and safety of occupants, and while these situation are rare, they must be addressed; and
WHEREAS,the hazardous living conditions often require that the tenant vacate the structure to allow for
extensive repairs of demolition of the structure; and
WHEREAS,when these code violations are caused by negligence or postponed maintenance by the property
owner,or when the property owner allows the improper use of a structure,the health and safety of tenants are at
risk; and
WHEREAS,in 2019,the City Council adopted Ordinance 1584-2019 adding SSFMC Chapter 8.70 Property
Owner Obligations With Respect to Tenants Displaced from Unsafe or Substandard Units; and
WHEREAS,SSFMC Chapter 8.70 establishes a form of relocation assistance available to residential rental
tenants displaced due to unsafe or substandard living conditions,which applies when a code violation is issued
by the City and the tenant household is required to vacate the unit whether temporarily or permanently; and
WHEREAS,if the property owner is unable to pay or refuses to pay the relocation assistance at the time it is
required,the City,in its sole discretion and subject to funding availability,is able to remit the relocation
assistance directly to the tenant(s)and bill the property owner for the amount of payment,plus any
administrative and other direct and/or indirect costs that it would not have incurred without the failure of the
property owner to make the required payment; and
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™41
File #:23-330 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:10a.
WHEREAS,if the City makes the relocation payments,the property owner is then required to reimburse the
City, and the City may also place a lien against the property to recoup the funds; and
WHEREAS,property owners who fail to properly maintain residential rental properties,and/or create
substandard residential rental units should bear responsibility for the hardships their actions (or inaction)create
for the tenant; and
WHEREAS,relocation benefits and assistance are necessary to ensure that displaced tenants secure safe,
sanitary and decent replacement housing; and
WHEREAS,relocation costs are a necessary component of code enforcement that should be borne by the
property owner,and the City should be reimbursed by the responsible owner for relocation-related costs that it
incurs in the code enforcement process; and
WHEREAS,the transaction will serve the goals of the City’s housing element by maintaining and improving
quality of life and assuring equal access to housing.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that it
hereby:
1.Approve Budget Amendment Number 23.066 authorizing the appropriation of $50,000 from the City’s
Affordable Housing Trust Fund (Fund 205)to advance relocation payments to displaced tenant
households,recover relocation costs,and any related administrative costs,pursuant to SSFMC Chapter
8.70 Property Owner Obligations with Respect to Tenants Displaced from Unsafe or Substandard Units.
2.Authorizes the City Manager,or her designee,to advance relocation payments to displaced tenant
households,recover relocation costs,execute documents related to relocation assistance payments and
any related administrative costs, and to take any other action consistent with the intent of this resolution.
*****
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™42
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:22-998 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:11.
Report regarding a resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute a purchase and sale
agreement with the City and County of San Francisco for the acquisition of property currently used for Mission
Road and Antoinette Lane for the Community Civic Campus Project (Sky Woodruff, City Attorney, and Jacob
Gilchrist, Director of Capital Projects)
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to
execute a purchase and sale agreement with the City and County of San Francisco for the acquisition of
property currently used for Mission Road and Antoinette Lane for the Community Civic Campus Project.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
The Community Civic Campus project consists of three phases of construction of new public facilities,
including a new police station (Phase I); a building that includes a new library, parks and recreation offices and
facilities, and a City Council Chamber and community theater (Phase II); and a new fire station (Phase III)
(together, the “Project”). Phases 1 and 2 of the Project are both located in the vicinity of Antoinette Lane and
Chestnut Avenue and are currently under construction.
In the course of finalizing documents for the construction of Phase 2 of the Project, the City identified several
small pieces of property along Antoinette Lane with unknown owners. One of the properties identified is
immediately adjacent to the Project property and approximately half the width of existing Antoinette Lane, with
a portion outside of the existing roadway. Upon further investigation, the City determined that the property is
part of long strip of land that is primarily half the width of Antoinette Lane and Mission Road. Approximately
1,600 square feet are outside of existing roadways. A depiction of the property is provided below. Since this
property is developed with existing roadways, but also includes land for the Project, City staff concluded that, if
possible, the City should attempt to acquire the total property to clean up title to the streets.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™43
File #:22-998 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:11.
Staff and the City Attorney’s Office commissioned a title report that identified the owner as the City and
County of San Francisco, with the property under the control of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
(SF PUC). City staff began working with SF PUC on potential acquisition of this property, which SF PUC
refers to as “Parcel 21.”
City staff retained ARWS to prepare an appraisal of the value of the property, which is attached to this report.
The appraisal was completed in October 2022 and concluded that the fair market value of the property is
$94,000. Most of the value is in the approximately 1,600 square feet outside of the existing roadways, with the
remainders having nominal value. SF PUC agreed in principle to sell the property to the City for the appraised
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™44
File #:22-998 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:11.
value. The parties then proceeded to negotiate the terms of a purchase and sale agreement for the property.
The property will primarily continue to be used as Mission Road and Antoinette Lane, including a minor
realignment of Antoinette Lane as part of the Project. A small portion will be part of the roadway landscaping
and public open space, including the connection from the pedestrian bridge over Colma Creek to Mission Road,
which will be constructed by SSF Housing Partners as part of the residential development project next door to
the Project.
A near-final version of the purchase and sale agreement is attached to the resolution. If the City Council
approves the resolution, the City Manager will be authorized to sign the agreement. The City will then move
forward with SF PUC to complete the purchase of the property.
State law generally requires a finding that acquisitions of property are consistent with the adopted General Plan.
This small property acquisition is primarily for the purpose of existing roadways and minor realignment of
Antoinette as part of the Project. Consequently, under Government Code section 65402(a), a General Plan
consistency finding is not necessary.
The City evaluated the environmental impacts of the Civic Campus Project pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), and the City Council, as lead agency for purposes of CEQA, certified
and adopted a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (“SEIR”) at a duly noticed public hearing on
December 13, 2017. The SEIR serves as the CEQA documentation for the City’s consideration and approval of
the Project, and no additional CEQA review is required.
FISCAL IMPACT
The purchase price for the property is $94,000, and the City has and will incur minor costs associated with the
preparation and recording of the purchase and sale agreement and related documents. This is included in the
current total project budget for pf1707 presented to Council on November 9, 2020. No additional funding
appropriation is required.
RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN
The Community Civic Campus Project, including Phase II, is included in the City’s Strategic Plan. Phase II
aligns with Priority #2 which is focused on enhancing quality of life.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution, which will approve and authorize the
City Manager to execute a purchase and sale agreement with the City and County of San Francisco for the
acquisition of property currently used for Mission Road and Antoinette Lane for the Community Civic Campus
Project.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™45
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Associated Right of Way Services, Inc.
2300 Contra Costa Blvd., Suite 525
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
925.691.8500
No. 22051
Appraisal Report
for
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
SFPUC Property
Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
South San Francisco, CA
Prepared by:
Erik Woodhouse, MAI, R/W-AC
Senior Appraiser
October 2022
46
2300 Contra Costa Blvd.
Suite 525
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
925.691.8500 phone
925.691.6505 fax
www.arws.com
October 4, 2022
Jacob Gilchrist
Director of Capital Projects
City of South San Francisco
400 Grand Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
Re: Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Owner: SFPUC
Property Address: Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane, South San Francisco,
CA
Dear Mr. Gilchrist:
In accordance with our contract with the City of South San Francisco, an appraisal has been made
of the fair market value of the property rights proposed to be acquired from the above portions of
Mission Road and Antoinette Lane and small additional fee-owned areas outside of the two
roadways, as requested. The proposed property interests to be acquired include the underlying
fee simple interests in these two parcels. The final valuation conclusion is included in the following
report.
This Appraisal Report is prepared in conformance with the Uniform Standards of Professional
Appraisal Practice, Standard Rule 2-2(a). This report contains a description of the subject
property, the property rights to be acquired, a valuation conclusion for the property to be acquired
and an estimate of fair market value. I have completed an inspection of the subject, gathered
pertinent information, sales and other data relevant to the valuation and analyzed the data to
reach my conclusions. I inspected the subject parcels and surrounding environment on August
25, 2022. A representative of the property owner, Brian Morelli, accompanied me on the
inspection. The date of value is the date of the site inspection.
The opinion of the fair market value of the property interests considered for acquisition for the
project is as shown in the following Summary of Salient Facts and Estimate of Fair Market Value,
which is made a part of this transmittal letter and appraisal report. The accompanying report is
submitted for your review and approval for acquisition purposes and is subject to the Assumptions
and Limiting Conditions included herein.
Sincerely,
Erik Woodhouse, MAI, R/W-AC
State Certified General Appraiser
CA License No. AG0346 30
47
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
Summary of Salient Facts and Estimate of Fair Market Value
Date of Valuation: August 25, 2022 (date of site visit)
Assessor's Parcel Number: None Assigned
Property Location/Address: Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane, South
San Francisco, CA
Owner: SFPUC
Owned Since: Over five years
Occupied By: Public street improvements and vacant land
Total Site Area:
Proposed Areas to be Acquired: Entire subject property
Zoning: Mission Road: Portion in publicly traveled right of way
areas not zoned *, Portion outside publicly traveled right
of way areas zoned ECR/C-RH - El Camino
Real/Chestnut Residential, High Density
Antoinette Lane: Portion in publicly-traveled right of
way areas not zoned *, Portion outside publicly-traveled
Fee Simple Value Size (s.f.)
Land
Value/s.f.
Mission Road Parcel Total Area:31,548
Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Zoned Land 31,548 Nominal $2,500
Not Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Designated Land 792 x $210 x 25%$41,580
$44,080
Antoinette Lane Parcel Total Area:13,954
Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Zoned Land 13,118 Nominal $2,500
Not Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Designated Land 836 x $225 x 25%$47,025
$49,525
Total Fee Simple Value $93,605
Rounded $94,000
Estimated
Value
% of Value due
to Utility in
Assembly
Area Size (s.f.)
Mission Road
Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Zoned Land 31,548
Not Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Designated Land 792
Total 32,340
Antoinette Lane
Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Zoned Land 13,118
Not Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Designated Land 836
Total 13,954
48
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
right of way areas zoned ECR/C-MXH – El Camino Real
Mixed-Use, High Density
General Plan: Mission Road: Portion not assigned; portions
designated High-Density Residential
Antoinette Lane: Portion not assigned, portions
designated El Camino Real Mixed-Use North, High
Intensity
El Camino Real-Chestnut Avenue Mission Road: Portion in publicly traveled right of way
Area Plan Land Use Designations: areas not designated *, Portion outside publicly traveled
right of way areas designated High-Density Residential
and Park and Recreation
Antoinette Lane: Portion in publicly traveled right of
way areas not designated *, Portion outside publicly
traveled right of way areas designated El Camino Real
Mixed-Use North, High Intensity
* See Extraordinary Assumptions
Highest and Best Use
As Vacant: Mission Road: 792 square feet outside of existing
public right of way have a highest and best use for
assembly with the adjacent parcel to the southwest;
remaining area has no economic use potential.
Antoinette Lane: 836 square feet outside of existing
public right of way have a highest and best use for
assembly with the adjacent parcel to the southwest;
remaining area has no economic use potential.
Flood Hazard Information: Flood Zones X and A, Map Nos. 06081C0037E and
06081E0041E, dated October 16, 2012
Earthquake Information: Not located in an Earthquake Fault Zone
The intent of this appraisal assignment is to conduct an investigation approximating the
thoroughness that a typical buyer would conduct when considering similar property on the open
market in the subject’s neighborhood and competing markets, and in conformance with the
necessary policies and techniques used by appraisers in developing an estimate of fair market
value.
An inspection of the subject was conducted to determine the size, condition and utility of the
property. However, since the underlying subject land is predominantly comprised of portions of
public roadway right of way areas that legally and physically are impractical to develop
independently for any marketable purpose, the value of the land has been estimated by applying
a modified version of the Sales Comparison Approach, considering the contributory value of both
49
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
areas in assembly with the adjacent parcels. Therefore, the adjacent properties were also
inspected to determine the size, condition and utility of these adjacent sites. The conclusion of
value for the Sales Comparison Approach is determined following appropriate adjustments to
properties that have sold and are similar to the parcel adjacent to the subject areas being
appraised, considering the unit prices paid in the market for this type of property. The concluded
unit land value has been used to value the areas being appraised. The Income and Cost
Approaches are not considered applicable to this assignment since the approaches do not
typically apply to the valuation of land.
50
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
Subject Location Map
51
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
Table of Contents
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND ESTIMATE OF FAIR MARKET VALUE
SUBJECT LOCATION MAP
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1
PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL .................................................................................................................. 1
SCOPE OF ASSIGNMENT ......................................................................................................................... 1
INTENDED USE OF THE APPRAISAL ........................................................................................................... 1
CLIENT AND INTENDED USER OF THE APPRAISAL ....................................................................................... 1
DATE OF VALUATION .............................................................................................................................. 1
PROPERTY INTEREST APPRAISED ............................................................................................................ 2
MARKET VALUE DEFINED ........................................................................................................................ 2
REASONABLE EXPOSURE TIME ................................................................................................................ 2
CERTIFICATION OF APPRAISER ................................................................................................................ 3
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS ................................................................................................ 5
PROJECT ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS .................................................................................. 6
HYPOTHETICAL CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................... 7
EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTIONS .............................................................................................................. 7
GENERAL INFORMATION ..................................................................................................................... 9
REGION, CITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD DATA ................................................................................................ 9
REAL ESTATE MARKET CONDITIONS ...................................................................................................... 10
Residential Market ........................................................................................................................................ 13
Commercial Market ...................................................................................................................................... 16
Retail Market ................................................................................................................................................ 16
SUBJECT PARCEL INFORMATION ..................................................................................................... 18
SUBJECT PROPERTY DATA SUMMARY .................................................................................................... 18
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ...................................................................................................................... 25
TITLE AND PROPERTY HISTORY ............................................................................................................. 26
Existing Easements ...................................................................................................................................... 26
FLOOD HAZARD INFORMATION ............................................................................................................... 27
EARTHQUAKE INFORMATION .................................................................................................................. 28
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................................. 28
LAND USE ........................................................................................................................................... 28
HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................ 34
VALUATION ......................................................................................................................................... 37
VALUATION METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................. 37
VALUATION, MISSION ROAD PARCEL ...................................................................................................... 38
Sales Data Summary .................................................................................................................................... 39
Sales Data Analysis ...................................................................................................................................... 54
Land Value Conclusion, Parcel Adjacent to Mission Road: ............................................................................. 56
Discount due to Assemblage Highest and Best Use ....................................................................................... 56
Value Conclusion, Mission Road Parcel ........................................................................................................ 58
VALUATION, ANTOINETTE LANE PARCEL ................................................................................................. 58
Land Value Conclusion, Parcel Adjacent to Antoinette Lane:.......................................................................... 59
Discount due to Assemblage Highest and Best Use ....................................................................................... 60
Value Conclusion, Antoinette Lane Parcel ..................................................................................................... 60
TOTAL FAIR MARKET VALUE, MISSION ROAD AND ANTOINETTE LANE PARCELS .......................................... 61
52
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
MAPS AND EXHIBITS
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL MAP .................................................................................................................... 20
APPRAISAL MAP OF AREAS TO BE ACQUIRED .......................................................................................... 21
SUBJECT AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH............................................................................................................. 22
SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOGRAPHS ..................................................................................................... 23
ZONING MAP ....................................................................................................................................... 31
GENERAL PLAN MAP ............................................................................................................................ 32
EL CAMINO REAL-CHESTNUT AVENUE AREA PLAN MAP ........................................................................... 33
COMPARABLE LAND SALE DATA SHEETS AND PARCEL MAP ...................................................................... 41
ADDENDA
LITIGATION GUARANTEE
APPRAISER QUALIFICATIONS
53
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
1
Introduction
Purpose of the Appraisal
The purpose of this appraisal is to furnish an opinion of the fair market value of the underlying fee
simple interest in the portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane, which are proposed to be
acquired from SFPUC by the City of South San Francisco. Although the interests in these areas
extend slightly outside of the respective public right of way areas, for the purpose of this appraisal
report, the parcels are referred to as the Mission Road parcel and the Antoinette Lane parcel,
respectively.
Scope of Assignment
The subject property was inspected to determine the size, condition, and utility of the underlying
land and existing improvements and/or encumbrances. Searches of public records, real estate
listings and sales services were employed to obtain data. Analysis of market conditions was
completed, both general and specific to the market. Market participants were interviewed.
Relevant property sales were researched and confirmed to the extent possible. The data is set
out in the property valuation section.
The Appraisal Report conforms to Standards Rule 2-2(a) of the Uniform Standards of Professional
Appraisal Practice. The information contained in this report is specific to the needs of the Client
and for the intended use stated in this report. I am not responsible for unauthorized use of this
report. The intent of this report is to provide sufficient data and analysis so as to have no
misleading information and a conclusion of value of high reliability.
Intended Use of the Appraisal
The intended use of the appraisal and report is to provide the City of South San Francisco with a
basis for determining fair market value to be offered and payable to the property owner for the
proposed acquisition parcels. The appraisal report is subject to administrative review by the
Client.
Client and Intended User of the Appraisal
The Client and the intended user of this appraisal report is the City of South San Francisco.
Date of Valuation
The property in this report has been valued as of August 25, 2022. The date of value is the date
of the site inspection.
54
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
2
Property Interest Appraised
This appraisal addresses the fee simple estate in the subject property. The fee simple estate is
defined as follows:
“Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate, subject only to the limitations
imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat.”
(The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Sixth Edition, published by the Appraisal Institute)
Market Value Defined
(California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1263.320)
“(a) The fair market value of the property taken is the highest price on the date of valuation
that would be agreed to by a seller, being willing to sell but under no particular or urgent
necessity for so doing, nor obliged to sell, and a buyer, being ready, willing and able to
buy but under no particular necessity for so doing, each dealing with the other with full
knowledge of all the uses and purposes for which the property is reasonably adaptable
and available.
(b) The fair market value of property taken for which there is no relevant, comparable market
is its value on the date of valuation as determined by any method of valuation that is just
and equitable.”
Reasonable Exposure Time
Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP 2020/2021 edition: Definitions)
defines exposure time as follows:
“EXPOSURE TIME: an opinion, based on supporting market data, of the length of time
that the property interest being appraised would have been offered on the market prior to
the hypothetical consummation of a sale at market value on the effective date of the
appraisal.”
Exposure time is presumed to be a reasonably adequate and sufficient period of time with
adequate effort necessary to result in a sale fulfilling the definition of value. It is presumed to be
a period immediately preceding the effective date of value. However, based on the definition of
market value under the Code of Civil Procedure cited above, developing an opinion of exposure
time is not required. Therefore, an opinion of exposure time has not been developed for this
appraisal.
USPAP’s 2020-21 edition is effective through December 31, 2022.
55
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
3
Certification of Appraiser
I hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief:
I have personally inspected the property that is the subject of this report.
The statements of fact contained in the appraisal report are true and correct, and the information
upon which the opinions expressed therein are based is correct; subject to the Limiting Conditions
therein set forth.
I understand that such appraisal may be used in connection with the proposed acquisition of the
entire subject property to be acquired by City of South San Francisco; that such appraisal has
been made in conformity with the appropriate State laws, regulations, policies and procedures
applicable to the appraisal of right of way for such purposes; and that to the best of my knowledge,
no portion of the value assigned to such property consists of items which are non -compensable
under the established law of the State of California.
Neither my employment nor my compensation for completing this assignment is in any way
contingent upon the values reported herein. My compensation is not contingent upon the
developing or reporting of predetermined values or direction in value that favors the cause of the
Client, the amounts of the value opinions, the attainment of a stipulated result or the occurrence
of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal.
I have not revealed the findings and results of such appraisal to anyone other than the proper
officials of the acquiring agency and I will not do so until so authorized by said officials, or until I
am required to do so by due process of law, or until I am released from this obligation by having
publicly testified as to such findings.
I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report and no
personal interest with respect to the parties involved.
I have performed no services as an Appraiser or in any other capacity, regarding the property that
is the subject of this report, within a three-year period immediately preceding the acceptance of
this assignment.
I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved
with this assignment.
The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported Assumptions
and Limiting Conditions, and are my own personal, impartial, unbiased professional analyses,
opinions, and conclusions.
Any decrease or increase in the fair market value of the subject real property prior to the date of
valuation caused by the project or improvements for which the subject property is acquired, or by
the likelihood that the property would be acquired for such project or improvements, other than
due to physical deterioration within the reasonable control of the owner, has been disregarded in
appraising the subject property.
56
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
4
The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report, to the best of
my knowledge and belief, has been prepared in conformity with the requirements of the Code of
Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute,
which includes the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP).
The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by
its duly authorized representatives. As of the date of this report, I have completed the continuing
education program for Designated Members of the Appraisal Institute, the International Right of
Way Association and the California Bureau of Real Estate Appraisers.
The opinion of fair market value for the proposed acquisition of the entire subject property as of
the date of valuation is set forth in the Summary of Salient Facts and Estimate of Fair Market
Value and is based upon my independent appraisal and the exercise of professional judgment.
Joe Castellanos provided assistance with confirmation of some of the comparable sale data used
for this report, as well as general market research and the writing of portions of this report. No
one else provided significant real property assistance to the person signing this certification.
I hereby certify that my opinion of the market value of the property appraised as described in this
report is included herein and that my opinions and conclusions were made subject to the
Assumptions and Limiting Conditions in this report and without collusion, coercion or direction
from anyone as to value.
October 4, 2022
Date Erik Woodhouse, MAI, R/W-AC
State Certified General Appraiser
CA License No. AG034630
57
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
5
Assumptions and Limiting Conditions
The following Assumptions and Limiting Conditions have been relied upon and used in making
this appraisal and estimating the respective values required for the purpose of the appraisal and
its intended use.
• No responsibility is assumed for legal or title considerations. Title to the property is
assumed to be good and marketable, unless otherwise stated in this report.
• The property is appraised free and clear of any or all liens and encumbrances, unless
otherwise stated in this report.
• Responsible ownership and competent property management are assumed, unless
otherwise stated in this report.
• The information furnished by others is believed to be reliable. However, no warranty is
given for its accuracy.
• Sketches, plat maps, or photographs contained in this report are included to assist the
reader in visualizing properties and no survey has been made of the property by the
Appraiser.
• No responsibility is assumed for discovery of hidden or non-apparent conditions of the
property, subsoil, or the structures that render it more or less valuable. Encroachment of
real property improvements is assumed to not exist. No responsibility is assumed for
arranging for engineering studies or a survey, which may be required to discover these
conditions.
• It is assumed that the subject is in full compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and
local environmental regulations and laws, unless otherwise stated in this report.
• It is assumed that all applicable zoning and use regulations and restrictions have been
complied with, unless nonconformity has been stated, defined, and considered in this
report.
• It is assumed that all required licenses, certificates of occupancy, or other legislative or
administrative authority from any local, state, or national governmental or private entity or
organization have been, or can be, obtained or renewed for any use on which the value
conclusions contained in this report are based.
• The Appraiser is not a soil expert. The existing soil and substructure has been assumed
adequate for existing or proposed uses unless contrary information is provided and
contained in this report. It is advisable to have a soil analysis and report completed by a
qualified soil engineer, or other qualified expert, so that any interested party will become
knowledgeable as to the important soil information including seismic data, soil
contaminants, type of fill, if any, or other relevant matters.
58
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
6
• Unless otherwise stated in this report, it is assumed that there are no hazardous or toxic
substances in the soil comprising the subject land.
• Unless otherwise stated in this report, the subject property is appraised without a specific
compliance survey having been conducted to determine if the property is or is not in
conformance with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The presence
of architectural and communications barriers that are structural in nature and would restrict
access by disabled individuals may adversely affect the property’s values, marketability,
or utility.
• The distribution, if any, of the total valuation in this report between land and improvements
applies only under the stated program of utilization. The separate allocations for land and
improvements must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if
so used.
• Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication.
It may not be used for any purpose by any person other than the party to whom it is
addressed without the written prior consent of the Appraiser, and in any event, only with
proper written qualification and only in its entirety.
• The delivery and/or possession of this report does not require the Appraiser to attend or
give testimony at any meeting, public hearing, pretrial conference, deposition or court trial
unless there is a written agreement between the Appraiser and the party possessing or
relying on this report or requesting such services.
• Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report (especially any conclusions as to
value, the identity of the Appraiser, or the firm with which the Appraiser is connected) shall
be disseminated to the public through advertising, public relations, news sales, or other
media.
Project Assumptions and Limiting Conditions
• A litigation guarantee for the subject property was reviewed and is displayed in the
Addenda of this report. The Appraiser relied on information contained in the report
including the ownership, legal description of the larger parcel, and title exceptions.
• The Appraiser relied on public records, assessor’s parcel maps, and/or exhibits provided
by the Client to determine the location, size, and shape of the subject property. Property
boundaries were not staked by survey.
• The Appraiser relied on appraisal maps pre pared by and obtained from the Client. These
exhibits are integral to this appraisal and provide size, location and a description of the
areas to be acquired.
• The Jurisdictional Exception Rule of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal
Practice (USPAP) is invoked where the USPAP requirements conflict with federal or state
59
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
7
laws relating to appraisals for the acquisition of real property by public agencies. The
exceptions include:
o Disregarding the proposed public project as required by California Code of Civil
Procedure Section 1263.330, which contradicts Standards Rule 1-2(e) because
the effects of the public project and proposed acquisitions on the subject’s property
value are being ignored.
o The exclusion of comparable data involving acquisitions by public agencies having
the power of eminent domain, listings and offers, assessed values, and appraising
any property or property interest other than that being valued, in conformance with
Evidence Code Section 822. This may conflict with Standards Rule 1-4, which
requires the appraiser to collect, verify and analyze all information necessary for
credible assignment results and further specifies that the appraiser analyze such
comparable sales data as are available to indicate a value conclusion.
Hypothetical Conditions
Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP 2020/2021 edition: Definitions)
defines hypothetical condition as follows:
“HYPOTHETICAL CONDITION: a condition, directly related to a specific assignment,
which is contrary to what is known by the appraiser to exist on the effective date of the
assignment results, but is used for the purpose of analysis.
Comment: Hypothetical conditions are contrary to known facts about physical, legal, or
economic characteristics of the subject property; or about conditions external to the
property, such as market conditions or trends; or about the integrity of data used in an
analysis.”
The following hypothetical conditions are used for this appraisal and may affect the assignment
results:
• The before condition analysis of the subject of this appraisal is made under the
hypothetical condition that the project and steps leading up to the project do not exist.
USPAP’s 2020-21 edition is effective through December 31, 2022.
Extraordinary Assumptions
Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP 2020/2021 edition: Definitions)
defines extraordinary assumptions as follows:
“EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTION: an assignment-specific assumption as of the
effective date regarding uncertain information used in an analysis which, if found to be
60
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
8
false, could alter the appraiser’s opinions or conclusions.
Comment: Uncertain information might include physical, legal, or economic characteristics
of the subject property; or conditions external to the property, such as market conditions
or trends; or about the integrity of data used in an analysis.”
The following extraordinary assumptions are used for this appraisal and may affect the
assignment results:
• According to Tony Rozzi, Chief Planner of the City of South San Francisco Planning
Department, public street areas do not have a zoning designation in South San Francisco.
However, the street areas are shown on the City’s zoning map and El Camino Real-
Chestnut Avenue Area Plan as having land use designations. It is an Extraordinary
Assumption of this report that portions of the parcels being appraised that are located
withing publicly-traveled right of way areas are not zoned.
USPAP’s 2020-21 edition is effective through December 31, 2022.
61
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
9
General Information
Region, City and Neighborhood Data
The subject property is located in the City
of South San Francisco, within San Mateo
County. San Mateo County is one of the
nine counties comprising what is known
as the San Francisco Bay Area. San
Mateo County was formed from parts of
San Francisco County and Santa Cruz
County in 1856. San Mateo County totals
roughly 744 square miles (293 square
miles are covered by water) and makes up
most of the San Francisco Peninsula that
extends from the San Francisco Bay
shoreline to the hillsides of the Santa Cruz
Mountains and neighboring Santa Clara
County. The county is geographically
divided by the Santa Cruz Mountains with
most development occurring along the
eastern, or bay, side. The majority of San
Mateo’s coastline is occupied by state
beaches and has limited development
potential due to state regulation. Industry is situated closest to the bay along the El Camino
Real/Highway 101 Corridor, with pockets of commercial and residential areas stretching westward
into the foothills. The California Department of Finance estimates San Mateo County’s population
at 744,662 people as of January 2022, which represents a 0.9% decrease from the estimated
population posted a year prior.
There are 20 incorporated cities in San Mateo County, including the City of South San Francisco,
where the subject is located. South San Francisco covers approximately 9.20 square miles of
land situated toward the northern part the San Francisco Peninsula, and about 21 square miles
of water. It is bounded by San Bruno Mountain State Park to the north, the City of San Bruno to
the south, the San Francisco Bay to the east, and Daly City and Milagra Ridge open space to the
west. The city combines residential uses and industrial and commercial elements in a largely
urban environment. After South San Francisco’s incorporation in 1908, industry remained the
city's main economic focus through the 1950s. In the latter half of the 20th Century major
manufacturers closed, and new development was focused on office parks, housing, high-rise
hotels, and yacht harbors. The biotechnology giant Genentech originated in South San Francisco
in 1976, leading to the City's identity as "the birthplace of biotechnology.” South San Francisco
population growth has tapered off from previous years to a population of 64,492 according to 2022
estimates provided by the California Department of Finance. South San Francisco is the fourth
largest city in the county.
South San Francisco and San Mateo County benefit from a number of freeways, arterials, and
expressways that provide access to most areas of the region. The primary transportation corridors
62
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
10
that pass through South San Francisco include Interstate 280, U.S. Highway 101, and State Route
82. Caltrain rail transportation, Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), SamTrans bus services, and the
San Francisco Bay Ferry provide mass transit for the city and greater Bay Area region, while the
San Francisco International Airport is located adjacent the city limits to the south.
The subject property is located in a mixed-use corridor of the city west of the Downtown area.
The subject’s mixed-use neighborhood is confined by El Camino Real to the south and Mission
Road to the north. The mix of uses in the neighborhood includes health services, multi-family
residential complexes, industrial yards, open space and public transit centers.
Real Estate Market Conditions
Since March 2020, the world has been dealing with the spread of the coronavirus, COVID-19, a
global pandemic. In the initial stages of the outbreak the economy experienced a significant
downturn, with most major markets declining by as much as 20%. Most COVID-19 related
restrictions were lifted in mid-2021 throughout the state, with approximately half of Californians
vaccinated at that time. The progression of COVID-19 continues with a reemergence through
multiple variants, but scientists are predicting that COVID-19 will likely shift from a pandemic to
an endemic.
COVID-19’s toll on the nation’s economy became emphatically clearer with the Bureau of
Economic Analysis’s (BEA) estimate of real gross domestic product (GDP) for the second quarter
2020, which decreased at an annual rate of 31.4%, after a decline of 5.0% in the first quarter
2020. Real gross domestic product (GDP) is a comprehensive measure of economic activity and
the most popular indicator of the nation's overall economic health. According to the Commerce
Department, the most devastating three-month collapse on record in the second quarter 2020
almost wiped away nearly five years of growth as consumers cut back spending, businesses
pared investments, and it would have been even more severe without trillions of dollars in
government aid to households and businesses. The attempt to freeze the economy and defeat
the virus had not produced the rapid rebound that many envisioned, and a surge in coronavirus
cases and deaths across the country in the second quarter of 2020 led to a renewed pullback in
63
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
11
economic activity, reflecting consumer unease and renewed shutdowns. Fortunately, a recovery
started in the following quarter. According to the BEA’s third estimate, third quarter (Q3) 2020
GDP increased at an annual rate of 33.4%, the largest single quarter of economic growth on
record. This rebound recovered two-thirds of the economic output lost due to the pandemic during
the first half of the year and brought the economy back to only 3.5 percentage points below its
pre-pandemic level (see graph displayed previously).
To start 2021, widespread vaccinations and government spending helped bring the U.S. closer to
where it was before the COVID-19 pandemic struck, the Commerce Department reported. First-
quarter GDP for 2021 increased at a rate of 6.3%, followed by 6.7% in Q2 2021. The increase in
GDP in Q1 2021 was the second-fastest pace for growth since the second quarter of 2003 and
exceeded only by the reopening-fueled burst in Q3 2020, that was until Q2 2021 saw a GDP
increase of 6.7%. The increase in GDP in the first half of 2021 reflected the continued economic
recovery influenced by the reopening of establishments, and the unending government response
related to the COVID-19 pandemic. A lower GDP increase of 2.3% in Q3 2021 was the result of
the continued economic impact of COVID-19 with a resurgence of COVID-19 cases. The U.S.
economy grew more-than-expected to end 2021. Despite signs that the acceleration would likely
tail off toward the end of the year, Q4 2021 GDP increased at a 6.9% annualized pace influenced
by sizeable boosts in inventories and consumer spending.
GDP contracted for the first half of 2022, decreasing at an annual rate of 1.6% in Q1 2022 and
0.6% in Q2 2022, according to the “second” estimate. Q1 2022 was the first decline recorded
since the major losses of Q2 2020. The decline in GDP for the most recent three-month period
came from a broad range of factors, including decreases in inventories, residential and
nonresidential investment, and government spending at the federal, state and local levels.
Consumer spending, as measured through the personal consumption expenditures price index,
increased 7.1 % for Q2 2022 as inflation accelerated. Inflation is at the root of much of the
economy’s troubles in 2022. According to Freddie Mac, the average 30-year mortgage rate
nationally has increased to 6.29% with 0.9 points as of September 22, 2022, from a low of 2.65%
and 0.7 points as of January 7, 2021. The Federal Funds Rate target rate has increased from a
range of 0%-0.25% as of March 2020 to its current range of 3.00%-3.25%, with more increases
anticipated.
The Conference Board Consumer Confidence Index (CCI) is a barometer of the health of the U.S.
economy from the perspective of the consumer. The index is based on consumers’ perceptions
of current business and employment conditions, as well as their expectations for six months
regarding business conditions, employment conditions, and income. The CCI increased for the
second month in a row as of September 27, 2022; the Index now stands at 108, whereas 100 is
the benchmark. The Conference Board sites improvements across jobs, wages, and declining
gas prices as the leading influences on increasing CCI. Concerns about inflation have somewhat
dissipated, however purchasing intentions were mixed, with intentions to buy automobiles and
big-ticket appliances rose, while home purchasing intentions fell as a reflection in rising mortgage
rates and a cooling housing market. According to the Conference Board, “…inflation and interest-
rate hikes remain strong headwinds to growth in the short term.”
64
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
12
Global stock markets initially suffered dramatic falls due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and the Dow
Jones Industrial Average (DJIA), one of the most closely watched U.S. benchmark indices
tracking targeted stock market activity, reported its largest-ever single day decline of almost 3,000
points on March 16, 2020, beating its previous record of 2,300 points that was set only four days
earlier. It had increased steadily since the end of the “Great Recession” to record-high levels but
fell sharply in the later part of February 2020 after mounting coronavirus fears. Since the dips in
February and March of 2020, the DJIA was on an upward trajectory through 2021, setting
numerous all-time highs since the later part of 2020. The trajectory reversed direction in 2022,
although still well above the losses seen in the initial stages of COVID-19. The recent losses in
2022 can be attributed to rising inflation and interest rate hikes.
65
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
13
The unemployment rate is the most frequently cited indicator of labor market health, and data
from the job market gives the picture of an economy that is continually recovering from the effects
of COVID-19 (see graphic displayed below). For August 2022, the unemployment rate rose 0.2%
to 3.7%. Nonfarm payroll employment rose by 315 ,000 jobs, according to the U.S. Bureau of
Labor Statistics (BLS). Generally, the national unemployment rate has been on a downward
trajectory after having spiked to 14.7%, when 870,000 jobs were lost in March 2020, followed by
a record 20.5 million in April 2020, with much of the U.S. in self-imposed shutdown mode to
prevent the spread of Covid-19. The job losses in those two months were by far the largest decline
since the government began tracking the data in 1939, and amount to layoffs so severe, they
more than doubled the 8.7 million jobs lost during the Great Recession and nearly wiped out the
22.8 million jobs gained over 10 years since the 2008 financial crisis. The last time American
joblessness was that severe was the Great Depression, when the unemployment rate peaked at
24.9% in 1933, according to historical annual estimates from the BLS.
The improvements in the labor market starting in May 2020 reflect the continued resumption of
economic activity that had been curtailed in March and April due to COVID-19 and efforts to
contain it. For August 2022, notable job gains occurred in professional and business services,
health care, and retail trade. With the unemployment rate at 3.7% and unemployed persons at 6
million, August unemployment rose just above levels seen prior to COVID-19 (3.5% and 5.7
million, respectively, in February 2020). The BL S indicates the increases in permanent job losses
and the labor force participation rate as factors playing into the August increases in
unemployment. The unemployment rate in San Mateo County was 2.1% (not seasonally adjusted)
for August 2022, which compa res with an unemployment rate of 4.1 % for California for the same
period.
Residential Market
Generally, housing is seen as one of the sectors to rise or fall as economic conditions improve or
degrade. The California housing market ended 2020 on a high note, with the statewide median
home price reaching record highs. That same momentum was carried forward in 2021, and in
April, the median home price throughout the state reached above the $800,000 mark for the first
time, according to the data released by the California Association of Realtors. While median home
66
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
14
prices are an imperfect measure of the current value of any individual home, they do provide
important information regarding the overall health of residential real estate markets. For August
2022, the median sales price of existing homes statewide was $839,460 , up 0.7 % from July and
up 1.4 % from a year earlier. While the number of sales of existing homes increased by 6.1 % and
decreased 24.4%, respectively, for all of California over the same time periods. The tight inventory
paired with high demand fueling California’s high home prices has begun to taper through 2022.
In San Mateo County, sales of single-family re-sale homes declined by 25.1% year-over-year in
August 2022 with 283 homes sold, according to MLSListings source data. Comparatively, the
monthly average since 2000 is 398. August marked the twelfth month in a row that home sales
were lower than the year before.
At $1,950,000, the median sales price for single-family, re-sale homes in San Mateo County in
August 2022 rose 1.6% compared to last year. The chart displayed below shows the trend for
median home sales prices in San Mateo County over the last four years (by month) through
August 2022.
There were 417 homes for sale in San Mateo County, as of September 5th, while the average
since 2000 is 1,287. The inventory of single-family re-sale homes was up, increasing by 27.1 %
67
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
15
compared to last year. At the current rate of sales, it would take 44 days to sell all homes listed
for sale compared to 27 days year over year.
CoreLogic provides the California Home Sale Activity by City report for August 2022 which reports
on re-sale single-family homes, condos, and new homes. There was a total of 528 sales in San
Mateo County with a median sale price of $1,500,000, no change year over year. In addition to
county level data, median sales price and change for incorporated cities within the county can be
a strong indicator of market trends in the subject area. 42 sales were recorded in South San
Francisco in August of this year with a median sale price of $1,180,000, a 1.7% decrease year
over year. The median sales price for the neighboring city of San Bruno increased by 13.3% year
over year with the average sale price of 26 sales at $1,312,500. Daly City, located north of the
subject, recorded 51 sales with a median price of $1,100,000, a 4.8% increase year over year.
Data tables displaying basic trends of median home sales prices from August 2021 and August
2022 at county and city levels are summarized as follows.
According to the San Mateo County Real Estate September 2022 Report provided by Compass,
general trends have shown recent home price appreciation rates and overbidding of homes on
the market has dropped dramatically year over year, while number of days on the market has
increased. Economic uncertainties have influenced many sellers, with the number of new listings
on the market remaining much lower year over year. The overbidding of list prices has seen a
dramatic decline. As of August 2022, 45% of sales have closed over final list price, compared to
86% of sales in March. Additionally, average sale prices compared to list price show that homes,
townhouses, and condos combined have sold for 99% of the list price on average in August 2022
compared to 110% of the list price for February through March of 2022.
68
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
16
Commercial Market
Cushman & Wakefield, in their San Mateo County Office & R&D Marketbeat Q2 2022, reported
an increase in workers returning to the office full time or for portions of the week. Additionally,
employment continued to climb throughout the San Francisco Peninsula metro division with
85,000 new jobs year over year. Office job growth has also increased dramatically with the San
Mateo County market closed the second quarter of 2022 (2Q22) with a record 510,000 positions.
However, net absorption decreased in 2Q22 by negative 742,000 square feet (sf) primarily due
to the delivery of new vacant constructions paired with large block vacant spaces outpacing move
ins. This shift wiped out the 717,000 square feet of positive net absorption experienced in 1Q22.
Leasing activity decreased slightly to 1.1 million square feet (million square feet) in 2Q22, after
the 1.8 million square feet gain of 1Q22 bringing the year-to-date gross absorption to 3.8 million
square feet. Annual gross absorption across the last four quarters increased to 7.4 million square
feet, nearly back to the pre-pandemic level of 7.9 million square feet seen in 2019.
San Mateo County’s office and R&D vacancy rate increased to 9.1% for 2Q22, up from 7.5% in
1Q22 and back to the 4Q21 level. Office space makes up 80% of the current vacancy rate.
Currently, there is approximately 3.4 million square feet of office space product under
construction; South San Francisco has the most expected deliveries at 1.8 million square feet.
Across the county two office buildings totaling 278,583 square feet were completed in the past
quarter, one of which is 100% vacant and the other only 72% occupied.
The average asking rent for office and R&D space in San Mateo County set a new high in 2Q22
at $6.60 per square foot on a monthly full-service basis from $6.36 per square foot recorded in
the first quarter of 2022. R&D rents are up over the quarter at $6.86 per square foot on a monthly,
triple net basis, from $6.50 per square foot in the first quarter. High end life science complexes
continue to command the top rents in the market.
Retail Market
Based on the Kidder Mathews Peninsula/San Mateo Retail Market Report, retail markets across
the Peninsula have experienced decreases in vacancy, unemployment, and rental rates while
construction deliveries were on the rise for the second quarter of 2022. For 2Q22 new construction
deliveries totaled 8,400 square feet while an additional 191,545 square feet were under
construction. Vacancy rates fell year over year from 5.4% during 2Q21 to 4.9% for 2Q22. Average
asking rents on a triple net basis decreased by 6.71% year over year from $39.62 per square foot
69
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
17
in 2Q21 down to $36.96 per square foot for 2Q22. Net absorption has also been on the rise across
the San Francisco Peninsula since 2021. The 2Q22 square feet of net absorption was at 18,824,
an increase from the 2Q21 value of 15,695 square feet. The graphics below give an overview of
the retail market conditions for the dating back to 2012.
70
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
18
Subject Parcel Information
Subject Property Data Summary
Assessor's Parcel Number: None Assigned
Property Location/Address: Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane, South
San Francisco, CA
Owner: SFPUC
Owned Since: Over five years
Occupied By: Public street improvements and vacant land
Total Site Area:
Proposed Areas to be Acquired: Entire subject property
Zoning: Mission Road: Portion in publicly traveled right of way
areas not zoned *, Portion outside publicly traveled right
of way areas zoned ECR/C-RH - El Camino
Real/Chestnut Residential, High Density
Antoinette Lane: Portion in publicly-traveled right of
way areas not zoned *, Portion outside publicly-traveled
right of way areas zoned ECR/C-MXH – El Camino Real
Mixed-Use, High Density
General Plan: Mission Road: Portion not assigned; portions
designated High-Density Residential
Antoinette Lane: Portion not assigned, portions
designated El Camino Real Mixed-Use North, High
Intensity
El Camino Real-Chestnut Avenue Mission Road: Portion in publicly traveled right of way
Area Plan Land Use Designations: areas not designated *, Portion outside publicly traveled
right of way areas designated High-Density Residential
and Park and Recreation
Antoinette Lane: Portion in publicly traveled right of
way areas not designated *, Portion outside publicly
Area Size (s.f.)
Mission Road
Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Zoned Land 31,548
Not Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Designated Land 792
Total 32,340
Antoinette Lane
Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Zoned Land 13,118
Not Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Designated Land 836
Total 13,954
71
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
19
traveled right of way areas designated El Camino Real
Mixed-Use North, High Intensity
* See Extraordinary Assumptions
Highest and Best Use
As Vacant: Mission Road: 792 square feet outside of existing
public right of way have a highest and best use for
assembly with the adjacent parcel to the southwest;
remaining area has no economic use potential.
Antoinette Lane: 836 square feet outside of existing
public right of way have a highest and best use for
assembly with the adjacent parcel to the southwest;
remaining area has no economic use potential.
Flood Hazard Information: Flood Zones X and A, Map Nos. 06081C0037E and
06081E0041E, dated October 16, 2012
Earthquake Information: Not located in an Earthquake Fault Zone
72
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
20
Assessor’s Parcel Map
73
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
21
Appraisal Map of Areas to be Acquired
Mission Road
(South Half-Width)
Antoinette Lane
(South Half-Width)
74
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
22
Subject Aerial Photograph
75
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
23
Subject Property Photographs
Northwest-facing view of Mission Road. Subject is half-width on left.
Southeast-facing view of Mission Road.
76
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
24
Subject Property Photographs
Southwest-facing view of Antoinette Lane. Subject is half-width on right.
Southwest-facing view of Antoinette Lane. Subject is half-width on right.
77
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
25
Property Description
The subject property is comprised two remnant areas owned by the San Francisco Public Utilities
Commission (SFPUC). The areas are predominantly located within the southwest half-widths of
Mission Road and Antoinette Lane, respectively, and each area has small portions outside of the
publicly traveled right of way areas. There are no Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APN) assigned to
either area. The subject area predominantly within Mission Road is adjacent to APN 093-312-
060, while the subject area predominantly within Antoinette Lane is adjacent to APN 093-312-
050.
The Mission Road area covers a total area of 32,340 square feet. Of this area, 28,061 square
feet are encumbered by the southwest half-width of the road, which is 33 feet wide and
approximately 1,000 in length between its southeast end and its northwest end at the intersection
of Grand Avenue. Mission Road is an arterial roadway leading from Chestnut Avenue to the
southeast to its intersection with El Camino Real to the northwest.
The Mission Road area is improved with two lanes of traveled roadway and curb and gutter
improvements. A portion of the area is also improved with sidewalk, and other portions are within
an open trench culvert and bicycle lanes. The portion of the Mission Road area outside of the
publicly traveled right of way area covers a total of 4,279 square feet and is occupied by a portion
of a concrete driveway and landscaping along Mission Road.
The Antionette Lane portion of the subject property covers a total area of 13,118 square feet. Of
this area, approximately 11,079 square feet are located within the southwest half-width of the
road, which is approximately 30 feet in width and 340 feet in length (scaled). Antoinette Lane is
a small cul-de-sac roadway extending from Chestnut Avenue to the southeast to the northwest
terminus of the parcel.
The Antoinette Lane portion of the subject property is improved with a single lane of traveled
roadway, as well as curb and gutter improvements, which bulbs in a cul-de-sac at the site’s
northwest end. The portion of the Antoinette Lane area outside of the publicly traveled right of
way covers a total of 2,875 square feet and is predominantly vacant or improved with landscaping.
Since neither of these areas could feasibly be independently used for any economic purpose,
their value is best measured based on the value of the adjacent parcels to the southwest, with
which they would be assembled at their respective highest and best uses.
As described later in the Land Use section of this report, in the City of South San Francisco,
allowable density is based on gross parcel area, and accordingly, if the parcel were assembled
and given the same zoning designation as the adjacent parcel to the south, its area could be used
to calculate density on that parcel, even if the street were required to be dedicated back to the
City for roadway purposes. However, according to Tony Rozzi, Chief Planner with the City of
South San Francisco, because the zoning and General Plan designation of the portions of the
parcels within the publicly-traveled right of way areas differ from th e land use designations of the
adjoining parcels to the southwest, such a use of these areas would necessitate a rezoning and
General Plan amendment to be consistent with the adjacent parcels to the southwest . Approval
of these rezoning and General Plan amendments would be discretionary at the Planning
78
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
26
Commission level and unlikely to be granted given their ultimate continued use as a roadway,
respectively.
Therefore, the portions of the parcels being appraised that are within existing public right of way
areas are considered to have nominal economic use potential.
The remaining areas outside of the existing public right of way areas are analyzed based on their
contributory value to adjacent parcels to the southwest, as previously described.
The site to the southwest of the Mission Road parcel is a 5.9-net acre site, net of a portion
occupied by the Colma Canal which bisects the site. The parcel is owned by the City of South
San Francisco, which had sought a development partner to construct a mixed-use housing and
retail project on the site for several years. In 2019, the site was approved for development of 800
dwelling units, 20% of which would be affordable housing, an 8,000-square foot childcare facility,
a 13,000-square foot market hall, and over 700 parking spaces. The parcel benefits from its
location near the South San Francisco BART Station nearby to the northwest. It is mostly level
and has all utilities available for development in adjacent streets.
The site to the southwest of the Antoinette Lane parcel is also owned by the City of South San
Francisco and is currently being developed with a combined Library, Parks and
Recreation/community theater/Council Chamber center and park. This development, which
broke ground in January 2021, is part of South San Francisco’s three-phase Community Civic
Campus project that will also ultimately include a new state-of-the-art police operations and 911
dispatch center and a new fire station. This site covers a total area of 1.13 acres, or 49,078
square feet, according to public records. It is level and triangular in shape, and all utilities
necessary for development are available in adjacent streets.
Title and Property History
A litigation guarantee for the subject property was provided for review. The litigation guarantee
was prepared by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company and dated May 21, 2021.
According to the title report reviewed, the subject's fee ownership is vested in the City and County
of San Francisco.
The subject has been under the same ownership for more than five years and is not currently
being offered for sale.
I am not aware of any leases or current offers to purchase the subject.
Existing Easements
Under Exception 4, the litigation guarantee references “…rights of the public, County and/or City,
in and to that portion of said land lying within the lines of Mission Road, a portion now known as
Antoinette Lane.”
79
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
27
The litigation guarantee does not indicate any other easements or encumbrances that would
adversely affect the value or utility of either of the parcels comprising the subject property at their
respective highest and best uses.
Flood Hazard Information
The subject property is in a mapped area designated to be in Flood Zones X and A by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Flood zone “X” is defined as areas of minimal flood
hazard, usually depicted on FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps as above the 500-year flood level.
Flood zone “A” is defined as areas with a 1% annual chance of flooding and a 26% chance of
flooding over the life of a 30-year mortgage. The FEMA Flood Zone Map Panels are
06081C0037E and 06081E0041E and the effective date is October 16, 2012. A copy of the Flood
Insurance Rate Map is included below.
80
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
28
Earthquake Information
All properties in California are subject to some degree of seismic risk. The Alquist-Priolo special
Studies Zone Act of 1972 was enacted by the State of California to regulate development near
active earthquake faults. The Act required the State Geologist to delineate “special studies zones”
along known active faults in California. Cities and counties affected by the identified zones must
limit certain development projects within the zones unless geologic investigation demonstrates
that the sites are not threatened by surface displacement from future faulting.
According to the California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey, the subject
property is not located in an Earthquake Fault Zone as designated under the Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. Related development limitations, therefore, do not apply.
Environmental Assessment
No environmental assessment regarding the subject property was provided for this assignment.
This appraisal assumes that no environmental remediation would be required.
Land Use
The zoning category for the portions of the Mission Road parcel within the publicly traveled right
of way area is assumed not to have a zoning designation (see Extraordinary Assumptions). A
small, 792-square foot portion of the Mission Road parcel at its northwesterly end has a zoning
designation of El Camino Real/Chestnut Residential, High-Density. This use is consistent with
the land use designation of the adjoining parcel to the southwest.
The zoning category for the portions of the Antoinette Lane parcel within the publicly traveled right
of way area is assumed not to have a zoning designation (see Extraordinary Assumptions). The
zoning category for portions of the Antoinette Lane parcel ou tside of the publicly traveled right of
way area is El Camino Real Mixed-Use, High Density, consistent with that of the surrounding
parcels.
According to the zoning section of the South San Francisco Municipal Code:
• The El Camino Real/Chestnut Residential, High-Density designation is intended to provide
for high-density residential development in the form of high rises, fronted by townhomes
at the ground level, close to the BART station. Active uses are required at the lower levels
along Mission Road and Centennial Way Linear Park to maintain visual interest and
promote safety along the public rights-of-way.
• The El Camino Real/Chestnut Mixed-Use, High -Density designation is intended to provide
sites for mixed-use development at high intensities. The ECR/C-MXH sub-district requires
active uses that are accessible to the general public, generate walk-in pedestrian clientele,
and contribute to a high level of pedestrian activity on the ground floor, along streets,
sidewalks, and bike and pedestrian pathways, with commercial, residential, or public
81
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
29
space up above, as well as eating and drinking establishments with outdoor dining.
Publicly accessible open space may also satisfy the active uses category where site
constraints otherwise prohibit development, as determined by the Chief Planner. The
commercial activities in the district are intended to be a destination, with regional and
neighborhood serving establishments as well as civic uses. A public plaza along the BART
right-of-way, just south of Oak Avenue, will provide a focus to the area, and a community-
wide gathering space.
The majority of the Mission Road parcel does not have a General Plan Designation. A small,
792 -square foot sliver of land at the northwest end of the site, adjoining the adjacent parcel to the
southwest, has a General Plan designation of High-Density Residential, consistent with the
adjacent parcel to the southwest. A small area at the southeast end of the parcel has a General
Plan designation of Parks.
The majority of the Antoinette Lane parcel also does not have a General Plan designation. Two
small slivers of land on the southwest side of the parcel have a General Plan designation of El
Camino Real Mixed-Use North, High Intensity, consistent with the adjacent parcel to the
southwest.
According to South San Francisco’s General Plan:
• Within the El Camino Real/Chestnut Avenue Area Plan, as it applies to this portion of the
subject property, the High-Density Residential designation allows higher densities than
elsewhere in the city, reflecting the area’s close proximity to the South San Francisco
BART Station. Up to 120 units per acre are permitted and a minimum density of 80 units
per acre is required. A maximum of 180 units per acre may be achieved for development
meeting specified criteria.
• The El Camino Real Mixed-Use North, High Intensity designation is intended to
accommodate high -intensity active uses and mixed-use development. Retail and
department stores; eating and drinking establishments; hotels; commercial recreation;
financial, business, and personal services; residential; educational and social services;
and office uses are permitted. The maximum FAR for all uses, inclusive of residential but
exclusive of structured parking, shall be 2.0, with increases to a maximum total FAR of 3.0
for development meeting specified criteria. Residential density (included within the overall
FAR) is limited to a maximum of 80 units per acre, with increases to a maximum of 110
units per acre for development meeting specified criteria.
• The Parks designation applies to Parks, recreation complexes, public golf courses, and
greenways.
Finally, within the El Camino Real-Chestnut Avenue Area Plan, the majority of the Mission Road
parcel does not have a land use designation, while portions of the site are designated High-
Density Residential (at the northwest end) and Park and Recreation (at the southeast end). The
portion of the Antoinette Lane Parcel within the publicly traveled right of way area is assumed not
to have a land use designation in the Plan (see Extraordinary Assumptions), and the portion
outside of the publicly traveled right of way area has a land use designation of El Camino Real
82
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
30
Mixed-Use North, High Intensity. These designations correspond to the General Plan land use
designations described above.
The zoning, General Plan, and the El Camino Real-Chestnut Avenue Area Plan maps are
included on the following pages.
83
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
31
Zoning Map
SUBJECT
84
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
32
General Plan Map
SUBJECT
85
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
33
El Camino Real-Chestnut Avenue Area Plan Map
SUBJECT
86
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
34
Highest and Best Use Analysis
The following definition of the term “Highest and Best Use” provides a reasonable basis for
analyzing the subject property:
The reasonable, probable and legal use of vacant land or improved properties which is physically
possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and results in the highest value.
Inherent in this definition are the following four criteria:
Legally Permissible: What uses are permitted, given existing deed and lease restrictions,
zoning, building codes, historic controls, and environmental
regulations?
Physically Possible: What uses of the site are possible, given the physical
characteristics as revealed in the site analysis?
Financially Feasible: Which possible and permissible uses will produce positive net
income from the development of the site after paying operating
expenses and other financial obligations?
Maximally Productive: Which financially feasible use will provide the highest value or rate
of return on investment?
The primary purpose of the highest and best use analysis is to identify the most productive,
competitive use to which the property can be put. This analysis is done in two parts. The first part
considers the possible uses of the site as if vacant. The second part evaluates the improvements
to determine if they represent the highest and best use or if they should be modified.
Another purpose of the highest and best use analysis is to assist in defining the scope of the
appraisal. In investigating the highest and best use, items that affect value such as accrued
depreciation and functional and external obsolescence are identified. Also, by defining the highest
and best use the selection of the comparable sales is narrowed, as they typically have the same
or similar highest and best use.
Based on the four tests of legally permissible, physically possible, financially feasible, and
maximally productive, the highest and best use of the subject property being valued has been
analyzed.
The two areas being valued are long, narrow strips of land that do not have independent
development potential. Therefore, their value is based on their contributory utility in assembly
with the respective adjacent parcels to the southwest, both of which are zoned for high-density
residential development and one of which calls for a mix of commercial development as well.
As previously described, in the City of South San Francisco, allowable density is based on gross
parcel area, and accordingly, if the parcel were assembled and given the same zoning designation
as the adjacent parcel to the south, its area could be used to calculate density on that parcel,
87
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
35
even if the street were required to be dedicated back to the City for roadway purposes. However,
according to Tony Rozzi, Chief Planner with the City of South San Francisco, because the zoning
and General Plan designation of the portions of the parcels within the publicly-traveled right of
way areas differ from the land use designations of the adjoining parcels to the southwest, such a
use of these areas would necessitate a rezoning and General Plan amendment to be consistent
with the adjacent parcels to the southwest. Approval of these rezoning and General Plan
amendments would be discretionary at the Planning Commission level and unlikely to be granted
given their ultimate continued use as roadways, respectively.
Therefore, the portions of the parcels being appraised that are within existing public right of way
areas are considered to have nominal economic use potential.
The Mission Road parcel, depicted in the graphic below, includes 4,279 square feet that are
located outside of the publicly traveled right of way area. These areas are shown in the graphic
as shaded in red and orange.
The red- and orange-shaded areas toward the right side of the graphic, at the southeast end of
the parcel, are adjacent to areas designated for park and open space uses in the City of South
San Francisco’s General Plan and the El Camino Real-Chestnut Avenue Area Plan. As such,
these areas are also considered to have nominal economic utility in assembly with the adjacent
parcel to the southwest.
The red-shaded area on the left side of the exhibit, shown on the left side of the exhibit, is adjacent
to a parcel that, as previously described, has been approved for development of a large mixed-
use development since 2019. This portion of the Mission Road parcel covers a total area of 792
square feet, according to representatives of the Client. Although incorporation of this portion of
the parcel into the development would not likely result in additional dwelling units on the parcel,
since it is already entitled, the highest and best use of this portion of the Mission Road parcel is
for assembly with the adjacent parcel.
88
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
36
Similarly, the Antoinette Lane parcel, depicted in the graphic below, includes 2,875 square feet
that are located outside of the publicly traveled right of way area. These areas are shown in the
graphic as shaded in red.
The Antoinette Lane parcel’s red-shaded area toward the left side of the graphic, at the northwest
end of the parcel, is also adjacent to areas designated for park and open space uses in the City
of South San Francisco’s General Plan. As such, this area is also considered to have nominal
economic utility in assembly with the adjacent parcel to the southwest.
The red-shaded areas on the southwest side of the parcel are adjacent to an area that is owned
by the City of South San Francisco and is currently being developed with a combined Library,
Parks and Recreation/community theater/Council Chamber center and park. The combined area
of these two areas is 836 square feet, according to representatives of the Client. Although
incorporation of this portion of the parcel into the development would not provide significant
additional utility, its highest and best use is nevertheless for assembly with the adjacent parcel.
89
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
37
Valuation
Valuation Methodology
There are three generally recognized approaches considered in the valuation of real property.
These are the cost approach, sales comparison approach, and income approach. The type and
age of the property and the quantity and quality of the available data affect the applicability of
each approach in a specific appraisal situation.
The Cost Approach estimates, through support sources, the cost of constructing the subject
improvements. Accrued depreciation from all causes is estimated and deducted from the
estimates of cost new of the improvements. The market value of the land is added to this
depreciated cost estimate to indicate the value of the subject property by the cost approach. The
Land Value Estimate in the valuation process is usually a separate step, which is generally
accomplished through the application of the sales comparison approach. The land value
conclusion is then incorporated into the cost approach.
The Sales Comparison Approach involves a search for recent sales of properties similar to the
subject. The prices paid for these properties provide the basis for estimating the value of the
subject by comparison. Adjustments are made for the differences in the properties as they
compare to the subject. A correlation of the data provides a value estimate for the subject. This
is the most used, and considered the most reliable, approach to estimating the value of land.
The Income Approach looks at the relationship between a property's income producing ability
and the value buyers and sellers assign to the income. An estimate is made of the market rent to
indicate an annual gross income. Estimated fixed and variable operating expenses are deducted
from the annual gross income to provide an annual net operating income. An indicated value of
the subject is derived through direct capitalization of the indicated net income by a market derived
overall rate or through the use of the discounted cash flow technique.
Reconciliation involves consideration of the relevance and influence of each approach in relation
to the actions of typical users and investors of properties and particularly the subject property.
The three indications of value are discussed and reconciled into a final conclusion of market value.
Since the properties to be appraised include only land, and since neither portion of land has
independent development potential, the value of the land has been estimated by applying a
modified version of the Sales Comparison Approach, considering the contributory value of both
areas in assembly with the respective adjacent parcels. The conclusion of value for the Sales
Comparison Approach is determined following appropriate adjustments to properties that have
sold and are similar to the parcels adjacent to the subject areas being appraised, considering the
unit prices paid in the market for this type of property. A discount is then applied to reflect the
additional contributory value of the areas in assembly and the limited market for these areas.
The income and cost approaches are not considered applicable to this assignment since the
approaches do not typically apply to the valuation of land.
90
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
38
Valuation, Mission Road Parcel
As previously stated, the portions of the Mission Road parcel within existing public right of way
areas and adjacent to areas zoned for park and open space use are considered to have nominal
economic use potential. Accordingly, these areas are assigned a nominal valuation of $2,500.
The 792 squa re foot area at the northwest end of the parcel is considered to have some
contributory value in assembly with the adjacent parcel to the southwest.
As previously described, the adjacent parcel is a 5.9-net acre parcel, net of a portion occupied by
the Colma Canal which bisects the site. The parcel is owned by the City of South San Francisco,
which had sought a development partner to construct a mixed-use housing and retail project on
the site for several years. In 2019, the site was approved for development of 800 dwelling units,
20% of which would be affordable housing, an 8,000-square foot childcare facility, a 13,000-
square foot market hall, and over 700 parking spaces. The parcel benefits from its location near
the South San Francisco BART Station nearby to the northwest. It is mostly level and has all
utilities available for development in adjacent streets.
Since the portion of the Mission Road parcel that would be assembled with this property was not
included in the entitlements, the area is being appraised as unentitled residential land.
Research was conducted to find comparable land sales in the subject’s market area.
The following table displays a summary of the selected sales, which are judged to be most
representative of current market conditions for the parcel adjacent to the Mission Road. The most
comparable land sales reflecting the actions of buyers and sellers in the marketplace are
summarized below. Comparable data sheets, Assessor’s Parcel Maps and photographs for each
comparable sale are included on the subsequent pages.
91
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
39
Sales Data Summary
Address
No.City, State
APN
L-01
South San Francisco, CA
015-113-180, -380
L-02 89 W El Camino Real
Mountain View, CA
L-03 1 Adrian Ct
Burlingame, CA
L-04 2301-2399 Geneva Ave
Daly City, CA
L-05 803 Belmont Ave
Belmont, CA
L-06 988 El Camino Real
South San Francisco, CA
100 Produce Ave and 124 S
Airport Blvd
Corridor Mixed Use
(CMU)Unentitled
Corridor Mixed Use
ECR/C-MXH Unentitled
Medium Density
Mixed Use
None
In contract 53,143
Mixed Use Corridor Old restaurant building (to be
demolished)
RRMU
193-13-022
025-169-380
005-061-010 through -070
Entitled
Live/Work Two older commercial
buildings (to be demolished)
Light Commercial Unentitled
Jun-21 0.46
Apr-21 2.83
Apr-20 0.44
044-172-190
011-325-080
Commercial Mixed-
Use
None
Sales Price
$/Sq. Ft. (Land)
Entitlements
Improvements
Sales
Contract Date
Parcel Size
(Acres)
Parcel Size
(Sq. Ft.)
Zoning
General PlanCOE
$5,950,000
10/27/21 20,159 $295.15
$63,000,000
$361.66
Unknown
06/02/22
4.00
174,198
Business
Commercial
High Density Mixed
Use
Entitled
Older industrial buildings (to
be demolished)
El Camino Real
Precise Plan Unentitled
$3,690,000
04/01/21 19,300 $191.19
$34,000,000
08/31/21 123,231 $275.90
$225.81
Apr-19 1.22 $12,000,000
Old hotel buildings
07/16/18 72,310 $89.89
Jan-17 1.66 $6,500,000
92
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
40
Comparable Land Sale Location Map
93
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
41
Comparable Land Sale Data Sheet – L-01Comparable Lan d Sale D ata Sheets a nd P
Compa rabl e La nd Sal e Dat a Shee ts
Compara ble La nd Sa le Da ta S hee ts a nd Parcel Ma p
Property Type Multi-family - Land
Sales Contract Date Unknown
COE 06/02/22
Sales Price $63,000,000
Address 100 Produce Ave and 124 S Airport
Blvd
City, State South San Francisco, CA
Zip 94080
APN 015-113-180, -380
Buyer
Seller
Document #
Terms
Parcel Size (Acres)
Parcel Size (Sq. Ft.)
$/Sq. Ft. (Land)
Zoning
General Plan
# of Units
Density (du/a)
Utilities
Improvements
Verified By
Contact Info.
Comments This is the sale of an entitled residential project at South Airport Boulevard and Produce
Avenue in South San Francisco.The parcels comprising the project,which in aggregate
cover four acres,are occupied by six 1980s-era industrial buildings that are proposed for
demolition to accommodate development of two seven-story structures with 480
apartments.The project would be the city’s second-largest residential development in the
last decade.Calls to the buyer and seller were not returned,and information for this sale
was based on available public records.
Icon SSF Apartments Owner LLC
PS Business Parks L.P.
44765
Assumed cash to seller
4.00
174,198
$361.66
Business Commercial
High Density Mixed Use
480
120
Public records
N/A
All Availible
Older industrial buildings (to be demolished)
94
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
42
Comparable Land Sale Parcel Map – L-01
95
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
43
Comparable Land Sale Data Sheet – L-02
Property Type Multi-family - Land
Sales Contract Date Jun-21
COE 10/27/21
Sales Price $5,950,000
Address 89 W El Camino Real
City, State Mountain View, CA
Zip 94040
APN 193-13-022
Buyer
Seller
Document #
Terms
Parcel Size (Acres)
Parcel Size (Sq. Ft.)
$/Sq. Ft. (Land)
Zoning
General Plan
# of Units
Density (du/a)
Utilities
Improvements
Verified By
Contact Info.
Mixed Use Corridor
Buen Camino Apartments LLC
Del Secco 1993 Family Partnership
25146559
Cash to Seller
0.46
20,159
$295.15
El Camino Real Precise Plan
Comments This is the October 2021 sale of a 0.46-acre property along West El Camino Real in
Mountain View.The property is located less than a mile from the Mountain View Caltrain
Station and about two miles south of the Google campus.The buyer reportedly intended to
develop an apartment project on the site,and the zoning allows for market-rate development
of up to 1.85 FAR,although the units will be below-market rate and the actual density is
unknown.The site is occupied by a gutted restaurant building,which will be demolished
and removed by the buyer to accommodate the project.The cost of demolition is unknown
but appears to be insignificant relative to the sale price.
Doug Finney - Listing Agent
(650) 358-5262 / (650) 358-5250
N/A
N/A
All Available
Old restaurant building (to be demolished)
96
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
44
Comparable Land Sale Parcel Map – L-02
97
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
45
Comparable Land Sale Data Sheet – L-03
Property Type Multi-family - Land
Sales Contract Date Apr-21
COE 08/31/21
Sales Price $34,000,000
Address 1 Adrian Ct
City, State Burlingame, CA
Zip 94010
APN 025-169-380
Buyer
Seller
Document #
Terms
Parcel Size (Acres)
Parcel Size (Sq. Ft.)
$/Sq. Ft. (Land)
Zoning
General Plan
# of Units
Density (du/a)
Utilities
Improvements
Verified By
Contact Info.
Cash to Seller
CP VII Adrian LLC
SHAC Adrian Court Apartments, LLC
126535
Two older commercial buildings (to be demolished)
2.83
123,231
$275.90
RRMU
Live/Work
265
94
All Availible
manichini@shapartments.com
Comments This is the sale of two parcels purchased for multi-family residential development.The
property sold with entitlements including the final map recorded and the building permits
ready to be issued for 265 residential units (38 moderate income units required)with 3,700
square feet of commercial space. The entitlements were reported to contribute an estimated
$8 million to the sale price.Dedication requirements included the construction of a privately
maintained park accessible to the public.Minor environmental remediation was required.
PG&E transmission tower and lines encumbered portions of the site at the time of the sale.
Michael Anichini - VP of Acquisitions SummerHill Apartment Communities (seller)
98
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
46
Comparable Land Sale Parcel Map – L-03
99
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
47
Comparable Land Sale Data Sheet – L-04
Property Type Multi-family - Land
Sales Contract Date Apr-20
COE 04/01/21
Sales Price $3,690,000
Address 2301-2399 Geneva Ave
City, State Daly City, CA
Zip 94014
APN 005-061-010 through -070
Buyer
Seller
Document #
Terms
Parcel Size (Acres)
Parcel Size (Sq. Ft.)
$/Sq. Ft. (Land)
Zoning
General Plan
# of Units
Density (du/a)
Utilities
Improvements
Verified By
Contact Info.
Cash to Seller
2321 Geneva LLC
Hargrove Trust & Anselmo Living Trust
052694 & 052695
None
0.44
19,300
$191.19
Light Commercial
Commercial Mixed-Use
N/A
N/A
All Available
(650) 391-1753
Comments The property consists of seven adjacent parcels of level rectangular land totaling 19,300
square feet of land area that has 200 feet of frontage and two corners on Geneva Avenue
between Pasadena and Castillo Streets,directly across the street from the Cow Palace.
The property is zoned C-1 by Daly City,which allows mixed uses of multi-family and
commercial.The 36 foot height limit,with no required set backs from the lot lines,would
allow three levels of apartment development over underground parking and the required
commercial use could be a relatively small area of ground floor retail type space.The
property was purchased unentitled and is currently available for ground lease while the
buyer processes entitlements for a proposed condominium project with ground-floor retail
space.A small portion of the property is located within the jurisdiction of the City and
County of San Francisco.
David Cutler, Listing Agent
100
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
48
Comparable Land Sale Parcel Map – L-04
101
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
49
Comparable Land Sale Data Sheet – L-05
Property Type Multi-family - Land
Sales Contract Date Apr-19
COE In contract
Sales Price $12,000,000
Address 803 Belmont Ave
City, State Belmont, CA
Zip 94002
APN 044-172-190
Buyer
Seller
Document #
Terms
Parcel Size (Acres)
Parcel Size (Sq. Ft.)
$/Sq. Ft. (Land)
Zoning
General Plan
# of Units
Density (du/a)
Utilities
Improvements
Verified By
Contact Info.
Cash to Seller
Roem Corporation
Lloyd Martini
Pending
Old hotel buildings
1.22
53,143
$225.81
Corridor Mixed Use (CMU)
Corridor Mixed Use
125
102
All Available
(650) 391-1805
Comments This property is located on the northeast side of Belmont and it's currently being used as a
motel.The proposed development consists of 125 Affordable Residential Apartments,
subterranean parking,ancillary space (community room,gym,office)and open space.The
residential unit mix includes 52 one-bedroom,40 two-bedroom,and 33 three-bedroom units.
Improvements might be needed to the private road accessing the site as part of the
development.The property has an irregular shape with a slight slope to it which was all
considered on the pricing.The contract price is rumored to be near the listing price.The
parcel area shown differs from public records (63,293 square feet)and is reportedly based
on a professional survey.
Richard Reisman - Listing Agent
102
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
50
Comparable Land Sale Parcel Map – L-05
103
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
51
Comparable Land Sale Data Sheet – L-06
Property Type Multi-family - Land
Sales Contract Date Jan-17
COE 07/16/18
Sales Price $6,500,000
Address 988 El Camino Real
City, State South San Francisco, CA
Zip 94080
APN 011-325-080
Buyer
Seller
Document #
Terms
Parcel Size (Acres)
Parcel Size (Sq. Ft.)
$/Sq. Ft. (Land)
Zoning
General Plan
# of Units
Density (du/a)
Utilities
Improvements
Verified By
Contact Info.manichini@shapartments.com
Comments This is the sale of four parcels purchased for multi-family residential development.A portion
of the property had extensive easement encumbrances which included PG&E gas and
electrical transmission lines,private sanitary sewer and public sanitary sewer.The property
was unentitled and development of the site required underground parking.The buyer
constructed a 172 unit apartment building which includes 10,000 square feet of commercial
area. The sale went into contract in January of 2017 and sold in July of 2018, and the buyer
performed entitlements in escrow.Extraordinary development costs stemmed from
Extensive Rule 20 undergrounding, necessity to bring Cal Water line from across El Camino
Real,and requirement for two levels of underground parking.Offsite cost and dedication
requirements were reported;however,no detail was given.There were no affordable housing
requirements and the sale was believed to reflect market value.
Michael Anichini - VP of Acquisitions SummerHill Apartment Communities (Buyer)
None
1.66
72,310
$89.89
ECR/C-MXH
Medium Density Mixed Use
172
104
See comments
Conventional
SHAC 988 ECR Apartments LLC
Petrocchi Trust
055228
104
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
52
Comparable Land Sale Parcel Maps – L-06
105
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
53
106
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
54
Sales Data Analysis
Adjustments are made to the comparable sale prices for the differences in the properties as they
compare to the parcel adjacent to the subject. A number of adjustments for the analysis of the
comparable data have been considered in relation to the subject property. The comparable data
has been adjusted for inferior and superior characteristics. For Example: where a comparable
had an inferior characteristic, a positive (+) adjustment to the comparable was made. Where the
comparable had a superior characteristic, a negative (-) adjustment was made to the comparable.
Adjustments were made sequentially for property rights conveyed, financing terms, conditions of
sale, expenditures incurred by the buyer immediately after the sale, and market conditions at the
time of sale. Adjustments for location characteristics, physical characteristics, use and non-realty
components of value are subsequently added and applied.
Property Rights Conveyed: Each comparable sale involved the conveyance of the fee simple
interest. Since the subject’s fee simple interest is being appraised, no adjustments are made for
this factor.
Financing terms: Each comparable sale involved cash to the seller or conventional financing.
Therefore, no adjustments are made for this factor.
Conditions of Sale: Each of the comparable sales appears to have been an arm’s length
transaction. No adjustments are necessary for this factor.
Expenditures Incurred Immediately After Purchase: Several of the comparable sales
necessitated demolition of existing structures to accommodate development. However, the
respective costs associated with demolition were deemed insignificant relative to the sale prices
paid. Therefore, none of the comparables required an adjustment for this factor.
Change in Market Conditions: Where information was available, the comparable sales used
had contract dates between January 2017 and June 2021. Comparable L-01 could not be
confirmed as of the writing of this report, but since it sold entitled, it is assumed that the contract
date occurred under similar market conditions to the date the sale closed, June 2022.
As previously described, after a period of explosive growth, the residential market has cooled
dram atically along with the broader economy, which is characterized by high inflation, declining
consumer confidence, and uncertainty. Comparables L-04 through L-06 receive positive
adjustments for inferior market conditions, to varying degrees, Comparables L-01 through L0-03,
which have (or are assumed to have) contract dates occurring since 2021, do not receive
adjustments for this factor.
Location: Comparable L -04 occup ies an inferior location in Daly City and receives an upward
consideration for this factor. Comparables L-01, L -02, L-03, and L -05 are located in superior
areas and receive downward adjustments. Comparable L-06 is located within the subject
neighborhood, and no adjustment to this sale is needed for this factor.
Size: The site southwest of Mission Road covers 5.9 acres, net of Colma Creek which passes
through the site. Typically, smaller properties will have a larger buyer pool, creating more
107
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
55
demand for smaller properties and resulting in higher prices on a per-square foot basis compared
to larger properties. Based on the unit value used as a per square foot basis, Comparables L-02
through L-06, all of which are smaller than the subject, receive downward adjustments.
Comparable L-01 is considered to be in the same size class as the subject and does not need an
adjustment for this factor.
Land Use (Zoning/General Plan): Although the planned densities for each are unknown,
Comparables L-02 and L-04 have zoning designations allowing for less intense development than
could be accommodated on the parcel adjacent to the subject, warranting positive adjustments
for each. The remaining sales are proposed for development at densities similar to what is
proposed for the adjacent parcel, and no further adjustments are needed.
Site Utility/Constraints: The site adjacent to the subject is bisected by the Colma Creek, which
impairs its overall utility. Comparable L-06 had extensive easement encumbrances, which
included PG&E gas and electrical transmission lines and private and public sanitary sewer. These
easements are judged to have a greater impact on this site due to its smaller size, and a positive
adjustment is needed for this factor. The remaining comparable sales have superior site utility
and receive negative adjustments for this factor.
Contributory Value of Existing Improvements & Utilities: All the comparable sales sold with
all public utilities necessary for development available, and none sold with improvements of
contributory value. No adjustments are needed for this factor.
Entitlements: Comparables L-01 and L-03 sold with entitlements in place, having been secured
by the seller, and significant downward adjustments are needed for this factor. The remaining
comparable sales sold unentitled, and no further adjustments are necessary.
108
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
56
The following table summarizes the adjustments made to each comparable. Bold text connotates
a more substantial adjustment.
Land Value Conclusion, Parcel Adjacent to Mission Road:
The unadjusted unit selling prices of the comparable sales range from $89.89 to $361.66 per
square foot. After adjustments, the comparable sales indicate a bracketed value range between
$191.19, as indicated by Comparable L-04, and $225.81, as indicated by Comparable L-05.
Comparable L-04 sold during inferior market conditions, occupies an inferior location, and has
inferior land use potential in comparison with the parcel adjacent to Mission Road. Although this
comparable is smaller and has superior site utility, overall, a net positive adjustment is warranted.
Comparable L-05 also sold during inferior market conditions, but due to its superior location,
smaller size, and superior site utility, an overall downward adjustment is indicated.
Based on the prior analysis and in view of the definition of value, the estimated fair market land
value of the parcel adjacent to the southwest of Mission Road is concluded to be toward the
upper-middle end of the bracketed range, or $210 per square foot.
Discount due to Assemblage Highest and Best Use
To value the 792-square foot portion of the Mission Road parcel being analyzed, a discount to
the unit value of the adjacent parcel is warranted to account for the limited market for the area of
a single potential buyer, the owner of the abutting parcel. The discount accounts for the additional
utility of the portion of the parcel to the owner of the adjacent property.
Since the adjacent parcel has already been granted development entitlements, it is unlikely that
the current or any prospective owner of that property would acquire the 792 -square foot portion
L-01 L-02 L-03 L-04 L-05 L-06
100 Produce Ave
and 124 S Airport
89 W El Camino
Real
1 Adrian Ct 2301-2399
Geneva Ave
803 Belmont Ave 988 El Camino
Real
South San
Francisco, CA
Mountain View,
CA
Burlingame, CA Daly City, CA Belmont, CA South San
Francisco, CA
Sales Contract Date Unknown Jun-21 Apr-21 Apr-20 Apr-19 Jan-17
Sale Date Jun-22 Oct-21 Aug-21 Apr-21 In contract Jul-18
Sales Price $63,000,000 $5,950,000 $34,000,000 $3,690,000 $12,000,000 $6,500,000
Parcel Size (Acres)4.00 0.46 2.83 0.44 1.22 1.66
Sales Price / Sq. Ft.$361.66 $295.15 $275.90 $191.19 $225.81 $89.89
Property Rights Conveyed Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø
Financing Terms Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø
Conditions of Sale Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø
Expenditures After Purchase Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø
Market Conditions (Time)Ø Ø Ø Positive Positive Positive
Location Negative Negative Negative Positive Negative Ø
Size Ø Negative Negative Negative Negative Negative
Land Use (Zoning / General Plan)Ø Positive Ø Positive Ø Ø
Site Utility / Constraints Negative Negative Negative Negative Negative Positive
Contributory Improvements & Utilities Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø
Entitlements Negative Ø Negative Ø Ø Ø
Net Adjustment Substantially
Negative Negative Negative Positive Negative Substantially
Positive
Comparable
109
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
57
being analyzed to add additional development density. Therefore, its contributory utility to the
adjacent parcel is considered to be minor, limited to providing additional landscaping and buffer
area for the development.
A summary of remnant land sales from the region is shown in the following table. These sales
have not been personally verified but were obtained from sources deemed reliable. The discount
factors for remnant land sales were found to vary widely from around 30% to 90%, largely based
on the additional utility provided by the remnant land to the adjacent buyer and the usability of the
remnant parcel itself.
REMNANT LAND SALES SUMMARY
Sale Date
Sale Grantor Purchase Price (per sf)Discount
No.Location Grantee Estimated Market (per sf)Zoning From Market
1 1098 S. 3rd St.Dec-05 $13.79 M1 54%
San Jose, CA Union Pacific Railroad $30.00
472-15-029 Lawrence B. Stone Properties
2 West of Dobbin Rd.Apr-07 $9.83 LI 61%
San Jose, CA Union Pacific Railroad $25.00
254-55-013 Allen Mirzaei
3 Griffith St. (East Side)Jan-07 $14.10 IG 30%
San Leandro, CA Union Pacific $20.00
077B-0851-048 & -055 Rosalinde & Arthur Gilbert Foundation
4 Griffith St. (East Side)Nov-09 $7.98 IG 43%
San Leandro, CA Rosalinde & Arthur Gilbert Foundation $14.00
077B-0851-055 Coca Cola Bottling Co.
5 323 South Canal St.Jan-09 $30.00 MI 33%
South San Francisco, CA unknown $45.00
015-164-220 Chang & Young Ahn
6 220 Shaw Rd. Aug-09 $27.38 M2 39%
South San Francisco, CA Economy Lumber $45.00
015-164-230 Angelo, Gordon & Co.
7 2075 N. Capitol Ave.Dec-00 $8.00 IP 64%
San Jose, CA PG&E $22.00
244-01-057 MA Laboratories, Inc.
8 2110 Railroad Ave.Aug-11 $2.22 PD-1319 85%
Pittsburg, CA City of Pittsburg $15.00
087-030-083 Randy Baugh
10 4050 Port Chicago Highway Mar-14 $3.52 Parks & Rec.61%
Concord, CA City of Concord $9.00
100-370-009 Pacific Ranch Inv.
11 25408 University Ct.Oct-17 $0.90 Residential 93%
Hayward, CA Burton / Vanderwilk $12.80
425-0390-019 County of Alameda
110
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
58
Since the 792-square foot area is judged to have minor contributory value in assembly with the
adjoining parcel, a discount factor toward the upper end of the range indicated by the preceding
data, or 75% is attributed to the value of the 792-square foot area. Conversely, the area is
concluded to have 25% of the underlying fee value for assembly with the adjacent parcel to the
southwest.
Value Conclusion, Mission Road Parcel
As previously stated, the portions of the Mission Road parcel within existing public right of way
areas and adjacent to areas zoned for park and open space use are considered to have nominal
economic use potential. Accordingly, these areas are assigned a nominal valuation of $2,500.
Therefore, the conclusion of value for the Mission Road parcel is as shown in the following table.
Valuation, Antoinette Lane Parcel
As previously stated, the portions of the Antoinette Lane parcel within existing public right of way
areas and adjacent to areas zoned for park and open space use are considered to have nominal
economic use potential. Accordingly, these areas are assigned a nominal valuation of $2,500.
Like with the portion of the Mission Road parcel analyzed in the preceding section, the two areas
along the southwest side of the Antoinette Lane parcel, covering a combined 836 square feet, are
considered to have some contributory value in assembly with the adjacent parcel to the
southwest.
As previously described, the site to the southwest of the Antoinette Lane parcel is also owned by
the City of South San Francisco and is currently being developed with a combined Library, Parks
and Recreation/community theater/Council Chamber center and park. This development, which
broke ground in January 2021, is part of South San Francisco’s three-phase Community Civic
Campus project that will also ultimately include a new state-of-the-art police operations and 911
dispatch center and a new fire station. This site covers a total area of 1.13 acres, or 49,078
square feet, according to public records. It is level and triangular in shape, and all utilities
necessary for development are available in adjacent streets.
The same comparable sales are used to analyze the value of the parcel adjacent to the southwest
of Antoinette Lane. The same adjustments are also applied, except for the adjustments for size
and site utility.
Fee Simple Value Size (s.f.)
Land
Value/s.f.
Mission Road Parcel Total Area:31,548
Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Zoned Land 31,548 Nominal $2,500
Not Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Designated Land 792 x $210 x 25%$41,580
$44,080
% of Value due
to Utility in
Assembly
Estimated
Value
111
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
59
Size: Based on the unit value used as a per square foot basis, Comparable L-01 receives a
positive adjustment for its larger site size, while Comparables L-02 and L-04 are smaller than the
site adjacent to Antoinette Lane and receive downward adjustments. The remaining sales are
considered to be in the same size class as the parcel southwest of Antoinette Lane and do not
need adjustments for this factor.
Site Utility/Constraints: The adjacent site has a somewhat irregular, triangular shape.
Comparable L-06 had extensive easement encumbrances, which included PG&E gas and
electrical transmission lines and private and public sanitary sewer. A large positive adjustment is
needed for this factor. Comparable L-03 had electrical transmission lines occupying a portion of
the site, while Comparable L-05 has irregular, hilly topography. Both sales are judged to have
effectively similar site utility and do not receive adjustments for this factor. The remaining
comparable sales have superior site utility and receive negative adjustments for this factor.
The following table summarizes the adjustments made to each comparable in relation to the
parcel southwest of Antoinette Lane. Bold text connotates a more substantial adjustment.
Land Value Conclusion, Parcel Adjacent to Antoinette Lane:
After adjustments, the comparable sales indicate a bracketed value range above $191.19 per
square foot, as indicated by Comparable L-04, below $275.90 per square foot, as indicated by
Comparable L-03, and similar to the sale price indicated by Comparable L-05, or $225.81 per
square foot, as indicated by Comparable L-05. Comparable L-04 sold during inferior market
conditions, occupies an inferior location, and has inferior land use potential in comparison with
the parcel adjacent to Mission Road. Although this comparable is smaller and has superior site
utility, overall, a net positive adjustment is warranted. Comparable L-03 occupies a superior
location and sold with entitlements in place, resulting in a net downward adjustment. Comparable
L-01 L-02 L-03 L-04 L-05 L-06
100 Produce Ave
and 124 S Airport
89 W El Camino
Real
1 Adrian Ct 2301-2399
Geneva Ave
803 Belmont Ave 988 El Camino
Real
South San
Francisco, CA
Mountain View,
CA
Burlingame, CA Daly City, CA Belmont, CA South San
Francisco, CA
Sales Contract Date Unknown Jun-21 Apr-21 Apr-20 Apr-19 Jan-17
Sale Date Jun-22 Oct-21 Aug-21 Apr-21 In contract Jul-18
Sales Price $63,000,000 $5,950,000 $34,000,000 $3,690,000 $12,000,000 $6,500,000
Parcel Size (Acres)4.00 0.46 2.83 0.44 1.22 1.66
Sales Price / Sq. Ft.$361.66 $295.15 $275.90 $191.19 $225.81 $89.89
Property Rights Conveyed Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø
Financing Terms Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø
Conditions of Sale Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø
Expenditures After Purchase Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø
Market Conditions (Time)Ø Ø Ø Positive Positive Positive
Location Negative Negative Negative Positive Negative Ø
Size Positive Negative Ø Negative Ø Ø
Land Use (Zoning / General Plan)Ø Positive Ø Positive Ø Ø
Site Utility / Constraints Negative Negative Ø Negative Ø Positive
Contributory Improvements & Utilities Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø
Entitlements Negative Ø Negative Ø Ø Ø
Net Adjustment Substantially
Negative Negative Negative Positive Similar Substantially
Positive
Comparable
112
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
60
L-05 also sold during inferior market conditions, but due to its superior location, a net neutral
adjustment is indicated.
Based on the prior analysis and in view of the definition of value, the estimated fair market land
value of the parcel adjacent to the southwest of Antoinette Lane is concluded to be similar to the
unit price of Comparable L-05, or $225 per square foot.
Discount due to Assemblage Highest and Best Use
To value the portions of the Antoinette Lane parcel being analyzed, which total 836 square feet,
a discount to the unit value of the adjacent parcel is warranted, similar to the preceding analysis
of the Mission Road parcel. Since the adjacent parcel has already been developed, the
contributory utility to the adjacent parcel is considered to be minor, limited to providing additional
landscaping and buffer area for the development. Therefore, a discount factor toward the upper
end of the range indicated by the preceding remnant sale data, or 75% is attributed. Conversely,
the areas are concluded to have 25% of the underlying fee value for assembly with the adjacent
parcel to the southwest.
Value Conclusion, Antoinette Lane Parcel
As previously stated, the portions of the Antoinette Lane parcel within existing public right of way
areas and adjacent to areas zoned for park and open space use are considered to have nominal
economic use potentia l. Accordingly, these areas are assigned a nominal valuation of $2,500.
Therefore, the conclusion of value for the Mission Road parcel is as shown in the following table.
Land Value of the Subject Property
Fee Simple Value Size (s.f.)
Land
Value/s.f.
Antoinette Lane Parcel Total Area:13,954
Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Zoned Land 13,118 Nominal $2,500
Not Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Designated Land 836 x $225 x 25%$47,025
$49,525
% of Value due
to Utility in
Assembly
Estimated
Value
113
City of South San Francisco
Acquisition of Portions of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane
Property Owner – SFPUC
61
Total Fair Market Value, Mission Road and Antoinette Lane Parcels
The total fair market value of the Mission Road and Antoinette Lane parcels is as shown in the
following table.
Fee Simple Value Size (s.f.)
Land
Value/s.f.
Mission Road Parcel Total Area:31,548
Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Zoned Land 31,548 Nominal $2,500
Not Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Designated Land 792 x $210 x 25%$41,580
$44,080
Antoinette Lane Parcel Total Area:13,954
Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Zoned Land 13,118 Nominal $2,500
Not Within Right of Way or Adjacent to Park-Designated Land 836 x $225 x 25%$47,025
$49,525
Total Fee Simple Value $93,605
Rounded $94,000
Estimated
Value
% of Value due
to Utility in
Assembly
114
ADDENDA
115
LITIGATION GUARANTEE
116
AMENDED
ORT Form 5315
Revised 06/05/14
ORDER NO.
2202068007-PL
REFERENCE NO.GUARANTEE NO.
A04201-LITA-173715
LITIGATION GUARANTEE
CLTA GUARANTEE FORM NO. 1 (06/05/14)
SUBJECT TO THE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE, AND THE GUARANTEE CONDITIONS ATTACHED HERETO
AND MADE A PART OF THIS GUARANTEE, OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Florida
corporation, herein called the Company
GUARANTEES
the Assured named in Schedule A of this Guarantee against loss or damage not exceeding the Amount of
Liability stated in Schedule A sustained by the Assured by reason of any incorrectness in the Assurances set forth
in Schedule A.
Issued through the office of:
Old Republic Title Company
524 Gibson Drive
Roseville, CA 95678
Countersigned:
By
Validating Officer
OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
A Stock Company
400 Second Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 371-1111
117
AMENDED
ORT Form 5315
Revised 06/05/14
EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE
Except as expressly provided by the assurances in Schedule A, the Company assumes no liability for loss or damage by
reason of the following:
(a)Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters affecting the title to any property beyond the lines
of the Land.
(b)Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, whether or not shown by the Public Records (1)
that are created, suffered, assumed or agreed to by one or more of the Assureds; or (2) that result in no loss to
the Assured.
(c)Defects, liens, encumbrances,adverse claims or other matters not shown by the Public Records.
(d)The identity of any party shown or referred to in any of the schedules of this Guarantee.
(e)The validity, legal effect or priority of any matter shown or referred to in any of the schedules of this Guarantee.
(f)(1) Taxes or assessments of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property; or, (2)
proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings,
whether or not the matters excluded under (1) or (2) are shown by the records of the taxing authority or by the
Public Records.
(g)(1) Unpatented mining claims; (2) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance
thereof; (3) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excluded under (1), (2) or (3) are
shown by the Public Records.
118
AMENDED
ORT Form 5315
Revised 06/05/14
GUARANTEE CONDITIONS
1.DEFINITION OF TERMS
The following terms when used in the Guarantee mean:
(a)the "Assured”: the party or parties named as the Assured in Schedule A, or on a supplemental writing executed
by the Company.
(b)“Land”: the Land described or referred to in Schedule A, and improvements affixed thereto which by law
constitute real property. The term “Land” does not include any property beyond the lines of the area described
or referred to in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest estate or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues,
alleys, lanes, ways or waterways.
(c)“Mortgage”: mortgage, deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument.
(d)“Public Records”: those records established under state statutes at Date of Guarantee for the purpose of
imparting constructive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without knowledge.
(e)“Date of Guarantee”: the Date of Guarantee set forth in Schedule A.
(f)“Amount of Liability”: the Amount of Liability as stated in Schedule A.
2.NOTICE OF CLAIM TO BE GIVEN BY ASSURED
The Assured shall notify the Company promptly in writing in case knowledge shall come to the Assured of any
assertion of facts, or claim of title or interest that is contrary to the assurances set forth in Schedule A and that might
cause loss or damage for which the Company may be liable under this Guarantee. If prompt notice shall not be given
to the Company, then all liability of the Company shall terminate with regard to the matter or matters for which
prompt notice is required; provided, however, that failure to notify the Company shall in no case prejudice the rights
of the Assured under this Guarantee unless the Company shall be prejudiced by the failure and then only to the
extent of the prejudice.
3.NO DUTY TO DEFEND OR PROSECUTE
The Company shall have no duty to defend or prosecute any action or proceeding to which the Assured is a party,
notwithstanding the nature of any allegation in such action or proceeding.
4.COMPANY’S OPTION TO DEFEND OR PROSECUTE ACTIONS; DUTY OF ASSURED TO COOPERATE
Even though the Company has no duty to defend or prosecute as set forth in Paragraph 3 above:
(a)The Company shall have the right, at its sole option and cost, to institute and prosecute any action or proceeding,
interpose a defense, as limited in Paragraph 4(b), or to do any other act which in its opinion may be necessary or
desirable to establish the correctness of the assurances set forth in Schedule A or to prevent or reduce loss or
damage to the Assured. The Company may take any appropriate action under the terms of this Guarantee,
whether or not it shall be liable hereunder, and shall not thereby concede liability or waive any provision of this
Guarantee. If the Company shall exercise its rights under this paragraph, it shall do so diligently.
(b)If the Company elects to exercise its options as stated in Paragraph 4(a) the Company shall have the right to
select counsel of its choice (subject to the right of the Assured to object for reasonable cause) to represent the
Assured and shall not be liable for and will not pay the fees of any other counsel, nor will the Company pay any
fees, costs or expenses incurred by an Assured in the defense of those causes of action which allege matters not
covered by this Guarantee.
(c)Whenever the Company shall have brought an action or interposed a defense as permitted by the provisions of
this Guarantee, the Company may pursue any litigation to final determination by a court of competent jurisdiction
and expressly reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to appeal from an adverse judgment or order.
(d)In all cases where this Guarantee permits the Company to prosecute or provide for the defense of any action or
proceeding, the Assured shall secure to the Company the right to so prosecute or provide for the defense of any
action or proceeding, and all appeals therein, and permit the Company to use, at its option, the name of the
Assured for this purpose. Whenever requested by the Company, the Assured, at the Company’s expense, shall
give the Company all reasonable aid in any action or proceeding, securing evidence, obtaining witnesses,
prosecuting or defending the action or lawful act which in the opinion of the Company may be necessary or
desirable to establish the correctness of the assurances set forth in Schedule A or to prevent or reduce loss or
damage to the Assured. If the Company is prejudiced by the failure of the Assured to furnish the required
cooperation, the Company’s obligations to the Assured under the Guarantee shall terminate.
119
AMENDED
ORT Form 5315
Revised 06/05/14
5.PROOF OF LOSS OR DAMAGE
(a)In the event the Company is unable to determine the amount of loss or damage, the Company may, at its option,
require as a condition of payment that the Assured furnish a signed proof of loss. The proof of loss must describe
the defect, lien, encumbrance, or other matter that constitutes the basis of loss or damage and shall state, to the
extent possible, the basis of calculating the amount of the loss or damage.
(b)In addition, the Assured may reasonably be required to submit to examination under oath by any authorized
representative of the Company and shall produce for examination, inspection and copying, at such reasonable
times and places as may be designated by any authorized representative of the Company, all records, books,
ledgers, checks, correspondence and memoranda, whether bearing a date before or after Date of Guarantee,
which reasonably pertain to the loss or damage. Further, if requested by any authorized representative of the
Company, the Assured shall grant its permission, in writing, for any authorized representative of the Company to
examine, inspect and copy all records, books, ledgers, checks, correspondence and memoranda in the custody or
control of a third party, which reasonably pertain to the loss or damage. All information designated as
confidential by the Assured provided to the Company pursuant to this paragraph shall not be disclosed to others
unless, in the reasonable judgment of the Company, it is necessary in the administration of the claim. Failure of
the Assured to submit for examination under oath, produce other reasonably requested information or grant
permission to secure reasonably necessary information from third parties as required in the above paragraph,
unless prohibited by law or governmental regulation, shall terminate any liability of the Company under this
Guarantee to the Assured for that claim.
6.OPTIONS TO PAY OR OTHERWISE SETTLE CLAIMS: TERMINATION OF LIABILITY
In case of a claim under this Guarantee, the Company shall have the following additional options:
(a)To pay or tender payment of the Amount of Liability together with any costs, attorneys’ fees, and expenses
incurred by the Assured that were authorized by the Company up to the time of payment or tender of payment
and that the Company is obligated to pay.
(b)To pay or otherwise settle with the Assured any claim assured against under this Guarantee. In addition, the
Company will pay any costs, attorneys’ fees, and expenses incurred by the Assured that were authorized by the
Company up to the time of payment or tender of payment and that the Company is obligated to pay;or
(c)To pay or otherwise settle with other parties for the loss or damage provided for under this Guarantee, together
with any costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses incurred by the Assured that were authorized by the Company up
to the time of payment and that the Company is obligated to pay.
Upon the exercise by the Company of either of the options provided for in 6 (a), (b) or (c) of this paragraph the
Company’s obligation to the Assured under this Guarantee for the claimed loss or damage, other than the payments
required to be made, shall terminate, including any duty to continue any and all litigation initiated by the Company
pursuant to Paragraph 4.
7.LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
(a)This Guarantee is a contract of Indemnity against actual monetary loss or damage sustained or incurred by the
Assured claimant who has suffered loss or damage by reason of reliance upon the assurances set forth in
Schedule A and only to the extent herein described, and subject to the Exclusions From Coverage of this
Guarantee.
(b)If the Company, or the Assured under the direction of the Company at the Company's expense, removes the
alleged defect, lien or, encumbrance or cures any other matter assured against by this Guarantee in a reasonably
diligent manner by any method, including litigation and the completion of any appeals therefrom, it shall have
fully performed its obligations with respect to that matter and shall not be liable for any loss or damage caused
thereby.
(c)In the event of any litigation by the Company or with the Company's consent, the Company shall have no liability
for loss or damage until there has been a final determination by a court of competent jurisdiction, and disposition
of all appeals therefrom.
(d)The Company shall not be liable for loss or damage to the Assured for liability voluntarily assumed by the Assured
in settling any claim or suit without the prior written consent of the Company.
120
AMENDED
ORT Form 5315
Revised 06/05/14
8.REDUCTION OF LIABILITY OR TERMINATION OF LIABILITY
All payments under this Guarantee, except payments made for costs, attorneys’ fees and expenses pursuant to
Paragraph 4 shall reduce the Amount of Liability under this Guarantee pro tanto.
9.PAYMENT OF LOSS
(a)No payment shall be made without producing this Guarantee for endorsement of the payment unless the
Guarantee has been lost or destroyed, in which case proof of loss or destruction shall be furnished to the
satisfaction of the Company.
(b)When liability and the extent of loss or damage has been definitely fixed in accordance with these Conditions, the
loss or damage shall be payable within thirty (30) days thereafter.
10.SUBROGATION UPON PAYMENT OR SETTLEMENT
Whenever the Company shall have settled and paid a claim under this Guarantee, all right of subrogation shall vest in
the Company unaffected by any act of the Assured claimant.
The Company shall be subrogated to and be entitled to all rights and remedies which the Assured would have had
against any person or property in respect to the claim had this Guarantee not been issued. If requested by the
Company, the Assured shall transfer to the Company all rights and remedies against any person or property
necessary in order to perfect this right of subrogation. The Assured shall permit the Company to sue, compromise or
settle in the name of the Assured and to use the name of the Assured in any transaction or litigation involving these
rights or remedies.
If a payment on account of a claim does not fully cover the loss of the Assured the Company shall be subrogated to
all rights and remedies of the Assured after the Assured shall have recovered its principal, interest, and costs of
collection.
11.ARBITRATION
Either the Company or the Assured may demand that the claim or controversy shall be submitted to arbitration
pursuant to the Title Insurance Arbitration Rules of the American Land Title Association ("Rules"). Except as provided
in the Rules, there shall be no joinder or consolidation with claims or controversies of other persons. Arbitrable
matters may include, but are not limited to, any controversy or claim between the Company and the Assured arising
out of or relating to this Guarantee, any service of the Company in connection with its issuance or the breach of a
Guarantee provision, or to any other controversy or claim arising out of the transaction giving rise to this Guarantee.
All arbitrable matters when the amount of liability is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the
Company or the Assured. All arbitrable matters when the amount of liability is in excess of $2,000,000 shall be
arbitrated only when agreed to by both the Company and the Assured. Arbitration pursuant to this Guarantee and
under the Rules shall be binding upon the parties. Judgment upon the award rendered by the Arbitrator(s) may be
entered in any court of competent jurisdiction.
12.LIABILITY LIMITED TO THIS GUARANTEE; GUARANTEE ENTIRE CONTRACT
(a)This Guarantee together with all endorsements, if any, attached hereto by the Company is the entire Guarantee
and contract between the Assured and the Company. In interpreting any provision of this Guarantee, this
Guarantee shall be construed as a whole.
(b)Any claim of loss or damage, whether or not based on negligence, or any action asserting such claim, shall be
restricted to this Guarantee.
(c)No amendment of or endorsement to this Guarantee can be made except by a writing endorsed hereon or
attached hereto signed by either the President, a Vice President, the Secretary, an Assistant Secretary, or
validating officer or authorized signatory of the Company.
121
AMENDED
ORT Form 5315
Revised 06/05/14
13.SEVERABILITY
In the event any provision of this Guarantee, in whole or in part, is held invalid or unenforceable under applicable
law, the Guarantee shall be deemed not to include that provision or such part held to be invalid, but all other
provisions shall remain in full force and effect.
14.CHOICE OF LAW; FORUM
(a)Choice of Law: The Assured acknowledges the Company has underwritten the risks covered by this Guarantee
and determined the premium charged therefore in reliance upon the law affecting interests in real property and
applicable to the interpretation, rights, remedies, or enforcement of Guaranties of the jurisdiction where the Land
is located.
Therefore, the court or an arbitrator shall apply the law of the jurisdiction where the Land is located to determine
the validity of claims that are adverse to the Assured and to interpret and enforce the terms of this Guarantee.
In neither case shall the court or arbitrator apply its conflicts of law principles to determine the applicable law.
(b)Choice of Forum: Any litigation or other proceeding brought by the Assured against the Company must be filed
only in a state or federal court within the United States of America or its territories having appropriate
jurisdiction.
15.NOTICES, WHERE SENT
All notices required to be given the Company and any statement in writing required to be furnished the Company
shall include the number of this Guarantee and shall be addressed to the Company at the office which issued this
Guarantee or at 400 Second Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-2499, (612) 371-1111.
122
AMENDED
Page_1_of_4 Pages
ORT Form 5315
Revised 06/05/14
LITIGATION GUARANTEE
ORDER NO.2202068007-PL
REFERENCE NO.
GUARANTEE NO.A04201-LITA-173715
LIABILITY $10,000.00
DATE OF GUARANTEE May 21st, 2021 at 7:30:00 AM
FEE $1,200.00
SCHEDULE A
1.Name of Assured:
City of South San Francisco
2.The estate or interest in the Land that is the subject of this Guarantee is:
Fee
3.The Land referred to in this Guarantee is described as follows:
** SEE EXHIBIT “A” ATTACHED **
4.This Litigation Guarantee is furnished solely for the purpose of facilitating the filing of an action to eminent domain.
It shall not be used or relied upon for any other purpose.
5.ASSURANCES:
According to the Public Records as of the Date of Guarantee,
a.Title to the estate or interest is vested in:
City and County of San Francisco
b.Except for the matters shown in Schedule B, there are no defects, liens, encumbrances or other matters
affecting title to the estate or interest in the land shown in Schedule A, which matters are not necessarily
shown in the order of their priority.
c.The current interest holders claiming some right, title or interest by reason of the matters shown in Part II of
Schedule B are as shown therein. The vestee named herein and parties claiming to have some right, title or
interest by reason of the matters shown in Part II of Schedule B may be necessary parties defendant in an
action, the nature of which is referred to above in paragraph 4.
d.The current interest holders claiming some right, title or interest by reason of the matters shown in Part I of
Schedule B may also be necessary parties defendant in an action, the nature of which is referred to above in
paragraph 4. However, no return address for mailing after recording is shown in Schedule C as to those
current interest holders.
e.The return address for mailing after recording, if any, as shown on each document referred to in Part II of
Schedule B by specific recording information, and as shown on the document(s) vesting title as shown above
in paragraph 5(a), are as shown in Schedule C.
123
AMENDED
Page_2_of_4 Pages
ORT Form 5315
Revised 06/05/14
LITIGATION GUARANTEE
ORDER NO.2202068007-PL
REFERENCE NO.
GUARANTEE NO.A04201-LITA-173715
LIABILITY $10,000.00
DATE OF GUARANTEE May 21st, 2021 at 7:30:00 AM
FEE $1,200.00
SCHEDULE B, PART I
1.Taxes and assessments, general and special, for the fiscal year 2021 -2022, a lien, but not
yet due or payable.
2.NOTE: No taxes shown for 2020-2021 fiscal year taxes
3.The lien of supplemental taxes, if any, assessed pursuant to the provisions of Section 75, et
seq., of the Revenue and Taxation Code of the State of California.
4.Rights of the public, County and/or City, in and to that portion of said land lying within the
lines of Mission Road, a portion now known as Antoinette Lane.
5.Easements for any existing public utilities.
6.Any facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the public records but which
could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or by making inquiry of persons in
possession thereof.
7.Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other
facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by the public records.
SCHEDULE B, PART II
None reported
124
AMENDED
Page_3_of_4 Pages
ORT Form 5315
Revised 06/05/14
LITIGATION GUARANTEE
ORDER NO.2202068007-PL
REFERENCE NO.
GUARANTEE NO.A04201-LITA-173715
LIABILITY $10,000.00
DATE OF GUARANTEE May 21st, 2021 at 7:30:00 AM
FEE $1,200.00
SCHEDULE C
Addresses
Paragraph No.Recording Information Mailing Address
5A City and County of San Francisco Water Department
125
AMENDED
Page_4_of_4 Pages
ORT Form 5315
Revised 06/05/14
EXHIBIT "A"
The land referred to in this policy is situated in the County of San Mateo, City of South San Francisco,State of
California, and is described as follows:
All that portion of the Southwesterly one-half of Mission Road (66 feet wide) as shown on the "Map of that Part of the
Lux Ranch Laying West of Mission Road" filed for record on March 10, 1891 in Book "D" at Page 58 lying between the
Northeasterly prolongation of the Northwesterly line and the Northeasterly prolongation of the Southeasterly line of
that certain "Take Parcel 1" as described in that Quitclaim Deed recorded January 31, 2008 as Instrument No. 2008-
009955 of Official Records.
126
APPRAISER QUALIFICATIONS
127
ERIK WOODHOUSE, MAI, R/W-AC
Industry experience since 2003
Current Responsibilities
Erik A.T. Woodhouse joined Associated Right of Way Services, Inc., in 2012, and currently serves as a
Real Estate Appraiser, performing appraisals for full and partial acquisitions assignments on improved
and unimproved properties for public improvement projects. The scope of his work includes
commercial, industrial, and multi-family residential properties for transportation and utility
improvement projects. All work is performed in conformance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance
and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act, Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, Caltrans
standards, and state and federal guidelines.
Mr. Woodhouse is experienced in appraising an extensive assortment of real estate types, and
earned his distinguished MAI designation conferred by the Appraisal Institute by completing a rigorous
program of course work, written exams, appraisal projects, and narrative report presentations.
Prior Experience
Prior to joining the AR/WS team, Mr. Woodhouse was employed by Petersen LaChance Regan Pino
(Boston, MA) as a Contract Associate Appraiser. He was responsible for research and preparation of
appraisal reports for a variety of commercial, residential, industrial, and special purpose property types.
He also conducted appraisals for underwriting, portfolio analysis, and litigation purposes.
Prior to his work with Petersen, Mr. Woodhouse was a Senior Real Estate Appraiser with Burchard &
Rinehart (Walnut Creek, CA) where his appraisal experience covered commercial, residential, and
agricultural land, as well as improved retail, office, industrial, multi-family residential, marina, hotel, and
agricultural properties. He conducted complex real estate appraisals of land and income producing
properties (primarily eminent domain acquisition); performed client consultation, market research,
highest and best use analysis, comparable data research and verification, valuation conclusions, and
analysis of severance damages and benefits; and assisted in preparation of appraisal reports and exhibits
for expert witness testimony in deposition and court trial.
Education
Connecticut College (New London, CT), B.A., Economics and German, cum laude
Connecticut College, International Studies Certificate, International Studies / Liberal Arts
Institute of European Studies (Humboldt University), Berlin, Germany
Mr. Woodhouse continues his education to maintain the MAI designation through the Appraisal
Institute; and continuing education in matters of real property appraisal, acquisition, relocation,
engineering, and law through the International Right of Way Association and other professional
organizations to broaden scope of knowledge and provide higher levels of service.
Appraisal Institute MAI Designation, No. 446913
Member, R/W-AC, Appraisal Certified, International Right of Way Association
State of California Certified General Real Estate Appraiser, No. AG034630
Appraisal Institute, Northern California Chapter, 2013-2015 and 2017-present Member, Board of
Directors, 2015-2018 Courses Chair, 2018 Spring Litigation Conference Chair
Conversant in Danish and German
128
ERIK WOODHOUSE, MAI, R/W-AC
Related Coursework:
The Appraisal Institute
Real Estate Appraisal Principles, Real Estate Appraisal Procedures, Uniform Standards of
Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), Business Practices and Ethics, Basic Income
Capitalization, Advanced Income Capitalization, Advanced Market Analysis & Highest and Best
Use, Advanced Sales Comparison and Cost Approaches, Report Writing and Valuation Analysis,
Advanced Applications, Introduction to Valuing Green Buildings, Spring Litigation Conference,
Condemnation Appraising, The Appraiser as an Expert Witness, Litigation Appraising
Successfully completed the Appraisal Institute’s Litigation Professional Development Program
IRWA
Principles of Real Estate Engineering, Appraisal of Partial Acquisitions, Ethics and the Right of
Way Profession
National Highway Institute
Real Estate Acquisition Under the Uniform Act: An Overview
College
Real Estate Principles, Microeconomics, Macroeconomics, Sociology, Statistics
Other
USPAP Continuing Education, Toastmasters International
129
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-340 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:11a.
Resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute a purchase and sale agreement with the City
and County of San Francisco for the acquisition of property currently used for Mission Road and Antoinette
Lane for the Community Civic Campus Project
WHEREAS, the Community Civic Campus project consists of three phases of construction of new
public facilities, including a new police station (Phase I); a building that includes a new library, parks and
recreation offices and facilities, and a City Council Chamber and community theater (Phase II); and a new fire
station (Phase III) (together, the “Project”). Phases I and II of the Project are both located in the vicinity of
Antoinette Lane and Chestnut Avenue and are currently under construction; and,
WHEREAS, in the course of finalizing documents for the construction of Phase 2 of the Project, the
City identified several small pieces of property along Antoinette Lane with unknown owners. One of the
properties identified is immediately adjacent to the Project property and approximately half the width of
existing Antoinette Lane, with a portion outside of the existing roadway. Upon further investigation, the City
determined that the property is part of long strip of land that is primarily half the width of Antoinette Lane and
Mission Road. Approximately 1,600 square feet are outside of existing roadways. A description of the property
is included in Exhibit A (the “Property”); and,
WHEREAS, a title report commissioned by the City identified the owner as the City and County of San
Francisco, with the Property under the control of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (“SF PUC”).
An appraisal commissioned by the City concluded that the of the fair market value of the Property is $94,000.
SF PUC has agreed to sell the Property to the City for the appraised fair market value. The City will use the
Property primarily for continued operation of Mission Road and Antoinette Lane, including a minor
realignment of Antoinette Lane as part of constructing Phase 2 of the Project. A small portion of the Property
will be used for recreational facilities; and
WHEREAS, the City evaluated the environmental impacts of the Project pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), and the City Council, as lead agency for purposes of CEQA, certified
and adopted a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (“SEIR”) at a duly noticed public hearing on
December 13, 2017. The SEIR serves as the CEQA documentation for the City’s consideration and approval of
the Project, and no additional CEQA review is required.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco as
follows:
1.The City Council finds and determines that the above recitals are true and correct and
incorporated herein by reference.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™130
File #:23-340 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:11a.
2.The City Council finds and determines acquisition of the Property does not require a finding of
conformity with the City’s adopted General Plan. Acquisition of the Property is primarily for the purpose of
continued operation of existing Mission Road and Antoinette Lane, including a minor realignment of Antoinette
Lane. It is therefore exempt from the requirement to find conformity with the General Plan under Government
Code section 65402(a).
3.The City Council hereby approves the Purchase and Sale Agreement, substantially in the form
attached as Exhibit A, and authorizes acquisition of the Property.
4.The City Manager and designees are authorized and directed to execute all documents and take
all actions necessary to implement this Resolution, including without limitation the execution of the Purchase
and Sale Agreement included as Exhibit A, including any minor amendments that do not increase the City’s
obligations, and all other necessary instruments, as applicable, subject to approval as to form by the City
Attorney.
*****
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™131
5336202_1.doc
AGREEMENT FOR SALE OF REAL ESTATE
by and between
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,
by and through its Public Utilities Commission,
a California municipal corporation,
as Seller,
and
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO,
a California municipal corporation
as Buyer,
for the sale and purchase of
an approximately 47,130 square foot portion of SFPUC Parcel 21,
located in South San Francisco, California
___________________, 202__
132
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1. SALE AND PURCHASE 2
1.1 Property Included in Sale ...................................................................................... 2
2. PURCHASE PRICE 2
3. TITLE 2
3.1 Conditions of Title ................................................................................................ 2
3.2 Buyer’s Responsibility for Title Insurance ........................................................... 3
4. “AS-IS” PURCHASE; RELEASE OF CITY 3
4.1 Buyer’s Independent Investigation ....................................................................... 3
4.2 Property Disclosures ............................................................................................. 4
4.3 Entry and Indemnity ............................................................................................. 4
4.4 “As-Is” Purchase ................................................................................................... 4
4.5 Release of City ...................................................................................................... 5
5. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT 6
5.1 Buyer’s Conditions Precedent............................................................................... 6
5.2 Contingency Period ............................................................................................... 6
5.3 City’s Condition Precedent ................................................................................... 6
5.4 Failure of City’s Conditions Precedent ................................................................. 7
6. ESCROW AND CLOSING 7
6.1 Escrow................................................................................................................... 7
6.2 Closing Date.......................................................................................................... 7
6.3 Deposit of Documents and Funds ......................................................................... 7
6.4 Prorations .............................................................................................................. 8
6.5 Title Company as Real Estate Reporting Person .................................................. 8
7. RISK OF LOSS 8
7.1 Loss ....................................................................................................................... 8
8. EXPENSES 9
8.1 Expenses ............................................................................................................... 9
8.2 Brokers .................................................................................................................. 9
9. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES 9
10. GENERAL PROVISIONS 9
10.1 Notices .................................................................................................................. 9
10.2 Successors and Assigns......................................................................................... 10
133
ii
10.3 Amendments ......................................................................................................... 10
10.4 Authority of Buyer ................................................................................................ 10
10.5 Buyer’s Representations and Warranties .............................................................. 11
10.6 No document or instrument furnished or to be furnished by the Buyer to City in
connection with this Agreement contains or will contain any untrue statement of material
fact or omits or will omit a material fact necessary to make the statements contained therein
not misleading, under the circumstances under which any such statement will have been
made.Governing Law ........................................................................................................ 11
10.7 Merger of Prior Agreements ................................................................................. 11
10.8 Parties and Their Agents ....................................................................................... 11
10.9 Interpretation of Agreement .................................................................................. 11
10.10 Attorneys’ Fees ..................................................................................................... 12
10.11 Time of Essence .................................................................................................... 12
10.12 No Merger ............................................................................................................. 12
10.13 Non-Liability of City Officials, Employees and Agents ...................................... 12
10.14 Conflicts of Interest............................................................................................... 12
10.15 Notification of Limitations on Contributions ....................................................... 12
10.16 Sunshine Ordinance .............................................................................................. 13
10.17 Tropical Hardwood and Virgin Redwood Ban ..................................................... 13
10.18 No Recording ........................................................................................................ 13
10.19 Effective Date ....................................................................................................... 13
10.20 Severability ........................................................................................................... 13
10.21 Acceptance by Buyer ............................................................................................ 14
10.22 Counterparts .......................................................................................................... 14
10.23 Cooperative Drafting ............................................................................................ 14
134
i
LIST OF EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
EXHIBIT B DEPICTION OF PROPERTY
EXHIBIT C FORM OF QUITCLAIM DEED
135
Rev 1/2019 1 5336202_1.doc
AGREEMENT FOR SALE OF REAL ESTATE
(an approximately 47,130-square foot portion of SFPUC Parcel 21 located in
South San Francisco, California)
THIS AGREEMENT FOR SALE OF REAL ESTATE (“Agreement”) dated for
reference purposes only as of _____________, 202__, is by and between the CITY AND
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, a California municipal corporation (“City” or “Seller”), by
and through its Public Utilities Commission (“SFPUC”), and the CITY OF
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, a California municipal corporation (“Buyer”). Seller and Buyer
are sometimes collectively referred to in this Agreement as the “Parties” or singularly as
“Party.”
THIS AGREEMENT IS MADE WITH REFERENCE TO THE FOLLOWING FACTS
AND CIRCUMSTANCES:
A. City, under the SFPUC, owned right of way parcels in the City of
South San Francisco, including SFPUC Parcel No. 21 (“Parcel 21”). Parcel 21 never contained
any SFPUC utility infrastructure.
B. The SFPUC sold certain property interests to the former South San Francisco
Redevelopment Agency in 2008 including portions of Parcel 21. Parcel 21 is and has been
entirely encumbered by portions of Buyer’s public streets and a public drainage channel. The
remainder of Parcel 21 not sold to the former South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency in the
2008 constitutes the property included in this sale (“Property”). The Property is described in
Section 1.1 [Property Included in Sale] below.
C. The Property is subject to SFPUC License P4522, dated September 9, 2021,
issued to Buyer for the construction of improvements to the existing road and culvert, and the
installation of new utilities (“License”). The Parties acknowledge that the Property is under the
possession and control of Buyer. City will revoke the License at Closing (defined in
Section 2(b) [Purchase Price] below).
D. Buyer has two major projects ongoing near the Property:
(1) a project that contains three vertical development structures on three
parcels that will deliver roughly 800 units of housing, of which 158 units
are 100% affordable housing, a childcare center, a market hall with a
public plaza, public open space in the form of a community park and
picnic area, and the completion of the existing Centennial Trail; and
(2) a new Library and Parks and Recreation building that will include
playground areas for children, a large synthetic turf exercise and playing
field, and a special garden area for quiet socializing among wildflowers
and native grasses that attract pollinators and butterflies (together, the
“Projects”).
Buyer seeks to acquire the Property to facilitate the Projects.
E. On _____________, 202__, the SFPUC Commission adopted Resolution
No. ________ declaring the Property as “surplus land” and “exempt surplus land” under the
State Surplus Lands Act (California Government Code Section 54220, et seq.). Because the
Parties are public agencies, the State Surplus Lands Act noticing requirements do not apply to
the sale of the Property as contemplated in this Agreement.
136
Rev 1/2019 2 5336202_1.doc
F. The SFPUC Commission has recommended sale of the Property to Buyer on the
terms and conditions set forth below, pursuant to Resolution No. ________.
G. Buyer desires to purchase the Property and City is willing to sell the Property,
subject to approval by City’s Board of Supervisors and Mayor, on the terms and conditions set
forth below.
ACCORDINGLY, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of
which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree as follows:
1. SALE AND PURCHASE
1.1 Property Included in Sale
Subject to the terms, covenants, and conditions set forth in this Agreement, City agrees to
sell to Buyer, and Buyer agrees to purchase from City, City’s interest in the Property, as more
particularly described in the attached Exhibit A, and shown generally on the map attached as
Exhibit A-1.
2. PURCHASE PRICE
The purchase price for the Property is Ninety Four Thousand Dollars ($94,000) (the
“Purchase Price”). Buyer will pay the Purchase Price as follows:
(a) Within five (5) business days after the date this Agreement is executed by
the Parties, Buyer will deposit into escrow with [NAME] (“Title Company”), [INSERT
ADDRESS], South San Francisco, CA [ZIP CODE], Attention: Steve Johnson, the sum of Two
Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty and no/100 Dollars ($2,820) as an earnest money deposit
(“Initial Deposit”). Before the expiration of the Contingency Period as provided in Section 5.2
[Contingency Period] below, Buyer will increase the Initial Deposit to Nine Thousand Four
Hundred and no/100 Dollars ($9,400) by depositing into escrow with the Title Company an
additional Six Thousand Five Hundred Eighty and no/100 Dollars ($6,580) (“Second Deposit,”
together with the Initial Deposit, the “Deposit”) in all cash. The Deposit will be held in an
interest-bearing account, and all interest thereon will be deemed a part of the Deposit. At the
Closing (defined below), the Deposit will be paid to City and credited against the Purchase Price.
(b) Buyer will pay the balance of the Purchase Price, which is Eighty Four
Thousand Six Hundred and no/100 Dollars ($84,600) to City at the consummation of the
purchase and sale contemplated by this Agreement (the “Closing”).
All sums payable under this Agreement including the Deposit, will be paid in
immediately available funds of lawful money of the United States of America.
3. TITLE
3.1 Conditions of Title
At the Closing, City will quitclaim interest in and to the Property to Buyer by quitclaim
deed in the form attached as Exhibit C (the “Deed”). Title to the Property will be subject to
(a) liens of local real estate taxes and assessments, (b) all existing exceptions and encumbrances,
whether or not disclosed by a current preliminary title report or the public records or any other
documents reviewed by Buyer pursuant to Section 5.1 [Buyer’s Conditions Precedent] below,
and any other exceptions to title that would be disclosed by an accurate and thorough
investigation, survey, or inspection of the Property, and (c) all items of which Buyer has actual
or constructive notice or knowledge. All of the foregoing exceptions to title are referred to
137
Rev 1/2019 3 5336202_1.doc
collectively as the “Conditions of Title.” Without limiting the foregoing, Buyer acknowledges
receipt of a litigation guarantee issued by the Title Company under Order No. 2202068007-PL,
dated January 18, 2023, covering the Property and approves all of the exceptions contained
therein.
3.2 Buyer’s Responsibility for Title Insurance
Buyer understands and agrees that the right, title and interest in the Property will not
exceed that vested in City, and City is under no obligation to furnish any policy of title insurance
in connection with this transaction. Buyer recognizes that any fences or other physical
monument of the Property’s boundary lines may not correspond to the legal description of the
Property. City will not be responsible for any discrepancies in the parcel area or location of the
property lines or any other matters that an accurate survey or inspection might reveal. It is
Buyer’s sole responsibility to obtain a survey from an independent surveyor and a policy of title
insurance from a title company, if desired.
4. “AS-IS” PURCHASE; RELEASE OF CITY
4.1 Buyer’s Independent Investigation
Buyer represents and warrants to City that Buyer has performed a diligent and thorough
inspection and investigation of each and every aspect of the Property, either independently or
through agents of Buyer’s choosing, including the following matters (collectively, the “Property
Conditions”):
(a) All matters relating to title including the existence, quality, nature and
adequacy of City’s interest in the Property and the existence of physically open and legally
sufficient access to the Property.
(b) The zoning and other legal status of the Property, including the
compliance of the Property or its operation with any applicable codes, laws, regulations, statutes,
ordinances and private or public covenants, conditions and restrictions, and all governmental and
other legal requirements such as taxes, assessments, use permit requirements and building and
fire codes.
(c) The quality, nature, adequacy and physical condition of the Property,
including, but not limited to, the structural elements, landscaping, utility systems, facilities and
appliance, and all other physical and functional aspects of the Property.
(d) The quality, nature, adequacy, and physical, geological and environmental
condition of the Property (including soils and any groundwater), and the presence or absence of
any Hazardous Materials in, on, under or about the Property or any other real property in the
vicinity of the Property. As used in this Agreement, “Hazardous Material” means any material
that, because of its quantity, concentration or physical or chemical characteristics, is now or
hereafter deemed by any federal, state or local governmental authority to pose a present or
potential hazard to human health or safety or to the environment.
(e) The suitability of the Property for Buyer’s intended uses. Buyer
represents and warrants that its intended use of the Property is to maintain the existing street
improvements for public transportation and public drainage improvements and to facilitate the
Projects.
(f) The economics and development potential, if any, of the Property.
(g) All other matters of material significance affecting the Property.
138
Rev 1/2019 4 5336202_1.doc
4.2 Property Disclosures
(a) California law requires sellers to disclose to buyers the presence or
potential presence of certain Hazardous Materials. Accordingly, Buyer is hereby advised that
occupation of the Property may lead to exposure to Hazardous Materials such as, but not limited
to, gasoline, diesel and other vehicle fluids, vehicle exhaust, office maintenance fluids, tobacco
smoke, methane and building materials containing chemicals, such as formaldehyde. By
execution of this Agreement, Buyer acknowledges that the notices and warnings set forth above
satisfy the requirements of California Health and Safety Code Section 25359.7 and related
statutes.
(b) According to the United States Geological Survey, roughly one-quarter of
the San Francisco Bay region may be exposed to liquefaction. More information about the
potential areas of liquefaction may be found at
http://geomaps.wr.usgs.gov/sfgeo/liquefaction/susceptibility.htm. By execution of this
Agreement, Buyer acknowledges the disclosure set forth above satisfies the requirements of
California Public Resources Code Section 2621.9 and Section 2694 and related statutes.
4.3 Entry and Indemnity
In connection with any entry by Buyer or its Agents (defined in Section 10.8 [Parties and
Their Agents] below) onto the Property, Buyer will give City reasonable advance written notice
of such entry and will conduct such entry and any inspections in connection therewith so as to
minimize, to the extent possible, interference with uses being made of the Property and otherwise
in a manner and on terms and conditions acceptable to City. All entries by Buyer or its Agents
onto the Property to perform any testing or other investigations that could affect the physical
condition of the Property (including soil borings) or the uses thereof will be made only pursuant
to the terms and conditions of a permit to enter in form and substance satisfactory to City.
Buyer will maintain, and will require that its Agents maintain, public liability and
property damage insurance in amounts and in form and substance adequate to insure against all
liability of Buyer and its Agents, arising out of any entry or inspection of the Property in
connection with the transaction contemplated by this Agreement, and Buyer will provide City
with evidence of such insurance coverage upon request from City.
To the fullest extent permitted under law, Buyer will indemnify, defend and hold
harmless City, its Agents, and each of them, from and against any liabilities, costs, damages,
losses, liens, claims and expenses (including reasonable fees of attorneys, experts and
consultants and related costs) arising out of or relating to any entry on, under or about the
Property by Buyer, its Agents, contractors and subcontractors in performing the inspections,
testing, or inquiries provided for in this Agreement, whether prior to the date of this Agreement
or during the term hereof (collectively “Buyer’s Actions”), including any injuries or deaths to
any persons (including Buyer’s Agents) and damage to any property, from Buyer’s Actions. The
foregoing indemnity will survive beyond the Closing, or, if the sale is not consummated, beyond
the termination of this Agreement.
4.4 “As-Is” Purchase
BUYER SPECIFICALLY ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT CITY IS
SELLING AND BUYER IS PURCHASING CITY’S INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY ON AN
“AS-IS WITH ALL FAULTS” BASIS. BUYER IS RELYING SOLELY ON ITS
INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION AND NOT ON ANY REPRESENTATIONS OR
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, FROM CITY OR
ITS AGENTS AS TO ANY MATTERS CONCERNING THE PROPERTY, ITS SUITABILITY
FOR BUYER’S INTENDED USES OR ANY OF THE PROPERTY CONDITIONS. CITY
139
Rev 1/2019 5 5336202_1.doc
DOES NOT GUARANTEE THE LEGAL, PHYSICAL, GEOLOGICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL
OR OTHER CONDITIONS OF THE PROPERTY, NOR DOES IT ASSUME ANY
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE COMPLIANCE OF THE PROPERTY OR ITS USE WITH
ANY STATUTE, ORDINANCE OR REGULATION. IT IS BUYER’S SOLE
RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE ALL BUILDING, PLANNING, ZONING, AND
OTHER REGULATIONS RELATING TO THE PROPERTY AND THE USES TO WHICH IT
MAY BE PUT.
4.5 Release of City
As part of its agreement to purchase the Property in its “As-Is With All Faults” condition,
Buyer, on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns, waives any right to recover from, and
forever releases and discharges, City, its officers, employees, agents, contractors, and
representatives, and their respective heirs, successors, legal representatives, and assigns, from
any and all demands, claims, legal, or administrative proceedings, losses, liabilities, damages,
penalties, fines, liens, judgments, costs, or expenses whatsoever (including attorneys’ fees and
costs), whether direct or indirect, known or unknown, foreseen or unforeseen, that may arise on
account of or in any way be connected with (a) Buyer’s and its Agents and customer’s past,
present and future use of the Property, (b) the physical, geological, or environmental condition of
the Property, including any Hazardous Material in, on, under, above or about the Property, and
(c) any federal, state, local, or administrative law, rule, regulation, order or requirement
applicable thereto, including the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA”, also commonly known as the “Superfund” law), as
amended by Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (“SARA”) (42 U.S.C.
Sections 9601-9657), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended by the
Solid Waste and Disposal Act of 1984 (collectively, “RCRA”) (42 U.S.C. Sections 6901-6987),
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended by the Clean Water Act of 1977
(collectively the “Clean Water Act”) (33 U.S.C. Section 1251 et seq.), the Toxic Substances
Control Act (“TSCA”) (15 U.S.C. Sections 2601-2629), Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
(49 U.S.C. Section 1801 et seq.), the Carpenter-Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account
Law (commonly known as the “California Superfund” law) (California Health and Safety Code
Sections 25300-25395), Hazardous Waste Control Act (California Health and Safety Code
Section 25100 et seq.), Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Law
(commonly known as the “Business Plan Law”) (California Health and Safety Code
Section 25500 et seq.), Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (California Water Code
Section 13000 et seq.), and the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986
(commonly known as “Proposition 65”) (California Health and Safety Code Section 25249.5
et seq.).
In connection with the foregoing release, Buyer expressly waives the benefits of
Section 1542 of the California Civil Code, which provides as follows:
A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS THAT
THE CREDITOR OR RELEASING PARTY DOES NOT KNOW
OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT THE TIME
OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE AND THAT, IF KNOWN BY
HIM OR HER, WOULD HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS
OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR OR RELEASED
PARTY.
BY PLACING ITS INITIALS BELOW, BUYER SPECIFICALLY ACKNOWLEDGES AND
CONFIRMS THE VALIDITY OF THE RELEASES MADE ABOVE AND THE FACT THAT
BUYER WAS REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL WHO EXPLAINED, AT THE TIME THIS
AGREEMENT WAS MADE, THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE ABOVE RELEASES.
140
Rev 1/2019 6 5336202_1.doc
INITIALS: BUYER: ________________
5. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT
5.1 Buyer’s Conditions Precedent
Buyer’s obligation to purchase the Property is conditioned upon all of the following
(“Buyer’s Conditions Precedent”) :
(a) Buyer’s review and approval of an updated preliminary title report, which
Buyer is responsible for ordering, together with copies of the underlying documents..
(b) Buyer’s review and approval of all zoning, land use, building,
environmental and other statutes, rules, or regulations applicable to the Property.
(c) Buyer’s review and approval of soils reports and other documents of
significance to the Property in City’s possession. City will make available to Buyer at City’s
Real Estate Division’s offices, without representation or warranty of any kind whatsoever, all
non-privileged items in its files relating to the Property for Buyer’s review and inspection, at
Buyer’s sole cost, during normal business hours. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Buyer’s review
will not include a review of any of City’s internal memoranda or reports, any privileged or
confidential information, or City’s appraisals of the Property, if any, except those already shared
with Buyer.
(d) City will have performed all material obligations to be performed by it
pursuant to this Agreement.
5.2 Contingency Period
Buyer will have until 5:00 p.m. San Francisco Time on the date that is ten (10) business
days after the Effective Date to review and approve or waive Buyer’s Conditions Precedent (such
period being referred to in this Agreement as the “Contingency Period”). If Buyer elects to
proceed with the purchase of the Property, then Buyer shall, before the expiration of the
Contingency Period, notify City in writing that Buyer has approved all such matters. If before
the end of the Contingency Period Buyer fails to give City such written notice and fails to object
to any of Buyer’s Conditions, then Buyer will be deemed to have waived Buyer’s Conditions.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, if Buyer objects to any of the matters contained within
Section 5.1 within the Contingency Period, then City may, but will have no obligation to remove
or remedy any objectionable matter. If City agrees to remove or remedy the objectionable
matter, it will notify Buyer within ten (10) days following Buyer’s notice of objection, and the
Closing Date will be delayed for so long as City diligently pursues such removal or remedy. If
and when City elects not to remove or remedy the objectionable matter, which City may do at
any time including following an initial election to pursue remedial or corrective actions, this
Agreement will automatically terminate, the Deposit will be returned to Buyer, and neither party
will have any further rights or obligations under this Agreement except as provided in
Section 4.3 [Entry and Indemnity], Section 8.2 [Brokers], or Section 10.4 [Authority of Buyer]
or as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement.
5.3 City’s Condition Precedent
The following are conditions precedent to City’s obligation to sell the Property to Buyer
(“City’s Conditions Precedent”):
141
Rev 1/2019 7 5336202_1.doc
(a) Buyer will have performed all of its obligations pursuant to or in
connection with this Agreement and all of Buyer’s representations and warranties will be true
and correct.
(b) A resolution approving and authorizing the transactions contemplated by
this Agreement and finding that the public interest or necessity demands, or will not be
inconvenienced by the sale of the Property, will have been adopted by City’s Board of
Supervisors and Mayor, in their respective sole and absolute discretion.
(c) Title Company will have agreed to be the real estate reporting person for
the Closing in compliance with the Reporting Requirements (defined in Section 6.5 [Title
Company as Real Estate Reporting Person] below).
5.4 Failure of City’s Conditions Precedent
Each of City’s Conditions Precedent are intended solely for the benefit of City. If any of
City’s Conditions Precedent are not satisfied as provided above, City may, at its option,
terminate this Agreement and shall return the Deposit to Buyer within a reasonable time period
not to exceed t (30) calendar days. Upon any such termination, neither Party will have any
further rights or obligations under this Agreement except as provided in Section 4.3 [Entry and
Indemnity], Section 8.2 [Brokers], or Section 10.4 [Authority of Buyer] or as otherwise
expressly provided in this Agreement.
6. ESCROW AND CLOSING
6.1 Escrow
On the date within five (5) days after the Parties execute this Agreement, Buyer and City
will deposit an executed counterpart of this Agreement with the Title Company, and this
instrument will serve as the instructions to the Title Company as the escrow holder for
consummation of the purchase and sale contemplated by this Agreement. City and Buyer agree
to execute such supplementary escrow instructions as may be appropriate to enable the Title
Company to comply with the terms of this Agreement; provided, however, in the event of any
conflict between the provisions of this Agreement and any supplementary escrow instructions,
the terms of this Agreement will control.
6.2 Closing Date
The Closing will be held, and delivery of all items to be made at the Closing under the
terms of this Agreement will be made, at the offices of the Title Company on (a) the date that is
_________________ (____) days after the expiration of the Contingency Period and enactment
of the Board of Supervisors’ resolution referred to in Section 5.3(b) above, or if such date is not a
business day, then upon the next ensuing business day, before 1:00 p.m. San Francisco time or
(b) such other date and time as the Parties may mutually agree upon in writing (the “Closing
Date”). Such date and time may not be extended without the prior written approval of the
Parties.
6.3 Deposit of Documents and Funds
(a) At or before the Closing, City will deposit into escrow the following
items:
(i) a duly executed and acknowledged Deed conveying the Property to
Buyer subject to the Conditions of Title; and
142
Rev 1/2019 8 5336202_1.doc
(ii) a copy of a letter confirming revocation of the License to Buyer
effective on the Closing Date.
(b) At or before the Closing, Buyer will deposit into escrow the funds
necessary to close this transaction.
(c) City and Buyer will each deposit such other instruments as are reasonably
required by the Title Company or otherwise required to close the escrow and consummate the
purchase of the Property in accordance with the terms hereof.
(d) City will deliver to Buyer originals (or to the extent originals are not
available, copies) of any items that City is required to furnish Buyer copies of or make available
at the Property pursuant to Section 5.1 [Buyer’s Conditions Precedent] above, within five (5)
business days after the Closing Date.
6.4 Prorations
On or after the Closing Date, any real property taxes and assessments, water, sewer, and
utility charges, amounts payable under any annual permits and/or inspection fees (calculated on
the basis of the period covered), and any other expenses normal to the operation and maintenance
of the Property, will all be prorated as of 12:01 a.m. on the date the Deed is recorded, on the
basis of a three hundred sixty-five (365)-day year. The Parties by this Agreement agree that if
any of the above described prorations cannot be calculated accurately on the Closing Date, then
the same will be calculated as soon as reasonably practicable after the Closing Date and either
Party owing the other Party a sum of money based on such subsequent proration(s) will promptly
pay said sum to the other Party.
6.5 Title Company as Real Estate Reporting Person
Section 6045(e) of the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and the regulations
promulgated thereunder (collectively, the “Reporting Requirements”) require that certain
information be made to the United States Internal Revenue Service, and a statement to be
furnished to City, in connection with the Closing. Buyer and City agree that if the Closing
occurs, Title Company will be the party responsible for closing the transaction contemplated in
this Agreement and is by this Agreement designated as the real estate reporting person (as
defined in the Reporting Requirements) for such transaction. Title Company will perform all
duties required of the real estate reporting person for the Closing under the Reporting
Requirements, and Buyer and City will each timely furnish Title Company with any information
reasonably requested by Title Company and necessary for the performance of its duties under the
Reporting Requirements with respect to the Closing.
7. RISK OF LOSS
7.1 Loss
All improvements on the Property are owned by Buyer, and any damage to or destruction
of those improvements prior to Closing will have no impact on the sale of the Property or the
terms under this Agreement. The Parties agree that Buyer is purchasing the Property in as-is
condition as further described in Section 4.4 [“As-Is” Purchase] above.
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary above, Buyer acknowledges that City
self-insures and will not be obligated to purchase any third-party commercial liability insurance
or property insurance.
143
Rev 1/2019 9 5336202_1.doc
8. EXPENSES
8.1 Expenses
Buyer will pay any transfer taxes applicable to the sale, personal property taxes, escrow
fees and recording charges, and any other costs and charges of the escrow for the sale.
8.2 Brokers
The Parties represent and warrant to each other that no broker or finder was instrumental
in arranging or bringing about this transaction and that there are no claims or rights for brokerage
commissions or finder’s fees in connection with the transactions contemplated by this
Agreement. If any person brings a claim for a commission or finder’s fee based on any contact,
dealings, or communication with Buyer or City, then the Party through whom such person makes
a claim will defend the other Party from such claim, and will indemnify the indemnified Party
from, and hold the indemnified Party against, any and all costs, damages, claims, liabilities, or
expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and disbursements) that the indemnified Party
incurs in defending against the claim. The provisions of this Section will survive the Closing, or,
if the purchase and sale is not consummated for any reason, any termination of this Agreement.
9. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES
IF THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY IS NOT CONSUMMATED DUE TO THE
FAILURE OF ANY CONDITION PRECEDENT OR CITY’S DEFAULT UNDER THIS
AGREEMENT AND BUYER IS NOT THEN IN DEFAULT, THEN THE TITLE
COMPANY WILL RETURN THE DEPOSIT TOGETHER WITH ACCRUED
INTEREST THEREON TO BUYER. IF THE SALE IS NOT CONSUMMATED DUE TO
ANY DEFAULT BY BUYER UNDER THIS AGREEMENT AND CITY IS NOT THEN
IN DEFAULT, THEN THE TITLE COMPANY WILL DELIVER THE DEPOSIT
TOGETHER WITH ACCRUED INTEREST THEREON TO CITY, AND CITY WILL
BE ENTITLED TO RETAIN SUCH SUM AS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES. THE
PARTIES HAVE AGREED THAT CITY’S ACTUAL DAMAGES, IN THE EVENT OF A
FAILURE TO CONSUMMATE THIS SALE AS SPECIFIED IN THE PRECEDING
SENTENCE, WOULD BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT OR IMPRACTICABLE TO
DETERMINE. AFTER NEGOTIATION, THE PARTIES HAVE AGREED THAT,
CONSIDERING ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE DATE OF THIS
AGREEMENT, THE AMOUNT OF THE DEPOSIT TOGETHER WITH ACCRUED
INTEREST THEREON IS A REASONABLE ESTIMATE OF THE DAMAGES THAT
CITY WOULD INCUR IN SUCH AN EVENT. BY PLACING THEIR RESPECTIVE
INITIALS BELOW, EACH PARTY SPECIFICALLY CONFIRMS THE ACCURACY
OF THE STATEMENTS MADE ABOVE AND THE FACT THAT EACH PARTY WAS
REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL WHO EXPLAINED, AT THE TIME THIS
AGREEMENT WAS MADE, THE CONSEQUENCES OF THIS LIQUIDATED
DAMAGES PROVISION.
INITIALS: CITY: _________ BUYER: __________
10. GENERAL PROVISIONS
10.1 Notices
Any notice, consent, or approval required or permitted to be given under this Agreement
will be in writing and will be given by (a) hand delivery, against receipt, (b) reliable
next-business-day courier service that provides confirmation of delivery, or (c) United States
registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt required, and addressed as follows (or
144
Rev 1/2019 10 5336202_1.doc
to such other address as either party may from time to time specify in writing to the other upon
five (5) days’ prior, written notice in the manner provider above):
CITY:
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
525 Golden Gate Avenue, 10th Floor
San Francisco, California 94102
Attn: Real Estate Director
Re: Sale of SFPUC Parcel No. 21
with a copy to:
Office of the City Attorney
City Hall, Room 234
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, California 94102
Attn: Real Estate Transactions Team
Re: Sale of SFPUC Parcel No. 21
BUYER:
City of South San Francisco
400 Grand Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
Attn: City Manager, Sharon Ranals
Telephone No.: (650) 829-6620
with a copy to:
City of South San Francisco, City Attorney
Sky Woodruff, Principal
Meyers Nave
1999 Harrison Street, 9th Floor
Oakland, CA 94612
A properly addressed notice transmitted by one of the foregoing methods will be deemed
received upon the confirmed date of delivery, attempted delivery, or rejected delivery, whichever
occurs first. Any e-mail addresses, telephone numbers, or facsimile numbers provided by one
party to the other will be for convenience of communication only; neither Party may give official
or binding notice orally or by e-mail or facsimile. The effective time of a notice will not be
affected by the receipt, prior to receipt of the original, of an oral notice or an e-mail or facsimile
copy of the notice.
10.2 Successors and Assigns
This Agreement will be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of, the Parties to this
Agreement and their respective successors, heirs, legal representatives, administrators and
assigns. Buyer’s rights and obligations under this Agreement will not be assignable without the
prior written consent of City; provided, however, even if City approves any such proposed
assignment, in no event will Buyer be released of any of its obligations under this Agreement.
10.3 Amendments
This Agreement may be amended or modified only by a written instrument signed by the
Parties.
10.4 Authority of Buyer
Buyer represents and warrants to City that Buyer is a California municipal corporation
duly organized, validly existing, and in good standing under the laws of the State of California.
Buyer further represents and warrants to City that this Agreement and all documents executed by
Buyer, which are to be delivered to City at Closing: (a) are or at the time of Closing will be duly
authorized, executed and delivered by Buyer; (b) are or at the time of Closing will be legal,
valid, and binding obligations of Buyer; and (c) do not and at the time of Closing will not violate
any provision of any agreement or judicial order to which Buyer is a party or to which Buyer is
subject. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, the foregoing
representations and warranties and any and all other representations and warranties of Buyer
contained in this Agreement or in other agreements or documents executed by Buyer in
connection herewith, will survive the Closing Date.
145
Rev 1/2019 11 5336202_1.doc
10.5 Buyer’s Representations and Warranties
Buyer makes the following representations as of the date of this Agreement and at all
times throughout this Agreement:
(a) Buyer is a California municipal corporation duly organized and validly
existing and in good standing under the laws of the jurisdiction in which it was formed. Buyer
has duly authorized by all necessary action the execution, delivery, and performance of this
Agreement. Buyer has duly executed and delivered this Agreement and this Agreement
constitutes a legal, valid, and binding obligation of Buyer, enforceable against Buyer in
accordance with the terms hereof.
(b) Buyer represents and warrants to City that it has not been suspended,
disciplined, or disbarred by, or prohibited from contracting with, any federal, state, or local
governmental agency. In the event Buyer has been so suspended, disbarred, disciplined, or
prohibited from contracting with any governmental agency, Buyer will immediately notify City
of same and the reasons therefore together with any relevant facts or information requested by
City. Any such suspension, debarment, discipline, or prohibition may result in the termination or
suspension of this Agreement.
10.6 No document or instrument furnished or to be furnished by the Buyer to City in
connection with this Agreement contains or will contain any untrue statement of material fact or
omits or will omit a material fact necessary to make the statements contained therein not
misleading, under the circumstances under which any such statement will have been
made.Governing Law
This Agreement will be governed by, subject to, and construed in accordance with the
laws of the State of California and City’s Charter and Administrative Code.
10.7 Merger of Prior Agreements
This Agreement, together with the exhibits to this Agreement, contain any and all
representations, warranties, and covenants made by Buyer and City and constitutes the entire
understanding between the Parties to this Agreement with respect to the subject matter hereof.
Any prior correspondence, memoranda, or agreements are replaced in total by this Agreement
together with the exhibits to this Agreement.
10.8 Parties and Their Agents
The term “Buyer” as used in this Agreement will include the plural as well as the
singular. If Buyer consists of more than one (1) individual or entity, then the obligations under
this Agreement imposed on Buyer will be joint and several. As used in this Agreement, the term
“Agents” when used with respect to either party will include the agents, employees, officers,
contractors, and representatives of such party.
10.9 Interpretation of Agreement
The article, section, and other headings of this Agreement and the table of contents are
for convenience of reference only and will not affect the meaning or interpretation of any
provision contained in this Agreement. Whenever the context so requires, the use of the singular
will be deemed to include the plural and vice versa, and each gender reference will be deemed to
include the other and the neuter. This Agreement has been negotiated at arm’s length and
between persons sophisticated and knowledgeable in the matters dealt with in this Agreement.
In addition, each Party has been represented by experienced and knowledgeable legal counsel.
Accordingly, any rule of law (including California Civil Code Section 1654) or legal decision
146
Rev 1/2019 12 5336202_1.doc
that would require interpretation of any ambiguities in this Agreement against the party that has
drafted it is not applicable and is waived. The provisions of this Agreement will be interpreted in
a reasonable manner to effect the purposes of the Parties and this Agreement. Use of the word
“including” or similar words will not be construed to limit any general term, statement, or other
matter in this Agreement, whether or not language of non-limitation, such as “without limitation”
or similar words, are used.
10.10 Attorneys’ Fees
If either Party to this Agreement fails to perform any of its respective obligations under
this Agreement or if any dispute arises between the Parties to this Agreement concerning the
meaning or interpretation of any provision of this Agreement, then the defaulting Party or the
Party not prevailing in such dispute, as the case may be, will pay any and all costs and expenses
incurred by the other Party on account of such default or in enforcing or establishing its rights
under this Agreement, including court costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees and disbursements.
For purposes of this Agreement, the reasonable fees of attorneys of the Parties will be based on
the fees regularly charged by private attorneys with the equivalent number of years of experience
in the subject matter area of the law for which the attorney’s services were rendered who practice
in the City of San Francisco in law firms with approximately the same number of attorneys as
employed by the City Attorney’s Office.
10.11 Time of Essence
Time is of the essence with respect to the performance of the Parties’ respective
obligations contained in this Agreement.
10.12 No Merger
The obligations contained in this Agreement will not merge with the transfer of title to
the Property but will remain in effect until fulfilled.
10.13 Non-Liability of City Officials, Employees and Agents
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, no elective or appointive
board, commission, member, officer, employee, or agent of City or Buyer will be personally
liable to the other Party, its successors and assigns, in the event of any default or breach by either
Party or for any amount that may become due to either Party, its successors and assigns, or for
any obligation of the Parties under this Agreement.
10.14 Conflicts of Interest
Through its execution of this Agreement, the Parties acknowledges that they are familiar
with the provisions of Article III, Chapter 2 of City’s Campaign and Governmental Conduct
Code, and Section 87100 et seq. and Section 1090 et seq. of the Government Code of the State of
California, and certify that they do not know of any facts that constitute a violation of said
provisions and agree that if they become aware of any such fact during the term of this
Agreement, such Party shall notify the other Party.
10.15 Notification of Limitations on Contributions
Through its execution of this Agreement, Buyer acknowledges that it is familiar with
Section 1.126 of the San Francisco Campaign and Governmental Conduct Code, which prohibits
any person who contracts with City for the selling or leasing of any land or building to or from
City whenever such transaction would require the approval by a City elective officer, the board
on which that City elective officer serves, or a board on which an appointee of that individual
147
Rev 1/2019 13 5336202_1.doc
serves, from making any campaign contribution to (a) City elective officer, (b) a candidate for
the office held by such individual, or (c) a committee controlled by such individual or candidate,
at any time from the commencement of negotiations for the contract until the later of either the
termination of negotiations for such contract or twelve months after the date the contract is
approved. Buyer acknowledges that the foregoing restriction applies only if the contract or a
combination or series of contracts approved by the same individual or board in a fiscal year have
a total anticipated or actual value of $100,000 or more. Buyer further acknowledges that the
prohibition on contributions applies to each Buyer; each member of Buyer’s board of directors,
and Buyer’s chief executive officer, chief financial officer and chief operating officer; any
person with an ownership interest of more than twenty percent (20%) in Buyer; any
subcontractor listed in the contract; and any committee that is sponsored or controlled by Buyer.
Additionally, Buyer acknowledges that Buyer must inform each of the persons described in the
preceding sentence of the prohibitions contained in Section 1.126. Buyer further agrees to
provide to City the names of each person, entity or committee described above.
10.16 Sunshine Ordinance
The Parties understand and agree that under City’s Sunshine Ordinance (San Francisco
Administrative Code, Chapter 67) and the State Public Records Law (Gov. Code Section 6250
et seq.), this Agreement and any and all records, information, and materials submitted to City or
Buyer under this Agreement are public records subject to public disclosure. The Parties by this
Agreement acknowledge that they may disclose any records, information and materials
submitted to each other in connection with this Agreement.
10.17 Tropical Hardwood and Virgin Redwood Ban
The City and County of San Francisco urges companies not to import, purchase, obtain or
use for any purpose, any tropical hardwood, tropical hardwood wood product, virgin redwood, or
virgin redwood wood product except as expressly permitted by the application of
Sections 802(b) and 803(b) of the San Francisco Environment Code.
10.18 No Recording
Neither this Agreement nor any memorandum or short form thereof may be recorded by
Buyer.
10.19 Effective Date
As used in this Agreement, the term “Effective Date” will mean the date on which both
Parties will have executed this Agreement provided the Agreement and the transactions
contemplated by the Agreement will have been authorized (a) in a manner required by law
governing Buyer, (b) by a duly adopted resolution of City’s Public Utilities Commission, and
(c) if required by City’s Charter, a duly adopted resolution of City’s Board of Supervisors and
Mayor.
10.20 Severability
If any provision of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person, entity, or
circumstance will be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement, or the
application of such provision to persons, entities or circumstances other than those as to which it
is invalid or unenforceable, will not be affected thereby, and each other provision of this
Agreement will be valid and be enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law, except to the
extent that enforcement of this Agreement without the invalidated provision would be
unreasonable or inequitable under all the circumstances or would frustrate a fundamental purpose
of this Agreement.
148
Rev 1/2019 14 5336202_1.doc
10.21 Acceptance by Buyer
This Agreement will be null and void unless it is accepted by Buyer and two (2) fully
executed copies of this Agreement are returned to City on or before 5:00 p.m. San Francisco time
on ________________, 202__.
10.22 Counterparts
This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each of which will be
deemed an original, but all of which taken together will constitute one and the same instrument.
10.23 Cooperative Drafting
This Agreement has been drafted through a cooperative effort of both Parties, and both
Parties have had an opportunity to have the Agreement reviewed and revised by legal counsel.
No party will be considered the drafter of this Agreement, and no presumption or rule that an
ambiguity will be construed against the party drafting the clause will apply to the interpretation
or enforcement of this Agreement.
NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY CONTAINED IN THIS
AGREEMENT, BUYER ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT NO OFFICER OR
EMPLOYEE OF CITY HAS AUTHORITY TO COMMIT CITY TO THIS AGREEMENT
UNLESS AND UNTIL A RESOLUTION OF CITY’S BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WILL
HAVE BEEN DULY ENACTED APPROVING THIS AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING
THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED BY THIS AGREEMENT. THEREFORE, ANY
OBLIGATIONS OR LIABILITIES OF CITY UNDER THIS AGREEMENT ARE
CONTINGENT UPON THE DUE ENACTMENT OF SUCH A RESOLUTION, AND THIS
AGREEMENT WILL BE NULL AND VOID IF CITY’S BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND
MAYOR DO NOT APPROVE THIS AGREEMENT IN THEIR RESPECTIVE SOLE
DISCRETION. APPROVAL OF THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED BY THIS
AGREEMENT BY ANY DEPARTMENT, COMMISSION OR AGENCY OF CITY WILL
NOT BE DEEMED TO IMPLY THAT SUCH RESOLUTION WILL BE ENACTED NOR
WILL ANY SUCH APPROVAL CREATE ANY BINDING OBLIGATIONS ON CITY.
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
149
Rev 1/2019 15 5336202_1.doc
The Parties have duly executed this Agreement as of the respective dates written below.
CITY:
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,
a California municipal corporation
By: _______________________________
ANDRICO PENICK
Director of Property
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
DAVID CHIU, City Attorney
By: _______________________________
Anna Parlato Gunderson
Deputy City Attorney
BUYER:
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
a California municipal corporation
By: _______________________________
SHARON RANALS
Its: City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO,
City Attorney
By: _______________________________
Sky Woodruff
City Attorney
150
A-1
EXHIBIT A
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
151
B-1
EXHIBIT B
DEPICTION OF PROPERTY
[see attached]
152
153
C-1
EXHIBIT C
FORM OF QUITCLAIM DEED
RECORDING REQUESTED BY,
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
Real Estate Services
525 Golden Gate Avenue, 10th Floor
San Francisco, California 94102
Attn: Real Estate Director
and
Real Estate Division
City and County of San Francisco
25 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 400
San Francisco, California 94102
Attn: Director of Property
MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO:
City of South San Francisco
___________________________
___________________________
Attn: _____________________
The undersigned hereby declares this instrument to be exempt
from Recording Fees (CA Govt. Code § 27383) and
Documentary Transfer Tax (CA Rev. & Tax Code § 11922 and
S.F. Bus. & Tax Reg. Code § 1105)
APN: Portion of Mission Road not assigned an
Assessor’s Parcel Number
(Space above this line reserved for Recorder’s use only)
QUITCLAIM DEED
(an approximately 47,130 square foot portion of SFPUC Parcel 21,
located in South San Francisco, California)
FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt and adequacy of which are hereby
acknowledged, the CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, a California municipal
corporation (“City”), pursuant to Resolution No. ___________, adopted by the Board of
Supervisors on ______________, 202__ and approved by the Mayor on ____________, 202__,
hereby RELEASES, REMISES AND QUITCLAIMS to the CITY OF
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, a California municipal corporation, any and all right, title and
interest City may have in and to the real property located in the City of South San Francisco,
County of San Mateo, State of California, described on the attached Exhibit A and made a part of
this quitclaim deed.
154
C-2
Executed as of this _____ day of ______________, 202__.
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,
a municipal corporation
By: ________________________________
ANDRICO PENICK
Director of Property
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
DAVID CHIU
City Attorney
By: ________________________________
Anna Parlato Gunderson
Deputy City Attorney
DESCRIPTION CHECKED/APPROVED:
By: ________________________________
Tony Durkee
Chief Surveyor
155
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the
identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is
attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
State of California )
) ss
County of ______________ )
On ________________, before me, ____________________________, a notary public in and
for said State, personally appeared _____________________________________, who 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.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature ________________________ (Seal)
5336202.1
156
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-312 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:12.
9..Title
Report regarding a resolution authorizing the acceptance of $15,000 in grant funding from Smart Growth
America to support the City of South San Francisco’s participation in the Complete Streets Leadership
Academies program with Caltrans and amending the Economic and Community Development Department’s
Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Operating Budget via Budget Amendment #23.053.(Christopher Espiritu,Senior
Transportation Planner)
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the South San Francisco City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the acceptance of
$15,000 in grant funding from Smart Growth America to support the City’s participation in the Complete
Streets Leadership Academies program with Caltrans and amending the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Operating
Budget via Budget Amendment #23.053.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
In July 2022,Caltrans District 4 Staff approached the City of South San Francisco (“City”)for support on their
application to Smart Growth America’s (“SGA”)Complete Streets Leadership Academies program
(“Program”).The Program is a technical assistance and peer learning program with virtual and in-person
workshops funded by a Cooperative Agreement from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s
(“CDC”) Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity.
The Program is designed to help state Departments of Transportation (“DOT”)and local communities work
together to put SGA’s National Complete Streets Coalition program (“Complete Streets”)into practice,engage
in peer learning,and improve cross-jurisdictional coordination.Caltrans was selected to participate in the
Program by working with the City,as well as the cities of Berkeley and San Leandro.Together,Caltrans and
these three local jurisdictions will learn about Complete Streets best practices and discuss policy and procedural
barriers to Complete Streets at the state and local levels.
The City and its partners Caltrans,SamTrans,San Mateo County Transportation Authority (“SMCTA”),San
Mateo County Office of Education (“SMCOE”),Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition (“SVBC”)and others,aim to
obtain a better understanding of the challenges and potential for implementing Complete Streets concepts on
South City streets.
The end goal of the Program is for the City,Caltrans,SamTrans,SMCTA,and its partners to collaborate on a
temporary demonstration of Complete Streets on El Camino Real for no longer than three weeks.It is
ultimately Caltrans’prerogative to determine how long a temporary demonstration project would be permitted
on the State Route,however the City is requesting three weeks to observe behavior and collect information for
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023Page 1 of 4
powered by Legistar™157
File #:23-312 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:12.
on the State Route,however the City is requesting three weeks to observe behavior and collect information for
other studies on El Camino Real.The Program would be especially helpful in providing the City with tools for
implementing Complete Streets projects on intra-city roadways,such as El Camino Real (SR 82)and replicate
successful strategies for installation on local streets.
As part of the grant, SGA requires each jurisdiction to:
1.Engage its partners/cohort to attend virtual workshops.
2.Engage its partners/cohort to attend the in-person workshop in San Leandro, California
3.Install a temporary (three-week)Complete Streets demonstration project on a state-owned road through
coordination with Caltrans.This project shall be installed by Summer 2023 and removed after three
weeks.
4.Work with SGA to produce a case study about the participant city’s demonstration project and analyze
its projected benefits.
On March 22,City Council directed Staff to conduct outreach and explore other locations for the temporary,
three-week installation of the Complete Streets demonstration project.Staff workshopped alternate locations
with SamTrans,SMCTA,Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition,San Mateo County Office of Education,residents as
part of BPAC,and local businesses on El Camino Real.The following locations were identified in the City’s
High Injury Network,Active South City Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan as needing improved safe access for
bikes and pedestrians,as well as needing to meet Safe Routes to School goals,and SamTrans goals for
improving ECR operations.Thus,these locations were identified to have potential for a more impactful
demonstration of Complete Streets concepts:
1)El Camino Real, between Ponderosa Avenue and Country Club Drive.
2)El Camino Real, between Country Club Drive and Spruce Avenue/Hazelwood Drive.
3)El Camino Real, between Ponderosa Avenue and Southwood Avenue/1st Street.
As shown in Attachment A,each segment on El Camino Real includes its own specific constraints and
complexities,but also opportunities for Complete Streets.A key consideration for all demonstration locations is
the relative ease of access by the general public from surrounding neighborhoods,schools,and connections to
existing City facilities, such as the Centennial Trail.
For Transit users,existing bus stops for both the SamTrans ECR route and the City Shuttle would be enhanced
with bus bulbs (provided by SamTrans) to optimize ECR and City Shuttle operations.
For bicyclists,the demonstration area can be accessed through the Centennial Trail from Orange Ave or South
Spruce Ave linking the Class I trail to a protected bike lane on El Camino Real.
For pedestrians,improving visibility of crosswalks from schools (South San Francisco High School,Ponderosa
Elementary School,and St.Veronica’s Catholic School)would improve safe crossings on El Camino Real,and
meet goals of the Safe Routes to School Program.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023Page 2 of 4
powered by Legistar™158
File #:23-312 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:12.
It is important to note that none of the above-listed locations on El Camino Real would avoid the temporary
repurposing of on-street parking.However,for businesses along El Camino Real (from Ponderosa to Spruce)
off-street parking was available for the exclusive use of those businesses on El Camino Real.
Depending on the segment identified for further evaluation,Complete Streets concepts applied to each segment
would temporarily reconfigure the roadway to include the following:
- Protected bike lanes on both sides of El Camino Real
- Temporary bus bulbs at bus stop locations
- Temporary conversion of the existing crosswalk to high-visibility/temporary public art crosswalk
- No reduction in existing travel lanes is anticipated, in order to expedite Caltrans review.
The accompanying resolution would accept the $15,000 grant award which would be used for the purchase of
temporary materials for the three-week demonstration project (i.e.,barriers,paint,temporary delineators)and
other support needs including additional materials,supplies,or refreshments for a public event,or other
expenses to make the project a success.
Additional information can be located at this link:
<https://smartgrowthamerica.org/2022-complete-streets-leadership-academies/>.
FISCAL IMPACT
Grant funds will be used to amend the Economic and Community Development Department’s current FY 22-23
Operating Budget per Budget Amendment #23.053. Receipt of these funds does not commit the City to ongoing
funding.
RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN
Grant funding to support the City’s participation in the Complete Streets Leadership Academies program will
provide an opportunity for the City to explore possible multi-modal safety improvements on a trial basis and
collect information on challenges and advance the goals of the General Plan’s Mobility and Safety elements,
and the City’s Active Transportation Plan (Active South City). The installation of temporary Complete Streets
concepts is an action item in the City’s Strategic Plan under Priority #2: Quality of Life.
CONCLUSION
Receipt of these funds would support the City’s participation in the Complete Streets Leadership Academies
and would introduce a temporary Complete Streets demonstration project for three weeks on an important
corridor for the City. It is recommended that the City Council accept $15,000 in grant funding and amend the
Economic and Community Development Department’s FY 22-23 Operating Budget via Budget Amendment
#23.053.
Attachments:
A)Alternative Locations for Complete Streets Demonstration
B)SGA Letter of Agreement
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023Page 3 of 4
powered by Legistar™159
File #:23-312 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:12.
C)SGA SubGrant Guidance
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023Page 4 of 4
powered by Legistar™160
El Camino Real (SR82)
Existing Conditions –Alt 1 For Illustrative Purposes
Only
161
El Camino Real (SR82)
Driveway Access
Maintained
Protected
Bike Lane
High Visibility
Crosswalks
Protected
Bike Lane
High Visibility
Crosswalks
Proposed Temporary Conditions –Alt 1 For Illustrative Purposes
Only
162
Alt 1 –ECR (Ponderosa to Country Club)
Mode Improved Complete Streets Treatment Notes
Pedestrians High Visibility Crosswalks Improved crossing for schools
(Ponderosa)
Bicycles Protected Bicycle Lanes (Class
IV Facility)
-No access to demonstration
area from Centennial Trail
-Frequent driveway breaks SB
Transit None No bus stops along segment
Parking Removal of parking to reduce
conflicts for bikes
Removal of parking along ECR
(No changes to existing private
Retail Parking Lots)
Lane Reduction None -
163
Existing Conditions –Alt 2 For Illustrative Purposes
Only
164
El Camino Real (SR82)
Proposed Temporary Conditions –Alt 2
Bus bulb
Driveway Access
Maintained
Protected
Bike Lane
High Visibility
Crosswalks
Protected
Bike Lane
Bus bulbs
For Illustrative Purposes
Only
165
Alt 2 –ECR (Country Club to South Spruce)
Mode Improved Complete Streets Treatment Notes
Pedestrians High Visibility Crosswalks -Improved crossing (Country
Club Dr)
-No nearby schools
Bicycles Protected Bicycle Lanes (Class
IV Facility)
-Access from Trail at Spruce
-Frequent driveway breaks SB
Transit Two Bus Bulbs (Spruce and
Country Club)
-Buses stop in lane, and not pull
in/out
Parking Removal of parking to reduce
conflicts for bikes
Removal of parking along ECR (No
changes to existing private Retail
Parking Lots)
Lane Reduction None -
166
Existing Conditions –Alt 3
El Camino Real (SR82)
For Illustrative Purposes
Only
167
El Camino Real (SR82)
Bus bulbs
Driveway Access
Maintained
Protected
Bike Lane
High Visibility
Crosswalks
Protected
Bike Lane
Proposed Temporary Conditions –Alt 3 For Illustrative Purposes
Only
168
Alt 3 –ECR (Southwood/1st to Orange Ave)
Mode Improved Complete Streets Treatment Notes
Pedestrians High Visibility Crosswalks -Improved crossing (Orange
Ave)
Bicycles Protected Bicycle Lanes (Class
IV Facility)
-Access from Trail at Orange
Ave
-Frequent driveway breaks NB
Transit Two Bus Bulbs (Southwood
and 1st)
-Buses stop in lane, and not pull
in/out
Parking Removal of parking to reduce
conflicts for bikes
Removal of parking along ECR (No
changes to existing private Retail
Parking Lots)
Lane Reduction None -
169
1152 15th St. NW, Suite 450 www.smartgrowthamerica.org
Washington, DC 20005
202-207-3355
Christopher Espiritu
Senior Transportation Planner
City of South San Francisco
400 Grand Ave
South San Francisco, CA 94080
RE: California Complete Streets Leadership Academy Award
Dear Christopher Espiritu:
We are delighted to work with you as part of the cohort of three cities participating in the California
Complete Streets Leadership Academy (Academy). The purpose of this letter is to formalize and
establish the mutual commitments between Smart Growth America (SGA) and the City of South San
Francisco (the Jurisdiction).
The Academy is a technical assistance and peer learning program with virtual and in-person
workshops funded by a Cooperative Agreement from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s
(CDC) Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity. The program is designed to help state DOTs
and local communities work together to put Complete Streets into practice, engage in peer learning,
and improve cross-jurisdictional coordination. During the workshops, participants will learn about
Complete Streets best practices and discuss policy and procedural barriers to Complete Streets at the
state and local levels. Throughout the workshops, participants will collaborate to plan and install
“quick-build” temporary Complete Streets demonstration projects on state highways
The Jurisdiction and SGA agree to work together in a collaborative spirit and negotiate in good faith on
all tasks and deliverables required for the Academy.
Dedication of Resources
SGA, through its Cooperative Agreement with CDC, shall cover the following monetary costs of the
work to be performed during the Academy:
1.SGA staff and consultant efforts retained for the Academy. SGA shall not cover the cost of the
Jurisdiction staff efforts.
2.Travel assistance to the Jurisdiction to send a cohort of up to 15 individuals to one in-person
workshop in San Leandro, California. This assistance shall cover travel expenses (including
mileage, gasoline, public transit, taxi, and a per diem for dinners based on federal guidance).
SGA shall issue official travel reimbursement guidance, including a detailed breakdown of
maximum reimbursement by expense type. It shall be the responsibility of individuals in the
Jurisdiction’s cohort to make travel arrangements. In line with the travel reimbursement
guidance provided by SGA, either the Jurisdiction or individuals within its cohort must provide
170
SGA with receipts for all expenses, completed W-9s, and completed ACH authorization forms
for electronic payment in order to receive reimbursement.
3.Catering expenses for the in-person workshop in San Leandro, California.
4.Costs to transport the attendees of the in-person workshop to the location of the Jurisdiction’s
project for a walking audit if needed using a shuttle, carpool or public transportation.
5.Two subawards to support the Jurisdiction’s Complete Streets demonstration project, for a
total of up to $15,000.
a.SGA shall provide up to $10,000 to the Jurisdiction on an expense reimbursement
basis. Funds must be used for temporary materials for the Jurisdiction’s Complete
Streets demonstration project. SGA shall issue detailed guidance on allowable
expenses and the reimbursement process. The Jurisdiction shall submit an invoice to
SGA with itemized expenses and receipts by July 31, 2023.
b.SGA shall provide $5,000 to the jurisdiction to support other aspects of the
demonstration project, whether additional materials, stipends for partners, supplies or
refreshments for a public event, or other expenses to make the project a success. The
Jurisdiction shall submit an invoice to SGA within two weeks post execution of the
Letter of Agreement.
The Jurisdiction shall provide the following resources and monetary support for the workshops and
demonstration project:
1.Cover the monetary costs of Jurisdiction staff time to attend 30 hours of virtual and in-person
workshops, convene additional planning sessions with the local cohort as needed, engage
community members to solicit input about the project, and facilitate all other demonstration
project planning activities.
Roles and Responsibilities
SGA shall:
1.Manage the Academy and be responsible for timely completion of all deliverables, including
delivery of 30 hours of in-person and virtual workshops;
2.Serve as the fiscal agent for the Academy and be responsible for signing all contracts and
handling all billing;
3.Complete a written case study on the Jurisdiction’s demonstration project;
The Jurisdiction shall:
1.Engage its 15-person cohort to attend all virtual workshops.
2.Engage its cohort to attend the in-person workshop in San Leandro, California., distribute all
travel reimbursement guidance provided by SGA to other members of the cohort, and
171
encourage cohort members to submit receipts for reimbursement in a timely manner using
forms provided by SGA. SGA cannot reimburse expenses without receipts;
3.Complete a Complete Streets demonstration project on a state-owned road through
coordination with the California Department of Transportation. This project shall be installed
before the end of the final virtual workshop block on July 13th, 2023. The Jurisdiction shall
work with SGA to produce a case study about their demonstration project and analyze its
projected benefits;
4.Comply with all federal laws, including but not limited to the Required Disclosures for Federal
Awardee Performance and Integrity Information Systems (FAPIIS):Consistent with 45 CFR
75.113, the Jurisdiction must disclose, in a timely manner in writing to SGA and the HHS Office
of Inspector General (OIG), all information related to violations of federal criminal law involving
fraud, bribery, or gratuity violations potentially affecting the federal award. Refer to the
“California Complete Streets Leadership Academy Subaward guidance” document for further
details.
Modification and Termination
These arrangements may be modified by mutual agreement of SGA and the Jurisdiction. This
agreement may be terminated only by mutual agreement of the parties, or if funding is withdrawn by
CDC, in which case SGA and the Jurisdiction shall make all reasonable efforts to find alternate funding
sources and, failing that, complete the Academy to the extent possible using available resources.
Signed on behalf of City of South San
Francisco
Name: __________________________________
Address: ________________________________
Email: __________________________________
Phone: _________________________________
Title: ___________________________________
Signature: _______________________________
Signed on behalf of Smart Growth America
Name: __________________________________
Title: ____________________________________
Signature: _______________________________
172
California Complete Streets Leadership Academy
Subaward guidance
SGA Associated Project #(s): CDC0 / 1203CDC004 / 107
SGA shall provide each participating Jurisdiction with subaward to support the Jurisdiction’s
Complete Streets demonstration project, for a total of up to $15,000.
●Subaward 1:SGA shall provide up to $10,000 to the Jurisdiction on an expense
reimbursement basis. Funds must be used for temporary materials for the Jurisdiction’s
Complete Streets demonstration project. The Jurisdiction shall provide an invoice to
SGA with itemized expenses and receipts.
●Subaward 2:SGA shall provide $5,000 to the jurisdiction to support other aspects of
the demonstration project, whether additional materials, stipends for partners, supplies
or refreshments for a public event, or other expenses to make the project a success.
SGA shall provide this subaward to the Jurisdiction upon execution of this letter.
Subaward 1: Detailed guidance ($10,000)
Allowable expense guidelines
●Funds may be used for materials for temporary roadway safety installations, including
but not limited to paint, reflective tape, rubber curbs, cones, and temporary signage, in
accordance with California DOT requirements for allowable treatments in state
right-of-way. Use of funds for these and other materials for temporary demonstration
projects does not require advanced approval from SGA.
●All expenditures must have a clear relationship to the temporary demonstration project.
SGA reserves the right to ask jurisdictions to submit explanations for purchases in
writing if the relationship is not clear.
●Funds shall not be spent on permanent infrastructure, including but not limited to
pouring concrete or anything included in a long-term maintenance plan.
●Funds may not be used to purchase food or beverages. Spending on alcohol is strictly
prohibited.
●Funds may not be used to support staff time or to provide stipends for participation in
the project planning process.
Process
1.SGA will reimburse each jurisdiction for allowable expenses up to $10,000.
2.Team leads must submit an invoice using the form provided by SGA with attached
receipts for all reimbursable expenses, as well as an ACH authorization form.SGA
cannot reimburse expenses without itemized receipts.
173
3.SGA will provide payment electronically within two months after receiving the
jurisdiction’s invoice.
4.All reimbursable expenses must be incurred before July 31, 2023. SGA strongly
encourages jurisdictions to make and submit an invoice for all purchases before SGA’s
fiscal year 2023 ends on June 30. The deadline to submit an invoice to SGA is July 31,
2023.
Subaward 2 Detailed guidance ($5,000)
Allowable expense guidelines
●These funds are flexible and may be used for any purpose identified by the jurisdiction
to help facilitate a successful temporary demonstration project. Eligible uses of funds
include but are not limited to temporary materials such as those listed above,
equipment rental, supplies or refreshments for an event, or stipends for community
members providing project input.
●All expenditures must have a clear relationship to the temporary demonstration project.
SGA reserves the right to ask jurisdictions to submit an explanation in writing of how the
funds were used and how they support the project goals.
Process
1.SGA will provide a single lump sum payment of $5,000 upfront to each jurisdiction upon
execution of each jurisdiction’s Letter of Agreement. To receive the payment, within two
weeks of the execution of the Letter of Agreement, jurisdictions must submit an invoice
to SGA, an ACH authorization form, and a W-9 using blank forms provided.
2.SGA will provide payment electronically within two month after receiving the
jurisdiction’s invoice.
174
175
176
177
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-314 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:12a.
Resolution authorizing the acceptance of $15,000 in grant funding from Smart Growth America to support the
City of South San Francisco’s participation in the Complete Streets Leadership Academies program with
Caltrans and amending the Economic and Community Development Department’s Fiscal Year 2022-2023
Operating Budget via Budget Amendment #23.053.
WHEREAS,Smart Growth America (“SGA”)has awarded the City of South San Francisco (“City”)$15,000 in
grant funding to support the City’s participation in the Complete Streets Leadership Academies program
(“Program”) ; and
WHEREAS,the Program is designed to help state Departments of Transportation and local communities work
together to implement SGA’s National Complete Streets Coalition program (“Complete Streets”)into practice,
engage in peer learning, and improve cross-jurisdictional coordination; and
WHEREAS,Caltrans was selected to participate in the Program by working with the City,as well as the cities
of Berkeley and San Leandro,and to learn about Complete Streets best practices and discuss policy and
procedural barriers to implementing Complete Streets at state and local levels; and
WHEREAS,SGA grant funding would support the City and Caltrans in implementing a temporary Complete
Streets demonstration project for three weeks on a state-owned roadway; and
WHEREAS,City staff has identified three different locations along El Camino Real that would have potential
for an impactful demonstration of Complete Streets concepts,including enhancing access and use by Transit
users, bicyclists, and pedestrians; and
WHEREAS,the installation of temporary Complete Streets concepts is an action item in the City’s Strategic
Plan under Priority #2: Quality of Life; and
WHEREAS,the grant funds will be used to amend the Economic and Community Development Department’s
Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-2023 Operating Budget via Budget Amendment #23.053.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City
does hereby accept $15,000 in grant funding from Smart Growth America to support the City of South San
Francisco’s participation in the Complete Streets Leadership Academies program with Caltrans.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve Budget Amendment #23.053 to
amend the Economic and Community Development Department’s FY 2022-2023 Operating Budget in order to
reflect an increase of $15,000.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute the
documents necessary to accept the grant funding and take any other actions necessary to carry out the intent of
this resolution on behalf of the City Council, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™178
File #:23-314 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:12a.
*****
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™179
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-141 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:13.
Report regarding a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consulting Services Agreement with
Kitchell CEM for the 840 West Orange Avenue and Westborough Preschool Projects.(Jacob Gilchrist,
Director of Capital Projects)
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a
Consulting Services Agreement between the City of South San Francisco with Kitchell CEM,of
Sacramento,California for Program and Construction Management Services for the 840 West Orange
Avenue (Project No.pf2301)and Westborough Preschool Project (Project No.pf2101)in an amount not
to exceed $1,353,609.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The City’s main library at 840 West Orange Avenue opened more than fifty years ago in 1966 and is home to
the library’s primary collections and services.In addition to providing access to a large collection of print and
media resources,the West Orange Avenue Library also provides programming,including story times,
“makerspaces,”cooking classes,and author talks.The Main Library is scheduled to close in Fall 2023 when the
new Library | Parks and Recreation Building opens.
In November 2020,then-Assistant City Manager Ranals presented to City Council two options for a re-
imagining of the property at 840 West Orange Avenue.With Council support for a preschool,and subsequent
funding appropriated in the Fiscal Year 2022-23 Capital Improvement Program,The project will include a full
seismic retrofit of the building,the development of a new playground for the preschool,and space for 80-120
preschool children.
The expansion of preschool services in Westborough has been a priority for the last four years.After learning
that Carter Park was not a suitable location due to significant seismic concerns,Staff pivoted to expanding the
existing Westborough Preschool.Conceptually,60 additional children could be served at the site,and the
project would include a new preschool playground.
With the approval of this resolution,Staff can begin the process of selecting architects and engineers,further
evaluating the buildings and sites, and developing budgets and schedules for the delivery of both projects.
Overview of City’s Procurement Process
The City’s procurement process is governed by both state and local law.State law requires contracts for
construction to be competitively bid pursuant to a set of specific,established rules.In particular,the City is
required to award construction contracts to “lowest responsible bidder”after providing notice in accordance
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 1 of 6
powered by Legistar™180
File #:23-141 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:13.
with law. (Pub. Contract Code §§ 20162, 20164.)
However,in awarding contracts for the purchase of professional services,equipment and supplies,the City has
some latitude.State law requires the City to adopt regulations and policies to govern such service and supplies
procurement,but otherwise provides the City flexibility in determining relevant requirements as long as they
are consistent with applicable state law.(Gov.Code §54202.)Chapter 4.04 of the Municipal Code and the
City’s Purchasing Procedures (Administrative Instruction Section IV,No.1)govern the City’s purchasing
policies and contract procurement processes.
The City’s purchasing ordinance distinguishes between three primary types of procurement methods as follows:
1.Competitive Bidding for Construction Projects
Public projects are specifically defined under the Public Contract Code,and generally involve any
construction project that is paid with public funds or those projects involving improvements,
demolition or other work on public property or facility.Public projects are required to be procured
through competitive bidding and the City must award the contract to the lowest bidder whose bid
complies with all of the City’s solicitation requirements and demonstrates that the bidder is able to
perform the work.Under the City’s policy,different levels of competitive bidding are required
depending on the dollar limit of the underlying project.
For these contracts,cost is generally the sole determining factor and the lowest responsible bidder is,
awarded the project even if another bidder appears to be more skilled but is more expensive.
2.Open Market Procedures for Vendors (Supplies and Equipment)
Open Market Procedures is the City’s vendor selection process for purchase of goods,supplies,and
professional services.These rules do not apply to,and may not be used for,public construction
projects.
Contracts for the purchase of goods and services that exceed $10,000 requires staff to utilize open
market procedures.If the contract is $25,000 or less,staff must obtain at least three quotes,which are
informal offers to perform work at a stated price.If the contract is greater than $25,000,staff will be
required to solicit the project,such as issuing a Request for Proposals (“RFPs”)and obtain at least
three written responses.
Under this vendor selection process,cost can be only one factor in determining which vendor the
City will ultimately select for services,equipment,or supplies.This requirement is similarly
reflected under SSFMC § 4.04.080.
Thus,when utilizing the open market vendor selection process,the City is focused on the skill,
ability,and expertise of the entity or person to be able to provide the service,equipment,or goods to
the City.The selection is based on competence,professional qualifications,and overall value to the
City with cost being only one factor in the determination of an award.
Federally Funded Procurements for Vendors (Supplies and Equipment)
Contracts that receive federal funding are required to incorporate and comply with additional terms
and conditions.The City’s Purchasing Procedures also provides guidance on procuring supplies andCity of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 2 of 6
powered by Legistar™181
File #:23-141 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:13.
and conditions.The City’s Purchasing Procedures also provides guidance on procuring supplies and
equipment contracts that are federally funded.Federally funded procurements also require a written
procedure for conducting evaluations and for selecting recipients and awarding the contract to the
responsible firm whose proposal is most advantageous to the City with price being only one factor.It
is also important to note that federally funded procurements do not include state or local geographical
preferences unless specifically authorized by federal law.Each evaluation is a nondiscrimination and
equal opportunity for all vendors.
3.Open Market Procedures for Architectural and Engineering (A&E) Professional Services
For certain professional services such as architectural,engineering,environmental,land surveying,or
construction project management,the Government Code also specifically requires that such services
not be awarded solely based on price,but instead based on demonstrated competence.(Gov.Code §
4526.)Both the state law provision and the City’s policy reflect the legislative view that when
acquiring such services,the City does not necessarily receive the best value when it pays the lowest
price. (See e.g.California Attorney General Op. No. 94-819 (February 9, 1995)).
General Request for Proposals (RFP) Review Process
RFPs are the City’s primary method to procure equipment,materials,supplies,and professional services.
Typically,this process consists of the City issuing the RFP for proposals from vendor candidates to demonstrate
their qualifications and abilities to provide the City with desired services, equipment/supplies, or other goods.
The City’s RFP contained evaluation and scoring criteria used to rank vendor candidates based on the strength
of their proposals.
Typical factors include demonstrated knowledge,qualifications,industry reputation,implementation schedule,
ease of implementation and cost.Factors not typically considered include the size of the firm and geographic
location of the firm (i.e.whether the firm is local,in-or out-of-state),race,sex or gender.However,the City
does have the discretion to include geography as one evaluation factor and to select local vendors where the
quality and price are equal between local and non-local vendors and federal funds are not used.
The City assembles an evaluation panel comprised primarily of City staff and third-party consultants and
personnel as necessary,to review and score the proposals,negotiate with the top-ranked candidate,and
recommend the selection for City Council approval.Staff will also maintain records of the method of
evaluation, final vendor selection and negotiations for a final contract.
Once candidates are ranked and a top-ranked candidate is identified,staff will negotiate terms of the contract
with that candidate.The final award of the contract is subject to consideration and approval by the City
Council.Staff will present the selection recommendation to the Council and prepare a resolution awarding the
contract to the recommended candidate.If the Council does not support staff’s recommendation,then it could
elect not to take any action on the resolution or contract award,and may instead direct staff to either
reconsider the other proposals selected or to re-issue the RFP which may include additional or different
selection criteria and qualification requirements.
Current Project: Preschool Design and Construction Management Services Procurement
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 3 of 6
powered by Legistar™182
File #:23-141 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:13.
The current project falls under Procurement Type 3 (Open Market Procedures for Architectural and
Engineering (A&E) Professional Services.
Staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) on the OpenGov website on November 16, 2022.
Twenty-six firms downloaded the RFP packet.Proposals were due on December 19,2022,with Kitchell CEM
being the only bidder.
Staff issued this RFP only for the scope of work at 840 West Orange Avenue because in 2022 the Westborough
Preschool project was briefly paused as different sites were considered for the project.Since then,Staff has
focused on an expansion of the existing preschool at Westborough Park.Because of the similarity in scope
between the two projects, Staff chose to add the Westborough Preschool scope to this agreement.
Kitchell’s fee in response to the RFP was $785,773.However,this fee included no contingency and notably was
only for the work on 840 West Orange Avenue.After comparing this dollar amount with projects of similar size
and scope, Staff was comfortable that the proposal is a good value for the City.
After discussing the project with two other firms who declined to bid due to a lack of staff resources,and
considering Kitchell’s excellent work on the Civic Campus projects and the biweekly Citywide Construction
Coordination Committee, Staff decided to proceed with the selection process.
The proposals were reviewed by a panel of three consisting of the Director of Parks and Recreation,Director of
Capital Projects, and the Deputy Director of Capital Projects.
Members of the panel rated the proposal in the following areas:
1.Knowledge and Understanding -Demonstrated understanding of the RFP objectives and work
requirements.Identification of key issues.Methods of approach,work plan,and experience with
similar projects related to type of services.
(40 points maximum)
2.Management Approach and Staffing Plan -Qualifications of project staff (particularly key
personnel such as the project manager),key personnel’s level of involvement in performing related
work and the team’s experience in maintaining schedule.
(20 points maximum)
3.Qualifications of the Proposer Firm -Experience with similar projects.Technical experience in
performing work related to type of services;record of completing work on schedule;strength and
stability of the firm;technical experience and strength and stability of proposed subconsultants;
demonstrated communications quality and success;and assessments by client references as
available.
(20 points maximum)
4.Total cost and cost effectiveness, including hourly rates, reasonableness, and appropriateness of
preliminary task budget.
(20 points maximum)
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 4 of 6
powered by Legistar™183
File #:23-141 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:13.
The proposal was scored by the panel as follows:
Scoring Criteria Kitchell
Knowledge and Understanding (40)36.7
Management Approach and Staffing Plan (20)18
Qualification of the Proposer Firm (20)19
Total Cost and Cost Effectiveness (20)18
Total 91.7
Based on interviews,scores,and overall consensus of the panel,staff worked with Kitchell CEM to negotiate
the final scope of work,including the additional services of site evaluation,consultant procurement,conceptual
design,and project planning for the Westborough Preschool.Assigning the same team of consultants to both
preschool sites creates efficiencies in use of resources,meetings with staff,consistency of design,and will
ultimately result in stretching the overall budget further for both sites.
The current contract amount of $1,353,609 includes full management services for 840 West Orange Avenue,
from initial project development through close of construction.It also includes initial evaluation,design,and
project planning for the Westborough Preschool.It does not include full services for Westborough Preschool
because the scope is not defined enough to develop an accurate budget,however Kitchell believes it to be in the
range of an additional $700,000 for construction management services.Rather than award the construction
management services now,Staff prefers to spend the next several months developing the project schedule and
scope,negotiating with Kitchell,and then bringing back an amendment to their agreement.Staff intends to
bring both project plans back to City Council near the end of 2023 for review and will likely request additional
services for Kitchell to manage bidding and construction at Westborough.
FISCAL IMPACT
These projects are included in the City of South San Francisco’s Capital Improvement Program.840 West
Orange Avenue received a $4,000,000 appropriation in the Fiscal Year 2022-23 Budget.$957,811 of this
contract will be funded by this appropriation.Westborough Preschool has received $5,500,000 in
appropriations over the last three fiscal years.$395,798 of this contract be funded by these appropriations.The
funding source for both projects is the Childcare Impact Fee.
RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN
Approval of this action will contribute to the City’s Strategic Plan.It aligns with Priority #2,which is focused
on enhancing quality of life by building and maintaining a sustainable city,making our city a great place to
live, learn and play.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a
Consulting Services Agreement between the City of South San Francisco with Kitchell CEM,of Sacramento,
California for Program and Construction Management Services for the 840 West Orange Avenue (Project No.
pf2301) and Westborough Preschool Project (Project No. pf2101) in an amount not to exceed $1,353,609.
Attachments:
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 5 of 6
powered by Legistar™184
File #:23-141 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:13.
1 - Construction Management Proposal
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 6 of 6
powered by Legistar™185
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS // PROJECT ID PF2301
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION SERVICES
800 WEST ORANGE AVENUE 800 WEST ORANGE AVENUE
PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECTPRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT
DECEMBER 19, 2022 186
315 MONTGOMERY STREET, 10TH FLOOR • SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94104 • WWW.KITCHELL.COM
December 19, 2022
Mr. Jacob Gilchrist, Director of Capital Projects
City of South San Francisco
550 North Canal Street
South San Francisco, CA 94080
Re: Request for Proposals for 840 West Orange Preschool Conversion - Construction Management and Inspection Services
Dear Mr. Gilchrist and Members of the Selection Committee:
This is an exciting time for the City of South San Francisco as you continue to make great improvements and develop great projects for the city. As you continue on your path, the conversion of the old library into a
preschool center, will not only optimize the use of City-owned buildings, but add value to the City’s assets. Kitchell has the right combination of project and construction management experience and experts who
can facilitate the vision of the City of South San Francisco. We have worked on both child care and preschool facilities, as well as seismically upgraded many public buildings that house and serve kids. Ideally suited
for this project, Kitchell understands the importance this project will have for the City and it constituency, and we are committed to continue to support the City of South San Francisco.
Challenging programs and projects require an experienced team who will provide effective leadership, continual coordination, forward thinking and creative solutions to ensure success. Kitchell has assembled a
core team of professionals that are uniquely and highly qualified to facilitate, lead and manage your project from planning through construction completion. Coupled with our proven track record in successfully
delivering similar projects for South San Francisco and other cities, our experience will support your vision. Benefits we bring to your project include:
THE RIGHT EXPERIENCE
Kitchell has been providing project and construction management services for over 44 years on a variety of projects, including the City of South San Francisco Measure W – Community Civic Center Program which
includes the Library, Park & Recreation Buildings and the new Police Station & Training Facility. A project where we have become the City’s trusted partner. We have also completed many child care and preschool
facilities in San Francisco, San Jose and many other cities within the Bay Area.
A HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEAM
Our team will be led by Project Director Brian Jemo, who has managed the construction and renovation of numerous facilities like yours. Our proposed Project Manager Robert Begonia, brings nearly 16
years of experience and will provide the City with the stability and consistency needed to manage the various consultants and stakeholders to plan, develop and execute the project. He will be the primary point of
contact between the City of South San Francisco and all project consultants and other key project stakeholders. Robert brings relevant experience from his recent involvement with several similar projects in San
Francisco and other agencies in the Bay Area. Operations Manager Ranjit Sinha, will continue to support our team by ensuring they have the necessary resources to meet the City’s needs for the program.
DEPTH OF RESOURCES TO SUPPORT OUR CORE TEAM & MEET YOUR Projects NEEDS
Brian and his team will be fully supported by our in-house support teams consisting of licensed engineers, architects, commissioning agents and subject matter experts who can provide an array of services, as needs
arise. Kitchell is the right firm to support your mission of delivering efficient, quality facilities and providing outstanding services. We look forward to an opportunity to present our core team during the interview
phase of the City’s process.
Sincerely,
Wendy Cohen, President (Authorized to bind the firm)
CONTACT DURING THE RFP PROCESS
Arturo Taboada, Principal-in-Charge
315 Montgomery Street, 10th Floor | San Francisco, CA 94104
cell. 510.239.1790 | email. ataboada@kitchell.com
187
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 2
The actions we take together, strengthen our communities.
Our employee-owners exemplify Kitchell’s purpose, “Together, Building Value Every Day,” both
on and off the job site. Our team recently volunteered at Arroyo Seco Elementary School and
Moms Against Poverty (MAP).
Project Director Brian Jemo v o l u n t e e r in g to b eauti fy the grounds for Arroy o Seco Ele m entary School students to enjoy!Project Manager Robert Begonia volun teering to pack food for Bay A re a f a m i l i e s i n need.
table ofCONTENTS
A. Introductory Letter 1
B. Consultant Information, Qualifications & Experience 3
C. Organization & Approach 8
D. Scope of Work 15
E. Schedule of Work 19
F. Conflict of Interest Statement 20
G. Litigation 21
H. Cost Proposal/Task Hours 22
Cost Proposal (separate sealed envelope)
188
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 3
B. CONSULTANT INFORMATION, QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE
A History of Innovative Solutions & Successful Results
Established in 1950, Kitchell is a 100% employee-owned company dedicated to providing construction management and general contracting
services in the Western United States. Our firm’s innovations in management and reliability in delivering projects on time and within or under budget
have earned us a reputation for superior performance.
Since Kitchell’s inception, we have completed over $53 billion in public sector construction representing more 3,600 projects in community
centers, education facilities, courthouses, municipal office buildings, parking structures, detention and criminal justice centers, healthcare facilities,
sports complexes, police/fire stations and performing/cultural arts centers. Our LEED and sustainability portfolio encompasses more than 130 projects
totaling over $11.5 billion. As a construction management firm, Kitchell is consistently ranked amongst Engineering News Record’s top
construction management firms.
Focusing on the public sector has allowed us to develop management and project control techniques targeted to its specific needs. Our methods have
been very successful—more than 85% of our work comes from repeat clients. We deliver our services using a variety of delivery strategies
including agency and multiple prime CM, construction management at risk, lease-leaseback, design-build and the traditional design-bid-build.
KITCHELL GIVES BACK
We take great pride in our 72-year legacy of Together, Building Value Every Day. This purpose underscores everything we do. To this end, we are
committed to being a good corporate citizen from social, economic and environmental perspectives. We fulfill our mission by building value in not
only the physical structures we create but also building value in our communities. How does this translate? It could be packing emergency food
boxes, collecting essential supplies for families in need, or hosting a soccer clinic for at-risk kids. While we offer a wide range of services including
construction management, program management, architectural and engineering services and facilities management, what binds us all together is
preserving the goodwill that the Kitchell name has accumulated over the past seven decades. Much of this is due to the legacy of philanthropy that
was established by our founder Sam Kitchell. Sam was careful to cultivate this same spirit of giving back within his leadership team and all of the
employee-owners at Kitchell.
In honor of our founder Sam, Kitchell holds an annual Founder’s Day where our employee-owners focus on volunteering and supporting non-profit
organizations in underserved populations. In 2022, our Bay Area team had a great time volunteering at Hamilton Families, Livermore Valley
Joint USD, Moms Against Poverty (MAP), Ronald McDonald House Charities and West Valley Mission College.
Hamilton Families Livermore Valley
Joint USD
Moms Against Poverty
(MAP)
Ronald McDonald
House Charities
West Valley
Mission College
By
TheNUMBERS
ENR TOP
$53B
1,550
$14.9B
$7.4B
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT FIRM
IN PUBLIC SECTOR CONSTRUCTION
IN EDUCATION PROGRAMS & PROJECTS
IN PUBLIC EDUCATION CONSTRUCTION
IN K-12 EDUCATION CONSTRUCTION
189
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 4
San Francisco Unified School District, Charles Drew Elementary School Modernization, SAN FRANCISCO, CA
A $21.6 million, 39,000 SF classroom building modernization including a daycare center and transitional
kindergarten school yards. Project scope encompassed a general school modernization and reconstruction
including ADA access, seismic upgrades and fire/life-safety upgrades, including but not limited to hazardous
material abatement, demolition of interior finishes, demolition of mechanical, plumbing and electrical
systems, demolition and installation of new fire sprinkler system, restroom upgrades, new flooring, new
ceilings, new wall finishes, new doors and hardware, new windows, new roof, new mechanical units, new
lighting, new fire alarm, new security system, new clock speaker system, new exterior paint, new trash
enclosure and new front entry with security gate.
PROJECT INFORMATION
1. Contracting Agency:San Francisco Unified School District
2. Contracting agency project manager Lori Shelton, Project Manager
3. Contracting agency contact info tel. 415.241.6152 | sheltonl@sfusd.edu
4. Contract amount $19.8 million
5. Funding source 2016 Prop A Bond
6. Date of contract April 2019
7. Date of completion June 2021
8. Consultant Project Manager and
contact information
Devin Kokotas, Project Manager
tel. 408.515.6112 | dkokotas@kitchell.com
9. Project Objective Modernization of the elementary school, EED program,
school yards and a Green Schoolyard project.
10. Project Description Please see description to the left.
11. Project Outcome Successfully completed and occupied by the campus.
Similar Project Similar Services
Relevancy
Same Team
Brian Jemo,
Project Director
Robert Begonia,
Project Manager
190
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 5
Livermore Area Recreation & Park District (LARPD), Michell K-8 Daycare Building, LIVERMORE, CA
A $1.27 million project to relocate Livermore Area Recreation and Park District’s (LARPD) Extended Student
Services (ESS) program. LARPD’s Extended Student Services (ESS) is a licensed child development program
serving children TK through fifth grade in Livermore. Kitchell relocated two existing portable buildings and
constructed two DSA pre-check approved modular classroom buildings (60’ x 32’ and 40’ x 32’) at Livermore
Valley Joint Unified School District Michell K-8 School.
PROJECT INFORMATION
1. Contracting Agency:Livermore Area Recreation and Park District (LARPD)
2. Contracting agency project manager Jeff Schneider, Project Manager
3. Contracting agency contact info tel. 925.373.5700 | jschneider@larpd.org
4. Contract amount $1.27 million
5. Funding source AB 16 Funds
6. Date of contract February 2021
7. Date of completion June 2022
8. Consultant Project Manager and
contact information
Maria Zupo, Project Manager
tel. 510.424.7632 | mzupo@kitchell.com
9. Project Objective Relocate LARPD’s Extended Student Services (ESS)
program
10. Project Description Please see description to the left.
11. Project Outcome Children enrolled in the ESS program moved into the
new classroom buildings Summer 2021.
Similar Project Similar Services
Relevancy
Brian Jemo,
Project Director
191
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 6
Peralta Community College District, Child Development Center at Merritt College, OAKLAND, CA
A new $27.4 million 18,000 SF two-story building consolidating the Child Care and Lab
Practicum Programs into a new facility with cross collaboration between the college’s
nursing, nutrition and horticultural programs. The facility will house a preschool and also
include adult classrooms for the college programs and will accommodate 96 preschool
students and 27 adult students in four ground-level classrooms, with four additional
classrooms on the second story creating space for 120 adult students. The building integrates
interior classroom environments into outdoor terraced play areas and includes teacher prep
areas, resource rooms, back of house food prep areas and administrative offices.
PROJECT INFORMATION
1. Contracting Agency:Peralta Community College District
2. Contracting agency project manager BC Hoff, Project Manager
3. Contracting agency contact info tel. 707.386.4846 | bhoff@peralta.edu
4. Contract amount $25.4 million
5. Funding source Measure G Bond Program
6. Date of contract July 2022
7. Date of completion April 2024
8. Consultant Project Manager and
contact information
Erin Griffin, Project Manager
tel. 510.847.7418 | egriffin@kitchell.com
9. Project Objective Design and construct a new Child Development center that will house a
preschool and also include adult classrooms for the college programs.
10. Project Description Please see description to the left.
11. Project Outcome The project has been 100% designed. A notice to proceed for
construction is expected to be issued to the general contractor by
January 2023. Construction is expected to complete in Spring 2024.
Similar Project Similar Services
Relevancy
Brian Jemo,
Project Director
192
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 7
ADDITIONAL PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Yosemite Community College District, Child Development Center,
Sonora, CA: A new $8.9 million childcare center consisting of five small wood
frame buildings totaling 13,517 SF built around a natural courtyard. The five
buildings are infant, toddler, preschool, administration and adult classrooms.
The project also includes site development, utilities and civil, structural, ecological landscaping,
mechanical, plumbing and electrical work. The project is LEED Silver certified.
California Department of General Services, California School for the Deaf Ongoing
- Preschool, Elementary & High School Modernizations, Riverside, CA: A 50,500
SF modernization of a preschool, elementary school and high school totaling $4.4 million, including
HVAC upgrades, new room finishes, new lighting and fire alarm system upgrades.
Roseville City School District, Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR) Projects, Roseville, CA:
A $52 million project consisting of ten projects at nine sites. The projects incorporate the construction
of a preschool addition, multipurpose building at each of five sites, the construction of three
classroom wings at one of the existing sites, the modernization of existing classrooms at one site,
the construction of two new elementary schools, a district office and another modernization project.
Projects included infrastructure and utility work and some sites included sewage lift stations.
Cupertino Union School District, Portal Elementary School, Cupertino, CA: A $7.5 million
project including new construction of a 12,505 SF library media center, a 1,920 SF child development
center and 4,065 SF administration, as well as modernizations to existing classrooms totaling 23,635
SF. Work included installation of portables, energy management, intercom/fire alarm, classroom
phones, primus and security locks, covered eating area, playground equipment, roof replacement,
HVAC replacement, landscape paving, lighting and power replacement, upgrade electrical service,
ceiling replacement, flooring replacement, interior wall replacement, casework replacement,
restroom upgrade, replace whiteboards, clocks/TV, data outlets, replace classroom sinks/DF and
window replacement.
Oakland Unified School District, Laurel Child Development Center,
Oakland, CA: Pre-design and bid phase management for a $13.8 million
(construction cost) project consisting of demolition of the existing child
development center at Laurel Elementary School and construction of a
new 10,000 SF child development center building. The new facility includes four classrooms,
administration area, kitchen, playground and associated site work.
San Bernardino Community College District, Measure CC - Crafton Hills College
Construction Management Services, Yucaipa, CA: Kitchell is providing construction
management services for approximately $170 million in renovation/modernization and new
construction projects over a five year period at Crafton Hills College. Component projects include a
$3.8 million child development center renovation.
Monterey Peninsula Community College District Measure I
Bond Implementation Plan, Monterey, CA: A $200 million bond
program consisting of the construction of a new child development center,
new and updated athletic facilities, a new student services building, new
math and sciences complex, new classrooms and laboratories and renovation of the other campus
buildings. Prior to construction, the team developed an implementation plan that includes a physical
master plan, a communication plan, master budget, master schedule, interim housing plan, processes
and procedures, consultant selection and coordination, and ongoing consulting tasks.
California Department of General Services, Richards Boulevard Office Complex, Sacramento,
CA: A new $1 billion office campus totaling approximately 1.25 million GSF consisting of four 7- to
11-story office buildings. Site improvements include a seven-level parking garage with 1,294 spaces and
an additional 318 surface parking spaces. The project also includes a Central Mechanical Space, space for
a cafeteria, auditorium, retail spaces and childcare.
Folsom Cordova Unified School District, Carl H. Sundahl Elementary School Modernization,
Folsom, CA: A $23.9 million modernization project which includes building and site demolition,
modernization and expansion of administration and multi-purpose buildings, a new kindergarten and
library/media center buildings, as well as a new parking lot and drop-off lanes, replacement of play
apparatuses and refreshment of landscaping.
Folsom Cordova Unified School District, Mangini Ranch Elementary
School, Folsom, CA: A new $50.9 million 66,000 SF, two-story steel-moment
and brace-framed kindergarten through fifth grade school building consisting
of administrative offices, classrooms, media center, multi-purpose room,
collaboration workrooms, infrastructure and maintenance facilities, playgrounds and hardcourts. The
project includes a 10-acre site surrounded by a newly developed residential community in Folsom Ranch.
San Juan Unified School District, Earl LeGette Elementary School Modernization and New
Construction, Fair Oaks, CA: A $31.2 million renovation and new construction project. Renovations
total 30,700 SF and include modernization of 17 existing classrooms, administration building and multi-
purpose room, as well as updates to HVAC, electrical/low voltage, interior and exterior finishes. New
construction totaling16,700 SF includes a new multi-purpose room, kindergarten classrooms standard
classroom wing, play structure and outdoor learning area. The project also provides ADA compliant path
of travel and site improvements to underground utilities.
San Juan Unified School District, Dyer-Kelly Elementary School,
Sacramento, CA: A new $49.5 million, 84,022 SF elementary school campus
consisting of next generation classrooms (including flexible furniture, multiple
writing walls and innovative technology), administration offices, a multipurpose
room and a library. Work includes replacement of eight existing portable classrooms with permanent
buildings, increasing campus capacity to 650 students and accommodating class size reduction for
kindergarten through fifth grade levels.
193
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 8
C. ORGANIZATION & APPROACH
Organization of Team
One of the most common challenges faced by clients today is to structure a project/construction
management team that will be both economical and provide direct accountability of architects,
consulting engineers, contractors and subcontractors. The city has done a great job with the initial steps
of the project in completing the feasibility study for the preschool conversion project. The preferred
option #1 for renovation of the existing library appears to be the most efficient and cost-effective option.
We are proposing a team that is similarly efficient and cost effective.
Our proposed team is based on a two-person core group of Project Director Brian Jemo and
Project Manager Robert Begonia. Brian and Robert have experience working on similar projects
including multiple daycare projects and dozens of renovations to existing buildings. In addition, they
have experience with all phases of a project including project initiation, consultant procurement, design
management, contractor procurement, construction management and project closeout. Brian and Robert
have experience working together on recent San Francisco Unified School District projects including the
Hillcrest Elementary School renovation project and the Hillcrest Elementary School New Building Project.
Our proposed team will be supported by Kitchell’s in-house technical support services group.
This includes an in-house engineering and architectural services (EAS) team, an in-house estimating
team and an in-house scheduling team. We believe this two-person core team along with the backing
of Kitchell’s in-house support services group provides the perfect blend of project experience and
capabilities to manage your preschool conversion project efficiently and cost effectively.
INFORMATION AS IT RELATES TO THIS PROJECT
1. Describe the roles and organization of your proposed team for this project. Indicate the composition of
subcontractors and number of project staff, facilities available and experience of your team as it relates to this
project. Include an organization chart.
Subcontractors:None
Number of Project Staff:2 (key staff) | 4 (as-needed staff)
Facilities Available:Kitchell has 11 available offices in California. Our services will be provided
out of our San Francisco office located at 315 Montgomery Street, 10th
Floor, San Francisco, CA 94104. As-needed support services will be provided
out of our Sacramento headquarters office located at 2450 Venture Oaks
Way, Suite 500, Sacramento, CA 95833.
Experience of our Team:Please see our proposed team resumes for details on their experience as it
relates to this project.
RANJIT SINHA
OPERATIONS MANAGER
BRIAN JEMO, ccm, leed ap
PROJECT DIRECTOR
(KEY STAFF)
ROBERT BEGONIA
PROJECT MANAGER
(KEY STAFF)
IN-HOUSE SUPPORT SERVICES TEAM
Wendy Cohen, ccm
President
Matt Chappell, eit, cep
Estimating Manager
Heather Brown, pe, cpmp, leed ap
Engineering & Architectural Services (EAS) Director
Rick Stassi
Scheduling Manager
EXECUTIVE OVERSIGHT
Our proposed project/construction management team is 100% dedicated to your success from
conception through completion. Our seasoned team will support the City of South San Francisco
to ensure your preschool conversion project moves forward smoothly through closeout. Our
team’s commitment goes beyond the job—they strive to see success in the community that they
live and work in.
194
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 9
2. Describe your project and management approach. Provide a detailed description of how the team and scope
of work will be managed.
Kitchell has successfully worked with the City of
South San Francisco as well as numerous other cities,
state agencies, local agencies, architectural firms,
contractors and subcontractors throughout the Bay
Area. Kitchell’s approach to all of our projects is based
on a collaborative team approach that includes
the City, architect, contractor, inspector, utility
companies and end-user. We view ourselves as the hub
of communication that connects each project team
member and supports each team member to make sure
the project is successful.
An important first step is to identify the City’s project
priorities and keys to success. Understanding project
priorities early and communicating those priorities to the
rest of the project team helps with decision making and
helps the project team navigate how to move forward as
the project progresses. One of the first activities Brian and Robert would like to conduct for the
project is a series of workshops with the City and daycare end users to develop the goals and
objectives for the project. As we conduct community outreach we will test these priorities with the
community and circle back with the City to make sure all participants and community are aligned.
We strongly believe that to have a successful project you need to work closely with the architect in
order to provide the most effective set of documents that can be produced so the construction phase is
streamlined. With our team approach and experience with the City, the architects are very comfortable
working with Kitchell focusing on the identified priorities along with meeting budget and schedule
while providing the highest quality product. Kitchell’s goal is to manage information and support the
architects. We do this in numerous ways including coordination with the City and daycare end users,
providing design and constructability reviews, assisting with strategy for project logistics and phasing.
Brian and Robert will conduct bi-weekly design meetings to track progress of the design, provide
coordination with the city and daycare end users and provide input/recommendations to make sure the
documents are well coordinated, high-quality, constructable and cost effective.
Coordination with public utility companies is extremely important if new
service is part of the project. According to the facility assessment the main existing
switchboard and generator are original equipment from the 1970’s and the existing pole mounted
transformer would not be acceptable under current PG&E standards. We are well-aware of the time
frames associated with utility engineering, inspection, and payment process. Incorporating PG&E into
project team early will be key to keeping the project on-schedule.
During the bidding phase Brian and Robert will solicit general contractors and key subcontractors such
as mechanical, electrical and plumbing. Brian and Robert have decades of experience working on public
construction projects in the Bay Area and have developed relationships with general contractor’s and
subcontractors. It has been proven that increased contractor participation lowers the bid day cost. Brian
and Robert will bring that resource to the City of South San Francisco.
We take a similar collaborative approach with the general contractor and subcontractors. Our experience
managing public works projects for nearly 50 years has shown us that we want to collaborate with the
contractor to help make the project a success. This includes being clear and transparent about the project
goals and requirements, and making the contractor accountable for those goals/requirements. Robert
will be on-site full-time managing the construction of the project. He will walk the job daily to
evaluate current project activities and assure consistency with the approved schedule. He will also be
there to support the contractor and help get answers quickly to keep work moving effectively.
Quality Doesn’t Just Happen,
It’s Planned!
We will take a proactive approach to see that the City receives the best project quality for its investment.
We will accomplish this by:
`Doing page-flip reviews of the design documents with the City, daycare end-users and
maintenance department. Page flip reviews will allow us to walk through the scope of work with
each group and get input from those groups for potential revisions. For example, on a previous
review of a school project in San Francisco we were walking the maintenance department through
the documents and they let us know they prefer the fire alarm devices in teacher staff rooms to be
heat detectors because burned popcorn often causes smoke detectors to be set-off.
`Thoroughly reviewing the design using collaborative Bluebeam reviews. A Bluebeam review is
a software that allows multiple users (Kitchell, City of SSF, architect, engineers, etc.) to all look at
the same set of documents and comments being made. When a design review comment is made it
allows all participants to see the comment immediately. Our collaborative Bluebeam reviews will
include design reviews by our in-house engineering and architectural department, as well as by the
on-site team of Brian and Robert to help confirm constructability, coordination between disciplines
and coordination with the existing site conditions. The Bluebeam review can be used by the City to
add comments at the same time as Kitchell or simply review the comments being provided.
3. Provide a summary of the overall approach to quality control. Specifically, outline the internal protocol for
ensuring clear communications between the City, the prime consultant, and all subconsultants.
195
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 10
`As we develop the contract documents and contract specifications, we will incorporate the City’s
Quality Assurance Program (QAP). The Cities QAP includes a Materials Acceptance Program,
Independent Assurance Program and Resident Engineers Certification of Materials. A meeting
including the City’s inspection department and the architect will be held to confirm the bid
documents incorporate these programs for the construction project.
`Implement the QAP throughout the construction project. The weekly owner, architect,
contractor (OAC) meeting will include an agenda item for quality assurance in which upcoming
and on-going inspections, special inspections, material identification and future preconstruction
meetings are discussed.
`A potential quality/value item that could be incorporated into the project is to bid-out
and complete the demolition/hazmat portion of the project early. If the library moves in
the fall 2023 and the existing building is vacant it could be possible to complete a demo package
prior to bidding the renovation project. This could expose some unforeseen conditions and structural
members needed to complete the design that could be incorporated into an addendum for the
renovation bid to avoid change orders.
`Require pre-installation meetings prior to each construction operation to ensure proper
installations and applications without rework. Pre-installation meetings will include Kitchell, GC,
applicable subcontractors, inspector and appropriate City staff.
`Conduct final quality control (punchlist) to ensure the design intent is incorporated in the field
and site user needs are met.
During construction, Robert will manage the QA/QC program in a cooperative effort with the inspection
team and general contractor. Robert will notify the contractors, architect and City of deficiencies and
follow through to ensure corrections are made in a timely manner. He will generate informal punchlists
at the end of construction phases to correct deficiencies and include the list as part of the regular weekly
progress meetings. This helps to make sure all project participants including the City, inspector and
contractor clearly understand the current issues as the project proceeds instead of waiting until project
conclusion when corrections become more difficult to implement.
BRIAN JEMO, ccm, leed ap
PROJECT DIRECTOR
With more than 23 years of professional experience in various planning, program and
construction management efforts for our clients, Brian brings extensive experience in
working with various stakeholders on their capital construction programs and projects. Brian
will serve as your primary point of contact throughout the project planning, design and
preconstruction phase of the project. Brian will ensure the project, design-team, and project
consultants are set-up for success, as well as ensuring contract compliance and quality
control. Brian will be supported by Robert throughout the preconstruction phase.
References
Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District
Kim McNeely, Bond Program Director
tel. 925.667.1921 | email. kmcneely@lvjusd.org
San Francisco Unified School District
Lori Shelton, Project Manager
tel. 415.241.6152 | email. SheltonL@sfusd.edu
ROBERT BEGONIA
PROJECT MANAGER
Robert has 16 years of industry experience including a recent $12 million renovation project
at Hillcrest Elementary School in San Francisco that is very similar to the City of South San
Francisco preschool renovation project. When the project transfers from the preconstruction/
design phase into the construction phase, Robert will be the on-site main point of contact.
Our intent is for Robert to be on-site every day to be the City’s boots-on-the-ground
representation to ensure construction quality, schedule and cost control. Brian will support
Robert and the project team throughout construction and closeout of the project.
References
San Francisco Unified School District
Lori Shelton, Project Manager
tel. 415.241.6152 | email. SheltonL@sfusd.edu
San Francisco Unified School District
Brittany Erway, Principal, Hillcrest Elementary
tel. 415.215.9274 | email. erwayb@sfusd.edu
4. Describe the roles of key individuals on the team. Provide resumes and at least two (2) references for all key
team members.
196
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 11
EDUCATION
BS, Construction Management, California Polytechnic State
University, San Luis Obispo
CREDENTIALS
Certified Construction Manager
LEED Accredited Professional
EMPLOYMENT WITH KITCHELL
20 years
COMMITMENT
Brian is committed to stay with the project for the duration of
the project.
Brian Jemo, ccm, leed ap
PROJECT DIRECTOR
With more than 23 years of professional experience in various planning, program and construction management efforts for our education
clients, Brian brings extensive experience in working with various stakeholders on their capital construction programs and projects. As your
primary point of contact throughout the project planning, design and preconstruction phase of the project, he will provide guidance to the
Kitchell team, ensuring contract compliance and quality control. With hands-on experience working on local Bay Area school projects, Brian
brings his in depth knowledge of the key factors involved in setting up and managing your projects.
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
San Francisco Unified School District, Charles Drew
Elementary School Modernization, San Francisco, CA: A $21.6
million, 39,000 SF classroom building modernization including
a daycare center and transitional kindergarten school yards.
Project scope encompassed a general school modernization and
reconstruction including ADA access, seismic upgrades and fire/
life-safety upgrades, including but not limited to hazardous material
abatement, demolition of interior finishes, demolition of mechanical,
plumbing and electrical systems, demolition and installation of new
fire sprinkler system, restroom upgrades, new flooring, new ceilings,
new wall finishes, new doors and hardware, new windows, new roof,
new mechanical units, new lighting, new fire alarm, new security
system, new clock speaker system, new exterior paint, new trash
enclosure and new front entry with security gate.
Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District, Michell K-8
School New Classroom Building, Gymnasium and Parking
Lot, Livermore, CA: A $25 million project consisting of construction
of a new 24,000 SF, 16-room classroom building, a new 11,200 SF
gymnasium with an amphitheater and parking lot reconfiguration.
This project includes a $1.27 million project to relocate Livermore
Area Recreation and Park District’s (LARPD) Extended Student
Services (ESS) program. LARPD’s Extended Student Services (ESS) is
a licensed child development program serving children TK through
fifth grade in Livermore. Kitchell relocated two existing portable
buildings and constructed two DSA pre-check approved modular
classroom buildings (60’ x 32’ and 40’ x 32’) at Livermore Valley Joint
Unified School District Michell K-8 School.
Peralta Community College District, Child Development
Center at Merritt College, Oakland, CA: A new $27.4 million
18,000 SF two-story building consolidating the Child Care and Lab
Practicum Programs into a new facility with cross collaboration
between the college’s nursing, nutrition and horticultural programs.
The facility will house a preschool and also include adult classrooms
for the college programs and will accommodate 96 preschool
students and 27 adult students in four ground-level classrooms,
with four additional classrooms on the second story creating space
for 120 adult students. The building integrates interior classroom
environments into outdoor terraced play areas and includes teacher
prep areas, resource rooms, back of house food prep areas and
administrative offices.
Oakland Unified School District, Laurel Child Development
Center Oakland, CA: Pre-design and bid phase management for a
$13.8 million (construction cost) project consisting of demolition of
the existing child development center at Laurel Elementary School
and construction of a new 10,000 SF child development center
building. The new facility includes four classrooms, administration
area, kitchen, playground and associated site work.
San Francisco Unified School District, Hillcrest ES
Modernization Project: A $13 million renovation of the existing
classroom building including MEP upgrades, new windows, exterior
paint and new finishes to the classrooms and administration offices.
San Francisco Unified School District, Hillcrest ES New
Classroom Building: A $7.3 million new classroom building
that included six new general education classrooms and student
restrooms as well as adjacent site work.
197
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 12
EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering, San Francisco State University
CREDENTIALS
None
EMPLOYMENT WITH KITCHELL
3 years
COMMITMENT
Robert is committed to stay with the project for the duration of
the project.
Robert Begonia
PROJECT MANAGER
With over 16 years in the construction industry, Robert has served on various project types including education, healthcare, public and
corporate facilities. He has a strong and wide-ranging history working with architects, general contractors and construction managers with
experience in special inspections and materials testing as well as building envelope design consultation.
As someone who has worked on everything from small residential renovations to a $500 million hospital, Robert enjoys the diversity of work
which is inherent in the nature of construction, finding that no two projects are alike and every day brings a new challenge. He has the ability
to stay calm, cool and collected under pressure, emphasizing communication as a defining factor in his management style. This key dynamic,
combined with Robert’s patience and humility, ensures a cohesive and supportive team environment which results in successful, quality projects.
Robert is skilled in construction scheduling, material and equipment procurement, contract administration, change order review, quality
assurance and quality control and building strong professional relationships. Robert holds a high level of interpersonal skills, believing
projects achieve the highest success when positive relationships are developed from the start. He considers timeliness, quality and safety to
be cornerstones to any successful project.
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
San Francisco Unified School District, Charles Drew
Elementary School Modernization, San Francisco, CA: A $21.6
million, 39,000 SF classroom building modernization including
a daycare center and transitional kindergarten school yards.
Project scope encompassed a general school modernization and
reconstruction including ADA access, seismic upgrades and fire/
life-safety upgrades, including but not limited to hazardous material
abatement, demolition of interior finishes, demolition of mechanical,
plumbing and electrical systems, demolition and installation of new
fire sprinkler system, restroom upgrades, new flooring, new ceilings,
new wall finishes, new doors and hardware, new windows, new roof,
new mechanical units, new lighting, new fire alarm, new security
system, new clock speaker system, new exterior paint, new trash
enclosure and new front entry with security gate.
San Francisco Unified School District, Hillcrest ES
Modernization Project: A $13 million renovation of the existing
classroom building including MEP upgrades, new windows, exterior
paint and new finishes to the classrooms and administration offices.
San Francisco Unified School District, Hillcrest ES New
Classroom Building: A $7.3 million new classroom building
that included six new general education classrooms and student
restrooms as well as adjacent site work.
City College of San Francisco, Chinatown/North Beach
Campus, San Francisco, CA: A 194,000 SF, 14-story tower with
an adjacent four-story educational building to accommodate the
growth of the college’s student population. The new campus
provides 42 classrooms and laboratories, administrative offices,
a teaching kitchen for culinary studies, a community auditorium
and a cafe. The 14-story tower building is one of the largest to go
through rigorous plan checking required by DSA, while additionally
employing sustainable design practices.
University of California, San Francisco, Benioff Children’s
Hospital, San Francisco, CA: A 183-bed OSHPD facility including
an urgent care/emergency department, pediatric primary care and
specialty outpatient care. The project is anticipating LEED Gold
certification.
University of California, Berkeley, Li Ka-Shing Center for
Biomedical & Health Sciences, Berkeley, CA: A $215 million,
200,000 SF CMAR facility including a vivarium, a brain imaging
center with space for MRIs and other imaging equipment, a teaching
laboratory, a 300-seat auditorium and 80-seat classroom, small
conference rooms, interaction spaces and faculty and staff offices.
198
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 13
IN-HOUSE SUPPORT SERVICES TEAM
Ranjit Sinha
OPERATIONS MANAGER
Wendy Cohen, ccm
PRESIDENT
EDUCATION
Civil Engineering, California Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo
Stanford Graduate School of Business, LEAD Program
CREDENTIALS
Certified Construction Manager | OSHA 10 Hour Certification
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
City of South San Francisco, Measure W, Community Civic Campus, Phase II: Library, Parks &
Recreation and Community Theater/Council Chamber, South San Francisco, CA: A new $101
million, 80,000 SF library and recreation facility. The project also includes a community theater/council
chamber as well as parking for 220 cars and site development. The library includes a learning center with
spaces specifically developed to create intimate areas for quiet study as well as one-on-one tutoring, as
well as larger spaces to foster creativity in a group setting for children as well as teen zones, technology
laboratories, reservable rooms, spaces for older residents and a Library Discovery Center.
City of South San Francisco, Measure W, Community Civic Campus Phase I: Police Operations &
911 Dispatch Center, South San Francisco, CA: A new $56.8 million, 44,000 SF police station designed
to reduce police emergency response times and enhance public safety by providing a state-of-the-art
emergency response center. The facility includes space for administration, operations, investigation,
property storage, evidence storage, support services, emergency dispatch, firing range, training and
classrooms for police and community use.
San Francisco Unified School District, Charles Drew Elementary School Modernization, San
Francisco, CA: A $21.6 million, 39,000 SF classroom building modernization including a daycare center
and transitional kindergarten school yards.
Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District, Michell K-8 School New Classroom Building,
Gymnasium and Parking Lot, Livermore, CA: A $25 million project consisting of construction of a
new 24,000 SF, 16-room classroom building, a new 11,200 SF gymnasium with an amphitheater and
parking lot reconfiguration. This project includes a $1.27 million project to relocate Livermore Area
Recreation and Park District’s (LARPD) Extended Student Services (ESS) program. LARPD’s Extended
Student Services (ESS) is a licensed child development program serving children TK through fifth grade
in Livermore. Kitchell relocated two existing portable buildings and constructed two DSA pre-check
approved modular classroom buildings.
EDUCATION
BS, Building Construction and Contracting, Purdue University
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
City of South San Francisco, Measure W, Community Civic Campus, Phase II: Library, Parks &
Recreation and Community Theater/Council Chamber, South San Francisco, CA: A new $101
million, 80,000 SF library and recreation facility. The project also includes a community theater/council
chamber as well as parking for 220 cars and site development. The library includes a learning center with
spaces specifically developed to create intimate areas for quiet study as well as one-on-one tutoring, as
well as larger spaces to foster creativity in a group setting for children as well as teen zones, technology
laboratories, reservable rooms, spaces for older residents and a Library Discovery Center.
City of South San Francisco, Measure W, Community Civic Campus Phase I: Police Operations &
911 Dispatch Center, South San Francisco, CA: A new $56.8 million, 44,000 SF police station designed
to reduce police emergency response times and enhance public safety by providing a state-of-the-art
emergency response center. The facility includes space for administration, operations, investigation,
property storage, evidence storage, support services, emergency dispatch, firing range, training and
classrooms for police and community use.
San Francisco Unified School District, Charles Drew Elementary School Modernization, San
Francisco, CA: A $21.6 million, 39,000 SF classroom building modernization including a daycare center
and transitional kindergarten school yards.
Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District, Michell K-8 School New Classroom Building,
Gymnasium and Parking Lot, Livermore, CA: A $25 million project consisting of construction of a
new 24,000 SF, 16-room classroom building, a new 11,200 SF gymnasium with an amphitheater and
parking lot reconfiguration. This project includes a $1.27 million project to relocate Livermore Area
Recreation and Park District’s (LARPD) Extended Student Services (ESS) program. LARPD’s Extended
Student Services (ESS) is a licensed child development program serving children TK through fifth grade
in Livermore. Kitchell relocated two existing portable buildings and constructed two DSA pre-check
approved modular classroom buildings.
City College of San Francisco, Program Management Services, San Francisco, CA: Kitchell has
been providing program and construction management services for CCSF associated with their $845
million Capital Improvement Program/Measure A since 2018.
199
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 14
HEATHER BROWN,
PE, LEED AP, CPMP
EAS DIRECTOR
Matt Chappell,
EIT, CEP
ESTIMATING MANAGER
Rick stassi
SCHEDULING MANAGER
EDUCATION
MBA, Finance, California State University Sacramento
BS, Mechanical Engineering, University of Portland, Oregon
CREDENTIALS
Mechanical Engineer #M31667, CA | LEED Accredited Professional |
Commissioning Process Management Professional
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
City of South San Francisco, Measure W - Community Civic
Campus, South San Francisco, CA: A $210 million program
comprised of three projects. Construction is taking place over
three phases beginning with the Police Operations & 911 Dispatch
Center, located at Chestnut Avenue and Antoinette Lane, followed
by the Library, Parks & Recreation and Community Theater/Council
Chambers. The third and final phase is part of a future phase
comprised of a new Fire Station.
City College of San Francisco, Program Management Services,
San Francisco, CA: Program and construction management services
for an $845 million bond program expected to span over seven years
encompassing infrastructure, new construction and renovation
projects. Projects include a new performing arts center, new STEAM
building, new Student Success Center, new child care center, new
utilities loop and major renovations to several buildings at the main
campus and other centers.
Yosemite Community College District, Child Development
Center, Sonora, CA: A new $8.9 million childcare center consisting
of 5 small wood frame buildings totaling 13,517 SF built around a
natural courtyard. The five buildings are infant, toddler, preschool,
administration and adult classrooms. The project also includes site
development, utilities and civil, structural, ecological landscaping,
mechanical, plumbing and electrical work. The project is LEED Silver
certified.
EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering, University of Nebraska
CREDENTIALS
Engineer In Training #EI-7956 | Certified Estimating
Professional #130-10
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
City College of San Francisco, Program Management Services,
San Francisco, CA: Program and construction management services
for an $845 million bond program expected to span over seven years
encompassing infrastructure, new construction and renovation
projects. Projects include a new performing arts center, new STEAM
building, new Student Success Center, new child care center, new
utilities loop and major renovations to several buildings at the main
campus and other centers.
San Juan Unified School District, Dyer-Kelly Elementary
School, Sacramento, CA: A new $49.5 million, 84,022 SF elementary
school campus consisting of next generation classrooms (including
flexible furniture, multiple writing walls and innovative technology),
administration offices, a multipurpose room and a library. The main
concept ideas for each section of the school consists of Town Square,
Main Street, Academic Neighborhoods and the Reading Porch to make
the school feel like its own community. Work includes replacement
of eight existing portable classrooms with permanent buildings and
accommodating class size reduction for K-5 grade levels.
Folsom Cordova Unified School District, Carl H. Sundahl
Elementary School Modernization, Folsom, CA: A $23.9 million
modernization project which includes building and site demolition,
modernization and expansion of administration and multi-purpose
buildings, new construction of 42,000 SF of classroom and library/
media center buildings, as well as a new parking lot and drop-off lanes,
replacement of play apparatuses and refreshment of landscaping.
EDUCATION
Coursework, Engineering, Sacramento City College
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
City College of San Francisco, Program Management Services,
San Francisco, CA: Program and construction management services
for an $845 million bond program expected to span over seven years
encompassing infrastructure, new construction and renovation
projects. Projects include a new performing arts center, new STEAM
building, new Student Success Center, new child care center, new
utilities loop and major renovations to several buildings at the main
campus and other centers.
California Department of General Services, Richards
Boulevard Office Complex, Sacramento, CA: A new $1 billion
design-build office campus totaling approximately 1.25 million
GSF consisting of four 7- to 11-story office buildings with two multi-
floor podiums at the base for the towers. Site improvements include
a seven-level parking garage with 1,294 spaces and an additional
318 surface parking spaces. The project also includes a Central
Mechanical Space, space for a cafeteria, auditorium, retail spaces
and childcare. Building tenants include Department of Tax and
Fee Administration and various departments within the Business,
Consumer Services and Housing agency.
San Juan Unified School District, Dyer-Kelly Elementary
School, Sacramento, CA: A new $49.5 million, 84,022 SF elementary
school campus consisting of next generation classrooms (including
flexible furniture, multiple writing walls and innovative technology),
administration offices, a multipurpose room and a library. The main
concept ideas for each section of the school consists of Town Square,
Main Street, Academic Neighborhoods and the Reading Porch to make
the school feel like its own community. Work includes replacement
of eight existing portable classrooms with permanent buildings and
accommodating class size reduction for K-5 grade levels.
200
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 15
D. SCOPE OF WORK
Understanding & Approach
A WORK PLAN TAILORED SPECIFICALLY FOR THE
CITY’S NEEDS
Communication and collaboration are the two most important factors in creating a
successful team and project. Kitchell will create and foster strong partnerships with all
team members including City staff, the architect and engineering teams. We will lead
the teams with integrity, transparency and respect while focusing on creating a team
atmosphere among all stakeholders involved throughout the project through trusted
methods to encourage collaboration, accessibility, and quality assurance for optimal
staff utilization. As a result, our team brings a proven ability to work effectively,
efficiently, and cohesively as part of your team—and we know your team!
Our work plan/approach in providing construction management and inspection
services ensures successful implementation that meets the City’s requirements and
is formulated to deliver your Orange Preschool project within the scope, budget,
schedule and quality parameters. Below we have outlined and detailed our approach
to each task identified in the RFP.
Programming, Planning & Design
(February 2023– June 2023)
The City has already done a great job with the initial planning of the Orange Avenue
Preschool Conversion. Working with SIM Architects to understand project needs and
develop an approach. Kitchell is excited to pick up the effort and work with the City to
determine which renovation scheme will be best. The project is essentially a tenant
improvement of the existing structure, with seismic enhancements. Site issues with
disabled access will need to be addressed. A design firm will need to be selected
to generate the construction documents. Kitchell will support the City and finalize
this phase by providing confirmational initial estimating services as well as initial
scheduling services. Kitchell will also help support the City by assisting to complete
the project team with the remaining participants such as geotechnical engineering,
hazardous material assessment, CEQA and surveying teams as needed.
Preconstruction Services
(February 2023– January 2024)
Leveraging Kitchell’s long time experience working with City staff and departments,
Kitchell will prepare the Division 0, Procurement Requirements and Division 1 General
Requirements of the construction documents.
1. Include a detailed Scope of
Work Statement describing your
understanding of the project and
the process and approach for all
services to be provided.
2. Describe project deliverables
and timing for each phase of your
work.
Kitchell Activities
`Kitchell will support the City and finalize this phase by providing confirmational
initial estimating services as well as initial scheduling services.
`Kitchell will also help support the City by assisting to complete the project team
with the remaining participants such as geotechnical engineering, hazardous
material assessment, CEQA and surveying teams as needed.
Deliverables
`Develop goals and objectives.
`Develop budget and master schedule
`Advertise/award design contract
`Advertise/award consultant
agreements (hazmat/survey, etc.)
201
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 16
Constructability Reviews
Kitchell has an in-house Engineering and Architectural Services
Department, which includes engineers, architects, programmers,
planners, and specifications specialists. Kitchell also has qualified
estimators and schedulers who complement the engineers so we
can provide a complete review of the construction documents. This
includes not only the quality of the construction documents, but
the cost of the project and the time it will take to construct. We will
focus our management and review efforts on the early identification
of work that does not conform to criteria or meet code requirements.
The design reviews for the major project could yield thousands of
comments, most of which if not resolved before construction will
result in questions, meetings, or change orders all of which take time
and effort to resolve and may delay construction and cost money.
Estimating
As noted above our in-house estimators can provide multiple levels
of estimating services. We have included three rounds of estimating
in our attached staffing/cost proposal. We included 20 hours of
estimating time at the beginning of the design phase to review
and understand what costs/budgets have been provided to date.
We have also included two rounds of full cost estimates at design
milestones. We suggest doing a full estimate at the 100% DD phase
and the 50% CD phase to confirm the project is on-budget and to
allow time for adjustment if needed.
Project Scheduling
Project scheduling begins at the start of the project and continues
through completion. Scheduling conversations are initiated early on
during the preconstruction phase to communicate to the entire team
all expectations and deliverables expected. Phasing, utility shutdowns
and cut-overs, City purchased furniture, and all of the other activities
that will occur during construction have to be identified and “flushed
out” during the preconstruction phase. In essence, the project must be
“built on paper” before it is put out for bid.
What-if scenarios are also evaluated to determine optimum
milestone durations. Milestones, site restrictions, and any other
items that would affect a contractor’s operation once on-site will be
identified in the bid documents.
The 12-month construction schedule for the Orange Avenue
Preschool Conversion Project is in line with other education
projects we have completed in the Bay area including projects at
Hillcrest Elementary School and Diablo Valley College. The 7-month
duration identified for design is aggressive and will require a well-
coordinated effort from all project participants.
Advertise & Award
(February 2024 – April 2024)
During the bidding and procurement phase Kitchell will solicit
quality general contractors throughout the Bay Area. In addition
to general contractors, Kitchell will solicit key subcontractors
including mechanical, electrical and plumbing subcontractors.
It has been proven that bid day costs go down as the number of
bidders increase. Kitchell will develop and manage the bid schedule
including bid-phase RFI’s and addenda.
After proposals are submitted, Kitchell will provide an evaluation to
ensure the bids are complete and responsive. Kitchell will provide a
written evaluation of the bids and provide a recommendation to the
City for award.
CM Services During Construction
(May 2024 – April 2025)
Construction is the realization of your vision and the collective
efforts of your design and construction partners. Our goal for the
construction phase of the projects is simple: Execute.
Kitchell’s efforts during preconstruction will prepare the teams for a
construction project free from surprises.
Kitchell Activities
`Kitchell will host collaborative design/constructability reviews
to ensure the highest quality documents are generated.
`Kitchell will produce estimates at key design milestones and
provide value engineering solutions as needed to keep the
project within budget.
`Kitchell will review the permits and plans to ensure
compatibility with the City’s planning, fire and building
department requirements. In addition, the County will have
additional requirements that must be incorporated into the
plans.
`Kitchell will prepare an agenda for the preconstruction
meeting. Highlights of special City restrictions and
requirements will be reviewed with the contractor.
Additionally, a responsibility matrix will be emphasized.
`Kitchell will work with the City attorney to ensure dispute
resolution clauses are included in the contract.
Deliverables
`Research existing structure structural and hazardous material
`Prepare general conditions contract documents
`Identify key construction milestones to be scheduled
`Constructability review of the design
`Estimating Services (as needed)
Kitchell Activities
`Kitchell will solicit quality general contractors throughout the
Bay Area.
`Kitchell will develop and manage the bid schedule including
bid-phase RFI’s and addenda, as well as provide a written
evaluation of the bids and provide a recommendation to the
City for award.
Deliverables
` Develop interest among general contractors
` Develop and implement a bid schedule to ensure fairness
` Facilitate review panels
` Review proposals and provide a recommendation
202
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 17
When the Notice to Proceed is issued, our team will have already
completed the planning process. This will allow us to immediately
get the work coordinated, ensure the timely sequencing of work
activities and establish and implement a comprehensive schedule
and defined quality control program.
Kitchell will monitor the work of the contractor and coordinate their
work with the activities and responsibilities of the City, architect,
and others to complete the project in accordance with the stated
objectives of work scope, cost, time and quality. We will coordinate
with the City to establish the on-site organization and lines of
authority necessary to carry out the overall plans of the construction
team. Procedures for project coordination will be developed and
implemented.
Construction Observation/Inspection
Services (May 2024 – April 2025)
The Lead Inspector will observe the project during construction.
They will guard the City against defects and deficiencies in the work
of the Contractor and ensure provisions of the contract documents
are being fulfilled. In addition, the contractor shall notify Kitchell
when inspections are required and Kitchell will coordinate this
process on behalf of the City. This request can happen upon start-up
of new activities or upon completion of a scope of work. Kitchell,
upon receiving an inspection request from the trade contractor, will
coordinate timely with the City so as not to delay the schedule.
Post Construction Services
(may 2025 – june2025)
Successful project closeout begins in the design phase. We assist the
architect in defining equipment and system start- up requirements
in the contract documents. Our front-end documents clearly
reflect the City’s expectations for contract closeout and warranty
issue response. We also develop procedures that define each team
member’s roles and responsibilities during the start-up, closeout and
warranty phases.
Kitchell initiates and participates in walk-through inspections
that are coordinated with the City, architect and contractor. From
these inspections, a punchlist of remaining items to be addressed
is generated. Our staff verifies that these items are corrected
before moving on to final completion. Kitchell determines final
completion of the work, at which time we notify the City and the
architect that the work is ready for a final inspection. In addition,
we secure and transmit to the City required closeout documents
including guarantees, affidavits, releases, bonds and waivers, as
well as coordinate delivery of all keys, manuals, record drawings and
maintenance stock. A complete set of reproducible as-built drawings
are delivered at project completion, as well as all records, logs,
Kitchell Activities
`Our team will facilitate a construction kick-off meeting to
review access to the construction site, safety and integration
with the City’s public work activities.
`Kitchell will establish and manage a system of reporting using
e-Builder and meetings with stakeholders to resolve issues
and keep all parties informed.
`We will inspect material deliveries to the site to ensure
conformance with design documents and intent.
`Schedule maintenance is an important element to project
control. Kitchell can provide monthly analytics tracking
earned value compared to schedule. This provides an excellent
indication of how the project is progressing. We will take
early and proactive measures to keep the project tracking on
schedule.
`Kitchell will integrate requirements for the schedule of values
into the contract documents. Dividing the schedule of values
into granular elements allows for accurate progress payment
analysis and reduces contractor disputes. The key is the initial
set up of the schedule of values as a submittal subject to City
approval.
`Kitchell will review contractor RFIs. The review starts with an
analysis of the designer’s intent and documentation. Then
a study of the question and implications will be performed.
Kitchell Activities
`Kitchell will provide a Project Manager Robert Begonia to
monitor day- to-day construction activity. Material deliveries
will be checked for conformance to the design documents. A
narrative and drawing mark-up will be prepared daily to track
the contractor’s progress. Project Manager Robert Begonia
will maintain progress photos on a shared drive available to
the City and will coordinate with the City inspector.
Deliverables
`Develop a list of proposed installation meetings.
`Maintain a log of quality deficiencies that are reviewed at the
weekly OAC meetings.
`Monthly reports that include an issues log.
`Progress photos.
`Tracking of the commissioning program.
We will work shoulder to shoulder with the architect and the
contractor to resolve design issues while maintaining quality
systems.
`Kitchell will facilitate processing of the submittals. While
submittal approval is ultimately the responsibility of the
design professionals, Kitchell will keep files and samples
organized and available to the designers and City.
`Kitchell will review all change orders for completeness, fair
costs and impact to the construction schedule. Kitchell will
negotiate equitable resolutions to change orders.
Deliverables
` Ensure contractor follow procurement log
` Process submittals and RFIs
` Review/Process PCO’s & Change Orders
` Host a weekly OAC meeting with minutes
203
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 18
photographs, change orders and shop drawings. Kitchell collects all
required written warranties provided by vendors, manufacturers and
contractors, and delivers them to the City. We ensure resolution of
warranty issues during the warranty period.
COST CONTROL & BUDGETING
Management of potential change orders during construction,
through prevention, will be a focus of our services. This could begin
with thoroughly reviewing design documents through detailed
design and constructability reviews to allow modifications to the
final construction documents, eliminating change orders before they
happen. Prompt resolution of requests for information and other
field issues is a key component towards mitigating change orders or
reducing their overall cost and schedule impact. Our estimating team
will be available throughout construction to provide cost estimates
of changed conditions and participate in negotiations as required.
Kitchell also has an in-house estimating department that can
support the project. Kitchell estimators can provide detailed cost
estimates at each design milestone or provide input on current
trends and escalation or value engineering suggestions if a full
estimate is not necessary. By providing up-to-date costs and
solutions for cost-overruns we will ensure the design stays within
budget. It has been proven that bid day costs go down as the
number of bidders increases. Kitchell will develop and manage the
bid schedule including bid-phase RFI’s and addenda.
Kitchell will manage “Risk Log” which is a forward-looking capture
of City risks and estimated costs. The log is a navigation tool to
eliminate or manage risks to the City. Cost will be reviewed and
discussed weekly at the owner, architect and contractor (OAC)
meetings. Kitchell will work continuously with the design team and
contractors efficiently solve problems.
Please see section H. Cost Proposal and Task Hours for a detailed
breakdown of Kitchell’s total hours per task.
Public Outreach
Kitchell will partner with the selected architectural
firm and City staff to host a series of workshops.
During the schematic phase of design the work
shops will gather public comment on design
elements and building features. Corresponding to the workshops,
Kitchell will host a website where the public can view the design as
it develops and make comments. Additionally, Kitchell will publish
and distribute a monthly newsletter in English and Spanish. As the
design progresses into construction documents the workshops,
websites and newsletters will shift focus from gathering information
to explaining what is going to be built and following the progress
through construction.
Communication Quality & Success
During the study phases of the project, frequent communication
with the design and engineering firms will ensure information flows
as required to maintain the project schedule. To ensure the quality of
the project, Kitchell will perform critical quality assurance functions
by performing in-depth design and estimate reviews. The structured
and comprehensive design review process—employed by Kitchell
and complying with City procedures—will ensure the documents
are well-coordinated and have benefited from the review and input
of all stakeholders. Documents will be reviewed at all stages of
design for conformance with City programmatic, operational and
security requirements and budgetary constraints. Over-the-shoulder
reviews are recommended prior to each design submittal to verify
that scope requirements will be met, the submittal will meet the level
of completeness required and to ensure the consultant is on schedule.
The key to managing various tasks is to have open and transparent
communication throughout the design and construction of the
new preschool. Kitchell will facilitate weekly owner, contractor
and architect meetings to review the schedule and budget. These
meetings are important to identifying issues early and when action
can be taken to mitigate schedule and budget impacts.
Maintaining Schedules
Maintaining a schedule is critical to moving a project forward.
Careful attention will be paid to communicating design progress and
identifying roadblocks to the schedule. The schedule will include
stakeholder meetings to validate and document progress and
sign-off. All of these elements and milestones will be incorporated
into the baseline schedule. Forecasting milestone dates is critical to
create a reliable schedule. Each phase will begin with a workshop to
confirm project goals, affirm milestones, validate budget and scope
alignment, and identify opportunities and constraints.
Kitchell understands the negative impact of even seemingly
insignificant schedule delays on the health of a project. The keys to
maintaining the preschool project’s schedule will be:
`Early coordination with PG&E
`Procurement of long-lead mechanical and electrical equipment.
We are currently seeing lead times of up to a year for switchgear
and mechanical equipment. We have identified an option to
procure these long lead items prior to the construction bid in
order to make sure they arrive in time for construction.
Please see question 3 to the left for additional information on how
Kitchell manages cost control and budgeting.
Kitchell Activities
`Kitchell will review the contractor’s as-built drawings for
completeness and accuracy.
`Kitchell will schedule and coordinate equipment training
sessions for the new facility and associated equipment.
`Operation manuals will be collected and transferred to the
City facilities and public works departments.
Deliverables
`Operations and maintenance manuals
`As-built drawings
`Warranty letters
3. Describe your cost control and budgeting methodology for this project
4. Provide the breakdown of the total hours per task (do not include the
cost in the proposal).
5. Provide responses to the following: a.) Describe the public outreach
process associated with the plan and how you will assist in facilitating
the public information workshops/meeting process to assure outreach.
5. Provide responses to the following: b.) How to manage the various
tasks to deliver a project within budget and on schedule.
204
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 19
E. SCHEDULE OF WORK Provide a detailed schedule for all phases of the plan and the proposing Consultant’s
services including time for reviews and approvals by others. The schedule shall include the
critical path of the work items, start, finish and predecessors. Tasks or Milestones, which
are interdependent, must be identified, along with the completion date of each milestone.
ID TaskModeTask Name Duration Start Finish
1 Program & Planning 90 days Wed 1/25/23 Tue 5/30/23
2 CM Contract Selection 0 days Wed 1/25/23 Wed 1/25/23
3 Review/Confirm Preferred Project Option 15 days Wed 1/25/23 Tue 2/14/23
4 Develop Goals & Objectives 20 days Wed 2/15/23 Tue 3/14/23
5 Develop Budget & Master Schdule 40 days Wed 2/15/23 Tue 4/11/23
6 Procure Design Consultant 75 days Wed 2/15/23 Tue 5/30/23
7 Procure Other Consultants (Hazmat, Survey, CEQA, etc…)75 days Wed 2/15/23 Tue 5/30/23
8 Preconstruction Services 420 days Wed 2/15/23 Tue 9/24/24
9 Research/Review Existing Conditions 25 days Wed 2/15/23 Tue 3/21/23
10 Coordination with PG&E 60 days Wed 7/5/23 Tue 9/26/23
11 Early Procurement of Electrical/Mech Equip as necessary 260 days Wed 9/27/23 Tue 9/24/24
12 Develop Front End Documents 25 days Wed 8/16/23 Tue 9/19/23
13 100% DD Design/Constructability Reviews (As Needed)15 days Wed 10/4/23 Tue 10/24/23
14 100% DD Estimate (As needed)15 days Wed 10/4/23 Tue 10/24/23
15 50% CD Design/Constructability Reviews (As Needed)15 days Wed 11/15/23 Tue 12/5/23
16 50% CD Estimate (As needed)15 days Wed 11/15/23 Tue 12/5/23
17 Design 170 days Wed 5/31/23 Tue 1/23/24
18 Review/Confirm Program 25 days Wed 5/31/23 Tue 7/4/23
19 Schematic Design 30 days Wed 7/5/23 Tue 8/15/23
20 Design Development 35 days Wed 8/16/23 Tue 10/3/23
21 Construction Documents 50 days Wed 10/4/23 Tue 12/12/23
22 City Permit Review/Approval 30 days Wed 12/13/23 Tue 1/23/24
23 Bid / Award to General Contractor 58 days Wed 2/7/24 Fri 4/26/24
24 Bidding Period 19 days Wed 2/7/24 Mon 3/4/24
25 City Board Approval 30 days Tue 3/5/24 Mon 4/15/24
26 Contract Execution 9 days Tue 4/16/24 Fri 4/26/24
27 Construction 260 days Mon 4/29/24 Mon 4/28/25
28 Notice to Proceed 0 days Mon 4/29/24 Mon 4/29/24
29 Mobilization 10 days Mon 4/29/24 Fri 5/10/24
30 Demo/Hazmat 15 days Mon 5/13/24 Fri 5/31/24
31 Structural Upgrades 80 days Mon 6/3/24 Fri 9/20/24
32 Rough-in 150 days Mon 6/3/24 Fri 12/27/24
33 Finishes 85 days Mon 12/30/24 Fri 4/25/25
34 Substantial Completion 0 days Mon 4/28/25 Mon 4/28/25
35 Closeout 45 days Mon 4/28/25 Fri 6/27/25
36 Punch List 35 days Mon 4/28/25 Fri 6/13/25
37 Commissioning 25 days Mon 4/28/25 Fri 5/30/25
38 Training 20 days Mon 6/2/25 Fri 6/27/25
39 Closeout Documentation 45 days Mon 4/28/25 Fri 6/27/25
1/25
4/29
4/28
Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul202320242025
Task
Split
Milestone
Summary
Project Summary
Inactive Task
Inactive Milestone
Inactive Summary
Manual Task
Duration-only
Manual Summary Rollup
Manual Summary
Start-only
Finish-only
External Tasks
External Milestone
Deadline
Progress
Manual Progress
840 West Orange Avenue Preschool Conversion Project
Page 1
Project: SSF Daycare ScheduleDate: Tue 12/13/22
840 West Orange Preschool Conversion Project
205
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 20
F. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The proposing Consultant shall
disclose any financial, business
or other relationship with the
City that may have an impact
upon the outcome of the plan.
The Consultant shall also list
current clients who may have
a financial interest in the
outcome of this contract or the
construction projects that may
follow. The proposing Consultant
shall disclose any financial
interest or relationship with
any construction company that
might submit a bid on a future
construction project.
Kitchell does not have any financial, business or other relationship with the City of
South San Francisco that may have an impact upon the outcome of the plan.
Kitchell does not have any current clients who may have a financial interest in the
outcome of this contract or the construction projects that may follow.
Kitchell does not have any financial interest or relationship with any construction
company that might submit a bid on a future construction project.
206
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 21
G. LITIGATION
Indicate if the proposing
Consultant was involved with
any litigation in connection
with prior projects. If yes, briefly
describe the nature of the
litigation and the result.
Kitchell does not have any current litigation. Below is our litigation for the past three years.
Project:Sacramento Memorial Auditorium Project
Date Filed:November 2019
Description:Fiscus v Kitchell: Mr. Fiscus alleges injury while riding his bike in
the area near the project site. This matter was tendered to the
party responsible for the traffic control plan.
Status:Resolved.
207
840 WEST ORANGE AVENUE PRESCHOOL CONVERSION PROJECT ID PF2301 | PAGE 22
H. COST PROPOSAL/TASK HOURS
Programming and Planning 2/23 to 6/23 (4 months)
Preconstruction Services
Design/AHJ Approval 6/23 - 2/24 (9 months)
Bid/Award 2/24 - 4/24 (2 months)
Construction 5/24 - 4/25 (11 months)
Closeout 5/25 - 6/25 (1 month)
FY 2022/2023 FY 2023/2024 FY 2024/2025
Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
PRECONSTRUCTION & BID
Project Director Brian Jemo 32 32 32 20 20 20 20 20 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 --------------
Project Manager Robert Begonia 80 80 80 80 64 64 64 80 64 80 64 64 80 80 80 --------------
ADDITIONAL PRECONSTRUCTION SERVICES AS NECESSARY
EAS - Design/Constructability (as needed)EAS -------120 -120 -------------------
Estimating (as needed)Matt Chappell -40 --20 --120 -120 -------------------
Scheduler (as needed)Rick Stassi -24 ---------------------------
CONSTRUCTION & CLOSEOUT
Project Director Brian Jemo ---------------16 16 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 4 4 4 2 0
Project Manager Robert Begonia ---------------160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 80 80
Scheduler Rick Stassi ---------------12 8 8 8 8 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 0 0
Consultant will provide the breakdown of the total hours per task in the proposal (do not include the cost in the proposal).
Consultant shall prepare a separate cost proposal with a breakdown by task and responsible consultant team member.
Cost proposal shall be submitted in a separate sealed envelope from the Proposal.
RFP REQUIREMENT
Per the RFP requirement, below we have provided the breakdown of the total hours per task and did not
include the cost in the proposal. All cost information has been provided in a separate sealed envelope.
Hours Per Task
208
315 Montgomery Street, 10th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
www.kitchell.com
209
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-142 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:13a.
Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consulting Services Agreement between the CITY OF
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO with KITCHELL CEM,of Sacramento,California for Program and Construction
Management Services for the 840 West Orange Avenue (Project No.pf2301)and Westborough Preschool
Project (Project No. pf2101) in an amount not to exceed $1,353,609.
WHEREAS,840 West Orange Avenue is South San Francisco’s Main Library that will close following the
opening of the new Library | Parks and Recreation Building in Fall 2023; and
WHEREAS, Westborough Preschool is a state-licensed preschool located at Westborough Park; and
WHEREAS,in November 2020 staff presented to City Council options for the re-use of 840 West Orange
Avenue; and
WHEREAS,the 840 West Orange Avenue Preschool Conversion project is included in the City of South San
Francisco's Fiscal Year 2022-23 Capital Improvement Program (Project No. pf2301); and
WHEREAS,the Westborough Preschool project is included in the City of South San Francisco's Fiscal Year
2021-22 Capital Improvement Program (Project No. pf2101); and
WHEREAS,the City received one qualified response to the RFP for construction management services and,
upon evaluation by a selection panel and negotiation,City staff recommends selecting Kitchell CEM of
Sacramento, California for the work and enter into a consulting services agreement with that firm.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City
Council hereby approves a consulting services agreement,attached herewith and incorporated herein as Exhibit
A,with Kitchell CEM of Sacramento,California in an amount not to exceed $1,353,609,conditioned on the
consultant’s timely execution of the consulting services agreement and submission of all required documents,
including but not limited to,certificates of insurance and endorsements,in accordance with the Project
documents.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the agreement in
substantially the same form as Exhibit A and to execute any other related documents on behalf of the City upon
timely submission by Kitchell a signed contract and all other necessary documents,subject to approval as to
form by the City Attorney.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to take any other required actions
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™210
File #:23-142 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:13a.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to take any other required actions
consistent with the intent of this resolution, that do not materially increase the City’s obligations.
*****
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™211
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] 4/17/2023
City of South San Francisco and Kitchell CEM Page 1 of 16
CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND
KITCHELL CEM
THIS AGREEMENT for consulting services is made by and between the City of South San
Francisco (“City”) and Kitchell CEM (“Consultant”) (together sometimes referred to as the “Parties”) as of
_______________ (the “Effective Date”).
Section 1. SERVICES. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Consultant
shall provide to City the services described in the Scope of Work attached as Exhibit A, attached hereto
and incorporated herein, at the time and place and in the manner specified therein. In the event of a
conflict in or inconsistency between the terms of this Agreement and Exhibit A, the Agreement shall
prevail.
1.1 Term of Services. The term of this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and shall
end on December 31, 2026 the date of completion specified in Exhibit A, and Consultant
shall complete the work described in Exhibit A prior to that date, unless the term of the
Agreement is otherwise terminated or extended, as provided for in Section 8. The time
provided to Consultant to complete the services required by this Agreement shall not affect
the City’s right to terminate the Agreement, as provided for in Section 8.
1.2 Standard of Performance. 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 which Consultant is engaged in the geographical area in
which Consultant practices its profession. Consultant shall prepare all work products
required by this Agreement in a substantial, first-class manner and shall conform to the
standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in Consultant's profession.
1.3 Assignment of Personnel. Consultant shall assign only competent personnel to perform
services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, at any
time during the term of this Agreement, desires the reassignment of any such persons,
Consultant shall, immediately upon receiving notice from City of such desire of City,
reassign such person or persons.
1.4 Time. Consultant shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this
Agreement as may be reasonably necessary to meet the standard of performance
provided in Sections 1.1 and 1.2 above and to satisfy Consultant’s obligations hereunder.
Section 2. COMPENSATION. City hereby agrees to pay Consultant a sum not to exceed $1,353,609
notwithstanding any contrary indications that may be contained in Consultant’s proposal, for services to be
performed and reimbursable costs incurred under this Agreement. In the event of a conflict between this
Agreement and Consultant’s proposal, attached as Exhibit A, or Consultant’s compensation schedule
attached as Exhibit B, regarding the amount of compensation, the Agreement shall prevail. City shall pay
Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement at the time and in the manner set forth herein.
The payments specified below shall be the only payments from City to Consultant for services rendered
212
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] 4/17/2023
City of South San Francisco and Kitchell CEM Page 2 of 16
pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall submit all invoices to City in the manner specified herein.
Except as specifically authorized by City, Consultant shall not bill City for duplicate services performed by
more than one person.
Consultant and City acknowledge and agree that compensation paid by City to Consultant under this
Agreement is based upon Consultant’s estimated costs of providing the services required hereunder,
including salaries and benefits of employees and subcontractors of Consultant. Consequently, the parties
further agree that compensation hereunder is intended to include the costs of contributions to any pensions
and/or annuities to which Consultant and its employees, agents, and subcontractors may be eligible. City
therefore has no responsibility for such contributions beyond compensation required under this Agreement.
2.1 Invoices. Consultant shall submit invoices, not more often than once per month during
the term of this Agreement, based on the cost for services performed and reimbursable
costs incurred prior to the invoice date. Invoices shall contain the following information:
Serial identifications of progress bills (i.e., Progress Bill No. 1 for the first invoice,
etc.);
The beginning and ending dates of the billing period;
A task summary containing the original contract amount, the amount of prior
billings, the total due this period, the balance available under the Agreement, and
the percentage of completion;
At City’s option, for each work item in each task, a copy of the applicable time
entries or time sheets shall be submitted showing the name of the person doing
the work, the hours spent by each person, a brief description of the work, and
each reimbursable expense;
The total number of hours of work performed under the Agreement by Consultant
and each employee, agent, and subcontractor of Consultant performing services
hereunder, as well as a separate notice when the total number of hours of work by
Consultant and any individual employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant
reaches or exceeds eight hundred (800) hours, which shall include an estimate of
the time necessary to complete the work described in Exhibit A;
The amount and purpose of actual expenditures for which reimbursement is
sought;
The Consultant’s signature.
2.2 Monthly Payment. City shall make monthly payments, based on invoices received, for
services satisfactorily performed, and for authorized reimbursable costs incurred. City
shall have thirty (30) days from the receipt of an invoice that complies with all of the
requirements above to pay Consultant. City shall have no obligation to pay invoices
submitted ninety (90) days past the performance of work or incurrence of cost.
213
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] 4/17/2023
City of South San Francisco and Kitchell CEM Page 3 of 16
2.3 Final Payment. City shall pay the last ten percent (10%) of the total sum due pursuant to
this Agreement within sixty (60) days after completion of the services and submittal to City
of a final invoice, if all services required have been satisfactorily performed.
2.4 Total Payment. City shall pay for the services to be rendered by Consultant pursuant to
this Agreement. City shall not pay any additional sum for any expense or cost whatsoever
incurred by Consultant in rendering services pursuant to this Agreement. City shall make
no payment for any extra, further, or additional service pursuant to this Agreement.
In no event shall Consultant submit any invoice for an amount in excess of the maximum
amount of compensation provided above either for a task or for the entire Agreement,
unless the Agreement is modified prior to the submission of such an invoice by a properly
executed change order or amendment.
2.5 Hourly Fees. Fees for work performed by Consultant on an hourly basis shall not exceed
the amounts shown on the compensation schedule attached hereto and incorporated
herein as Exhibit B.
2.6 Reimbursable Expenses. The following constitute reimbursable expenses authorized by
this Agreement _____________________________. Reimbursable expenses shall not
exceed $_____________________. Expenses not listed above are not chargeable to
City. Reimbursable expenses are included in the total amount of compensation provided
under Section 2 of this Agreement that shall not be exceeded.
2.7 Payment of Taxes, Tax Withholding. Consultant is solely responsible for the payment of
employment taxes incurred under this Agreement and any similar federal or state taxes.
To be exempt from tax withholding, Consultant must provide City with a valid California
Franchise Tax Board form 590 (“Form 590”), as may be amended and such Form 590
shall be attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit ____. Unless Consultant
provides City with a valid Form 590 or other valid, written evidence of an exemption or
waiver from withholding, City may withhold California taxes from payments to Consultant
as required by law. Consultant shall obtain, and maintain on file for three (3) years after the
termination of this Agreement, Form 590s (or other written evidence of exemptions or
waivers) from all subcontractors. Consultant accepts sole responsibility for withholding
taxes from any non-California resident subcontractor and shall submit written
documentation of compliance with Consultant’s withholding duty to City upon request. .
2.8 Payment upon Termination. In the event that the City or Consultant terminates this
Agreement pursuant to Section 8, the City shall compensate the Consultant for all
outstanding costs and reimbursable expenses incurred for work satisfactorily completed as
of the date of written notice of termination. Consultant shall maintain adequate logs and
timesheets in order to verify costs incurred to that date.
214
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] 4/17/2023
City of South San Francisco and Kitchell CEM Page 4 of 16
2.9 Authorization to Perform Services. The Consultant is not authorized to perform any
services or incur any costs whatsoever under the terms of this Agreement until receipt of
authorization from the Contract Administrator.
2.10 Prevailing Wage. Where applicable, the wages to be paid for a day's work to all classes
of laborers, workmen, or mechanics on the work contemplated by this Agreement, shall be
not less than the prevailing rate for a day’s work in the same trade or occupation in the
locality within the state where the work hereby contemplates to be performed as
determined by the Director of Industrial Relations pursuant to the Director’s authority under
Labor Code Section 1770, et seq. Each laborer, worker or mechanic employed by
Consultant or by any subcontractor shall receive the wages herein provided for. The
Consultant shall pay two hundred dollars ($200), or whatever amount may be set by Labor
Code Section 1775, as may be amended, per day penalty for each worker paid less than
prevailing rate of per diem wages. The difference between the prevailing rate of per diem
wages and the wage paid to each worker shall be paid by the Consultant to each worker.
An error on the part of an awarding body does not relieve the Consultant from
responsibility for payment of the prevailing rate of per diem wages and penalties pursuant
to Labor Code Sections 1770 1775. The City will not recognize any claim for additional
compensation because of the payment by the Consultant for any wage rate in excess of
prevailing wage rate set forth. The possibility of wage increases is one of the elements to
be considered by the Consultant.
a. Posting of Schedule of Prevailing Wage Rates and Deductions. If the schedule of
prevailing wage rates is not attached hereto pursuant to Labor Code Section 1773.2, the
Consultant shall post at appropriate conspicuous points at the site of the project a
schedule showing all determined prevailing wage rates for the various classes of laborers
and mechanics to be engaged in work on the project under this contract and all
deductions, if any, required by law to be made from unpaid wages actually earned by the
laborers and mechanics so engaged.
b. Payroll Records. Each Consultant and subcontractor shall keep an accurate
payroll record, showing the name, address, social security number, work week, and the
actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice, worker, or other employee
employed by the Consultant in connection with the public work. Such records shall be
certified and submitted weekly as required by Labor Code Section 1776.”
Section 3. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT. Except as set forth herein, Consultant shall, at its sole
cost and expense, provide all facilities and equipment that may be necessary to perform the services
required by this Agreement. City shall make available to Consultant only the facilities and equipment listed
in this section, and only under the terms and conditions set forth herein.
City shall furnish physical facilities such as desks, filing cabinets, and conference space, as may be
reasonably necessary for Consultant’s use while consulting with City employees and reviewing records and
215
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] 4/17/2023
City of South San Francisco and Kitchell CEM Page 5 of 16
the information in possession of the City. The location, quantity, and time of furnishing those facilities shall
be in the sole discretion of City. In no event shall City be obligated to furnish any facility that may involve
incurring any direct expense, including but not limited to computer, long-distance telephone or other
communication charges, vehicles, and reproduction facilities.
Section 4. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Before beginning any work under this Agreement,
Consultant, at its own cost and expense, unless otherwise specified below, shall procure the types and
amounts of insurance listed below against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property that may
arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant and its agents,
representatives, employees, and subcontractors. Consistent with the following provisions, Consultant shall
provide Certificates of Insurance, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit C, indicating that
Consultant has obtained or currently maintains insurance that meets the requirements of this section and
under forms of insurance satisfactory, in all respects, to the City. Consultant shall maintain the insurance
policies required by this section throughout the term of this Agreement. The cost of such insurance shall be
included in the Consultant's bid. Consultant shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any
subcontract until Consultant has obtained all insurance required herein for the subcontractor(s).
4.1 Workers’ Compensation. Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, maintain
Statutory Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability Insurance for any
and all persons employed directly or indirectly by Consultant. The Statutory Workers’
Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability Insurance shall be provided with limits of
not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) per accident. In the alternative,
Consultant may rely on a self-insurance program to meet those requirements, but only if
the program of self-insurance complies fully with the provisions of the California Labor
Code. Determination of whether a self-insurance program meets the standards of the
Labor Code shall be solely in the discretion of the Contract Administrator (as defined in
Section 10.9). The insurer, if insurance is provided, or the Consultant, if a program of self-
insurance is provided, shall waive all rights of subrogation against the City and its officers,
officials, employees, and volunteers for loss arising from work performed under this
Agreement.
4.2 Commercial General and Automobile Liability Insurance.
4.2.1 General requirements. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain
commercial general and automobile liability insurance for the term of this
Agreement in an amount not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00)
per occurrence, combined single limit coverage for risks associated with the work
contemplated by this Agreement. If a Commercial General Liability Insurance or an
Automobile Liability form or other form with a general aggregate limit is used,
either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be
performed under this Agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be at least
twice the required occurrence limit. Such coverage shall include but shall not be
limited to, protection against claims arising from bodily and personal injury,
including death resulting there from, and damage to property resulting from
216
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] 4/17/2023
City of South San Francisco and Kitchell CEM Page 6 of 16
activities contemplated under this Agreement, including the use of owned and non-
owned automobiles.
4.2.2 Minimum scope of coverage. Commercial general coverage shall be at least as
broad as Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability occurrence form
CG 0001 or GL 0002 (most recent editions) covering comprehensive General
Liability and Insurance Services Office form number GL 0404 covering Broad
Form Comprehensive General Liability. Automobile coverage shall be at least as
broad as Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability form CA 0001 (ed. 12/90)
Code 8 and 9. No endorsement shall be attached limiting the coverage.
4.2.3 Additional requirements. Each of the following shall be included in the
insurance coverage or added as a certified endorsement to the policy:
a. The insurance shall cover on an occurrence or an accident basis, and not
on a claims-made basis.
b. Any failure of Consultant to comply with reporting provisions of the policy
shall not affect coverage provided to City and its officers, employees,
agents, and volunteers.
4.3 Professional Liability Insurance.
4.3.1 General requirements. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain
for the period covered by this Agreement professional liability insurance for
licensed professionals performing work pursuant to this Agreement in an amount
not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) covering the licensed
professionals’ errors and omissions. Any deductible or self-insured retention shall
not exceed ONE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS $150,000 per claim.
4.3.2 Claims-made limitations. The following provisions shall apply if the professional
liability coverage is written on a claims-made form:
a. The retroactive date of the policy must be shown and must be before the
date of the Agreement.
b. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be
provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the Agreement or
the work, so long as commercially available at reasonable rates.
c. If coverage is canceled or not renewed and it is not replaced with another
claims-made policy form with a retroactive date that precedes the date of
this Agreement, Consultant must provide extended reporting coverage for
a minimum of five (5) years after completion of the Agreement or the work.
The City shall have the right to exercise, at the Consultant’s sole cost and
217
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] 4/17/2023
City of South San Francisco and Kitchell CEM Page 7 of 16
expense, any extended reporting provisions of the policy, if the Consultant
cancels or does not renew the coverage.
d. A copy of the claim reporting requirements must be submitted to the City
prior to the commencement of any work under this Agreement.
4.4 All Policies Requirements.
4.4.1 Acceptability of insurers. All insurance required by this section is to be placed
with insurers with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VII.
4.4.2 Verification of coverage. Prior to beginning any work under this Agreement,
Consultant shall furnish City with complete copies of all policies delivered to
Consultant by the insurer, including complete copies of all endorsements attached
to those policies. All copies of policies and certified endorsements shall show the
signature of a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. If
the City does not receive the required insurance documents prior to the Consultant
beginning work, it shall not waive the Consultant’s obligation to provide them. The
City reserves the right to require complete copies of all required insurance policies
at any time.
4.4.3 Notice of Reduction in or Cancellation of Coverage. A certified endorsement
shall be attached to all insurance obtained pursuant to this Agreement stating that
coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, or 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. In the event that any
coverage required by this section is reduced, limited, cancelled, or materially
affected in any other manner, Consultant shall provide written notice to City at
Consultant’s earliest possible opportunity and in no case later than ten (10)
working days after Consultant is notified of the change in coverage.
4.4.4 Additional insured; primary insurance. City and its officers, employees, agents,
and volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to each of the
following: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of Consultant,
including the insured’s general supervision of Consultant; products and completed
operations of Consultant, as applicable; premises owned, occupied, or used by
Consultant; and automobiles owned, leased, or used by the Consultant in the
course of providing services pursuant to this Agreement. The coverage shall
contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to City or its
officers, employees, agents, or volunteers.
A certified endorsement must be attached to all policies stating that coverage is
primary insurance with respect to the City and its officers, officials, employees and
volunteers, and that no insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City shall be
called upon to contribute to a loss under the coverage.
218
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] 4/17/2023
City of South San Francisco and Kitchell CEM Page 8 of 16
4.4.5 Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Consultant shall disclose to and
obtain the approval of City for the self-insured retentions and deductibles before
beginning any of the services or work called for by any term of this Agreement.
Further, if the Consultant’s insurance policy includes a self-insured retention that
must be paid by a named insured as a precondition of the insurer’s liability, or
which has the effect of providing that payments of the self-insured retention by
others, including additional insureds or insurers do not serve to satisfy the self-
insured retention, such provisions must be modified by special endorsement so as
to not apply to the additional insured coverage required by this agreement so as to
not prevent any of the parties to this agreement from satisfying or paying the self-
insured retention required to be paid as a precondition to the insurer’s liability.
Additionally, the certificates of insurance must note whether the policy does or
does not include any self-insured retention and also must disclose the deductible.
During the period covered by this Agreement, only upon the prior express written
authorization of Contract Administrator, Consultant may increase such deductibles
or self-insured retentions with respect to City, its officers, employees, agents, and
volunteers. The Contract Administrator may condition approval of an increase in
deductible or self-insured retention levels with a requirement that Consultant
procure a bond, guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim
administration, and defense expenses that is satisfactory in all respects to each of
them.
4.4.6 Subcontractors. Consultant shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its
policies or shall furnish separate certificates and certified endorsements for each
subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the
requirements stated herein.
4.4.7 Wasting Policy. No insurance policy required by Section 4 shall include a
“wasting” policy limit.
4.4.8 Variation. The City may approve a variation in the foregoing insurance
requirements, upon a determination that the coverage, scope, limits, and forms of
such insurance are either not commercially available, or that the City’s interests
are otherwise fully protected.
4.5 Remedies. In addition to any other remedies City may have if Consultant fails to provide
or maintain any insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time
herein required, City may, at its sole option exercise any of the following remedies, which
are alternatives to other remedies City may have and are not the exclusive remedy for
Consultant’s breach:
a. Obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such
insurance from any sums due under the Agreement;
219
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] 4/17/2023
City of South San Francisco and Kitchell CEM Page 9 of 16
b. Order Consultant to stop work under this Agreement or withhold any payment that
becomes due to Consultant hereunder, or both stop work and withhold any payment,
until Consultant demonstrates compliance with the requirements hereof; and/or
c. Terminate this Agreement.
Section 5. INDEMNIFICATION AND CONSULTANT’S RESPONSIBILITIES. To the fullest extent
permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend with counsel 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 damage to property, or any violation of any federal, state, or municipal law or
ordinance, to the extent caused, in whole or in part, by the willful misconduct or negligent acts or omissions
of Consultant or its employees, subcontractors, or agents, by acts for which they could be held strictly
liable, or by the quality or character of their work. The foregoing obligation of Consultant shall not apply
when (1) the injury, loss of life, damage to property, or violation of law arises wholly from the gross
negligence or willful misconduct of the City or its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers and (2) the
actions of Consultant or its employees, subcontractor, or agents have contributed in no part to the injury,
loss of life, damage to property, or violation of law. It is understood that the duty of Consultant to indemnify
and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code.
Acceptance by City of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not
relieve Consultant from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification
and hold harmless clause shall apply to any damages or claims for damages whether or not such insurance
policies shall have been determined to apply. By execution of this Agreement, Consultant acknowledges
and agrees to the provisions of this Section and that it is a material element of consideration.
In the event that Consultant or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant providing services
under this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees
Retirement System (PERS) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of City, Consultant shall
indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any employee and/or employer contributions
for PERS benefits on behalf of Consultant or its employees, agents, or subcontractors, as well as for the
payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of
City.
Section 6. STATUS OF CONSULTANT.
6.1 Independent Contractor. 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
right to control Consultant only insofar as the results of Consultant's services rendered
pursuant to this Agreement and assignment of personnel pursuant to Subparagraph 1.3;
however, otherwise City shall not have the right to control the means by which Consultant
accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other
City, state, or federal policy, rule, regulation, law, or ordinance to the contrary, Consultant
and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing services under this
Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any and
220
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] 4/17/2023
City of South San Francisco and Kitchell CEM Page 10 of 16
all claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including
but not limited to eligibility to enroll in the California Public Employees Retirement System
(PERS) as an employee of City and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for
employer contributions and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits.
6.2 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 or to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.
Section 7. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS.
7.1 Governing Law. The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement.
7.2 Compliance with Applicable Laws. Consultant and any subcontractors shall comply with
all laws applicable to the performance of the work hereunder.
7.3 Other Governmental Regulations. To the extent that this Agreement may be funded by
fiscal assistance from another governmental entity, Consultant and any subcontractors
shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations to which City is bound by the terms of
such fiscal assistance program.
7.4 Licenses and Permits. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant and
its employees, agents, and any subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications,
and approvals, including from City, of what-so-ever nature that are legally required to
practice their respective professions. Consultant represents and warrants to City that
Consultant and its employees, agents, any subcontractors shall, at their sole cost and
expense, keep in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses,
permits, and approvals that are legally required to practice their respective professions. In
addition to the foregoing, Consultant and any subcontractors shall obtain and maintain
during the term of this Agreement valid Business Licenses from City.
7.5 Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity. Consultant shall not discriminate, on the
basis of a person’s race, religion, color, national origin, age, physical or mental handicap or
disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, or sexual orientation, against any
employee, applicant for employment, subcontractor, bidder for a subcontract, or participant
in, recipient of, or applicant for any services or programs provided by Consultant under this
Agreement. Consultant shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws,
policies, rules, and requirements related to equal opportunity and nondiscrimination in
employment, contracting, and the provision of any services that are the subject of this
Agreement, including but not limited to the satisfaction of any positive obligations required
of Consultant thereby.
Consultant shall include the provisions of this Subsection in any subcontract approved by
the Contract Administrator or this Agreement.
221
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] 4/17/2023
City of South San Francisco and Kitchell CEM Page 11 of 16
Section 8. TERMINATION AND MODIFICATION.
8.1 Termination. City may cancel this Agreement at any time and without cause upon written
notification to Consultant.
Consultant may cancel this Agreement for cause upon 30 days’ written notice to City and
shall include in such notice the reasons for cancellation.
In the event of termination, Consultant shall be entitled to compensation for services
performed to the date of notice of termination; City, however, may condition payment of
such compensation upon Consultant delivering to City all materials described in Section
9.1.
8.2 Extension. City may, in its sole and exclusive discretion, extend the end date of this
Agreement beyond that provided for in Subsection 1.1. Any such extension shall require a
written amendment to this Agreement, as provided for herein. Consultant understands and
agrees that, if City grants such an extension, City shall have no obligation to provide
Consultant with compensation beyond the maximum amount provided for in this
Agreement. Similarly, unless authorized by the Contract Administrator, City shall have no
obligation to reimburse Consultant for any otherwise reimbursable expenses incurred
during the extension period.
8.3 Amendments. The parties may amend this Agreement only by a writing signed by all the
parties.
8.4 Assignment and Subcontracting. City and Consultant recognize and agree that this
Agreement contemplates personal performance by Consultant and is based upon a
determination of Consultant’s unique personal competence, experience, and specialized
personal knowledge. Moreover, a substantial inducement to City for entering into this
Agreement was and is the professional reputation and competence of Consultant.
Consultant may not assign this Agreement or any interest therein without the prior written
approval of the Contract Administrator. Consultant shall not assign or subcontract any
portion of the performance contemplated and provided for herein, other than to the
subcontractors noted in the proposal, without prior written approval of the Contract
Administrator.
8.5 Survival. All obligations arising prior to the termination of this Agreement and all
provisions of this Agreement allocating liability between City and Consultant shall survive
the termination of this Agreement.
8.6 Options upon Breach by Consultant. If Consultant materially breaches any of the terms
of this Agreement, City’s remedies shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
222
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] 4/17/2023
City of South San Francisco and Kitchell CEM Page 12 of 16
8.6.1 Immediately terminate the Agreement;
8.6.2 Retain the plans, specifications, drawings, reports, design documents, and any
other work product prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement;
8.6.3 Retain a different consultant to complete the work described in Exhibit A not
finished by Consultant; or
8.6.4 Charge Consultant the difference between the cost to complete the work
described in Exhibit A that is unfinished at the time of breach and the amount that
City would have paid Consultant pursuant to Section 2 if Consultant had
completed the work.
Section 9. KEEPING AND STATUS OF RECORDS.
9.1 Records Created as Part of Consultant’s Performance. All reports, data, maps,
models, charts, studies, surveys, photographs, memoranda, plans, studies, specifications,
records, files, or any other documents or materials, in electronic or any other form, that
Consultant prepares or obtains pursuant to this Agreement and that relate to the matters
covered hereunder shall be the property of the City. Consultant hereby agrees to deliver
those documents to the City upon termination of the Agreement. It is understood and
agreed that the documents and other materials, including but not limited to those described
above, prepared pursuant to this Agreement are prepared specifically for the City and are
not necessarily suitable for any future or other use. City and Consultant agree that, until
final approval by City, all data, plans, specifications, reports and other documents are
confidential and will not be released to third parties without prior written consent of both
parties unless required by law.
9.2 Consultant’s Books and Records. Consultant shall maintain any and all ledgers, books
of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents
evidencing or relating to charges for services or expenditures and disbursements charged
to the City under this Agreement for a minimum of three (3) years, or for any longer period
required by law, from the date of final payment to the Consultant to this Agreement.
9.3 Inspection and Audit of Records. Any records or documents that Section 9.2 of this
Agreement requires Consultant to maintain shall be made available for inspection, audit,
and/or copying at any time during regular business hours, upon oral or written request of
the City. Under California Government Code Section 8546.7, if the amount of public funds
expended under this Agreement exceeds TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($10,000.00), the
Agreement shall be subject to the examination and audit of the State Auditor, at the
request of City or as part of any audit of the City, for a period of three (3) years after final
payment under the Agreement.
9.4 Records Submitted in Response to an Invitation to Bid or Request for Proposals. All
responses to a Request for Proposals (RFP) or invitation to bid issued by the City become
223
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] 4/17/2023
City of South San Francisco and Kitchell CEM Page 13 of 16
the exclusive property of the City. At such time as the City selects a bid, all proposals
received become a matter of public record, and shall be regarded as public records, with
the exception of those elements in each proposal that are defined by Consultant and
plainly marked as “Confidential,” "Business Secret" or “Trade Secret."
The City shall not be liable or in any way responsible for the disclosure of any such
proposal or portions thereof, if Consultant has not plainly marked it as a "Trade Secret" or
"Business Secret," or if disclosure is required under the Public Records Act.
Although the California Public Records Act recognizes that certain confidential trade secret
information may be protected from disclosure, the City may not be in a position to establish
that the information that a prospective bidder submits is a trade secret. If a request is
made for information marked "Trade Secret" or "Business Secret," and the requester takes
legal action seeking release of the materials it believes does not constitute trade secret
information, by submitting a proposal, Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold
harmless the City, its agents and employees, from any judgment, fines, penalties, and
award of attorneys fees awarded against the City in favor of the party requesting the
information, and any and all costs connected with that defense. This obligation to
indemnify survives the City's award of the contract. Consultant agrees that this
indemnification survives as long as the trade secret information is in the City's possession,
which includes a minimum retention period for such documents.
Section 10 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
10.1 Attorneys’ Fees. If a party to this Agreement brings any action, including arbitration or 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.
10.2 Venue. In the 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 San Mateo or in the United States District Court for
the Northern District of California.
10.3 Severability. 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.
10.4 No Implied Waiver of Breach. The waiver of any breach of a specific provision of this
Agreement does not constitute a waiver of any other breach of that term or any other term
of this Agreement.
224
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] 4/17/2023
City of South San Francisco and Kitchell CEM Page 14 of 16
10.5 Successors and Assigns. The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of
and shall apply to and bind the successors and assigns of the parties.
10.6 Use of Recycled Products. Consultant shall prepare and submit all reports, written
studies and other printed material on recycled paper to the extent it is available at equal or
less cost than virgin paper.
10.7 Conflict of Interest. Consultant may serve other clients, but none whose activities within
the corporate limits of City or whose business, regardless of location, would place
Consultant in a “conflict of interest,” as that term is defined in the Political Reform Act,
codified at California Government Code Section 81000 et seq.
Consultant shall not employ any City official in the work performed pursuant to this
Agreement. No officer or employee of City shall have any financial interest in this
Agreement that would violate California Government Code Sections 1090 et seq.
Consultant hereby warrants that it is not now, nor has it been in the previous twelve (12)
months, an employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City. If Consultant was an
employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City in the previous twelve (12) months,
Consultant warrants that it did not participate in any manner in the forming of this
Agreement. Consultant understands that, if this Agreement is made in violation of
Government Code §1090 et.seq., the entire Agreement is void and Consultant will not be
entitled to any compensation for services performed pursuant to this Agreement, including
reimbursement of expenses, and Consultant will be required to reimburse the City for any
sums paid to the Consultant. Consultant understands that, in addition to the foregoing, it
may be subject to criminal prosecution for a violation of Government Code § 1090 and, if
applicable, will be disqualified from holding public office in the State of California.
10.8 Solicitation. Consultant agrees not to solicit business at any meeting, focus group, or
interview related to this Agreement, either orally or through any written materials.
10.9 Contract Administration. This Agreement shall be administered by _________________
("Contract Administrator"). All correspondence shall be directed to or through the Contract
Administrator or his or her designee.
10.10 Notices. All notices and other communications which are required or may be given under
this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given (i) when
received if personally delivered; (ii) when received if transmitted by telecopy, if received
during normal business hours on a business day (or if not, the next business day after
delivery) provided that such facsimile is legible and that at the time such facsimile is sent
the sending Party receives written confirmation of receipt; (iii) if sent for next day delivery
to a domestic address by recognized overnight delivery service (e.g., Federal Express);
and (iv) upon receipt, if sent by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested. In
each case notice shall be sent to the respective Parties as follows: Consultant
Kitchell CEM
225
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] 4/17/2023
City of South San Francisco and Kitchell CEM Page 15 of 16
Wendy Cohen, President
2450 Venture Oaks Way #500,
Sacramento, CA 95833
City:
City Clerk
City of South San Francisco
400 Grand Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
10.11 Professional Seal. Where applicable in the determination of the contract administrator,
the first page of a technical report, first page of design specifications, and each page of
construction drawings shall be stamped/sealed and signed by the licensed professional
responsible for the report/design preparation. The stamp/seal shall be in a block entitled
"Seal and Signature of Registered Professional with report/design responsibility," as in the
following example.
Seal and Signature of Registered Professional with
report/design responsibility.
10.12 Integration. This Agreement, including all Exhibits attached hereto, and incorporated
herein, represents the entire and integrated agreement between City and Consultant and
supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral
pertaining to the matters herein.
10.13 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and/or by facsimile or
other electronic means, and when each Party has signed and delivered at least one such
counterpart, each counterpart shall be deemed an original, and, when taken together with
other signed counterpart, shall constitute one Agreement, which shall be binding upon and
effective as to all Parties..
10.14 Construction. The headings in this Agreement are for the purpose of reference only and
shall not limit or otherwise affect any of the terms of this Agreement. The parties have had
an equal opportunity to participate in the drafting of this Agreement; therefore any
construction as against the drafting party shall not apply to this Agreement.
The Parties have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date.
226
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] 4/17/2023
City of South San Francisco and Kitchell CEM Page 16 of 16
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO Consultants
____________________________ _____________________________________
City Manager NAME:
TITLE:
Attest:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
____________________________
City Attorney
2729962.1
227
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
228
EXHIBIT B
COMPENSATION SCHEDULE
229
EXHIBIT C
INSURANCE CERTIFICATES
230
[OPTIONAL] EXHIBIT D
FORM 590
231
Hr Rate
Change Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Hours Charge
Hr Rate
Change Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Hours Charge
242$ 16 16 32 7,753$ 252$ 0 -$
218$ 80 80 160 34,916$ 227$ 0 -$
206$ 0 -$ 214$ 0 -$
206$ 70 70 14,385$ 214$ 70 70 70 210 44,882$
206$ 0 -$ 214$ 25 25 50 10,686$
206$ 0 -$ 214$ 0 -$
0 -$ 0 -$
242$ 16 16 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 4 92 22,290$ 252$ 4 4 2 0 10 2,520$
218$ 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 1600 349,158$ 227$ 160 160 80 80 480 108,937$
206$ 12 8 8 8 8 4 4 4 4 4 64 13,152$ 214$ 2 2 0 0 4 855$
2018 441,654$ 754 167,880$
Hrs Cost
1124 240,931
288 63,182
2168 476,882
490 36,816
817,811
604 119,350
380 79,027
50 10,686
140,000
Grand Total w/ Add'l Precon & Cx 1,166,875
FY 25/26 Sub Total
840 West Orange Preschool Conversion
Cost Breakdown by Task
Design
Bid/Procurement
Construction
Closeout
Total Base Cost
Add'l Precon as Necessary
EAS Commissioning Services
Facility Maintenance Services
4 mo Contingency of $35K
FY 24/25 Sub Total
4/25/2023
Hr Rate
Change Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Hours Charge
Hr Rate
Change Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Hours Charge
242$ 16 16 16 16 64 15,506$ 252$ 0 -$
218$ 64 80 80 80 304 66,340$ 227$ 0 -$
206$ 0 -$ 214$ 0 -$
206$ 0 -$ 214$ 0 -$
206$ 0 -$ 214$ 70 70 70 70 280 59,843$
206$ 0 -$ 214$ 25 25 50 10,686$
206$ 0 -$ 214$ 0 -$
206$ 0 -$ 214$ 0 -$
242$ 16 16 8 8 8 8 8 8 80 19,382$ 252$ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 4 4 4 4 80 20,158$
218$ 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 1280 279,326$ 227$ 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 1920 435,749$
164$ 12 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 68 11,179$ 171$ 8 8 8 8 8 8 4 4 4 4 4 4 72 12,311$
1796 391,734$ 2402 538,746$
Hrs Cost
608 131,659
576 124,139
288 64,003
3500 778,105
1,097,906
750 148,200
380 79,603
50 10,686
140,000
Grand Total w/ Add'l Precon & Cx 1,476,395
CD Design Phase
Facility Maintenance Services
EAS Commissioning Services
4 mo Contingency of $35K
Bid/Procurement
Construction
Closeout
Total Base Cost
Add'l Precon as Necessary
Sub Total
Westborough Childcare Expansion
Feasibility Review
Cost Breakdown by Task
Programing to DD-Phase Design
FY 24/25Sub TotalFY 24/25
4/25/2023
840 West Orange Preschool Conversion
Programming and Planning 4/23 start (5-months)
Pre-Construction Services
Design/AHJ Approval (8-months)
Bid /Award (3-months)
Construction (12-months)
Closeout (2-months)
840 West Orange Preschool Conversion Hourly Rate Mar Apr May Jun Hours Charge
Hr Rate
Change Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Hours Charge
Hr Rate
Change Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Hours Charge
Hr Rate
Change Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Hours Charge
PRECONSTRUCTON & BID (Included in Base Cost)
Project Director Brian Jemo $224 32 32 32 96 21,504$ 233$ 20 20 20 20 20 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 212 49,388$ 242$ 0 -$ 252$ 0 -$
Project Manager Robert Begonia $202 80 80 80 240 48,422$ 210$ 80 64 64 64 80 64 80 64 64 80 80 80 864 181,293$ 218$ 0 -$ 227$ 0 -$
Additional Preconstruction Services As Necessary
EAS - Design/Constructability (as needed)EAS $152 0 -$ 158$ 120 120 240 37,939$ 164$ 0 -$ 171$ 0 -$
EAS - Commissioning EAS $190 0 -$ 198$ 50 50 100 19,760$ 206$ 70 70 70 210 43,156$ 214$ 70 70 14,961$
Facility Maintenance / Total Cost of Operations Planning FM $190 0 -$ 198$ 0 -$ 206$ 25 25 5,138$ 214$ 25 25 5,343$
Estimating (as needed)Matt Chappell $152 80 80 12,160$ 158$ 20 120 120 260 41,101$ 164$ 0 -$ 171$ 0 -$
Scheduler (as needed)Rick Stassi $152 24 24 3,648$ 158$ 0 -$ 0 -$ 0 -$
CONSTRUCTION & CLOSEOUT (Included in Base Cost)
Project Director Brian Jemo $224 0 -$ 233$ 0 -$ 242$ 16 16 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 4 4 4 100 24,228$ 252$ 2 0 2 504$
Project Manager Robert Begonia $202 0 -$ 210$ 40 40 80 16,786$ 218$ 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 1920 418,989$ 227$ 80 80 160 36,312$
Scheduler Rick Stassi $152 0 -$ 158$ 0 -$ 164$ 12 8 8 8 8 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 68 11,179$ 171$ 0 0 0 -$
subtotal 440 85,734$ 1756 346,267$ 2323 502,690$ 257 57,120$
Proposal Comments:
Hrs Cost
1124 239,066
288 61,5412168471,183
162 36,816
808,607
604 94,848
380 77,877
50 10,481
140,000
1,131,812
Grand Total w/ Add'l Precon &
Cx
Design
Cost Breakdown by Task
840 West Orange Preschool Conversion
3. Commissioning hours included allow for LEED v4 Enhanced Commissioning - Option 1, Path 1.
2. Section 2 of the RFP document identified a Scope of Work for the project. Section 6 of the scope of work
refers to providing
a full-time inspector for the project during construction. Our proposal has incorporated a full-time project manager
during construction of the project. That project manager will provide day-to-day on-the-job observation and will
oversee quality control for the project. Based on our previous experience working with the City of SSF specific
construction inspections are carried out by the city's in-house inspectors. The Kitchell full-time project manager will
coordinate inspections with the contractor and the general contractor but we have not incorporated a full-time
inspector into this staffing/working plan.
1. Section 2 of the RFP document identified a Scope of Work for the project. Section 5 identifies services to be
provided during construction. Paragraph H identifies that the construction manager shall review and respond to
submittals with minimal assistance from the Design Engineers. The Kitchell project manager will conduct submittal
review to confirm compliance with the specifications however all submittals will be transmitted to the Architect of
record for their review and approval.
Facility Maintenance Services
4 mo Contingency of $35K
Bid/ProcurementConstruction
Closeout
Total Base Cost
Add'l Precon as Necessary
EAS Commissioning Services
FY 25/26 Sub TotalFY 22/23 Sub Total FY 23/24 Sub Total FY 24/25 Sub Total
4/25/2023
840 West Orange Preschool Conversion
Programming and Planning 4/23 start (5-months)
Pre-Construction Services
Design/AHJ Approval (8-months)
Bid /Award (3-months)
Construction (12-months)
Closeout (2-months)
840 West Orange Preschool Conversion Hourly Rate Mar Apr May Jun Hours Charge
Hr Rate
Change Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Hours Charge Mar Apr May Jun Hours Charge
PRECONSTRUCTON & BID (Included in Base Cost)
Project Director Brian Jemo $224 32 32 32 96 21,504$ 233$ 20 20 20 20 20 100 23,296$ 0 -$
Project Manager Robert Begonia $202 80 80 80 240 48,422$ 210$ 80 64 64 64 80 352 73,860$ 0 -$
Additional Preconstruction Services As Necessary
EAS - Design/Constructability (as needed)EAS $152 0 -$ 158$ 120 120 18,970$ 0 -$
EAS - Commissioning EAS $190 0 -$ 198$ 50 50 9,880$ 0 -$
Facility Maintenance / Total Cost of Operations Planning FM $190 0 -$ 198$ 0 -$ 0 -$
Estimating (as needed)Matt Chappell $152 80 80 12,160$ 158$ 20 120 140 22,131$ 0 -$
Scheduler (as needed)Rick Stassi $152 24 24 3,648$ 158$ 0 -$ 0 -$
CONSTRUCTION & CLOSEOUT (Included in Base Cost)
Project Director Brian Jemo $224 0 -$ 233$ 0 -$ 0 -$
Project Manager Robert Begonia $202 0 -$ 210$ 0 -$ 0 -$
Scheduler Rick Stassi $152 0 -$ 158$ 0 -$ 0 -$
subtotal 440 85,734$ 762 148,137$ 0 -$
Hrs Cost
788 167,083
0 0
0 0
0 0
167,083
364 56,909
50 9,880
0 0
Grand Total w/ Add'l Precon & Cx 233,872
Westborough Childcare Expansion Feasibility Review Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Programming and Planning 5/23 to 7/23 (3-months)
-Develop goals and objectives
- Develop budget and master schedule
- Kitchell EAS to perform Facility Condition Assessment
Onboarding and Preliminary Consultant Assessments (6 to 7 months)
- Advertise/Award Design contract (first 3 months)
-Advertise/Award Consultant Agreements (Survey, Geotech, Hazmat,
CEQA, Fire Hydrant Flow) (first 3 months)
-Manage consultant scopes (AOR, survey, geotech borings, etc...) 2nd 3-
4 months
-Coordinate meetings with End Users/City and consultants to
discuss/review feasibility. 2nd 3-4 months
Westborough Childcare Expansion Feasibility Review Hourly Rate Mar Apr May Jun Hours Charge
Hr Rate
Change Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Hours Charge Mar Apr May Jun Hours Charge
Program Development
Project Director Brian Jemo $224 40 40 80 17,920$ 233$ 32 20 20 20 20 112 26,092$ 0 -$
Project Manager Robert Begonia $202 0 -$ 210$ 80 64 64 64 64 336 70,503$ 0 -$
Support Services As Necessary
EAS - Facility Condition Assessment EAS $190 0 -$ 198$ 166 166 32,802$ 0 -$
Estimating (as needed)Matt Chappell $190 0 -$ 198$ 80 160 240 47,424$ 0 -$
Scheduler (as needed)Rick Stassi $190 0 -$ 198$ 24 24 4,742$ 0 -$
CONSTRUCTION & CLOSEOUT
Project Director Brian Jemo $224 0 -$ 233$ 0 -$ 0 -$
Project Manager Robert Begonia $202 0 -$ 210$ 0 -$ 0 -$
Scheduler Rick Stassi $152 0 -$ 158$ 0 -$ 0 -$
subtotal 80 17,920$ 878 181,563$ 0 -$
Proposal Comments:
Hrs Cost
958 199,483
199,483
433,354
3. Commissioning hours included allow for LEED v4 Enhanced Commissioning - Option 1, Path 1.
4. CM Services for the future Westborough site would be determined at a later date but could be budgeted with a
ROM of $800k to $2M depending on desing, pahsing and scheudle
Total for both projects thru
November
Total Base Cost
2. Section 2 of the RFP document identified a Scope of Work for the project. Section 6 of the scope of work refers to
providing
a full-time inspector for the project during construction. Our proposal has incorporated a full-time project manager
during construction of the project. That project manager will provide day-to-day on-the-job observation and will
oversee quality control for the project. Based on our previous experience working with the City of SSF specific
construction inspections are carried out by the city's in-house inspectors. The Kitchell full-time project manager will
coordinate inspections with the contractor and the general contractor but we have not incorporated a full-time
inspector into this staffing/working plan.
Sub Total
Westborough Childcare Expansion
Feasibility Review
Cost Breakdown by Task
1. Section 2 of the RFP document identified a Scope of Work for the project. Section 5 identifies services to be
provided during construction. Paragraph H identifies that the construction manager shall review and respond to
submittals with minimal assistance from the Design Engineers. The Kitchell project manager will conduct submittal
review to confirm compliance with the specifications however all submittals will be transmitted to the Architect of
record for their review and approval.
Design
Bid/Procurement
Construction
Closeout
Facility Maintenance Services
4 mo Contingency of $35K
FY 22/23 FY 23/24
FY 22/23 Sub Total FY 23/24 Sub Total FY 24/25
EAS Commissioning Services
FY 25/26 Sub Total
840 West Orange Preschool Conversion
Cost Breakdown by Task
Design
Bid/Procurement
Construction
Closeout
Total Base Cost
Add'l Precon as Necessary
FY 22/23 Sub Total FY 23/24 Sub Total
4/25/2023
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-261 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:14.
Report regarding a resolution approving budget amendment 23.065 appropriating $9,000,000 in the City of
South San Francisco’s Fund 280 for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 for the development of Community Civic Campus
Phase 3: Fire Station #63 (Project Number pf2306). (Jacob Gilchrist, Director of Capital Projects)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution approving budget amendment 23.065
appropriating $9,000,000 in the City of South San Francisco’s Fund 280 for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 for the
development of Community Civic Campus Phase 3: Fire Station #63 (Project Number pf2306).
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The replacement of Fire Station #63 at the Municipal Services Building (MSB)was considered as Phase 3 of
the Community Civic Campus in 2016.In 2018,the Fire Station project was put on hold due to cost increases
in Phases 1 and 2 of the Civic Campus.More recently,at a July 2021 City Council meeting,Council adopted a
resolution approving a Purchase and Sale Agreement (PSA)for the acquisition of 71 Camaritas Avenue for the
purposes of relocating Fire Station #63.
Following the PSA and at the direction of City Council,due diligence efforts were conducted including a
preliminary layout of the site to ensure it would accommodate a Fire Station.Staff is currently forecasting a
total project cost of $32 Million for the new Fire Station #63 and assuming a two-story design.
The bulk of the funding for Fire Station #63 is provided by the Community Benefit Payment required by the
Development Agreement for the Southline project,a redevelopment of a 28.5 acre industrial site with up to 2.8
million square feet of office /research &development (R&D),which was approved by Council on July 27,
2022.The developer of the Southline project,Lane Partners,will contribute a total of $25 million in
Community Benefit Payments. The first $9 million installment was paid to the City in March 2023.
Just over half of this 9 million appropriation is to be spent on the professional design and management services
provided by the Community Civic Campus consultants,primarily SmithGroup and Kitchell CEM and their
subconsultants.Approved by City Council on October 12,2022,the professional services fees for SmithGroup
and Kitchell are:
SmithGroup Design Services - Fire Station 63 $3,500,000
Kitchell Management Services - Fire Station 63 $2,100,000
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to FY 2022-23.This $9 million in funding for the Fire Station #63 Project is provided
by the first Community Benefit Payment required by the Development Agreement for the Southline project,a
redevelopment of a 28.5 acre industrial site with up to 2.8 million square feet of office /research &
development (R&D), which was approved by Council on July 27, 2022.
RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN
This effort is included in the City’s Strategic Plan.It aligns with Priority #2 which is focused on enhancingCity of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™232
File #:23-261 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:14.
This effort is included in the City’s Strategic Plan.It aligns with Priority #2 which is focused on enhancing
quality of life and Priority #3 which is focused on enhancing public safety.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution approving budget amendment 23.065 appropriating
$9,000,000 in the City of South San Francisco’s Fund 280 for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 for the development of
Community Civic Campus Phase 3: Fire Station #63 Project Number pf2306.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™233
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-262 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:14a.
Resolution approving budget amendment 23.065 appropriating $9,000,000 in the City of South San Francisco’s
Fund 280 for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 for the development of Community Civic Campus Phase 3:Fire Station
#63 (Project Number pf2306).
WHEREAS,on July 27,2022,the City Council approved a Development Agreement for the Southline project,
a redevelopment of a 28.5 acre industrial site with up to 2.8 million square feet of office /research &
development (R&D); and
WHEREAS,the developer of the Southline project,Lane Partners will contribute a total of $25 million in
Community Benefit Payments; and
WHEREAS, the first $9 million installment was paid to the City in March 2023; and
WHEREAS,the City is committed to enhancing quality of life and public safety for all residents of South San
Francisco; and
WHEREAS,the intent of this project is to replace the existing Fire Station #63 with a state of the art facility at
71 Camaritas Avenue.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City
Council hereby:
1.Finds the foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein as part of this Resolution.
2.Approves a total of $9 million in funds to Fire Station #63 (Project Number pf2306) from Fund 280.
3.Authorizes the Finance Director,or their designee,to take all necessary budgetary actions to carry out
the intent of this Resolution, which will straddle appropriations across multiple City fiscal years.
4.Authorizes the City Manager to take any other related actions necessary to carry out the intent of this
Resolution.
*****
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/27/2023Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™234
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-342 Agenda Date:4/26/2023
Version:1 Item #:15.
Conference with real property negotiators
Property: 226-230 Grand Ave., 232-238 Grand Ave., and 240-246 Grand Ave
Agency negotiator: Nell Selander, ECD Director; Danielle Thoe, Housing Manager; Sky Woodruff, City
Attorney
Negotiating parties: To be announced prior to closed session
Under negotiation: Price and terms
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/21/2023Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™235