Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
08.28.2024@630 Regular CC
Wednesday, August 28, 2024 6:30 PM City of South San Francisco P.O. Box 711 South San Francisco, CA Library Parks & Recreation Building, Council Chambers 901 Civic Campus Way, South San Francisco, CA City Council JAMES COLEMAN, Mayor (District 4) EDDIE FLORES, Vice Mayor (District 5) MARK ADDIEGO, Councilmember (District 1) MARK NAGALES, Councilmember (District 2) BUENAFLOR NICOLAS, Councilmember (District 3) ROSA GOVEA ACOSTA, City Clerk FRANK RISSO, City Treasurer SHARON RANALS, City Manager SKY WOODRUFF, City Attorney Regular Meeting Agenda 1 August 28, 2024City Council Regular Meeting Agenda How to observe the Meeting (no public comment, including via Zoom): 1) Local cable channel: Astound, Channel 26, Comcast, Channel 27, or AT&T, Channel 99 2) https://www.ssf.net/Government/Video-Streaming-City-and-Council-Meetings/City-Council 3) https://www.youtube.com/@CityofSouthSanFrancisco/streams 4) Zoom meeting (streaming only): https://ssf-net.zoom.us/j/88636346631 Webinar ID: 886 3634 6631 Join by Telephone: +1 669 900 6833 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 4:30 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 During a meeting, comments can only be made in person: Complete a Digital Speaker Card located at the entrance to the Council Chambers. 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 8/29/2024 2 August 28, 2024City Council Regular Meeting Agenda CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AGENDA REVIEW ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM STAFF PRESENTATIONS Proclamation recognizing August as National Water Quality Month. (James Coleman, Mayor) 1. Proclamation recognizing September as Childhood Cancer Awareness Month. (James Coleman, Mayor) 2. Proclamation Recognizing September as National Preparedness Month. (James Coleman, Mayor) 3. Presentation regarding status update of City Council 2024 Priorities as of August 2024 (Rich Lee, Assistant City Manager) 4. COUNCIL COMMENTS/REQUESTS 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 4:30 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. Page 3 City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2024 3 August 28, 2024City 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 August 14, 2024. (Rosa Govea Acosta, City Clerk)5. Report regarding a resolution authorizing the City Manager or designee to purchase several remnant parcels (Assessor Parcel Numbers 091022010, 091022020, 091022030, 091025010, 091034080, and 015031090) with outstanding delinquent taxes in South San Francisco subject to an upcoming County of San Mateo Chapter 8 non-objection agreement tax sale. (Nell Selander, Economic & Community Development Director; Greg Mediati, Parks & Recreation Director; and Adena Friedman, Chief Planner) 6. Resolution authorizing the City Manager or designee to purchase several remnant parcels (Assessor Parcel Numbers 091022010, 091022020, 091022030, 091025010, 091034080, and 015031090) with outstanding delinquent taxes in South San Francisco subject to an upcoming County of San Mateo Chapter 8 tax sale. 6a. Report regarding a resolution approving the acceptance of Community Project Funding grant funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development Economic Development Initiative for Fiscal Year 2023-24, in an amount of $1,666,279 for the South San Francisco Centennial Way Trail and Outdoor Learning Center project (pk2302) pursuant to Budget Amendment Number 25.012 (Greg Mediati, Director of Parks and Recreation, Philip Vitale, Deputy Director of Capital Projects, and Christina Fernandez, Deputy City Manager) 7. Resolution authorizing the acceptance of Community Project Funding grant funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development Economic Development Initiative for Fiscal Year 2023-24 in an amount of $1,666,279 for the South San Francisco Centennial Way Trail and Outdoor Learning Center project pursuant to Budget Amendment Number 25.012. 7a. Page 4 City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2024 4 August 28, 2024City Council Regular Meeting Agenda ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS Report regarding a resolution authorizing a professional services agreement with SmartWave Technologies for a two-year pilot program to install and manage Wi-Fi equipment at the South San Francisco Housing Authority, in the amount not to exceed $102,750, and authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement. (Tony Barrera, Director of Information Technology) 8. Resolution to approve a professional services agreement with SmartWave Technologies, LLC., for a two-year pilot program to install and manage Wi-Fi equipment at the South San Francisco Housing Authority, (project number pf2305) Public Wi-Fi network, in the amount not to exceed $102,750, and authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement. 8a. Report regarding a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consulting Services Agreement between the City of South San Francisco and Plan to Place, LLC for Facilitation Services for Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities, and consideration of potential alternatives. (Nell Selander, Economic and Community Development Director, and Megan Wooley-Ousdahl, Principal Planner) 9. Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consulting Services Agreement between the City of South San Francisco and Plan to Place, LLC for Facilitation Services for Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities in an amount not to exceed $79,920 9a. Report regarding an ordinance adding Chapter 8.78 (“Mooring Regulations”) to the South San Francisco Municipal Code to provide regulations for mooring in the City’s navigable waterways. (Rich Lee, Assistant City Manager; Kimia Mahallati, Assistant City Attorney) 10. Ordinance adding Chapter 8.78 (“Mooring Regulations”) to the South San Francisco Municipal Code to provide regulations for mooring in the City’s navigable waterways. 10a. Report regarding an ordinance amending Chapters 8.72 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code to prohibit the retail sale of polystyrene. (Christina Fernandez, Deputy City Manager) 11. Ordinance amending Chapters 8.72 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code to prohibit the retail sale of polystyrene. 11a. Report regarding the formation of the Eastern Neighborhoods CFD. (Christina Fernandez, Deputy City Manager; Jason Wong, Deputy Finance Director; Noah Christman, Lighthouse Public Affairs; Brian Forbath, Stradling Law; Susan Goodwin, Goodwin Consulting Services) 12. Page 5 City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2024 5 August 28, 2024City Council Regular Meeting Agenda ITEMS FROM COUNCIL – COMMITTEE REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS ADJOURNMENT Page 6 City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2024 6 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-797 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:1. Proclamation recognizing August as National Water Quality Month.(James Coleman, Mayor) City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™7 DESIGNATION OF AUGUST AS NATIONAL WATER QUALITY MONTH WHEREAS, clean water is essential for life and healthy communities. Groundwater, lakes, rivers, and streams are significant resources that the United States of America relies on as a source of fresh water; and WHEREAS, South San Francisco recognizes how regular human activities have impact on our water quality. National Water Quality Month reminds us how our actions both past and present affect our waterways; and WHEREAS, there are many things individuals can do to prevent water pollution including: participating in a community or waterway clean-up, picking up after pets, assuring that only rain water enters storm drains, choosing nontoxic household products, not using chemical fertilizers or pesticides and reducing water usage; and WHEREAS, without safe and reliable water and wastewater treatment systems, no community, or sector of the economy – from our richly diverse communities to biotech, service, and manufacturing – can exist thrive and expand; and WHEREAS, technological advances and the dedication of thousands of water industry professionals in the state of California ensures that our drinking water and treated wastewater meets some of the most stringent water quality standards in the nation; and WHEREAS, South San Francisco recognizes the community benefits derived from the City’s team of dedicated professionals in engineering, field operations, parks and at the water quality control plant who tirelessly work to ensure that surface waters meet strict standards for human contact and recreation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco does hereby designate August as National Water Quality Month in South San Francisco. ________________________________ James Coleman, Mayor ________________________________ Eddie Flores, Vice Mayor ________________________________ Mark Addiego, Councilmember ________________________________ Mark Nagales, Councilmember ________________________________ Flor Nicolas, Councilmember Dated: August 28, 2024 8 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-796 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:2. Proclamation recognizing September as Childhood Cancer Awareness Month.(James Coleman, Mayor) City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™9 Dated: August 28, 2024 IN RECOGNITION OF SEPTEMBER AS CHILDHOOD CANCER AWARENESS MONTH WHEREAS, Childhood Cancer Awareness Month is a time when we celebrate advances in childhood cancer treatment and survivorship care, remember the children we’ve lost, and engage new advocates to join in our mission of achieving a day when every child with cancer can live a long and healthy life; and WHEREAS, Approximately 1 in 285 children in the U.S. will be diagnosed with cancer before their 20th birthday and estimated 15,780 children per year – are expected to be diagnosed with cancer in the United States; and WHEREAS, Childhood cancer is not one disease – there are more than 12 major types of pediatric cancers and over 100 subtypes; and WHEREAS, Cancer is the number one cause of death by disease among children. Worldwide, 300,000 children lose their lives every year to cancer; and WHEREAS, more than 95 percent of childhood cancer survivors will have a significant health-related issue by the time they are 45 years of age; these health-related issues are side-effects of either the cancer or more commonly, the result of its treatment; and WHEREAS, childhood cancer has touched many in our South San Francisco community. Among them, Jesus Pena and Patricia Watson, who lost their 33-month-old daughter Juliana, to Neuroblastoma; and WHEREAS, as the color gold is significant and symbolic because it represents childhood cancer, the tree on Sign Hill shines bright during the month of September in honor of Juliana, and all the other families that have been affected by childhood cancer. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco does hereby recognize September as Childhood Cancer Awareness Month, which is a time to recognize the children and families affected by childhood cancers and to emphasize the importance of supporting research on these devastating conditions. ________________________________ James Coleman, Mayor ________________________________ Eddie Flores, Vice Mayor ________________________________ Mark Addiego, Councilmember ________________________________ Mark Nagales, Councilmember ________________________________ Buenaflor Nicolas, Councilmember 10 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-831 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:3. Proclamation Recognizing September as National Preparedness Month.(James Coleman, Mayor) City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™11 Dated: August 28, 2024 RECOGNITION OF NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS MONTH SEPTEMBER 2024 WHEREAS, National Preparedness Month is an observance each September to raise awareness about the importance of preparing for disasters and emergencies that could happen at any time; and WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco remains committed to emergency response and preparedness responding to over 9,000 calls for service, completing of over 18,000 hours of training, hosting over 300 hours of regional technical rescue training, and facilitating over 5,400 hours of Community Emergency Response Team Training annually; and WHEREAS, this year’s theme focuses on Preparing Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Communities for Risks and Disasters; and WHEREAS, we know more than 60% of the Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Communities does not believe that taking a step to prepare will make a difference and are not confident in their ability to prepare; and WHEREAS, the Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Community is a large, diverse group that spans across many cultures, languages, and unique circumstances that must be considered when developing strategies to engage communities on disaster preparedness; and WHEREAS, the Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Communities can experience unique barriers when it comes to accessing disaster preparedness information and resources that take their languages, their experiences, cultures, into consideration; and WHEREAS, being prepared for disasters starts at home. Everyone can be part of helping to prepare for emergencies. Creating a support network of family, friends, and others who can assist you during an emergency is important in planning efforts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco does hereby recognize September 2024 as National Preparedness Month to enhance public awareness of what to do in an emergency and to encourage all to be prepared. ________________________________ James Coleman, Mayor ________________________________ Eddie Flores, Vice Mayor ________________________________ Mark Addiego, Councilmember ________________________________ Mark Nagales, Councilmember ________________________________ Buenaflor Nicolas, Councilmember 12 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-814 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:4. Presentation regarding status update of City Council 2024 Priorities as of August 2024 (Rich Lee, Assistant City Manager) City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™13 City Council 2024 Priorities August 2024 Update August 28, 2024 14 “A” List“A” List 15 Category: Age-Friendly 3 16 Completed Tasks June 2024: Met with AARP Outstanding Tasks Aug/Sept 2024: Age-Friendly Survey to be issued Q4: Age-Friendly Task force to convene Q4: Senior Advisory Committee Priorities: Age-Friendly Task Force; Create Action Plan; Senior Advisory Committee 4 Status: In progress 17 Category: Budget/Financial Sustainability 5 18 Completed Tasks July 2024: Council adopted resolution to place BLT on ballot. Outstanding Tasks Education/Information for public and local businesses Priority: Business License Tax (BLT) Ballot Measure 6 Status: In progress 19 Category: Childcare 7 20 Priority: Westborough Childcare Expansion 8 Completed Tasks May 2024: Contract awarded/executed Outstanding Tasks 2025: Groundbreaking 2027: Construction completion Status: In progress 21 Category: Communications 9 22 Priorities: Better Communication; Expand messaging methods 10 Status: Website – Complete: Expansion of messaging: In progress 23 Categories: Community Development/Housing 11 24 Completed Tasks July 2024: On-Call Agreement for financial analysis Outstanding Tasks Q4: Wage Theft Ordinance Q4: Update on apprenticeship Priorities: Wage Theft Ordinance; Labor standard for development 12 Status: In progress 25 Category: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) 13 26 Completed Tasks June 2024: Pride Event held Racial & Social Equity Plan; most goals completed Priorities: Expand Pride Event; Racial & Social Equity Plan progress 14 Status: Complete, but DEI efforts are ongoing. 27 Category: Finance 15 28 Outstanding Tasks Q4: City Attorney’s Office to provide memo on Sheetz v. County of El Dorado (Developer Impact Fees) October 2024: Finance to present pension agenda item Priorities: DIF Alternative Plan; Pension Funding Sustainability 16 Status: In progress 29 Category: Health & Wellness 17 30 Completed Tasks July 2024: Peer support contract presented to EAP provider; first responder panel. Mental Health Clinician Priorities: Mental Health/Wellness and Crisis Response Team 18 Status: Complete 31 Category: Housing 19 32 Completed Tasks June 2024: Anti-Displacement Open House/information session Outstanding Tasks Sept/Oct 2024 First Anti- Displacement CAC Meeting Q4: Consider Right to Legal Counsel Priorities: Anti-Displacement Roadmap; Right to Legal Counsel; 20 Status: In progress 33 Completed Tasks August 2024: Housing Submmittee met and made recommendations Outstanding Tasks Q4 Bring ordinances to Council Q4 Presentation Priority: SRO/Mobile Home Protection Measures 21 Status: In progress 34 Category: Land Use 22 35 Outstanding Tasks Q4 Contract with consultant for objective design standards. Priority: Ornamentation 23 Status: In progress 36 Category: Public Safety 24 37 Completed Tasks June 2024: FY 2024-25 Adopted Budget Outstanding Tasks August 2024: finalize locations; in queue for installation; on track for completion, pending Caltrans approval for El Camino Real Priority: Expand ALPRs 25 Status: In progress 38 Category: Transportation 26 39 Completed Tasks QR Codes Simme seats App update Outstanding Tasks Potential electrification $4-5M HCD AHSC grant Priority: South City Shuttle Upgrades 27 Status: Completed 40 “B” List“B” List 41 Category: Community Development 29 42 Completed Tasks July 2024: Facilitator RFP issued Outstanding Tasks August 2024: Award of contract Priority: Vacant City Properties 30 Status: In progress 43 Category: Housing 31 44 Completed Tasks City remains supportive of SSFUSD future development. Priority: Foxridge Parcels 32 Status: Ongoing 45 Categories: Health & Safety 33 46 Completed Tasks May 2024: Two District 5 Clean Up Events Bigbellys added P&R quarterly staff-led activities (most recent at Alta Loma Park) Volunteer-led clean up events (Aug 23rd Orange Park; then City Hall block) Priority: Clean SSF Campaign 34 Status: Complete, but ongoing 47 Completed Tasks May 2024: Discussed Customer Services Concerns with SSF Scavenger July 2024: Toured Blue Line Transfer Station July 2024: Issued RFQ for consultant to review Scavenger agreement Outstanding Tasks Execute consultant agreement Convene subcommittee Priority: Engage with SSF Scavenger 35 Status: In progress 48 “C” List“C” List 49 Categories: Code Enforcement 37 50 Outstanding Tasks Q4: Will align with County’s ordinance Priority: Tobacco Ordinance 38 Status: In progress 51 Category: Housing 39 52 Outstanding Tasks Q4: Staff to provide memo to Council Priorities: Commercial Linkage Fee Revolving Fund | Tax Exempt Housing | Housing Rate Charged by Union Builders 40 Status: In Progress 53 Category: Infrastructure 41 54 Completed Tasks February 2024: Lighting Study Presentation Outstanding Tasks Updating study with consultant to incorporate PCE grant. Will follow up once scope and budget have been finalized for downtown lighting project. Priority: Lighting Study 42 Status: In progress 55 Category: Long-Range Planning 43 56 Completed Tasks July 2024: Issued RFP for Meeting Facilitation Outstanding Tasks Q4: Award contract January 2025: Develop 5-year plan in conjunction with annual Council retreat Priority: Develop 5-year plan 44 Status: In progress 57 Category: Quality of Life 45 58 Outstanding Tasks Q4: Potential Locations – City Hall, Grand Ave. Breezeway, Smart & Final lot Requirements: Proximity to restroom + staff resources Priority: Relocation of Farmers Market 46 Status: In progress 59 Category: Sustainability 47 60 Completed Tasks August 2024: Fact Finding underway Outstanding Tasks Q4: Study session Priority: Artificial Turf Study/Moratorium 48 Status: In progress 61 Completed Tasks July 2024: Memo provided to Council Priority: Microgrids 49 Status: Complete 62 Outstanding Tasks Q4: Study Session Priority: Fireplace Wood Burning Ordinance 50 Status: In Progress 63 Outstanding Tasks August 2024: Study Session Priority: Retail polystyrene, Styrofoam, and single use plastics 51 Status: In Progress 64 Council 2024 Priorities – August 2024 Update City of South San Francisco THANK YOU 65 ID Start time Name / Nombre Would you like to speak during Public Comment on a matter NOT on the agenda? Desea hablar de un tema que If you would like to speak on an agenda item(s), Enter the Agenda Item Number(s) below. 1 8/28/24 16:05:50 Cory David Yes / Si Na 2 8/28/24 18:20:33 Cynthia Marcopulos Yes / Si And I am speaking on 3 8/28/24 18:21:33 Charlene Rouspil Yes / Si Na 4 8/28/24 18:22:49 Leah Taylor No 8 two year pilot project 5 8/28/24 18:32:35 Sam Chetcuti Yes / Si Other 6 8/28/24 19:03:48 Test Yes / Si Na 7 8/28/24 19:16:47 Avin Sharma No 8 8 8/28/24 0:00:00 Housing Authority Representative Yes / Si Non Agendized Item 9 8/28/24 0:00:00 Leslie Fong Yes / Si 8 10 8/28/24 0:00:00 Claudia Yes / Si 8 11 8/28/24 0:00:00 Barbara Rubino Yes / Si 8 12 8/28/24 0:00:00 Bonnie Morgan Yes / Si 9 13 8/28/24 0:00:00 Annie Lo Yes / Si 9 14 8/28/24 0:00:00 Fianola Villamejor Yes / Si 9 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-864 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:5. Motion to approve the Minutes for August 14, 2024. (Rosa Govea Acosta, City Clerk) City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™66 CALL TO ORDER Mayor Coleman called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Councilmember Addiego, present Councilmember Nagales, present Councilmember Nicolas, present Vice Mayor Flores, present Mayor Coleman, present PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Assistant City Manager Lee led the pledge. AGENDA REVIEW No changes. ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM STAFF • Economic and Development Manager Lucero announced the second of the four What’s Happening East of 101: A Biotech Speaker Series will be occurring on August 23, 2024, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers and invited all to register and attend. • Executive Assistant to the City Manager Patea invited all to save the date for the Sign Hill Tree lighting on August 29, 2024, in recognition of Childhood Cancer Awareness Month and Juliana’s Journey and shared all will be meeting at the LPR. • Parks and Recreation Deputy Director Duldulao invited the community to attend Movie Night on August 16, 2024, 8:00 p.m. at Martin Elementary School and the Annual Concert in the Park at Orange Park on September 21, 2024. • Director of Capital Projects Gilchrist provided an update on the Linden Park planning and noted feedback is being collected at events to include Movie Night and an open house on August 24, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. MINUTES REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 14, 2024 6:30 p.m. Library Parks and Recreation Building Council Chambers 901 Civic Campus Way, South San Francisco, CA 67 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 14, 2024 MINUTES PAGE 2 PRESENTATIONS 1. Proclamation recognizing August 14, 2024, as Amgen Day in South San Francisco. (James Coleman, Mayor) Mayor Coleman recognized August 14, 2024, as Amgen Day and presented a proclamation to members of the Amgen team. Executive Director of Oncology Research, Jason DeVoss, thanked the Council for their recognition and support. ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM STAFF • City Manager Ranals introduced Matt Samson as the new Fire Chief for the City of South San Francisco and highlighted his accomplishments and contributions. Chief Samson thanked staff for their support during the transition and recognized the leadership team. COUNCIL COMMENTS/REQUESTS Councilmember Nicolas expressed gratitude to the City staff for accepting summer interns and highlighted the need to empower youth to seek careers in public service. She also thanked staff for their prompt response to reported hazards on Greendale Drive, participation in and support in National Nights Out, the Centennial Road Show, and the Pistahan Parade. She thanked Astellas for kicking off the first of the Joint City of South San Francisco and Biocom Speaker Series. She requested the meeting be adjourned in memory of Francisco Yabut, Generoso Sevilla, Adele Cassinelli, and Don Nelson. Councilmember Nagales apprised the community of events he attended including the Pistahan Parade and National Night Out. He also thanked Public Works staff for their response to the incident at Greendale Drive. He requested the meeting be adjourned in memory of Brandon Lucero. Councilmember Addiego highlighted National Night Out and recognized Laura Fanella, Gloria Meharres, the CERT team, and community members for their support. He also shared that Cuneo Bakery has opened a retail counter and encouraged all to visit. He requested the meeting be adjourned in memory of Lois Mares. Vice Mayor Flores recognized the several National Night Out events and expressed appreciation for all those who attended. He apprised the community of events he attended including the welcoming of the National League of Cities, quarterly hospitality general manager meetings at the South San Francisco Conference Center, and backpack give away hosted in partnership with Rep Urs Clothing. He also thanked the Public Works Department for working to improve the beautification of our city. Lastly, he requested the City Manager work with the Police Department to create a safety plan to address Waymo in our city. Mayor Coleman apprised the community of the events he attended including internship graduations, the Samoan Flag Raising event, National Night Out events, and the LGBTQ Leadership Summit. He requested that staff explore the area near Smart and Final as there has been a concern regarding double parking. PRESENTATIONS 2. Presentation from Peninsula Clean Energy. (Shawn Marshall, Chief Executive Officer) 68 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 14, 2024 MINUTES PAGE 3 Peninsula Clean Energy CEO Marshall provided a presentation and reviewed the services provided. Mayor Coleman thanked CEO Marshall for the work done and acknowledged the impact it has on the community. PUBLIC COMMENTS – NON-AGENDA ITEMS The following individuals addressed the City Council: • Cory David • Cynthia Marcopulos • Charlene Rouspil • Annie Lo • Olga P • Fionnola Villamejor PUBLIC COMMENTS – CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS The following individual addressed the City Council: • Rhovy Antonio (Consent Item No. 7) CONSENT CALENDAR The Assistant City Clerk duly read the Consent Calendar, after which the Council voted and engaged in a discussion of specific items as follows. Item No. 5 and Item No. 7 was pulled by Councilmember Addiego and Councilmember Nagales for further discussion. 3. Motion to approve the Minutes for July 24, 2024. (Rosa Govea Acosta, City Clerk) 4. Report regarding Resolution No. 123-2024 approving the acceptance of grant funds from the Kaiser Permanente Northern California Community Health Grant in the amount of $25,000 and amending the Parks and Recreation Department Fiscal Year 2024-25 Operating Budget pursuant to Budget Amendment Number 25.006. (Angela Duldulao, Parks and Recreation Deputy Director) 5. Report regarding a resolution approving a Second Amendment to a Professional Services Agreement with Precision Concrete Cutting for a citywide Infrastructure assessment and inventory and increase the amount by $250,000 for a total not to exceed amount of $513,277, and authorizing the City Manager to execute the Second Amendment. (Alex Henry, Public Works Program Manager) 6. Report regarding Resolution No. 124-2024 authorizing the City Manager to execute a Memorandum of Understanding with the National League of Cities for an Advancing Economic Mobility grant and approving Budget Amendment #25.010 appropriating $20,000 in grant funds. (Michael Guss, Economic Development Specialist) 7. Report regarding adoption of an ordinance adding Chapter 10.80 to the South San Francisco Municipal Code prohibiting any person in control of a multi-unit building from preventing a candidate or representative from lawfully campaigning door-to-door. (Sky Woodruff, City Attorney) Item No. 5: Councilmember Addiego requested clarification on the project status and requested that the Council receive a comprehensive assessment. Vice Mayor Flores expressed support in reviewing the inventory assessment report. Public Works Director Kim provided an overview of the project 69 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 14, 2024 MINUTES PAGE 4 status and noted that additional information would be brought forward at a future meeting for the Council to review. The item will be discussed at a future meeting. Item No. 7: Given the recent discussion brought forth by members of the public, Councilmember Nagales shared his intent in bringing this matter for the Council's consideration, noting that it was intended to expand voter participation. However, given the legal concerns raised, he supports postponing the matter for further discussion. At the request of Councilmember Addiego, City Attorney Woodruff apprised the Council and the community of the challenges the California Apartment Association raised. The item will be discussed at a future meeting. Motion – Councilmember Nicolas /Second – Councilmember Nagales: To approve Consent Calendar 3, 4, and 6, by roll call vote: AYES: Councilmember Addiego, Nagales, Nicolas, Vice Mayor Flores, and Mayor Coleman; NAYS: None; ABSENT: None; ABSTAIN: None ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 8. Presentation regarding update on the City of South San Francisco’s investment portfolio (Frank Risso, Treasurer, Karen Chang, Director of Finance, Carlos Oblites, Chandler Asset Management) City Treasurer Risso introduced Jayson Schmit with Chandler Asset Management who presented an update on the City’s investment portfolio. Jayson highlighted that the City is comfortable with their investments and potentially purchasing more. City Treasurer Risso noted that the City has significantly diversified its portfolio over the last 10 years and is in a good position. 9. Discussion regarding an update of the Junipero Serra Boulevard and I-280 Westborough Boulevard Pedestrian and Bicycle Connectivity and Safety Project Feasibility Study (st2301). (Lawrence Henriquez, Senior Civil Engineer) Senior Civil Engineer Henriquez introduced Principal David Mahama with DKS Associates and Sasha Dansky with Mark Thomas. David Mahama reviewed the project background, goals, process, and public outreach. Sasha Dansky reviewed the improvement solutions and potential alternatives. Senior Civil Engineer reviewed the next steps for the project. The Council engaged in questions and discussions and provided feedback indicating the desire to view a table comparison of the alternatives with timelines, safety measures, and numbers. 10. Report regarding three separate resolutions authorizing the submittal of three grant applications to the San Mateo County Transportation Authority for Cycle 7 Pedestrian and Bicycle Program Funding and similar grant applications requiring no more than a total of $500,000 in local match funds. (John Wilson, Associate Civil Engineer) Associate Civil Engineer Wilson presented the report. The Council engaged in questions and discussion and expressed their support for the item. 70 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 14, 2024 MINUTES PAGE 5 Motion – Councilmember Nicolas /Second – Councilmember Nagales: To approve Resolution No. 125-2024 supporting the Alta Loma Middle and Buri Buri Elementary Schools Ped and Bike Improvements Project and submitting an application to the San Mateo County Transportation Authority for Cycle 7 Pedestrian and Bicycle Program Funding and similar grant applications requiring no more than a total of $200,000 in local match funds, by roll call vote: AYES: Councilmember Addiego, Nagales, Nicolas, and Vice Mayor Flores, and Mayor Coleman; NAYS: None; ABSENT: None; ABSTAIN: None; Motion – Councilmember Nicolas /Second – Councilmember Nagales: To approve Resolution No. 126-2024 supporting the Parkway Heights Middle School Ped and Bike Improvements Project and authorizing the submittal of an application to the San Mateo County Transportation Authority for Cycle 7 Pedestrian and Bicycle Program Funding and similar grant applications requiring no more than a total of $200,000 in local match funds, by roll call vote: AYES: Councilmember Addiego, Nagales, Nicolas, and Vice Mayor Flores, and Mayor Coleman; NAYS: None; ABSENT: None; ABSTAIN: None; Motion – Councilmember Nicolas /Second – Councilmember Nagales: To approve Resolution No. 127-2024 supporting the Ponderosa Elementary School Ped and Bike Improvements Project and authorizing submittal of an application to the San Mateo County Transportation Authority for Cycle 7 Pedestrian and Bicycle Program Funding and similar grant applications requiring no more than a total of $100,000 in local match funds, by roll call vote: AYES: Councilmember Addiego, Nagales, Nicolas, and Vice Mayor Flores, and Mayor Coleman; NAYS: None; ABSENT: None; ABSTAIN: None. 11. Report regarding Resolution No. 128-2024 authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consulting Services Agreement with Presidio Systems, Inc. of Livermore, California, for $2,389,985.80, and authorizing a total contract budget of $2,760,000.00 for the Condition Assessment of the Sanitary Sewer System (Project No. ss2001). (Jeffrey Chou, Senior Civil Engineer) Senior Civil Engineer Chou presented the report. The following individual addressed the City Council: • Fionolla Villamejor The Council inquired about the scoring for both proposals and noted it is beneficial to review the scale, dollar amount, and timeline. The Council also inquired about the possibility of prioritizing problem areas rather than the City as a whole in hopes of obtaining additional bids. Staff indicated additional information would be shared through a Council memo. Principal Engineer Ruble shared the benefit in assessing the City as whole allows for a comprehensive understanding of conditions allowing for budgeting and planning. Motion – Councilmember Addiego /Second – Councilmember Nicolas: To approve Resolution No. 128-2024 authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consulting Services Agreement with Presidio Systems, Inc. of Livermore, California, for $2,389,985.80, and authorizing a total contract budget of $2,760,000.00 for the Condition Assessment of the Sanitary Sewer System (Project No. ss2001), by roll call vote: AYES: Councilmember Addiego, Nagales, Nicolas, and Vice Mayor Flores, and Mayor Coleman; NAYS: None; ABSENT: None; ABSTAIN: None; 71 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 14, 2024 MINUTES PAGE 6 12. Report regarding Resolution No. 129-2024 approving the execution of grant funds from the Ocean Protection Council (OPC) under the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006 (Proposition 84), Proposition 68, Environmental License Plate Funds, Once Through Cooling Or General Funds, and approving Budget Amendment #25.011. (Audriana Hossfeld, Senior Civil Engineer) Senior Civil Engineer Hossfeld presented the report. The Council noted the significance of the item and suggested outreach to educate the community. Motion – Vice Mayor Flores /Second – Mayor Coleman: To approve Resolution No. 129-2024 approving the execution of grant funds from the Ocean Protection Council (OPC) under the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006 (Proposition 84), Proposition 68, Environmental License Plate Funds, Once Through Cooling Or General Funds, and approving Budget Amendment #25.011, by roll call vote: AYES: Councilmember Addiego, Nagales, Nicolas, and Vice Mayor Flores, and Mayor Coleman; NAYS: None; ABSENT: None; ABSTAIN: None; ITEMS FROM COUNCIL – COMMITTEE REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS 13. Certificate of Recognition for the Italian American Citizens Club presented on August 2, 2024. (James Coleman, Mayor) 14. Certificate of Recognition for the Pistahan Parade Committee presented on August 10, 2024. (James Coleman, Mayor) 15. Recognition of the National League of Cities on Its Historic 100th Anniversary and Road Show: 100 Years, 100 Cities presented on August 3, 2024. (James Coleman, Mayor) Mayor Coleman apprised the Council and the community of the following recognitions issued on behalf of the City Council: A Certificate of Recognition to the Italian American Citizens Club on August 2, 2024, at a mixer held with the South San Francisco Chamber of Commerce hosted at the Bocce Courts; A Certificate of Recognition to the Pistahan Parade Committee on August 10, 2024; and a proclamation issued to the National League of Cities on Its Historic 100th Anniversary and Road Show presented on August 3, 2024. Councilmember Addiego acknowledged the public comments received regarding election practices and suggested that the Mayor’s Weekly Newsletter be postponed during this election cycle to promote an equitable election process and address the community’s concerns. CLOSED SESSION Entered into Closed Session: 9:54 p.m. 16. Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8) Property: 400 Miller Avenue (APN 012-303-110) City Negotiators: Nell Selander, Economic and Community Development Director, and Sky Woodruff, City Attorney Negotiating Party: Nisar M Shaikh Trust Under Negotiations: Price and terms Resumed from Closed Session: 10:17 p.m. 72 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 14, 2024 MINUTES PAGE 7 ADJOURNMENT Being no further business, Mayor Coleman adjourned the City Council meeting at 10:18 p.m. *** Adjourned in Memory of Francisco Yabut, Generoso Sevilla, Adele Cassinelli, Don Nelson, and Lois Mares *** Submitted by: Approved by: Jazmine Miranda James Coleman Assistant City Clerk Mayor Approved by the City Council: / / NOTE: The Meeting Minutes represent actions taken during the meeting of the City Council. Complete Council members discussions of meeting items can be viewed in archived video recordings on the City’s website at https://www.ssf.net/Government/Video-Streaming-City-and-Council-Meetings/City-Council Public comments submitted via the eComment portal can be viewed in the City Clerk’s repository at https://ci-ssf-ca.granicusideas.com/meetings?scope=past 73 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-757 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:6. Report regarding a resolution authorizing the City Manager or designee to purchase several remnant parcels (Assessor Parcel Numbers 091022010,091022020,091022030,091025010,091034080,and 015031090)with outstanding delinquent taxes in South San Francisco subject to an upcoming County of San Mateo Chapter 8 non-objection agreement tax sale.(Nell Selander,Economic &Community Development Director;Greg Mediati,Parks &Recreation Director; and Adena Friedman, Chief Planner) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager or designee to purchase several remnant parcels along Westborough Boulevard between Oakmont Drive and Olympic Drive (APNs 091022010, 091022020,091022030,091025010,091034080)and a remnant right-of-way parcel on Sylvester Road north of Associated Road (APN 015031090)with outstanding delinquent taxes in South San Francisco subject to an upcoming County of San Mateo Chapter 8 non-objection agreement tax sale. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION In May 2023 the City received notice that the San Mateo County Tax Collector’s office would be conducting a Chapter 7 public auction for tax defaulted properties,including several properties within South San Francisco.Staff discussed the possible acquisition of some of these tax defaulted properties with Council in closed session on July 12,2023,and October 25,2023,and received direction to submit a letter to the County objecting to the inclusion of certain properties in the public auction, instead requesting these properties be subject to a Chapter 8 sale. In January of 2024,the City Council approved a resolution (02-2024)to authorize the City Manager to purchase several remnant parcels along Westborough Boulevard,and one parcel on Sylvester Road.The staff report and resolution are attached to this staff report for reference (Attachments 1 and 2).The previous staff report contains a discussion of the properties. Following City Council approval of this resolution,and City staff submitted an application to the County of San Mateo Tax Collector’s Office to purchase the remnant parcels.The County Board of Supervisors approved the application,and submitted an application to the State Controller’s office,as State approval is required to allow the sale.However,due to a clerical error in the County’s application,the State Controller’s office denied the purchase,and the City was not able to purchase the properties through a Chapter 8 objection sale.Following this determination,City staff met with County staff to discuss next steps.Since these parcels are no longer scheduled for a Chapter 7 sale,the City may proceed with a Chapter 8 (non-objection sale).This is a simpler process than a Chapter 8 objection sale,since no letter of objection is needed.The County does not have a timeline for the sale but has indicated that it will likely be within the next few months. Next Steps City staff is requesting authorization to purchase the properties through a Chapter 8 sale.Because these sales happen infrequently,and are dependent on the State’s timing and approval,the County is working through the procedure and fees of the sale.Although the Council approved authorization to purchase the properties earlier in the year,City staff are City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™74 File #:24-757 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:6. of the sale.Although the Council approved authorization to purchase the properties earlier in the year,City staff are following the County’s direction and submitting a new application,including requesting a new authorization from City Council. FISCAL IMPACT There is unlikely to be any substantial,net new impact to the General Fund associated with this acquisition.Staff has estimated that the total acquisition costs for the parcels will be approximately $130,000,including $120,666 for the Westborough properties,$4,357 for the Sylvester Road property,and transaction fees not yet estimated by the County. These expenditures were contemplated in the Fiscal Year 2024-2025 budget and therefore no additional General Fund appropriation is being sought at this time. All costs incurred to acquire the Sylvester Road right-of-way and transfer it to the private developer (Trammel Crow)will be borne by the developer -fully reimbursed upon transfer.This includes the delinquent taxes,fees paid to the County, consultant time (if needed),staff time,and City Attorney time.The Economic &Community Development Department is absorbing these costs as they are incurred and then will be responsible for recouping them through escrow when the Sylvester Road right-of-way is transferred to Trammel Crow. The costs associated with the acquisition of the Westborough properties and completing substantial deferred maintenance on the properties was planned for in the FY 24-25 Parks and Recreation operating budget.Staff estimates the deferred maintenance will cost approximately $150,000, with ongoing maintenance of roughly $10,000 per year. CONCLUSION Staff recommends City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager or designee to purchase several remnant parcels along Westborough Boulevard between Oakmont Drive and Olympic Drive to ensure it is maintained in a safe and unblighted manner and a remnant right-of -way parcel on Sylvester Road north of Associated Road to facilitate more orderly development and continued public access. Attachments: 1.January 10, 2024 Staff Report 2.Resolution 02-2024 Associated File: Resolution 24-772 City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™75 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:23-1055 Agenda Date:1/10/2024 Version:1 Item #:5. Report regarding a resolution authorizing the City Manager or designee to purchase several remnant parcels (Assessor Parcel Numbers 091022010,091022020,091022030,091025010,091034080,and 015031090)with outstanding delinquent taxes in South San Francisco subject to an upcoming County of San Mateo Chapter 8 tax sale.(Nell Selander,Economic &Community Development Director;Greg Mediati,Parks &Recreation Director; and Adena Friedman, Chief Planner) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager or designee to purchase several remnant parcels along Westborough Boulevard between Oakmont Drive and Olympic Drive (APNs 091022010,091022020,091022030,091025010,091034080)and a remnant right-of-way parcel on Sylvester Road north of Associated Road (APN 015031090)with outstanding delinquent taxes in South San Francisco subject to an upcoming County of San Mateo Chapter 8 tax sale. BACKGROUND With some exceptions,such as for publicly owned lands,all properties are required to pay property taxes.In San Mateo County,these taxes are collected by the San Mateo County Tax Collector’s Office.Some property owners become delinquent in paying their property taxes and other special assessments and liens that appear on the property tax bill.In these cases,the Tax Collector’s Office follows lengthy procedures to collect such debts, but eventually may sell these properties at tax auctions if the debts remain unpaid. Typically,properties are sold at what is known as a Chapter 7 public auction,which notices tax defaulted properties to the public and allows anyone to participate in the auction to purchase a property.Once a list of tax defaulted properties is established for a Chapter 7 public auction,the County provides notice of this list to local jurisdictions.Local jurisdictions can object to the public sale of certain properties and request that those properties be held over for a Chapter 8 tax sale.At a Chapter 8 sale,public agencies may purchase tax defaulted properties for public purposes. In May 2023 the City received notice that the San Mateo County Tax Collector’s office would be conducting a Chapter 7 public auction for tax defaulted properties.Staff discussed the possible acquisition of some of these tax defaulted properties with Council in closed session on July 12,2023 and October 25,2023 and received direction to submit a letter to the County objecting to the inclusion of certain properties in the public auction, instead requesting these properties be subject to a Chapter 8 sale.Below is a discussion of the properties the City objected to selling at the Chapter 7 sale and will instead be available for purchase at the Chapter 8 sale, which is anticipated to be held in early 2024. City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/5/2024Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™76 File #:23-1055 Agenda Date:1/10/2024 Version:1 Item #:5. DISCUSSION Remnant Frontage Parcels on Westborough Boulevard APNs 091022010, 091022020, 091022030, 091025010, 091034080 These remnant frontage parcels are 10-foot-wide strips along the southern edge of Westborough Boulevard, between Oakmont Drive and Olympic Drive (see Attachment 1 for a map of these parcels and images of recent conditions).These parcels contain numerous trees and unkept ground level vegetation spanning the area between the street and the rear yards of the homes backing up to Westborough Boulevard.The property owners have not maintained these properties for many years and,as a result,many of the trees now warrant significant trimming and/or removal.In recent years,Code Enforcement staff has cited one of the property owners,based out of Florida,to resolve hazardous tree issues and tall weeds,however,the property owner has been unresponsive.Several years ago,the City mitigated some hazardous trees and placed a lien against one of the properties to recoup these expenses. The delinquent taxes owed on these properties amount to $109,804,meaning the City would have to pay that amount plus any additional fees imposed by the Tax Collector’s Office to purchase the properties at the Chapter 8 tax sale.A portion of the outstanding tax liability is a lien imposed by the City,so those funds will flow back to the City offsetting some of the acquisition cost.Additionally,the City would need to spend approximately $150,000 to remove trees,shrubs,and any refuse on the properties shortly after acquisition ensuring the properties are safe,unblighted,and in good condition for long-term,routine maintenance.Staff estimates ongoing annual costs will be roughly $10,000 for weed abatement and litter pick up. While the acquisition of these parcels provides short-term stability to these properties -ensuring they are maintained in good order and relieving the City of the time and cost associated with protracted Code Enforcement actions -it also provides longer-term opportunities for adding right-of-way,creating pathways, and adding more attractive landscaping.The need for these improvements and budget to support them have not yet been identified,but owning the properties allows for flexibility should the City wish to make these changes in the future. Portion of Sylvester Road APN 015031090 This property is a 17,162 square foot section of Sylvester Road north of Associated Road (see Attachment 2 for a map of this parcel and images of recent conditions).It is vacant right-of-way that is currently privately owned and surrounded by other privately-owned rights-of-way in the middle of a fully entitled life sciences redevelopment project at 120 E. Grand Avenue led by the Trammell Crow Company. The 120 E.Grand project,approved by the Planning Commission in May 2023,consists of two new office / R&D buildings,an amenity building,and a parking garage.The project requires access via Sylvester Road, either via acquisition of the roadway parcel or via easement,as well as a dedication to the City of a Public Utility Easement.This was included as part of the project’s Conditions of Approval (Mapping and Agreements City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/5/2024Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™77 File #:23-1055 Agenda Date:1/10/2024 Version:1 Item #:5. Utility Easement.This was included as part of the project’s Conditions of Approval (Mapping and Agreements Condition #15). Trammell Crow had intended to acquire the parcel at the public Chapter 7 tax auction,but the County Tax Collector’s Office withheld the property for sale at the Chapter 8 auction because it is a right-of-way parcel. Given complications with the public sale of rights-of-way in San Francisco over the past several years (most notably Presidio Terrace where both former Speaker Pelosi and the late Senator Feinstein lived),the County has instituted the practice of withholding right-of-way parcels for Chapter 8 auctions for public agencies to acquire. The City likewise objected to the sale of the property at the Chapter 7 sale and will have the ability to purchase it at the Chapter 8 sale. It is the City’s intention to acquire the property at the Chapter 8 sale and then sell it to Trammell Crow to recoup the City’s costs.The City intends to sell it to Trammell Crow with protections put in place to preserve it as right-of-way,rather than maintain public ownership of the land,given the private ownership of the surrounding street network.This will facilitate the efficient and orderly development of the life science development. Staff estimates that an appropriate sale price would be roughly $20,000 to $30,000 to cover staff time to facilitate the property transaction,the delinquent tax bill of approximately $4,100,and any fees imposed by the County. Next Steps City staff is staying in close communication with County Tax Collector staff to understand the Chapter 8 tax sale process.Because these sales happen so infrequently (it has been several years since the last Chapter 7 sale and many more years since the last Chapter 8 sale),the County is still working through procedure,fees,and exact timing of the sale. County staff has indicated to the City that the sale is anticipated to occur early in 2024. Staff is seeking Council authorization to purchase the properties now in the event the sale is scheduled before the next regular Council meeting.Council may note that the authority granted by the accompanying resolution is broad to address most eventualities that may arise during the sale process.The resolution has been drafted in this way to avoid the worst-case scenario -where staff do not have appropriate authority to act on behalf of the City at the Chapter 8 auction and therefore miss the opportunity to purchase the properties for several more years. FISCAL IMPACT The precise impact to the City’s General Fund associated with adopting the resolution is not known as this time. What the City knows is that there are the immediate acquisition costs of $109,804 for the Westborough properties and $4,100 for the Sylvester Road property,along with transaction fees imposed by the County (which have not yet been provided,but staff estimate to be several thousand dollars for all of the properties). Given these costs,staff estimate the acquisition cost to be approximately $120,000 for all of the properties.As noted above,any and all costs incurred to acquire the Sylvester Road right-of-way and transfer it to Trammel Crow will be entirely borne by the developer -fully reimbursed upon transfer.This includes the delinquent City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/5/2024Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™78 File #:23-1055 Agenda Date:1/10/2024 Version:1 Item #:5. Crow will be entirely borne by the developer -fully reimbursed upon transfer.This includes the delinquent taxes, fees paid to the County, consultant time, staff time, and City Attorney time. Additionally,there are the costs associated with the substantial deferred maintenance of the Westborough properties,which staff estimates to be $150,000 and the ongoing cost of $10,000 per year.All told,the impact in Fiscal Year 2023-2024 to the General Fund will be about $270,000 and $10,000 annually thereafter. Because the precise amount is not known,or if costs may be apportioned to various impact fee funds or special funds,staff is not seeking an appropriation at this time.Staff intends to address the budget impacts of these transactions in the Mid-Year Budget Adjustment anticipated to be presented to Council in late January or early February 2024.In the meantime,these costs will be borne by the Economic &Community Development Department and Parks & Recreation Department operating budgets. CONCLUSION Staff recommends City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager or designee to purchase several remnant parcels along Westborough Boulevard between Oakmont Drive and Olympic Drive to ensure it is maintained in a safe and unblighted manner and a remnant right-of -way parcel on Sylvester Road north of Associated Road to facilitate more orderly development and continued public access. Attachments: 1.Map and Images of Westborough Boulevard Properties 2.Map and Images of Sylvester Road Property City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/5/2024Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™79 Atachment 1: Westborough Parcels Loca�on Map and Images 80 Attachment 2: Sylvester Parcel Location Map and Images 81 AmCity of South San Francisco City CouncilmrResolution: RES 02-2024 File Number: 23-1059 P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA Enactment Number: RES 02-2024 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO PURCHASE SEVERAL REMNANT PARCELS ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS 091022010, 091022020, 091022030, 091025010, 091034080, AND 015031090) WITH OUTSTANDING DELINQUENT TAXES IN SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SUBJECT TO AN UPCOMING COUNTY OF SAN MATEO CHAPTER 8 TAX SALE. WHEREAS, in May 2023 the City received notice that the San Mateo County Tax Collector's office would be conducting a Chapter 7 public auction for tax defaulted properties; and WHEREAS, in closed session meetings of City Council at its regular meetings on July 12, 2023, and October 25, 2023, Council provided direction to staff to object to the Chapter 7 sale of certain defaulted tax properties in order to acquire them via a Chapter 8 sale; and WHEREAS, these properties include five remnant parcels along Westborough Boulevard between Oakmont Drive and Olympic Drive (APNs 091022010, 091022020, 091022030, 091025010, 091034080) and one remnant right of way parcel on Sylvester Road north of Associated Road (APN 015031090); and WHEREAS, the properties along Westborough Boulevard have been the subject of past Code Enforcement action, are not properly maintained, and pose a nuisance to the community; acquiring them will stabilize the properties and provide the City with flexibility in the future should it wish to expand the Westborough right-of-way, construct pathways, or enhance landscaping; and WHEREAS, the Sylvester Road parcel is a key uncontrolled piece of property at the center of a large development surrounded by privately owned streets; acquiring the parcel and transferring it to the Trammel Crow Company in exchange for reimbursement of all costs associated with the action will allow for its maintenance and preservation as publicly accessible right-of-way; and WHEREAS, the City provided an objection in writing to the San Mateo County Tax Collector's Office, which acknowledged receipt and withheld these properties from the public Chapter 7 sale; and WHEREAS, the County has indicated that a Chapter 8 tax auction may happen in the first quarter of 2024; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to provide staff with sufficient authority to complete the acquisition of these five parcels to further the above stated goals. City of South San Francisco 82 File Number: 23-1059 Enactment Number: RES 02-2024 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco does hereby authorize the City Manager or their designee to take all actions necessary to effectuate the purchase of the following remnant parcels along Westborough Boulevard between Oakmont Drive and Olympic Drive (APNs 091022010, 091022020, 091022030, 091025010, 091034080) and the remnant right of way parcel on Sylvester Road north of Associated Road (APN 015031090) with outstanding delinquent taxes subject to an upcoming County of San Mateo Chapter 8 tax sale. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute any documents necessary on behalf of the City to carry out the intent of this resolution, subject to approval by the City Attorney. At a meeting of the City Council on 1/10/2024, a motion was made by Councilmember Addiego, seconded by Councilmember Nagales, that this Resolution be approved. The motion passed. Yes: 5 Mayor Coleman, Vice Mayor Flores, Councilmember Addiego, Councilmember Nagales, and Councilmember Nicolas Attest by Rosa/,6ovea Acosta, City Clerk City of South San Francisco 83 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-772 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:6a. Resolution authorizing the City Manager or designee to purchase several remnant parcels (Assessor Parcel Numbers 091022010,091022020,091022030,091025010,091034080,and 015031090)with outstanding delinquent taxes in South San Francisco subject to an upcoming County of San Mateo Chapter 8 tax sale. WHEREAS,in May,2023 the City received notice that the San Mateo County Tax Collector’s office would be conducting a Chapter 7 public auction for tax defaulted properties; and WHEREAS,in closed session meetings of City Council at its regular meetings on July 12,2023,and October 25,2023,Council provided direction to staff to object to the Chapter 7 sale of certain defaulted tax properties in order to acquire them via a Chapter 8 sale; and WHEREAS,at a City Council meeting on January 10,2024,the City Council approved a resolution authorizing the City Manager or designee to purchase the defaulted tax properties via a Chapter 8 sale; and WHEREAS,the previous application for the purchase of the parcels was denied by the State Controller’s office,due to a clerical error,necessitating the need for a new application for a Chapter 8 non-objection sale; and WHEREAS,these properties include five remnant parcels along Westborough Boulevard between Oakmont Drive and Olympic Drive (APNs 091022010,091022020,091022030,091025010,091034080)and one remnant right of way parcel on Sylvester Road north of Associated Road (APN 015031090); and WHEREAS,the properties along Westborough Boulevard have been the subject of past Code Enforcement action,are not properly maintained,and pose a nuisance to the community;acquiring them will stabilize the properties and provide the City with flexibility in the future should it wish to expand the Westborough right-of- way, construct pathways, or enhance landscaping; and WHEREAS,the Sylvester Road parcel is a key uncontrolled piece of property at the center of a large development surrounded by privately owned streets;acquiring the parcel and transferring it to the Trammel Crow Company in exchange for reimbursement of all costs associated with the action will allow for its maintenance and preservation as publicly accessible right-of-way; and WHEREAS, the County has indicated that a Chapter 8 tax auction may happen in the second half of 2024; and WHEREAS,the City Council wishes to provide staff with sufficient authority to complete the acquisition of City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™84 File #:24-772 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:6a. these five parcels to further the above stated goals. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco does hereby authorize the City Manager or their designee to take all actions necessary to effectuate the purchase of the following remnant parcels along Westborough Boulevard between Oakmont Drive and Olympic Drive (APNs 091022010,091022020,091022030,091025010,091034080)and the remnant right of way parcel on Sylvester Road north of Associated Road (APN 015031090)with outstanding delinquent taxes subject to an upcoming County of San Mateo Chapter 8 tax sale. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute any documents necessary on behalf of the City to carry out the intent of this resolution, subject to approval by the City Attorney. ***** City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™85 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-811 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:7. Report regarding a resolution approving the acceptance of Community Project Funding grant funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development Economic Development Initiative for Fiscal Year 2023-24,in an amount of $1,666,279 for the South San Francisco Centennial Way Trail and Outdoor Learning Center project (pk2302)pursuant to Budget Amendment Number 25.012 (Greg Mediati,Director of Parks and Recreation,Philip Vitale,Deputy Director of Capital Projects, and Christina Fernandez, Deputy City Manager) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the acceptance of grant funding from the Economic Development Initiative Community Project Fund for Fiscal Year 2023-24 in an amount of $1,666,279 for the Centennial Way Trail and Outdoor Learning Center project (pk2302). BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The Centennial Way Park project will create a new park along Centennial Way Trail between Spruce Avenue and the city limits near Huntington Avenue.The new park includes an outdoor learning space,a pollinator themed garden and playground,nature play space,green space and picnic tables,and a skate park and bike park with new lighting and improvements to the paved trail.The project is funded by a Clean California grant,a Community Project Funding grant, and matching funds from the City. In early 2023,City staff submitted Community Project Funding (CPF)grant requests to Congressman Mullin’s office for funding consideration in the Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2023-24,which included a $1,666,279 request for funding the Centennial Way Trail and Outdoor Learning Center project. In July 2023,City staff learned while the request moved through various committees,the request for Centennial Way Trail and Outdoor Learning Center had been reduced to $1,050,000.In October 2023,staff presented an award of contract for construction of Centennial Way Park South to City Council with a total project budget of $5,868,478, anticipating a CPF grant of $1,050,000.The CPF grant was an earmark pending final authorization at the federal level, with funds planned to be received in 2024.To allow the project to move forward with park construction and meet delivery requirements of the Clean California local grant,it was requested of Council to allow the project to utilize $1,050,000 of Park Construction Fees (Fund 806)at the time,which would be appropriated back to Park Construction Funds (Fund 806) when the CPF grant was awarded. Staff recently learned that the original request of $1,666,279 has been awarded to the City of South San Francisco, allowing the project budget to increase by $616,279 for a total project budget of $6,484,757.The additional project funds allow the project to address construction change orders associated with PG&E vault protection,relocation of public art, and other unforeseen construction expenses.Staff is also exploring replacement of the existing perimeter fencing to improve the overall project site. FISCAL IMPACT Acceptance of $1,666,279 in grant funding has no impact to the General Fund and allows $1,050,000 of Park Construction Fees (Fund 806) to be replaced by the $1,666,279 CPF grant funds. 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 City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™86 File #:24-811 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:7. play. CONCLUSION It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the acceptance the Economic Development Initiative Community Project Fund for Fiscal Year 2023-24 in an amount of $1,666,279 for the Centennial Way Trail and Outdoor Learning Center project (pk2302) and approve Budget Amendment Number 25.012. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™87 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-812 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:7a. Resolution authorizing the acceptance of Community Project Funding grant funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development Economic Development Initiative for Fiscal Year 2023-24 in an amount of $1,666,279 for the South San Francisco Centennial Way Trail and Outdoor Learning Center project pursuant to Budget Amendment Number 25.012. WHEREAS, the Centennial Way Trail Park Improvements project creates a new park on Centennial Way Trail between Spruce Avenue and the city limits near Huntington Avenue; and WHEREAS, the project is partially funded by a Clean California Local grant, administered through the California Department of Transportation, and matching funds from the City; and WHEREAS, in early 2023, City staff submitted a $1,666,279 funding request through Congressman Mullin for the Economic Development Initiative Community Project Fund for Fiscal Year 2023-24; and WHEREAS, the City Council authorized a construction budget of $4,505,417, with $450,542 contingency, totaling a construction budget of $4,955,959; and WHEREAS, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2024 and became law No: 118-42 on March 9, 2024, which included a Community Project Fund grant in the amount of $1,666,279 for the Centennial Way Trail and Outdoor Learning Center project; and WHEREAS, the City Council authorized $1,050,000 of Park Construction Fees (Fund 806) be appropriated to project pk2302 to bridge the funding gap from the earmarked Community Project Funding as per Budget Amendment Number 24.015. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of South San Francisco City Council hereby accepts $1,666,279 in Congressionally Directed Spending for the South San Francisco Centennial Way Trail and Outdoor Learning Center project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council approves using the $1,666,279 Community Project Funding to replace the appropriation of $1,050,000 from Park Construction Fees (Fund 806). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council approves Budget Amendment Number 25.012 to amend the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Capital Improvement Budget for project pk2302. 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 8/23/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™88 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-778 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:8. Report regarding a resolution authorizing a professional services agreement with SmartWave Technologies for a two-year pilot program to install and manage Wi-Fi equipment at the South San Francisco Housing Authority, in the amount not to exceed $102,750,and authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement.(Tony Barrera, Director of Information Technology) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommend authorizing the professional services agreement with SmartWave Technologies for a two-year pilot program which includes the installation and management of a Wi-Fi network for residents at the South San Francisco Housing Authority. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The City Council initially allocated funds to build a community Wi-Fi network in the downtown area. Unfortunately,the project encountered delays due to Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E)requirements, resulting in its cancellation.This budget year,staff proposed redirecting the initiative to the South San Francisco Housing Authority,located at 350 C Street,which consists of 80 units and serves approximately 200 residents. Internet connectivity has become increasingly important for job searches,educational resources, communication,and access to government services.This is especially crucial in housing authorities,where residents frequently face economic challenges and rely heavily on community support. Establishing free Wi-Fi at the Housing Authority will provide the following benefits to the residents: 1.Access to Information:Internet access is crucial for residents to access information on job opportunities, education resources, healthcare services, and government programs. 2.Educational Opportunities:Many educational resources are now accessible online.Free Wi-Fi allows children and adults alike to access educational materials, online courses, and homework help. 3.Job Search and Employment:Job seekers are often required to apply for jobs online,submit resumes, and communicate with potential employers.Free Wi-Fi facilitates these activities,making it possible for residents to find employment and improve their economic situation. 4.Communication:Wi-Fi enables residents to stay in touch with family and friends through email,social media,and video calls,which is especially important for maintaining social connections and support systems. 5.Access to Government Services:Many government services and benefits are now accessible online. Free Wi-Fi allows residents to access these services,apply for benefits,and stay informed about community resources. 6.Quality of Life:Access to the internet enhances overall quality of life by providing entertainment options, access to news and information, and opportunities for personal development. 7.Digital Inclusion:Providing free Wi-Fi helps bridge the digital divide by ensuring that all residents, regardless of income level, have access to the internet and the opportunities it offers. The Information Technology Department recommends utilizing a Cooperative Purchasing Agreement for the wireless installation and equipment from the City of Tucson,Arizona.According to SSF Municipal CodeCity of South San Francisco Printed on 8/22/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™89 File #:24-778 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:8. wireless installation and equipment from the City of Tucson,Arizona.According to SSF Municipal Code Section 4.04.040(b),the City may “piggyback”off an existing contract,if the contract terms are valid and have been negotiated by another governmental agency using a quote or bid process that substantially conforms to the procedures established by state law and the City purchasing ordinance.Furthermore,the City’s purchasing policy requires the bid process on the piggybacked contract to have been completed within the last year.The City Attorney has reviewed the Cooperative Purchase Contract structure used by the wireless consultant and found it consistent with City’s purchasing procedures. SmartWave will install wireless equipment on ten light poles,some owned by the City and others by the Housing Authority,to ensure that the Wi-Fi signal reaches the residents.If necessary,some residents may purchase a Wi-Fi extender to enhance the signal within their units.Also,residents will be required to accept the terms and conditions via the captive portal to access the network. Additionally,a new 100 Mb symmetrical internet circuit will be installed at the Housing Authority office to provide adequate bandwidth for the area. The cost of the circuit is $16,800 and is separate from this agreement. Staff recommend a two-year pilot program to assess the usage and data traffic and will return to the City Council at a future date to discuss the future of the project.The cost of installation and management of the Wi- Fi network for two years, with a 10% contingency, totals $102,750. FISCAL IMPACT The City has allocated sufficient funds for project number pf2305 Public Wi-Fi network,which is funded by the Infrastructure Reserve. RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN Building a free Community Wi-Fi Network will contribute to the City’s Strategic Plan under Priority #2 Quality of Life by providing basic internet service. CONCLUSION Providing free Wi-Fi to the residents of the Housing Authority will not only provide connectivity,but it will also empower the residents by fostering community engagement and creating opportunities for growth.Leah Taylor,Executive Director of the South San Francisco Housing Authority,also highlights the critical need for connectivity in Attachment A, to enhance the well-being of residents in the community. Attachment A: SSFHA Letter of Support Presentation:Housing Authority Wi-Fi Project.pdf City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/22/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™90 91 Community Wi-Fi Network Housing Authority 92 Background Initially intended to build in the Oldtown / Downtown area Recommended to move project to Housing Authority Located on 350 C Street 80 Units 200 Residents 93 Benefits Access to information Educational Opportunities Job Search and Employment Communication Access to government services Quality of Life Digital Inclusion 94 Benefits •Leah Taylor Executive Director at the Housing Authority •Residents top resource needed •Resident working from home •Students doing homework online •Seniors with disabilities accessing health care providers 95 Project Details •SmartWave will install wireless equipment on 10 light poles and manage the network. •Users need to connect captive portal •2 –Year pilot to assess usage •100Mb symmetrical internet circuit (separate agreement) 96 Project Costs •Utilizing Cooperative agreement •Project Costs: •Agreement -2-year installation and maintenance/support $93,409 •10% contingency $9,341 •2-year Internet costs 100Mb symmetrical $16,800 (separate agreement) Total Project Cost: $119,550 •Funds allocated from Infrastructure Reserves 97 Recommendation Approve 2-year professional services agreement with SmartWave Technologies to build a public Wi-Fi network at the Housing Authority 98 Questions 99 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-779 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:8a. Resolution to approve a professional services agreement with SmartWave Technologies, LLC., for a two-year pilot program to install and manage Wi-Fi equipment at the South San Francisco Housing Authority, (project number pf2305) Public Wi-Fi network, in the amount not to exceed $102,750, and authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement. WHEREAS, the City Council allocated funds to build a community Wi-Fi network in the downtown area; and WHEREAS, the downtown project encountered delays which resulted in cancellation; and WHEREAS, City staff proposed redirecting the initiative to the South San Francisco Housing Authority where it can serve 80 units, approximately 200 residents; and WHEREAS, the City sought to partner with SmartWave Technologies, who will install wireless equipment on ten light poles, owned by both City and Housing Authority, at 350 C. Street; and WHEREAS, the City will piggyback off of the City of Tucson Arizona Cooperative Purchasing Contract for best pricing, at a total cost of $102,750, which includes a 10% contingency; and WHEREAS, free Wi-Fi will bridge the digital divide while enhancing quality of life for housing authority residents; and WHEREAS, City staff will return to City Council at a future date to discuss the future of the project. NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby take the following actions: 1. Approves a two-year agreement with SmartWave Technologies for a total cost of $102,750 which includes a 10% contingency, attached hereto and included herein as Exhibit A. 2. Authorizes the City Manager to execute the two-year agreement with SmartWave Technologies, LLC. in substantially the same form as Exhibit A, subject to approval as to form by City Attorney, and to take any other action for the purpose of carrying out the intent of this resolution that do not materially increase the City’s obligation. ***** City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/22/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™100 Short Form Services Agreement [Rev:04/01/2024] 1 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SERVICES AGREEMENT This Services Agreement (this “Agreement”) is made and entered into between the City of South San Francisco, a municipal corporation (“City”) and Smartwave Technologies, LLC., (“Consultant”) effective as of August 1, 2024 (the “Effective Date”). City and Consultant are hereinafter collectively referred to as (the “Parties”). In consideration of their mutual covenants, the Parties hereby agree as follows: 1.Scope of Services. Consultant shall provide the following services and/or materials (“the Work”): Installation, configuration and management of Wi-Fi equipment and network for two years, as more specifically described in the Scope of Services, attached hereto as Exhibit A. Equipment pricing is based on the City of Tucson Cooperative Purchasing Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit B. The Work shall commence on September 30, 2024, and shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City by November 30, 2026, unless such date is extended or otherwise modified by the City in writing. In the event of a conflict or inconsistency between the text of the main body of this Agreement and Exhibit A, the text of the main body of this Agreement shall prevail. 2.Payment. City shall pay Consultant an amount not to exceed: Ninety-Three Thousand Four Hundred Nine Dollars and Twelve Cents ($93,409.12) for the full and satisfactory completion of the Work in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The amount stated above is the entire compensation payable to Consultant for the Work performed hereunder, including all labor, materials, tools and equipment furnished by Consultant. The calculation of payment for the Work shall be set forth as follows: A.Equipment and installation totaling $78,319.12 shall be invoiced upon completion of the work. B. Year One maintenance and support shall commence immediately upon completion of equipment installation and shall be invoiced in one lump sum totaling $7,545.00, prior to the performance of such Work. C. Year Two maintenance and support shall commence immediately upon completion of Year One maintenance and support and shall be invoiced in one lump sum totaling $7,545.00 prior to the performance of such Work. City shall make payments, based on invoices received. City shall have thirty (30) days from the receipt of an invoice to pay Consultant. 3.Independent Contractor. It is understood and agreed that this Agreement is not a contract of employment and does not create an employer-employee relationship between the City and Consultant. At all times Consultant shall be an independent contractor and City shall not control the manner of Consultant accomplishing the Work. Consultant is not authorized to bind the City to any contracts or other obligations without the express written consent of the City. 4.Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), and hold harmless the City and its elected and appointed officers, officials, employees, agents, contractors and consultants (collectively, the “City Indemnitees”) from and against any and all liability, loss, damage, claims, expenses and costs (including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees and costs of litigation) (collectively, “Liability”) of every nature arising out of or in connection with Consultant’s performance of the Work or Consultant’s failure to comply with this Agreement, except such Liability caused by the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the City Indemnitees. 101 Short Form Services Agreement [Rev:04/01/2024] 2 5. Insurance. Prior to beginning the Work and continuing throughout the term of this Agreement, Consultant (and any subcontractors) shall, at Consultant’s (or subcontractor’s) sole cost and expense, furnish the City with certificates of insurance evidencing that Consultant has obtained and maintains insurance in the following amounts: A. Workers’ Compensation that satisfies the minimum statutory limits. B. Commercial General Liability and Property Damage Insurance in an amount not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence, TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000) annual aggregate, for bodily injury, property damage, products, completed operations and contractual liability coverage. The policy shall also include coverage for liability arising out of the use and operation of any City-owned or City-furnished equipment used or operated by the Consultant, its personnel, agents or subcontractors. C. Comprehensive automobile insurance in an amount not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage including coverage for owned and non-owned vehicles. D. Professional Liability Insurance in an amount not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) covering the licensed professionals’ errors and omissions. All insurance policies shall be written on an occurrence basis and shall name the City Indemnitees as additional insureds with any City insurance shall be secondary and in excess to Consultant’s insurance. 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. The certificates shall contain a statement of obligation on the part of the carrier to notify City of any material change, cancellation, termination or non- renewal of the coverage at least thirty (30) days in advance of the effective date of any such material change, cancellation, termination or non-renewal. The City’s Risk Manager may waive or modify any of the insurance requirements of this section. 6. Compliance with all Applicable Laws; Nondiscrimination. Consultant shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws, regulations and ordinances in the performance of this Agreement. Consultant shall not discriminate in the provision of service or in the employment of persons engaged in the performance of this Agreement on account of race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, gender, marital status, sexual orientation, age, physical or mental disability in violation of any applicable local, state or federal laws or regulations. 7. Termination. City may terminate or suspend this Agreement at any time and without cause upon written notification to Consultant. Upon receipt of notice of termination or suspension, Consultant shall immediately stop all work in progress under this Agreement. The City's right of termination shall be in addition to all other remedies available under law to the City. 8. 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 Purchase Agreement, shall be not less than the prevailing rate for a day’s work in the same trade or occupation in the locality within t he 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 102 Short Form Services Agreement [Rev:04/01/2024] 3 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. 9. 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 B. 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. 10. Severability. If any term or portion of this Agreement is held to be invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. 11. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the Parties. This Agreement may be modified or amended only by a subsequent written agreement signed by both Parties. 12. Non-Liability of Officials, Employees and Agents. No officer, official, employee or agent of City shall be personally liable to Consultant in the event of any default or breach by City or for any amount which may become due to Consultant pursuant to this Agreement. 13. Prevailing Party. In the event that either party to this Agreement commences any legal action or proceeding (including but not limited to arbitration) to interpret the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such a proceeding shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attorney’s fees associated with that legal action or proceeding. 103 Short Form Services Agreement [Rev:04/01/2024] 4 14. Notice. 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: Smartwave Technologies, LLC. 2662 Holcomb Bridge Rd., Ste. 340 Alpharetta, GA 30022 Attn: Kevin Brangers City: City Clerk City of South San Francisco 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 15. Execution in Counterpart. 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 si gned counterpart, shall constitute one Agreement, which shall be binding upon and effective as to all Parties. 16. Assignment, Governing Law. The Consultant may not assign any of Consultant’s obligations under this Agreement without the City’s prior written approval. This Agreement is governed by California law. The jurisdiction for any litigation arising from this Agreement shall be in the state of California, and shall be venued in the County of San Mateo. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the date written above. CITY: CONSULTANT: By: _____________________________ By:__________________________ City Manager Print Name: ___________________ Attest: Title: ________________________ ________________________________ City Clerk Company: _____________________ APPROVED AS TO FORM: Date: _________________________ ____________________________ City Attorney 2729961.1 104 7/24/24 SmartWAVE Technologies LLC 6985 Via Del Oro, #A-1 San Jose, CA 95119 SHEET 1 OF 2 Project: Public Housing WiFi Project - 350 C Street Tony Barrera City of South San Francisco 329 Miller Avenue So. San Francisco, CA 94080 tony.barrera@ssf.net ****PRICES GOOD FOR 30 DAYS FROM PROPOSAL DATE**** EQUIPMENT/MATERIALS DESCRIPTION PART NUMBER UNIT PRICE Wireless Materials 60GHz cnWave V5000 Distribution Node C600500A004A-T 1 ea $1,433.00 Universal Pole Mount Bracket for 1“-3” diameter poles C000000L137A 1 ea $26.00 60GHz cnWave V3000 Client Node Radio Only C600500C024A-T 4 ea $797.00 60GHz cnWave V3000 Client Node Antenna Assembly, 44.5 dBi C600500D001A-T 4 ea $94.00 cnWave Precision Mounting Bracket C000000L125A 4 ea $108.00 Waterproof PSU Cable Joiner 14-16 AWG N000000L180A 5 ea $9.00 Cable Gland, Long, M25, Qty 5 C000000L124A 1 ea $38.00 Cable Gland for 6-9mm cable, M25, Qty 10 C000000L123A 1 ea $52.00 Grounding Cable, 0.6m with M6 ring to M6 ring C000000L138A 5 EA $5.00 10G SFP+ MMF SR Transceiver, 850nm. -40C to 85C SFP-10G-SR 1 EA $59.00 Outdoor AC/DC PSU, 100W, 54VDC N000000L179B 1 EA $177.00 Optical CABLE,MM, 30m N000082L194A 1 EA $251.00 Ruckus T750 802.11ax Outdoor Wireless Access Point, 4x4:4 Stream, Omni Beamflex+ coverage, 2.4GHz/5GHz concurrent dual band, (1x) 2.5G Ethernet port, (1x) 10/100/1000 Ethernet port, 100-240 Vac, POE in/out 901-T750-US01 15 EA $1,835.00 Mounting Kit for Ruckus T610/T610s and spare for T710/T710s, T310 series, T300, T301 902-0125-0000 15 ea $68.00 7x Gigabit Ethernet ports, 1x 2.5 Gigabit Ethernet, 10G SFP+, 1GB of RAM, 1GB NAND, modern quad-core CPU SWRB5009UPr+S+OUT 1 EA $456.00 6-Port Gigabit Managed High Power 802.3bt PoE Switch with 4 PoE Ports and 2 SFP Fiber Gigabit Ports, 95W Per PoE Port, 300W Total LPS3400ATMP-300-T1 4 EA $872.00 Outdoor Pole Mounting Kit for Outdoor Switch MMK0001-L 4 ea $50.00 Linkpower Injector Converts 802.bt to 51V Passive PoE, Output 72W 1.41A APC1048-BT 4 ea $77.00 Photocell Power Tap Continuous On; 120V; Base– Standard 3-prong Twist-lock per ANSI; C136.10; Cord length – 20 ft.; Cord Connection – pigtail; Circuit breaker – 10A, auto-reset; Load rating – 10A SW-5771-20-1 13 ea $184.00 Ridge-Mount Non-penetrating SLED, 8FT, protective mat, 96"L x 12"W x 15"H SWSUR-237x8-R 2 EA $1,042.00 Outdoor NEMA Enclosure (J-BOX)SWNEMA 10 EA $72.00 Outdoor rated CAT6 Cabling Materials, Shielded Connectors, and Ground Wire SWCAT60D 6 EA $129.00 Outdoor Rated 1Gbps POE Surge Protection SWCMJ8POE 12 EA $82.00 Shipping, consumables, miscellaneous items SWMISC 1 EA $1,209.00 Licenses and Support Items Ruckus SZ100 and VSCG License Upgrade for 1 AP L09-0001-SG00 15 EA $70.00 Ruckus Smartcell Insight Management Software License for 1 AP 909-SCIL-0000 15 EA $11.00 Partner WatchDog Support for vSCG License supporting 1 Ruckus AP - 2 Years S02-0001-1LSG 15 EA $40.00 Partner WatchDog Support for SmartCell Insight, Single AP - 2 Years 802-SCIL-1L00 15 EA $6.00 SmartWave Technical Support - Network Monitoring, Optimization, Reporting and Technician Dispatch - 2 Years SWSPPTOD-2YR 20 EA $720.00 Materials/Equip Professional Services Lic/Support (2-Years) Sales Tax (9.875%) Grand Total QUANTITY 93,409.12$ PRICING SUMMARY 47,262.00$ 16,305.00$ 25,175.00$ 4,667.12$ Exhibit A 105 7/24/24 SmartWAVE Technologies LLC 6985 Via Del Oro, #A-1 San Jose, CA 95119 SHEET 2 OF 2 EQUIPMENT/MATERIALS DESCRIPTION PART NUMBER UNIT PRICEQUANTITY Pricing Notes: 1. Taxes are included. Shipping is included. 2. Payment Terms are Net-30 upon receipt of an invoice. A 1.5% late payment charge per month will apply. 3. SmartWAVE will retain ownership of the equipment until payment is made in full. 4. Professional Services include Survey, Design, Installation and Testing. 5. Services do not include install/extension of electrical power or conduit. 6. Price does not include Traffic Control Plans. 7. Price does not include the cost of Permits or Structural Analysis. 8. Price does not include Internet Services. 9. Price assumes 120V AC Outlet at all radio installation locations. 10. Price includes 2 Years post installation support, monitoring and Technician Dispatch. 11. Price assumes equipment can be installed on all street lights and buildings on the property. 106 Exhibit B 107 108 SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE INSURER F : INSURER E : INSURER D : INSURER C : INSURER B : INSURER A : NAIC # NAME:CONTACT (A/C, No):FAX E-MAILADDRESS: PRODUCER (A/C, No, Ext):PHONE INSURED REVISION NUMBER:CERTIFICATE NUMBER:COVERAGES IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. OTHER: (Per accident) (Ea accident) $ $ N / A SUBR WVD ADDL INSD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. $ $ $ $PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY (Per accident) BODILY INJURY (Per person) COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT AUTOS ONLY AUTOSAUTOS ONLY NON-OWNED SCHEDULEDOWNED ANY AUTO AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY Y / N WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? (Mandatory in NH) DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below If yes, describe under ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE $ $ $ E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE E.L. EACH ACCIDENT EROTH-STATUTEPER LIMITS(MM/DD/YYYY)POLICY EXP(MM/DD/YYYY)POLICY EFFPOLICY NUMBERTYPE OF INSURANCELTRINSR DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required) EXCESS LIAB UMBRELLA LIAB $EACH OCCURRENCE $AGGREGATE $ OCCUR CLAIMS-MADE DED RETENTION $ $PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $GENERAL AGGREGATE $PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $MED EXP (Any one person) $EACH OCCURRENCE DAMAGE TO RENTED $PREMISES (Ea occurrence) COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS-MADE OCCUR GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: POLICY PRO-JECT LOC CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE (MM/DD/YYYY) CANCELLATION AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ACORD 25 (2016/03) © 1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. CERTIFICATE HOLDER The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD HIRED AUTOS ONLY 8/30/2023 Yates,LLC 2800 Century Parkway NE Suite 300 Atlanta GA 30345 404-633-4321 404-633-1312 certs@yatesins.com The Hanover American Insurance Company 36064 SMARTE01-C The Hanover Insurance Company 22292SmartWaveTechnologies,LLC Kevin J Brangers 2662 Holcomb Bridge Rd.Ste 340 Alpharetta GA 30022 Allmerica Financial Benefit Insurance Company 41840 812297156 A X 1,000,000 X 1,000,000 10,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 X ZZAJ53055700 8/27/2023 8/27/2024 2,000,000 C 1,000,000 X X X X HA Phys Dmg AHAJ49414900 8/27/2023 8/27/2024 B X X 5,000,000UHAJ530564008/27/2023 8/27/2024 5,000,000 X -0- C X N W2AJ48940800 8/27/2023 8/27/2024 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 C A A Business Auto -Any Auto Employee Theft (incl ERISA) Leased/Rented Equipment AHAJ49414900 ZZAJ53055700 ZZAJ53055700 8/27/2023 8/27/2023 8/27/2023 8/27/2024 8/27/2024 8/27/2024 Comp Ded $1,000 $1,000 Ded $1,000 Ded Coll Ded $1,000 $250,000 $25,000 B Cyber Liability LHAJ53056800 8/27/2023 -8/27/2024 $10,000 Retention $2,000,000 B E&O Liability LHAJ53056800 8/27/2023 -8/27/2024 $10,000 Retention $2,000,000 A Business Personal Prop ZZAJ53055700 8/27/2023 -8/27/2024 $1,000 Ded $380,000 Subject to policy terms,conditions,forms,and exclusions,the insurance coverages afforded by the policies above include the following when required by written contract for the certificate holder and/or entities listed below:Blanket Additional Insured in regards to General Liability for ongoing and completed operations,Automobile Liability and Umbrella Liability;Blanket Primary and Non-Contributory in regards to General Liability and Automobile Liability;Blanket See Attached... City of South San Francis 329 Miller Avenue South San Francisco CA 94080 109 ACORD 101 (2008/01) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD © 2008 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. THIS ADDITIONAL REMARKS FORM IS A SCHEDULE TO ACORD FORM, FORM NUMBER:FORM TITLE: ADDITIONAL REMARKS ADDITIONAL REMARKS SCHEDULE Page of AGENCY CUSTOMER ID: LOC #: AGENCY CARRIER NAIC CODE POLICY NUMBER NAMED INSURED EFFECTIVE DATE: SMARTE01-C 1 1 Yates,LLC SmartWave Technologies,LLC Kevin J Brangers 2662 Holcomb Bridge Rd.Ste 340 Alpharetta GA 30022 25 CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE Waiver of Subrogation in regards to General Liability,Automobile Liability,Workers Compensation and Umbrella Liability.Per Project Aggregate applies to the General Liability. FORMS: 421-2915 06/15 -Commercial General Liability Broadening Endorsement 421-2916 0615 -Commercial General Liability Enhancement Endorsement 421-3635 0716 -Aggregate Limits of Insurance Per Project and Per Location With Cap 461-0155 (9-97)-Business Auto Coverage –Broadening Endorsement 461-0478 12 12 -Blanket Additional Insured –Primary and Non-Contributory 475-0001 12/22 -Hanover Commercial Follow Form Excess And Umbrella Policy 475-0526 01/18 -Blanket Waiver of Transfer of Rights of Recovery Against Others To Us Entities:City of South San Francisco its officers,officials,employees and volunteers 110 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-737 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:9. Report regarding a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consulting Services Agreement between the City of South San Francisco and Plan to Place,LLC for Facilitation Services for Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities,and consideration of potential alternatives.(Nell Selander, Economic and Community Development Director, and Megan Wooley-Ousdahl, Principal Planner) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends City Council consider adopting a resolution approving a Consulting Services Agreement with Plan to Place,LLC for Facilitation Services for Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities in an amount not to exceed $79,920 and authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement.Should Council decline to approve the resolution as drafted,staff is seeking feedback on the alternatives discussed in the Conclusion section of this staff report. BACKGROUND Over the past year,the City has received significant public comment regarding the future use of the City-owned Municipal Services Building.Both the Municipal Services Building and West Orange Library are two aging pieces of the City’s infrastructure that beginning in 2014 were planned for decommissioning when their continued repair and maintenance begged the question -should they be substantially repaired or replaced?Over several years,the City planned for these buildings to be replaced and new community-serving spaces to be built,including a new Police Department,the new Library |Parks &Recreation Center,and eventually a new Fire Station 63.The planning effort for the delivery of these new facilities included substantial community outreach engagement,passage of a local sales tax measure (Measure W),selection of design and construction firms to complete the projects, property acquisition, and rezonings to accommodate these new uses. Staff detailed the current conditions of the Municipal Services Building and West Orange Library facilities,past planning efforts for these properties,reuse and redevelopment options for them,and information regarding a community engagement effort planned for Fall 2024 in a staff report and presentation to the City Council on June 26,2024 (see Link 1).During that meeting,Council directed staff to move forward with an inclusive community engagement process to hear from the community regarding the future of these sites.The input gathered during this engagement process would be used to help inform next steps for these City-owned properties. At its June 26th meeting,City Council also requested additional outreach meetings be held,in addition to the two Open Houses staff had proposed.Regarding the timeline for this effort,Council expressed an interest in allowing more time for community input,yet not excessively elongating the process.City Council also expressed appreciation for the engagement process for the new park at Linden Avenue and Pine Avenue which included multiple meetings and engagement opportunities,and refreshments.At the time staff received this City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 1 of 8 powered by Legistar™111 File #:24-737 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:9. included multiple meetings and engagement opportunities,and refreshments.At the time staff received this feedback from Council,the Request for Proposals to solicit a facilitator had already been released with responses due just two days later,on June 28th.Staff asked short-listed firms invited to interview to incorporate this expanded scope in their interview presentation.This expanded scope was then negotiated as part of the contract with the staff recommended firm, as detailed below. DISCUSSION Facilitation Professional Services Procurement Staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP)on the City’s preferred procurement platform,OpenGov Procurement,on May 28,2024,with proposals due a month later,on June 28,2024.While this RFP was open to the general public,to generate interest in the project,staff notified a total of 11 firms and non-profits, including firms on the City’s on-call list and others that staff has worked with in the past on similar efforts. Twenty-five firms downloaded the proposal packet.Eight firms submitted proposals.Review and recommendation of a preferred firm consisted of a two-step process outlined below.In all,seven staff from three different City departments reviewed the proposals and participated in evaluating the responsive firms. Step 1. Paper Review of All Eight Proposals A panel of four staff members (the Director of Capital Projects,Deputy Director of Economic and Community Development,Chief Planner,and Principal Planner)reviewed the eight proposals.The panel rated the proposals 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. 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. 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. 4.Presentation of a Concise and Responsive Proposal The total possible score a firm could receive was 100 points. The panel’s scores are included in Attachment 1. The top four scores, all above 80 points, were Lighthouse Public Affairs, Winter Consulting, Plan to Place, LLC, and SERA Design & Architecture. While Lighthouse Public Affairs received the top score during the paper review,staff made the decision to City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 2 of 8 powered by Legistar™112 File #:24-737 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:9. While Lighthouse Public Affairs received the top score during the paper review,staff made the decision to exclude them from the interview process because the City’s former Assistant City Manager is a principal at this firm.Staff was concerned about a conflict of interest specifically on this project,as the former Assistant City Manager was a key member of the project team managing Measure W and the planning process and development of the new L|PR Center.Staff reached out to Lighthouse Public Affairs to inform them of this decision. Step 2. Interviews of Top Three Firms Of the remaining applicants,staff invited the firms with the three highest-rated proposals to an interview.The firms included Plan to Place,LLC,Winter Consulting,and SERA Design &Architecture.City staff invited the firms to give a presentation and asked the firms to address the following prompt during their interview: For the interview,please watch the City Council meeting on June 26,2024.Staff presented a report to Council regarding this item,and City Council provided direction.During the interview, please discuss how you would adjust the proposed scope and timeline to address Council’s comments. Prior to the interviews,staff called references for all three firms.All three firms received strong references from former clients. These reference checks helped inform the interview questions. Interviews were conducted on July 29,2024,by a panel of three staff members (the Assistant City Manager, Director of Economic and Community Development,and Director of Parks and Recreation).After a presentation by the firm,including a response to the prompt above,the interview panelists asked each firm the following questions: 1.Can you speak to your experience facilitating sensitive community conversations? 2.How do you build credibility with community members? 3.What effective tools or processes do you use to ensure all voices are heard? 4.How do you create a transparent and open process that generates community buy-in? 5.How would you approach getting constructive feedback from community members who lack faith in the process? Members of the panel rated the interviews in the following areas: 1.Presentation Quality: Was the presentation professional, engaging, and concise? 2.Response to City Prompt:Response to the City’s prompt for the interview which was “Discuss how you would adjust the proposed scope and timeline to address Council’s comments from the 06/26/2024 City City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 3 of 8 powered by Legistar™113 File #:24-737 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:9. would adjust the proposed scope and timeline to address Council’s comments from the 06/26/2024 City Council meeting.” 3.Overall Q&A Responses 4.Demonstrated Qualifications of the Project Manager and Team 5.Demonstrated Experience with Similar Projects The total possible score a firm could receive was 100 points.The interview panel’s scores are included in Attachment 2. Staff Recommended Firm Based on the scoring of the interviews and the consensus of the panel,staff identified Plan to Place,LLC as the recommended firm.The firm’s description and biographical information on the staff for the proposed project is included as Attachment 3.In addition to submitting a thoughtful,comprehensive,and responsive scope of work in response to the RFP,Plan to Place delivered a concise and responsive interview presentation.They answered questions thoroughly, drawing parallels between past work and the proposed project. Plan to Place has extensive experience working with communities throughout the Bay Area on complex projects ranging from City-wide General Plans,Specific Plans,and Housing Elements,to the adaptive reuse of discrete sites and Vision Plans.They regularly facilitate conversations related to adaptive reuse,vital infrastructure improvements and essential services,housing and displacement,and more.Their sole focus is on the public facing side of projects. While the firm’s senior staff have urban design and planning backgrounds,the firm’s work is limited to just community engagement -they would not have a contractual interest in the outcome of the engagement effort as they would not be the planning or architecture firm engaged on future phases of a project to reuse or redevelop. Plan to Place also committed their most senior staff to completing the majority of the hours projected for this project -this is notable as the City would have the most experienced staff committed to this important and sensitive project. Proposed Scope of Work After the conclusion of the interview process,City staff contacted the Principal at Plan to Place and worked with them to revise the scope of work that was outlined in the Request for Proposals to better align with Council’s direction during the June 26,2024 meeting.Plan to Place’s updated proposed scope for this effort includes: ·Two Hosted Tours of the Municipal Services Building and West Orange Library sites,held prior to the Open Houses and on two different days to increase participation ·Two Community Open Houses City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 4 of 8 powered by Legistar™114 File #:24-737 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:9. ·Eight focus group meetings and pop-up activities ·Online feedback form to include prompts similar to those asked in the in-person community open houses to provide an equitable opportunity for input ·Outreach materials Attachment 4 is Plan to Place’s original proposal,submitted on June 28,2024.Attachment 5 is Plan to Place’s updated scope of work revised per Council’s guidance during the June 26, 2024 City Council meeting. Proposed Schedule City staff has revised the initial project schedule to allow for additional time and engagement opportunities,per guidance from Council during the June 26,2024 meeting.Staff now proposes that the Hosted Tours,Open Houses,and focus group meetings /pop-up activities be held over the fall (September through November 2024) and conclude with a presentation of the Community Engagement Summary Report to City Council in early 2025. Proposed Budget Plan to Place’s budget of $79,920 is commensurate with the level of effort for this initiative. This effort will be led by Plan to Place’s Principal and Senior Engagement Specialist who have led numerous community outreach and engagement efforts similar to this one and have experience facilitating community conversations on sensitive topics.Plan to Place staff have backgrounds in community engagement,urban design,landscape architecture,and the creative arts which will assist them in facilitating an engaging and dynamic community engagement process for the future of the MSB and West Orange Library sites.While this is a significant investment,it is important to note that disposition of the Municipal Services Building could have very substantial start-up and ongoing impacts on the City budget,and should be carefully considered.If approved by Council, the City Manager will execute the Contract Services Agreement with Plan to Place. FISCAL IMPACT The fee for this project ($79,920)will be absorbed by the operating budgets of the City Manager’s Office, Parks and Recreation Department,and the Economic and Community Development Department.There is no new impact to the General Fund associated with adopting the recommendation. CONCLUSION While staff recommends the consultant,Plan to Place,selected through a rigorous and competitive public procurement process and the proposed scope of work as presented with this staff report,there are various alternatives Council may wish to consider.Staff is presenting these options without recommendation and simply to provide Council with information to consider in evaluating whether or not to approve the associated resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a consulting services agreement with Plan to Place as presented in Exhibit A to the associated resolution. Alternative 1 - Reduced Scope or Phased Scope of Work While staff believes the negotiated price for the proposed scope is reasonable and reflective of the effort involved in a broad community engagement effort,Council could direct staff reduce the scope of work or phase City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 5 of 8 powered by Legistar™115 File #:24-737 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:9. involved in a broad community engagement effort,Council could direct staff reduce the scope of work or phase the scope of work.In a reduced scope of work scenario,staff would recommend returning to the scope of work identified in the RFP including just two community open houses,two tours,and a report to Council.In a phased approach,staff would recommend Council approve the associated resolution and direct staff to return to Council approximately halfway through the project with initial results of the outreach before proceeding with additional engagement and exhausting the full budget.The goal of a reduced or phased approach would be to spend no more than $50,000 and then return to Council before proceeding. Alternative 2 -Eliminate Outreach Effort and Remove the Municipal Services Building as a Housing Opportunity Site Over the past year,the City has received numerous comments from a group of residents requesting the Municipal Services Building site be removed from the City’s certified 2023-2031 Housing Element.As presented to Council on June 26,2024 and detailed in the staff report linked below,the State of California requires all jurisdictions in California to adopt a Housing Element and have it certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)every eight years.The Housing Element is a planning document prepared by local jurisdictions to identify how the jurisdiction will meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA).Cities do not have to build the housing,but they do have to rezone the site to permit housing and remove any constraints, to demonstrate capacity for housing development. The Municipal Services Building site was included in the City’s 2015-2023 Housing Element beginning in 2017 when the City was required by HCD to select a replacement Opportunity Site for the parcels now occupied by the L|PR Center (which was a previous Housing Element site).Opportunity Sites not developed during a Housing Element cycle are typically included in the following Housing Element,and so the Municipal Services Building site was carried forward from the 2015-2023 Housing Element to the City’s 2023-2031 Housing Element.Identifying a site as an Opportunity Site in the City’s Housing Element does not require it to be built for housing;however,if the site is used for something other than housing,an alternative site would be required to be identified as an Opportunity Site in its stead. If Council desires to remove the Municipal Services Building site from the City’s adopted and State-certified Housing Element,Council would need to consider and adopt an amendment to the Housing Element,which would then be submitted to HCD for review and approval.Removal of the Municipal Services Building site would require identification of other similar and suitable sites that can accommodate the same amount of affordable housing,and very low-income housing in particular.The Municipal Services Building is located in a high-opportunity area,providing lower income residents access to schools,jobs,and community amenities in a higher-income neighborhood.This furthers the State’s goals of providing lower income community members with access to opportunity.Any replacement sites would need to be similarly situated in high-opportunity areas of the City and,preferably,be City-controlled in order to maximize the amount of affordable housing possible within any housing development on the site. While Council could elect to replace the Municipal Services Building site with the West Orange Library site in the 2023-2031 Housing Element,the West Orange Library site may not be big enough to accommodate the amount of affordable housing that the Municipal Services Building can accommodate and therefore other sites City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 6 of 8 powered by Legistar™116 File #:24-737 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:9. amount of affordable housing that the Municipal Services Building can accommodate and therefore other sites may need to be identified in addition to the West Orange Library site.The City’s property holdings are primarily in the Downtown and so would not meet the high-opportunity threshold required of any other substitute Housing Element sites that would need to be identified.In this case,privately owned sites would need to be identified.Together,the West Orange Library site and any other identified replacement sites that would generate sufficient capacity for lower income housing would need to then be evaluated for feasibility - are there barriers (including economic barriers) to their development or redevelopment. Any identified replacement sites if not already zoned for housing (such as the West Orange Library site)would need to be rezoned to allow for housing development.This may also necessitate a General Plan Amendment depending on the identified sites.The process to replace the Municipal Services Building site with other suitable sites and complete any necessary rezonings would take nine months to a year to complete given the number of Planning Commission and City Council hearings necessary to complete the process,as well as capacity analysis and feasibility analysis on the selected sites. As previously discussed at the June 26th Council meeting,removal of the Municipal Services Building site as a housing opportunity site in the Housing Element leaves the future of the property uncertain and has no direct effect on immediate use of the property.With the opening of the L|PR Center,staff and functions previously housed at the Municipal Services Building were moved to the L|PR Center.Substantial building improvements would have to be identified through a feasibility study and identified improvements completed at the Municipal Services Building before services and programs could resume there.At this time,the City’s operating and capital budgets do not include funding capacity for the capital improvement costs or operating expenses necessary to reopen the Municipal Services Building.Therefore,reinitiation of services at the Municipal Services Building would not occur prior to identification of programming to be provided at the site,budgeting to provide funding,completion of required improvements,and hiring of necessary staff.In the interim,the Municipal Services Building would continue to remain unused. Finally,it should be noted that removing the Municipal Services Building site as a housing opportunity site in the City’s 2025-2031 Housing Element may not necessarily prevent it from ever being redeveloped for housing or affordable housing.Should the City determine that it wishes to lease the property for more than 15 years or sell the property,it would need to be surplused under the State’s Surplus Land Act.Through this State- mandated process,the property would need to be first offered to affordable housing developers and if offers are received,the City would be required by State law to engage in good faith negotiations for a period of time before declining or accepting an offer.If an offer is not accepted,the City could proceed to lease or sell the property for a use other than affordable housing once the State certifies that the surplus process has been adhered to and State law requirements met. Alternative 3 -Proceed with Community Engagement and Remove the Municipal Services Building as a Housing Opportunity Site Should Council wish to replace the Municipal Services Building site in the City’s 2025-2031 Housing Element with other similar and suitable opportunity sites,staff would strongly recommend also proceeding with a facilitated community engagement process as described in Plan to Place’s scope and proposed in the associated City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 7 of 8 powered by Legistar™117 File #:24-737 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:9. facilitated community engagement process as described in Plan to Place’s scope and proposed in the associated resolution.While the Municipal Services Building would be removed from the Housing Element,it would remain a City asset that has been largely decommissioned and plans should be made for its reuse or redevelopment.As illustrated by the discussion of capital and operating expenses and State Surplus Land Act requirements discussed above,significant City funding and effort will have to go into any reuse or redevelopment.As such,any future plans for the Municipal Services Building and West Orange Library should be informed by a broad community engagement effort, as is contemplated by the proposed scope of work. Links: 1.June 26, 2024 City Council Meeting, Agenda Item #20: <https://ci-ssf-ca.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=6734493&GUID=D8B102CE-D536-48CA- Attachments: 1.Paper Review Scoring 2.Interview Scoring 3.Plan to Place Firm Description and Staff Bios 4.Plan to Place’s Proposal, as submitted on June 28, 2024 5.Plan to Place’s Revised Scope of Work and Budget, as submitted on August 13, 2024 Associated File: Resolution 24-783 City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 8 of 8 powered by Legistar™118 ATTACHMENT 1 Procurement Step 1 – Paper Review Scoring 119 ATTACHMENT 2 Procurement Step 2 – Interview Scoring 120 9 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services C. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSER’S FIRM 121 10 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services C. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSER’S FIRM Plan to Place is a four person community engagement and communication firm founded in 2016 and based in Marin County. At Plan to Place we value highly collaborative and inclusive community-based, neighborhood and urban planning efforts. As a full-service engagement firm, we are continually exploring and innovating new outreach tools that are tailored to meet the needs of our clients and the communities we work with. We implement an array of communication, facilitation and engagement in-person and digital platforms designed to provide access to a wide range of participants. We specialize in: •Comprehensive community engagement strategies •Customized outreach tools that spark imagination and intrigue •Interactive and approachable visioning exercises •Inclusive processes that prioritize equitable integration of all voices and aspirations •Genuine and active listening to and empowering of stakeholders •Creative community-facing design and branding •Thoughtful translation of complex planning challenges into collaborative community-supported OUR APPROACH TO COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT We take a holistic approach to community engagement that integrates client and stakeholder input throughout the process. We design context-sensitive and inclusive engagement plans that reach broad and representative audiences using the following strategies: • Designing compelling outreach campaigns via virtual technologies and in-person events; • Bringing engagement opportunities to the places where people already are - be that at the park or on their smartphone; • Building consensus among diverse groups by establishing strong relationships of trust; and • Cultivating community partnerships with local CBOs, and (whenever possible) employing locals to assist with project execution (e.g., event promotion, advisory groups, translation/ interpretation). OUR EXPERIENCE We have extensive experience working with communities throughout the Bay Area on complex and dynamic urban design and planning projects at a range of site scales from City-wide General Plans, Climate Adaptation Planning, Specific Plans, and Housing Elements, to the adaptive reuse of discrete sites and Vision Plans. We regularly facilitate conversations related to housing and displacement, adaptive reuse, accessibility and mobility, vital infrastructure improvements and essential services, environmental justice and climate resilience, and community benefits including parks and community gathering spaces. Our strength lies in fostering trust and generating authentic conversations with community ambassadors and representatives of difficult to reach sub-populations throughout the jurisdictions we work within. Our objective is to ensure that all perspectives are represented in the final outcome of any project; our sole focus is on the public- facing side of the project, crafting tailored and adaptable engagement strategies, preparing attractive outreach materials, and developing accessible engagement activities. We have included a description of relevant projects in the reference and staff sections of this proposal, and would be happy to share other examples if desired. 122 11 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services D. PROPOSER’S STAFF TEAM 123 12 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services D. PROPOSER’S STAFF TEAM DAVE JAVID, AICP, LEED AP Principal Dave will provide oversight and co-manage the project to review contracts, strategy, timeline and deliverables, and co-produce messaging and facilitate meetings. Dave has over 20 years of experience leading a diverse range of award-winning community-based planning efforts. Dave’s experience as a project manager on vision, corridor, strategic/specific plan and placemaking projects has provided invaluable insight on the opportunities and the challenges of balancing client objectives while meeting community expectations. Dave has been fortunate to work with the community of South San Francisco on impactful planning projects including the General Plan Update and Lindenville Specific Plan. RACHAEL SHARKLAND Sr. Community Engagement Specialist and Designer (Point of Contact) Rachael will collaborate with the project team to prepare messaging and outreach materials and facilitate meetings, and will co-manage the project as the main point of contact between Plan to Place and the City. Rachael has 10 years of experience working as a researcher, designer, and project manager on complex urban design projects including master plans for higher education and health campuses and civic design and transit guidelines. Her experience in dance, counseling, and ecology informs her reverence for a participatory design process grounded in an ethics of resilience, equity, empathy, and agency. She is skilled in various community engagement and communication technologies and methods that advance a participatory design process. Rachael recently worked closely with City staff on the Lindenvill Specific Plan project. QUENTIN FREEMAN Outreach Specialist and Graphic Designer Quentin will collaborate with the project team on both outreach materials and communication templates and assist with meeting logistics and facilitation. Quentin’s multidisciplinary work spans community-based research, visual arts, and place-based analysis and design to imagine and enact futures rooted in climate resilience and equity. A recent graduate from UC Berkeley’s Urban Studies program with emphasis on landscape architecture and socio-ecological sustainability, she is working to build connections between people and place, and believes wholly in a design process grounded in authentic and empowering participation at every step. 124 www.plantoplace.com DAVE JAVID, AICP, LEED AP Founder + Principal Dave has over 20 years of experience leading a diverse range of award-winning community-based planning efforts. Dave’s experience as a project manager on vision, corridor, strategic, specific plan and resilient placemaking projects has provided invaluable insight on the opportunities and the challenges of balancing client objectives while meeting community expectations. By implementing a range of engagement and communication platforms, Dave has forged relationships with key community leaders to establish partnerships and a common dialogue that has led to successful policy outcomes. FEATURED PROJECTS GENERAL PLAN UPDATE + EIR | SOUTH FRANCISCO + PETALUMA, CA Leading the community engagement effort in in collaboration with Raimi + Associates in both cities, co-facilitating meetings with advisory groups/committees, faith-based organizations, the business community, and regional agencies. Prepared interactive activities for in-person meetings and workshops and sub-areas meetings. We also developed virtual platforms to provide access to the planning effort through online media, surveys and feedback forms to engage diverse perspectives. DIRIDON STATION AREA COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT | SAN JOSE, CA Led a comprehensive engagement strategy in partnership with Raimi + Associates, through collaboration with City staff to facilitate a range of community and passionate stakeholder input related to the transformation of a transit hub in the heart of the downtown, targeted by Google for a mixed-use campus. Outreach includes monthly meetings with a 38-person advisory group, stakeholder meetings, pop-up events, surveys, digital tools and a custom project website. Creative solutions have been implemented to ensure all community members have an equal opportunity to share their perspectives, while navigating large protests that often occur during community meetings. MULTI-FAMILY OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS | MARIN COUNTY, CA Led the community engagement strategy working closely with Planning Directors from 11 jurisdictions across Marin County to collectively prepared Objective Design Guidelines and Standards that will be used as a toolkit County wide. Outreach includes in-person workshops and a range of virtual platforms and interactive online tools. ADDITIONAL RELEVANT PROJECTS LINDENVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN | South San Francisco, CA HARBOR INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | Belmont, CA EASTSIDE INNOVATION DISTRICT AND NORTHEAST AREA PLANS | San Carlos, CA 2023–2031 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE | Corte Madera, Los Altos, Piedmont, Mill Valley, San Rafael, Larkspur ASHBY + N. BERKELEY BART STATION ZONING | Berkeley, CA DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN AND EIR | San Mateo, CA MTC REGIONAL “PLANNING INNOVATIONS” FORUMS | Bay Area, CA DOWNTOWN VISION PLAN | Los Altos, CA EXPERIENCE PLAN TO PLACE Founder + Principal, 2016 – present M-GROUP Principal Planner + Designer, 2013 – 2016 PMC Senior Urban Planner, 2011 – 2013 MIG INC. Project Manager, 2009 – 2011 RRM DESIGN GROUP Senior Planner, 2004 – 2009 EDUCATION MASTER OF ARTS City and Regional Planning California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CA BACHELOR OF ARTS Urban Studies and Planning, Visual Arts Minor University of California, San Diego San Diego, CA PRESENTATIONS “Retooling the Outreach Toolkit” CCAPA Conference, Oakland, CA “Achieving Sustainable Results: Public and Private Efforts & Coordination” CCAPA Conference, Hollywood, CA "The Planner’s Guide to Implementing Green Principles” CCAPA Conference, San José, CA MEMBERSHIPS + ACCREDITATIONS Co-Director, Sustainability Committee, APA, Cal Northern - 2012-2015 American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Accredited Professional (LEED AP) San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research (SPUR) 125 www.plantoplace.com RACHAEL SHARKLAND Sr. Engagement Specialist + Designer Rachael has 10 years of experience working as a researcher, designer, and project manager on complex urban design projects including masterplans for higher education and health campuses and civic design and transit guidelines. Her experience in dance, counseling, and ecology informs her reverence for a participatory design process grounded in an ethics of resilience, equity, empathy, and agency. She is committed to design and leadership that promotes well-being for all life. FEATURED PROJECTS GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA Collaborated with the City in a three-year public engagement campaign that reached all 15 neighborhoods through sub-area advisory group meetings, pop-ups, in-person and virtual workshops, online feedback forms, and a dynamic project website. HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATES | BAY AREA, CA Designed and managed an inclusive engagement strategy in compliance with State Law and AFFH requirements including interactive mapping and website development, project videos, field interviews and workshops, and pop-up events. REIMAGINE HILLSDALE | HILLSDALE SHOPPING CENTER, SAN MATEO, CA Co-designed and co-managed a comprehensive engagement with Gehl Studios including project messaging and branding, promotional collateral, a dynamic project website, virtual and in-person workshops. NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | SAN CARLOS, CA Designed and managed an inclusive outreach campaign to foster dialogue and build consensus among stakeholders to determine a long-term vision for zoning, land use, transit, infrastructure, and environmental remediation for San Carlos’ industrial Northeast Area. NORTH VENTURA COORDINATED AREA PLAN | PALO ALTO, CA Managed a comprehensive, community-centered engagement and design process with the City of Palo Alto to transform a light industrial site into a mixed-use neighborhood with an equitable open space, housing, and transit strategy. Outreach included stakeholder and community advisory meetings, surveys, polls, digital mapping, and facilitated walking tours. SOCIAL EQUITY & INCLUSIVE OUTREACH TOOLKIT | SAN FRANCISCO, CA Co-created a guide for design professionals that outlines principles, frameworks, and tools to implement an equitable and inclusive public engagement process. ADDITIONAL RELEVANT PROJECTS GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | Petaluma, CA HARBOR INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | Belmont, CA LINDENVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN | South San Francisco, CA MISSION ROCK DESIGN GUIDELINES | San Francisco, CA EXPERIENCE PLAN TO PLACE Sr. Engagement Specialist + Designer, 2021-present PERKINS & WILL Designer + Project Manager, 2016-2020 GLS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Designer + Project Manager, 2014-2016 UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT Project Manager 2008-2010 DANCE EDUCATOR 2016-present CERTIFIED SOMATIC PRACTICIONER 2023 EDUCATION MA Landscape Architecture Harvard University, 2010-2013 BA Philosophy, Literature, and History Wesleyan University, 2003-2007 TRAINING Integrative Counseling Hakomi Institute, 2020–2022 Equity & Anti-Racism Facilitation Holistic Resistance, 2020-present Mind-Body Coaching Embody Lab, 2023 126 www.plantoplace.com QUENTIN FREEMAN Outreach Specialist and Graphic Designer Quentin’s multidisciplinary work spans community-based research, visual arts, and place-based analysis and design to imagine and enact futures rooted in climate resilience and equity. A recent graduate from UC Berkeley’s Urban Studies program with emphasis on landscape architecture and socio-ecological sustainability, she is working to build connections between people and place, and believes wholly in a design process grounded in authentic and empowering participation at every step. FEATURED PROJECTS BELMONT HARBOR INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | BELMONT, CA Collaboratively creating high-level engagement strategies, designing outreach materials, and co-facilitating virtual and in-person pop ups, community workshops, and stakeholder meetings to empower the Belmont community to shape the future of the HIA. Ongoing creation of new, interactive engagement strategies. LINDENVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN | SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA Creating outreach materials in four languages, facilitating pop-up events and community workshops, and synthesizing feedback from the community for incorporation into the Lindenville Specific Plan. SAN CARLOS NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | SAN CARLOS, CA Crafting high-level engagement strategies, designing virtual engagement materials, and co-facilitating virtual engagement events to give San Carlos residents a platform to shape the future of the Northeast Area. CORTE MADERA CLIMATE ADAPTATION IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CORTE MADERA, CA Analyzing community needs and sentiments to craft effective engagement strategies, designing outreach materials, website, and project graphics to make the planning process as transparent and equitable as possible. RELEVANT RESEARCH “Cultural and Climatic Resiliency of Local Food Systems, Región de la Araucanía, Southern Chile.” University of California and Pontificia Universidad de Chile, Villarrica. Villarrica, Chile. “Mapping the History of the Land in the East Bay, 1800-present day., to Understand Present Day Social Geographies and Access to Food and Land.” University of California, Berkeley. “The Case for Cultural Districts as Restorative City Planning in Oakland,” researched and written for the East Side Arts Alliance, Oakland, CA. EXPERIENCE PLAN TO PLACE Outreach Specialist + Graphic Designer, 2023-present LEXICON OF SUSTAINABILITY Graphic Designer + Storytelling Intern, 2022 CENTER FOR CITIES + SCHOOLS Youth Planning Mentor, 2022 GROUNDWORK Environmental Fellow, 2021 SANTA CRUZ MUSEUM OF ARTS + HISTORY Youth Arts Coordinator, 2015-2019 FREELANCE ARTIST + ILLUSTRATOR 2020 - present EDUCATION BA Urban Studies University of California, Berkeley, 2019- 2023 127 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO Facilitation Services for Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities June 27, 2024 Proposal submitted by Plan to Place 128 ii plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services Proposal submitted by Plan to Place for City of South San Francisco Facilitation Services for Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities June 27, 2024 129 iii plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services TABLE OF CONTENTS A. Transmittal Letter .........................................................................................................1 B. Executive Summary, Understanding of Required Services, and Approach to Scope of Work .................................................................................................................................4 C. Description of Proposer’s Firm ..................................................................................10 D. Proposer’s Staff Team ................................................................................................12 E. Fees and Charges......................................................................................................17 F. References .................................................................................................................19 G. Completed Reports and Presentations.........................................................................21 130 1 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services A. TRANSMITTAL LETTER June 27, 2024 Megan Wooley-Ousdahl, AICP, Principal Planner Economic and Community Development Department City of South San Francisco 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 RE: Request for Proposals for Facilitation Services for Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities Megan, Plan to Place is pleased to submit our proposal to facilitate community discussions about the future of the Municipal Services Building (MSB) and the West Orange Library. This effort exemplifies South San Francisco’s forward-thinking and inclusive governance as it prioritizes adaptation and community ownership in its ever-evolving urban landscape. Shared civic spaces are more important than ever in forging and sustaining community integrity and cohesion. Setting a course for how the MSB and West Orange Library can respond to the General Plan’s zoning (high-density, multi-family, mixed-use) and status as a Housing Element opportunity site, while upholding equitable community access is critical. The thoughtful inclusion of all segments of the community (including Spanish, Mandarin, Cantonese, and Tagalog speakers, students, and residents of varying needs and abilities) will be essential to generate unique and actionable insights for the City reflective of the diversity that characterizes South San Francisco. Transparency and equity are central to all our outreach and engagement efforts, with an aim to reduce barriers to participation, and include voices that aren’t typically part of the planning processes. Strategies include creating eye-catching and accessible graphics; designing engagement events to be fun, family-friendly and located where target populations gather and feel comfortable; translating project materials; and offering live interpretation to encourage all members of the community to engage. Throughout the process we will collaborate with City staff to recalibrate and course correct our outreach approach as needed. Plan to Place has worked on projects throughout the Bay Area and has extensive experience in South San Francisco, working most recently on the City’s General Plan Update and Lindenville Specific Plan. We are familiar with the City’s diverse sub-populations and have connected with community-based organizations (CBOs) that represent various interests (e.g., Padres en Accion, SSF Asian Alliance, SSF Youth Commission, Community Learning Center, Everything South City). We are encouraged that the City is prioritizing gathering comprehensive community feedback before embarking on redevelopment for these City-owned facilities. 131 2 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services “I’m located, therefore I am.” This aboriginal saying captures the intrinsic connection between identity and place. A successful vision for the MSB and West Orange Library is rooted in current community need and prior community experience-- it must tell a specific and compelling story. We are uniquely situated to facilitate the emergence of this story such that the City staff and elected officials can move forward with actionable and visionary principles to help guide future decision- making. We look forward to the opportunity to speak with you further about this effort, and trust the enclosed information is complete and adequate for your evaluation. Should you require any additional information or have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact us at 415.889.0580 or via email. Thank you for your time and consideration. Dave Javid, AICP, LEED AP Founder + Principal, PLAN to PLACE dave@plantoplace.com 132 3 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services B. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, UNDERSTANDING OF REQUIRED SERVICES, AND APPROACH TO SCOPE OF WORK 133 4 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services B. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, UNDERSTANDING OF REQUIRED SERVICES, & APPROACH TO SCOPE OF WORK With our engagement ethos rooted in equity and deep listening, and our experience in South San Francisco, Plan to Place is uniquely positioned to facilitate this effort. From our work with the City on the General Plan Update, we have a broad understanding of the planning context that informs this engagement effort. Situated on either side of El Camino Real, the MSB and West Orange Library have the potential to establish a community heart that can accommodate a variety of services that would benefit from being co-located. As both the facilities are located within zoning districts that encourage high-density and civic uses respectively, they are part of the City’s vision to improve access and cohesion. Their location at the intersection of several neighborhoods (e.g. El Camino, Sunshine Gardens, Orange Park, Southwood, Avalon) should be leveraged to inform intentions for future community use. At its core, the engagement campaign must effectively communicate the opportunities and constraints of these City-Owned properties so that community feedback can be most meaningfully integrated into actionable redevelopment guidelines. We will craft materials that contextualize this planning effort and solicit specific feedback that captures community hopes, concerns, and desires. We’ve had success using interactive online mapping tools and participatory visioning activities that highlight collective story-telling oriented toward a shared future. As this effort considers the adaptive reuse of both sites, the hosted site tours are an excellent opportunity to document in real time and place residents’ memories and desires for the potential transformation of the MSB and West Orange Library. We will use graphic note-taking to incorporate these ideas into community open houses following the tours. This sequencing of tour and workshop will maintain momentum and demonstrate transparency in a community- driven process. By carefully tracking feedback received during the tour and workshop, we will use additional meetings with subpopulations and community advocacy groups that weren’t represented at the community open houses, to ensure all perspectives are represented. APPROACH TO SCOPE OF WORK Plan to Place will collaborate with City staff to prepare and facilitate a community engagement effort that is far-reaching, accessible, and compelling. The following objectives will guide our effort: 1. Build trust with residents, stakeholders and CBOs that is consistent and approachable; 2. Promote a culture of dialogue between residents, stakeholders CBOs, consultants, and City staff; 3. Ensure engagement materials are visually compelling and easy-to-understand for diverse, multilingual residents; 4. Systematically analyze input throughout the process to course correct our approach as needed; and 134 5 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services 5. Prepare a comprehensive summary report that captures the range input and desired diirection gathered throughout this effort. The following scope of work items represent the proposed method of engagement and outreach, building off of the approach in the RFP. Plan to Place will collaborate with City staff to refine this strategy. TASK 1 - PROJECT KICK-OFF AND MANAGEMENT This task will include an initial kick-off meeting with the project team and regular team check-ins throughout the duration of the project to assess the efficacy of our outreach and course correct as needed. Rachael Sharkland will be the point of contact and conduit between the Plan to Place team and the City, to review strategy, timeline and deliverables. The Plan to Place team will participate in a kick-off meeting to:: • Discuss the project goals, key issues, and project milestones; • Confirm expectations for work products and refine the scope of work and budget as necessary; and • Discuss project roles and responsibilities. TASK 2 - COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT WORKPLAN Plan to Place will collaborate with City staff to prepare a dynamic engagement strategy to be refined throughout the course of the project. This will be a living, shared resource that all members of the team will have access to update throughout the project. The engagement strategy will be designed to: • Outline goals and objectives for facilitating community conversations; • Confirm schedule, format, and resources for all engagement activities through the shared resource; • Identify target demographic and interest groups, methods of multilingual communication (including Spanish, Tagalog, and Simplified Chinese) and engagement with hard-to-reach groups and special needs populations, and metrics to analyze progress and effectiveness; • Articulate a range of communication strategies to effectively reach target segments of the community; • Confirm messaging and and collateral for the promotion of events and online questionnaires; • Specify outreach tools including social media outlets to reach specific audiences in addition to traditional mailing and survey tools; • Complete engagement analytics throughout the process to assess whether our engagement approach is reaching target communities; and • Confirm coordination, facilitation and roles and responsibilities. TASK 3 - DEVELOP OUTREACH MATERIALS Plan to Place will co-produce messaging with the City to effectively communicate the background and intention of the effort to re-purpose the decommissioned MSB and West Orange Library. It will be important to articulate that this is a discrete effort and unique opportunity for residents to create a shared vision for enhancing valuable community resources. 135 6 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services Consistent and identifiable messaging will be used across promotional and outreach materials for in-person and online engagement, including: • Style Guide – The first step to creating branding materials will be to prepare a Style Guide that identifies the fonts, color schemes, and graphic design elements. The proposed Style Guide will build off existing branding resources. • Outreach templates – Once the Style Guide is approved, Plan to Place will draft a project logo if desired and related icons, outreach templates (e.g., digital / physical postcard, City newsletter, social media posts), document templates and graphic style guidelines. • Promotional collateral – Plan to Place will provide language and graphics for electronic formats (media release, e-blast notice, City newsletter, and social media postings). • Online feedback forms (see task 4.4) – Plan to Place will collaborate with the City to craft online feedback forms and questionnaires to supplement the community conversations and site tours and create parity for residents and community members unable to attend in- person events. TASK 4 - ORGANIZE AND FACILITATE COMMUNITY CONVERSATIONS TASK 4.1 COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSES (2) Plan to Place will collaborate with City staff to hold up to two in-person community- wide open houses to provide community members and decision makers a forum to learn about and share input on the future of the MSB and West Orange Library, and related planning process. It is anticipated that live polling and interactive exercises that encourage storytelling and participatory decision-making will be used to garner feedback. We will coordinate simultaneous interpretation for both open houses. For each open house, Plan to Place will prepare outreach materials and coordinate with City staff to co-produce content and engagement activities. Anticipated roles and responsibilities for staff include: • City staff will lead meeting logistics to confirm meeting space and A/V capabilities. • Plan to Place will work with City staff to identify the overall purpose, approach, objective, target audience and anticipated outcome of each open house. • Plan to Place will assist with preparation of outreach materials including messaging for email blasts and social media posts, and preparation of postcards or flyers building using the templates prepared in previous tasks. • Plan to Place will prepare public-facing agendas, and internally annotated agendas as a resource to get to and through each event. • Plan to Place and City staff will co-produce the content for each workshop. • Plan to Place will lead facilitation at each open house and prepare and manage interactive in- meeting activities to foster input, and ensure meetings are engaging and accessible. • Plan to Place will assist the City with refreshments, child care and translation and live interpretation services as needed, up to the amount allocated in the expense budget. • Plan to Place will provide meeting summaries after each open house. 136 7 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services TASK 4.2 HOSTED TOURS OF MSB AND WEST ORANGE LIBRARY (2) Plan to Place will assist City staff as needed to prepare for tours of the Municipal Services Building and the West Orange Library. Plan to Place will staff and coordinate the timing of these meetings, which are anticipated to occur the same day as the Community Open Houses for efficiency and to complement the in-person activities. Anticipated roles and responsibilities: • City staff to plan and facilitate two walking tours on the day of each of the two Community Open Houses. • Plan to Place to attend the walking tours to observe conversations, and co-facilite and/or take notes as needed, to be incorporated into the Summary Report. TASK 4.3 ADDITIONAL MEETINGS (4) Plan to Place will help coordinate and facilitate up to four additional meetings as needed, including one-on-one or larger focus group meetings designed to meet with key stakeholders. Plan to Place will work with City staff to identify stakeholders and to prepare agendas, discussion prompts, and activities for each meeting. It is anticipated that these meetings will be facilitated through virtual meeting platforms and will be up to 1.5 hours. The stakeholders should include community ambassadors that represent disadvantaged segments of the population that are not always equitably included in the public planning process. Anticipated roles and responsibilities: • Plan to Place will team with City staff to identify stakeholders, draft meeting agendas and content, and coordinate and schedule the meetings. This will include drafting an email to participants and tracking RSVPs. • City staff will lead meeting logistics (physical location set up) and Plan to Place will assist with meeting logistics as needed, including virtual platform settings. • Plan to Place will co-facilitate meetings. • Plan to Place will assist the City with translation and live interpretation services as needed, up to the amount allocated in the expense budget. • Plan to Place will summarize the key takeaways from each meeting. TASK 4.4: ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM (RECOMMENDED TASK) As noted in the RFP, we fully agree with the City’s vision to include an online questionnaire or feedback form to expand the reach of this effort. We are including this as a separate task from Task 3: Outreach Materials. Plan to Place will collaborate with City staff to co-produce content for an online feedback form that will capture demographic information and responses to prompts similar to those asked in the in-person community open houses to provide an equitable opportunity for input. The online feedback form will be concise and accessible on a computer or mobile device and translated in Spanish, Tagalog and simplified Chinese as needed. Plan to Place will summarize the results into a 137 8 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services the results into a key themes memo supported by summary graphics and direct quotes. The feedback forms are anticipated to be administered and analyzed through Google Forms, or an equivalent software. Access to the feedback forms can be advertised at events, social media platforms, City newsletter and other resources with survey link and QR code for ease of access. TASK 5 - COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY REPORT Plan to Place will prepare a final summary report to analyze and synthesize community input received to provide the foundation for future decision making about the potential redevelopment of the MSB and West Orange Library. We will also prepare a short presentation of the results to share at a City Council meeting. The summary report will be visually compelling and include graphics about recommended next steps for redevelopment. 138 9 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services C. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSER’S FIRM 139 10 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services C. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSER’S FIRM Plan to Place is a four person community engagement and communication firm founded in 2016 and based in Marin County. At Plan to Place we value highly collaborative and inclusive community-based, neighborhood and urban planning efforts. As a full-service engagement firm, we are continually exploring and innovating new outreach tools that are tailored to meet the needs of our clients and the communities we work with. We implement an array of communication, facilitation and engagement in-person and digital platforms designed to provide access to a wide range of participants. We specialize in: •Comprehensive community engagement strategies •Customized outreach tools that spark imagination and intrigue •Interactive and approachable visioning exercises •Inclusive processes that prioritize equitable integration of all voices and aspirations •Genuine and active listening to and empowering of stakeholders •Creative community-facing design and branding •Thoughtful translation of complex planning challenges into collaborative community-supported OUR APPROACH TO COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT We take a holistic approach to community engagement that integrates client and stakeholder input throughout the process. We design context-sensitive and inclusive engagement plans that reach broad and representative audiences using the following strategies: • Designing compelling outreach campaigns via virtual technologies and in-person events; • Bringing engagement opportunities to the places where people already are - be that at the park or on their smartphone; • Building consensus among diverse groups by establishing strong relationships of trust; and • Cultivating community partnerships with local CBOs, and (whenever possible) employing locals to assist with project execution (e.g., event promotion, advisory groups, translation/ interpretation). OUR EXPERIENCE We have extensive experience working with communities throughout the Bay Area on complex and dynamic urban design and planning projects at a range of site scales from City-wide General Plans, Climate Adaptation Planning, Specific Plans, and Housing Elements, to the adaptive reuse of discrete sites and Vision Plans. We regularly facilitate conversations related to housing and displacement, adaptive reuse, accessibility and mobility, vital infrastructure improvements and essential services, environmental justice and climate resilience, and community benefits including parks and community gathering spaces. Our strength lies in fostering trust and generating authentic conversations with community ambassadors and representatives of difficult to reach sub-populations throughout the jurisdictions we work within. Our objective is to ensure that all perspectives are represented in the final outcome of any project; our sole focus is on the public- facing side of the project, crafting tailored and adaptable engagement strategies, preparing attractive outreach materials, and developing accessible engagement activities. We have included a description of relevant projects in the reference and staff sections of this proposal, and would be happy to share other examples if desired. 140 11 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services D. PROPOSER’S STAFF TEAM 141 12 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services D. PROPOSER’S STAFF TEAM DAVE JAVID, AICP, LEED AP Principal Dave will provide oversight and co-manage the project to review contracts, strategy, timeline and deliverables, and co-produce messaging and facilitate meetings. Dave has over 20 years of experience leading a diverse range of award-winning community-based planning efforts. Dave’s experience as a project manager on vision, corridor, strategic/specific plan and placemaking projects has provided invaluable insight on the opportunities and the challenges of balancing client objectives while meeting community expectations. Dave has been fortunate to work with the community of South San Francisco on impactful planning projects including the General Plan Update and Lindenville Specific Plan. RACHAEL SHARKLAND Sr. Community Engagement Specialist and Designer (Point of Contact) Rachael will collaborate with the project team to prepare messaging and outreach materials and facilitate meetings, and will co-manage the project as the main point of contact between Plan to Place and the City. Rachael has 10 years of experience working as a researcher, designer, and project manager on complex urban design projects including master plans for higher education and health campuses and civic design and transit guidelines. Her experience in dance, counseling, and ecology informs her reverence for a participatory design process grounded in an ethics of resilience, equity, empathy, and agency. She is skilled in various community engagement and communication technologies and methods that advance a participatory design process. Rachael recently worked closely with City staff on the Lindenvill Specific Plan project. QUENTIN FREEMAN Outreach Specialist and Graphic Designer Quentin will collaborate with the project team on both outreach materials and communication templates and assist with meeting logistics and facilitation. Quentin’s multidisciplinary work spans community-based research, visual arts, and place-based analysis and design to imagine and enact futures rooted in climate resilience and equity. A recent graduate from UC Berkeley’s Urban Studies program with emphasis on landscape architecture and socio-ecological sustainability, she is working to build connections between people and place, and believes wholly in a design process grounded in authentic and empowering participation at every step. 142 www.plantoplace.com DAVE JAVID, AICP, LEED AP Founder + Principal Dave has over 20 years of experience leading a diverse range of award-winning community-based planning efforts. Dave’s experience as a project manager on vision, corridor, strategic, specific plan and resilient placemaking projects has provided invaluable insight on the opportunities and the challenges of balancing client objectives while meeting community expectations. By implementing a range of engagement and communication platforms, Dave has forged relationships with key community leaders to establish partnerships and a common dialogue that has led to successful policy outcomes. FEATURED PROJECTS GENERAL PLAN UPDATE + EIR | SOUTH FRANCISCO + PETALUMA, CA Leading the community engagement effort in in collaboration with Raimi + Associates in both cities, co-facilitating meetings with advisory groups/committees, faith-based organizations, the business community, and regional agencies. Prepared interactive activities for in-person meetings and workshops and sub-areas meetings. We also developed virtual platforms to provide access to the planning effort through online media, surveys and feedback forms to engage diverse perspectives. DIRIDON STATION AREA COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT | SAN JOSE, CA Led a comprehensive engagement strategy in partnership with Raimi + Associates, through collaboration with City staff to facilitate a range of community and passionate stakeholder input related to the transformation of a transit hub in the heart of the downtown, targeted by Google for a mixed-use campus. Outreach includes monthly meetings with a 38-person advisory group, stakeholder meetings, pop-up events, surveys, digital tools and a custom project website. Creative solutions have been implemented to ensure all community members have an equal opportunity to share their perspectives, while navigating large protests that often occur during community meetings. MULTI-FAMILY OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS | MARIN COUNTY, CA Led the community engagement strategy working closely with Planning Directors from 11 jurisdictions across Marin County to collectively prepared Objective Design Guidelines and Standards that will be used as a toolkit County wide. Outreach includes in-person workshops and a range of virtual platforms and interactive online tools. ADDITIONAL RELEVANT PROJECTS LINDENVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN | South San Francisco, CA HARBOR INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | Belmont, CA EASTSIDE INNOVATION DISTRICT AND NORTHEAST AREA PLANS | San Carlos, CA 2023–2031 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE | Corte Madera, Los Altos, Piedmont, Mill Valley, San Rafael, Larkspur ASHBY + N. BERKELEY BART STATION ZONING | Berkeley, CA DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN AND EIR | San Mateo, CA MTC REGIONAL “PLANNING INNOVATIONS” FORUMS | Bay Area, CA DOWNTOWN VISION PLAN | Los Altos, CA EXPERIENCE PLAN TO PLACE Founder + Principal, 2016 – present M-GROUP Principal Planner + Designer, 2013 – 2016 PMC Senior Urban Planner, 2011 – 2013 MIG INC. Project Manager, 2009 – 2011 RRM DESIGN GROUP Senior Planner, 2004 – 2009 EDUCATION MASTER OF ARTS City and Regional Planning California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CA BACHELOR OF ARTS Urban Studies and Planning, Visual Arts Minor University of California, San Diego San Diego, CA PRESENTATIONS “Retooling the Outreach Toolkit” CCAPA Conference, Oakland, CA “Achieving Sustainable Results: Public and Private Efforts & Coordination” CCAPA Conference, Hollywood, CA "The Planner’s Guide to Implementing Green Principles” CCAPA Conference, San José, CA MEMBERSHIPS + ACCREDITATIONS Co-Director, Sustainability Committee, APA, Cal Northern - 2012-2015 American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Accredited Professional (LEED AP) San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research (SPUR) 143 www.plantoplace.com RACHAEL SHARKLAND Sr. Engagement Specialist + Designer Rachael has 10 years of experience working as a researcher, designer, and project manager on complex urban design projects including masterplans for higher education and health campuses and civic design and transit guidelines. Her experience in dance, counseling, and ecology informs her reverence for a participatory design process grounded in an ethics of resilience, equity, empathy, and agency. She is committed to design and leadership that promotes well-being for all life. FEATURED PROJECTS GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA Collaborated with the City in a three-year public engagement campaign that reached all 15 neighborhoods through sub-area advisory group meetings, pop-ups, in-person and virtual workshops, online feedback forms, and a dynamic project website. HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATES | BAY AREA, CA Designed and managed an inclusive engagement strategy in compliance with State Law and AFFH requirements including interactive mapping and website development, project videos, field interviews and workshops, and pop-up events. REIMAGINE HILLSDALE | HILLSDALE SHOPPING CENTER, SAN MATEO, CA Co-designed and co-managed a comprehensive engagement with Gehl Studios including project messaging and branding, promotional collateral, a dynamic project website, virtual and in-person workshops. NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | SAN CARLOS, CA Designed and managed an inclusive outreach campaign to foster dialogue and build consensus among stakeholders to determine a long-term vision for zoning, land use, transit, infrastructure, and environmental remediation for San Carlos’ industrial Northeast Area. NORTH VENTURA COORDINATED AREA PLAN | PALO ALTO, CA Managed a comprehensive, community-centered engagement and design process with the City of Palo Alto to transform a light industrial site into a mixed-use neighborhood with an equitable open space, housing, and transit strategy. Outreach included stakeholder and community advisory meetings, surveys, polls, digital mapping, and facilitated walking tours. SOCIAL EQUITY & INCLUSIVE OUTREACH TOOLKIT | SAN FRANCISCO, CA Co-created a guide for design professionals that outlines principles, frameworks, and tools to implement an equitable and inclusive public engagement process. ADDITIONAL RELEVANT PROJECTS GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | Petaluma, CA HARBOR INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | Belmont, CA LINDENVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN | South San Francisco, CA MISSION ROCK DESIGN GUIDELINES | San Francisco, CA EXPERIENCE PLAN TO PLACE Sr. Engagement Specialist + Designer, 2021-present PERKINS & WILL Designer + Project Manager, 2016-2020 GLS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Designer + Project Manager, 2014-2016 UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT Project Manager 2008-2010 DANCE EDUCATOR 2016-present CERTIFIED SOMATIC PRACTICIONER 2023 EDUCATION MA Landscape Architecture Harvard University, 2010-2013 BA Philosophy, Literature, and History Wesleyan University, 2003-2007 TRAINING Integrative Counseling Hakomi Institute, 2020–2022 Equity & Anti-Racism Facilitation Holistic Resistance, 2020-present Mind-Body Coaching Embody Lab, 2023 144 www.plantoplace.com QUENTIN FREEMAN Outreach Specialist and Graphic Designer Quentin’s multidisciplinary work spans community-based research, visual arts, and place-based analysis and design to imagine and enact futures rooted in climate resilience and equity. A recent graduate from UC Berkeley’s Urban Studies program with emphasis on landscape architecture and socio-ecological sustainability, she is working to build connections between people and place, and believes wholly in a design process grounded in authentic and empowering participation at every step. FEATURED PROJECTS BELMONT HARBOR INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | BELMONT, CA Collaboratively creating high-level engagement strategies, designing outreach materials, and co-facilitating virtual and in-person pop ups, community workshops, and stakeholder meetings to empower the Belmont community to shape the future of the HIA. Ongoing creation of new, interactive engagement strategies. LINDENVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN | SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA Creating outreach materials in four languages, facilitating pop-up events and community workshops, and synthesizing feedback from the community for incorporation into the Lindenville Specific Plan. SAN CARLOS NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | SAN CARLOS, CA Crafting high-level engagement strategies, designing virtual engagement materials, and co-facilitating virtual engagement events to give San Carlos residents a platform to shape the future of the Northeast Area. CORTE MADERA CLIMATE ADAPTATION IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CORTE MADERA, CA Analyzing community needs and sentiments to craft effective engagement strategies, designing outreach materials, website, and project graphics to make the planning process as transparent and equitable as possible. RELEVANT RESEARCH “Cultural and Climatic Resiliency of Local Food Systems, Región de la Araucanía, Southern Chile.” University of California and Pontificia Universidad de Chile, Villarrica. Villarrica, Chile. “Mapping the History of the Land in the East Bay, 1800-present day., to Understand Present Day Social Geographies and Access to Food and Land.” University of California, Berkeley. “The Case for Cultural Districts as Restorative City Planning in Oakland,” researched and written for the East Side Arts Alliance, Oakland, CA. EXPERIENCE PLAN TO PLACE Outreach Specialist + Graphic Designer, 2023-present LEXICON OF SUSTAINABILITY Graphic Designer + Storytelling Intern, 2022 CENTER FOR CITIES + SCHOOLS Youth Planning Mentor, 2022 GROUNDWORK Environmental Fellow, 2021 SANTA CRUZ MUSEUM OF ARTS + HISTORY Youth Arts Coordinator, 2015-2019 FREELANCE ARTIST + ILLUSTRATOR 2020 - present EDUCATION BA Urban Studies University of California, Berkeley, 2019- 2023 145 16 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services E. FEES AND CHARGES 146 17 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services City of SSF | Facilitation Services for Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities PLAN to PLACE | PROJECT BUDGET JUNE 2024 Principal Sr.Engagement Specialist Outreach Specialist Hourly Billing Rate $290 $220 $180 TASK Description and Hours 1 Project Kick-off and Management 12 16 8 $8,440 2 Community Engagement Work Plan 4 4 6 $3,120 3 Develop Outreach Materials 8 16 16 $8,720 4.1 Community Open Houses (2)16 30 30 $16,640 4.2 Hosted Tours of MSB and West Orange Library (2)4 4 4 $2,760 4.3 Additional Meetings (4)20 24 32 $16,840 4.4 Online Feedback Form 4 8 8 $4,360 5 Community Engagement Summary Report 12 10 12 $7,840 80 112 116 $68,720 Direct Costs (e.g., printing, workshop materials, travel) $2,500 Direct Costs (estimated cost for translation + interpretation services, workshop refreshments and childcare)$13,500 TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET $84,720 Task Number / Description Subtotal PLAN to PLACE Project Subtotal 147 18 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services key themes memo supported by summary graphics and direct quotes. The feedback forms are anticipated to be administered and analyzed through Google Forms, or an equivalent software. Access to the feedback forms can be advertised at events, social media platforms, City newsletter and other resources with survey link and QR code for ease of access. TASK 5 - COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY REPORT Plan to Place will prepare a final summary report to analyze and synthesize community input received to provide the foundation for future decision making about the potential redevelopment of the MSB and West Orange Library. We will also prepare a short presentation of the results to share at a City Council meeting. The summary report will be visually compelling and include graphics about recommended next steps for redevelopment F. REFERENCES 148 19 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services F. REFERENCES REIMAGINE HILLSDALE | SAN MATEO, CA (2022 - 2023) Ghigo DiTommaso, Director Gehl Studios email: ghigo@gehlpeople.com phone: (415) 636 9130 x 505 The ‘Reimagine Hillsdale’ project is a collaborative effort to help shape the future reuse of the Hillsdale Shopping Center in San Mateo. Working closely with Gehl Studios and client team, Plan to Place is co-facilitating a series of interactive open houses in a space in the mall, conducting pop- up events throughout the City, co-leading site tours, and leading virtual engagement opportunities. Feedback received will help inform the future programmatic changes to the Hillsdale Shopping Center. INNOVATION DISTRICT VISION PLAN | SAN CARLOS, CA (2020-2021) Al Savay, Planning Director City of San Carlos email: asavay@cityofsancarlos.org phone: (650) 802-4209 Plan to Place lead outreach efforts for a visioning effort to redevelop an industrial site in San Carlos. A highly collaborative engagement and visioning strategy identified community perspectives and priorities related to circulation, mix of uses, open space and the environment. Key outreach tools included virtual stakeholder meetings, community workshops and site walks with community members, property owners and stakeholders. DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT | SAN JOSE, CA (2017-2021) Lori Severino, Former Diridon Program Manager City of San Jose email: lori.severino@lpsconsulting.net phone: 510.541.3215 Working closely with Raimi + Associates and City staff, Plan to Place lead engagement activities related to Google’s proposal for this major transit hub in San Jose, including regular meetings with a 38-person advisory group (representing perspectives ranging from the formerly homeless and housing advocates, to major business and development interests), focus/solution group meetings, pop-up/intercept and stakeholder meetings, walking tours, and regional workshops facilitated in multiple languages. “The Plan to Place team demonstrated professionalism, patience, and empathy in the face of protests and intense fears about displacement. They conducted an inclusive, transparent process that led to a set of desired outcomes. Ultimately, the thoughtful design and implementation of the engagement process helped build broad support for the outcomes. We highly recommend Plan to Place!” -Lori Severino, Diridon Program Manager - City of San Jose 149 20 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services G. COMPLETED REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS 150 21 plantoplace.com City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services G.COMPLETED REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS The following are examples of comprehensive engagement summaries we have prepared at critical phases of the following projects - South San Francisco General Plan Policy Frameworks Summary and San Jose Diridon Station Area Civic Engagement Report. We would be happy to provide additional examples if desired. We plan to prepare a dynamic final summary for this effort that will balance key themes with graphics and imagery that will capture the input, hopes, desires, and direction received throughout the process. 151 1 Community Workshop #2 | July 14, 2020 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GENERAL PLAN Community Conversations: Policy Frameworks March, 2021 | Conversation Summary Notes 152 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 2 This page intentionally left blank 153 3 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes The City of South San Francisco hosted a series of Community Conversations for the General Plan Update between March 15, 2021 and March 31, 2021 virtually via the Zoom Meeting platform. The meetings were an hour and a half and were held on various days either midday (11:30am - 1pm) or during the evening (6pm - 7:30pm). The purpose of the conversations was to review the policy frameworks for a range of topics and sub areas as they related to elements of the South San Francisco General Plan Update. Through a presentation, conversation topics, live polls, and small group discussions, meeting participants asked questions and provided comments on each framework topic or sub area listed below: ● Sustainability | March 15 at 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. ● Climate | March 16 at 11:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. ● Health | March 17 at 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. ● Mobility | March 18 at 11:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. ● Land Use | March 23 at 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. ● East of 101 | March 24 at 11:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. ● Lindenville | March 25 at 11:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. ● Parks | March 25 at 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. ● Housing | March 29 at 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. ● Downtown | March 31 at 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. The following is a summary of the conversations and input received. Meeting Participant Demographics Cumulatively for the entire series, there were approximately 19 members of the CAC present at the conversations and 160 members of the public. Many members of the public participated in multiple conversations. Most participants who took the demographic survey were over the age of 30 and identified as Asian, Hispanic/Latino, or White. The neighborhoods represented in residence, per a live poll that was administered during the meeting, included the following breakdown: ● 19% from Downtown ● 1% from El Camino Real/Orange Park ● 18% from Sunshine Gardens ● 9% from Winston Serra ● 2% from Avalon ● <1% from Lindenville ● <1% from East of 101 ● <1% from Sign Hill ● 9% Westborough ● 11% Not from SSF For the demographics of each meeting, see the respective section below (please see the Appendix for the comprehensive poll results). Overview of Meetings The agenda for each meeting followed a similar format: ● Welcome and Introductions ● Overview of the General Plan Update ● Policy Framework Highlights ● Participant Discussions ● Next Steps 154 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 4 The presentation provided an overview of the project, outreach events to date, the purpose of the analyses and policy frameworks, an overview vision statement, core values, and guiding principles. Policy Frameworks for South San Francisco The next item on the agenda included an overview of the policy framework by topic or sub area for each meeting. The policy frameworks are broad ideas to guide the direction of policy in the General Plan Update. Participants learned how the project team developed these frameworks from community and City staff input, as well as ongoing initiatives and activities at the City. The frameworks highlight key outcomes and performance metrics, and specific goals, policies, and implementation activities for each policy framework. Below lists each policy framework by topic in order of the meetings held chronologically. Sustainability The policy framework focusing on Sustainability was held on March 15 at 6pm. In attendance were 18 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, Hispanic or White, and from one of the following neighborhoods (Downtown, Sunshine Gardens, Winston Serra, Sign Hill, and not from SSF). Participants mostly work outside SSF and have been to a General Plan Update meeting before (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results). At this meeting, the project team provided an overview of sustainability and previously conducted community engagement around the topic. The following list describes key themes from previous engagement upon which the policy framework draws: ● Establish the City as an environmental leader ● Access to public transit including BART, Caltrain, buses, and free shuttles ● Pedestrian and cyclist safety ● The need for improved parks and open spaces – preserve views and trail system ● The need for additional public and civic spaces ● Revitalize Colma Creek ● Lack of trees along streets and on residential properties ● Bring nature and biodiversity back into the City ● Preserve and enhance historic and cultural resources including public art ● Climate threats including sea level rise, emergency preparedness, and wildfires Described below are each goal for Sustainability and outcomes that each framework strives for: • Goal #1: Make green buildings the standard in South San Francisco for new construction and major renovations. ● Goal #2: Improve the performance of existing buildings in South San Francisco. ● Goal #3: A resilient and fossil fuel free energy system. ● Goal #4: Divert organics from landfill. ● Goal #5: Increase carbon sequestration in open spaces and in the urban forest through marsh enhancement and tree planting. ● Goal #6: Make the wastewater treatment plant operate more efficiently. Following the presentation, the project team conducted a live poll to gather insight on the goals and how well they align to the community. Participants were asked their perspective on the following (rated from 0 to 5, with 5 being the most agreed upon: ● Switch to electric equipment when replacing appliances: 4.6 ● Not accept or buy single-use plastics (water bottles and straws): 4 ● Install a “laundry-to-landscape” greywater system: 3.3 ● Buy/lease an electric vehicle: 3.5 ● Walk or bike instead of drive to run errands or commute: 3.5 155 5 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes ● Update local building code: 3.5 ● Support “Neighborhood Resilience Hubs”: 3.9 ● Provide education and outreach to top food waste producers: 3.8 ● Require use of recycled urban water in applicable sectors: 3.9 ● Accelerate implementation of the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plans: 4.2 ● Focus on municipal operations GHG reductions: 3.9 *Please see appendix for full poll results Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to discuss ideas presented in the policy frameworks. The following is a summary of those conversations: ● Create opportunities with partnerships from local organizations and institutions to further progress sustainability goals and increase access to best practices. ● Incentivize residents and business owners to implement sustainable practices creatively through city- hosted campaigns and workshops ● Support Carbon Neutral by 2045 ● Provide financial support and education for solar panel investment on an individual and community level ● Define the trajectory and implementation timelines, specifically with an All Electric Ordinance ● Define an agreed approach to leadership in SSF ● Think about the end user’s habits and convenience, specifically increasing opportunities for recycling and composting in public areas ● Focus on the maintenance, upkeep, and access of open space ● Create sustainable food sources for all residents that centers education, community, and wellness ● Install solar on city buildings and facilities ● Present individual actions as a starting point for implementing sustainable living ● Explain microgrids and their significance ● Comments associated with other policy frameworks: o Health and Environmental Justice: Address disparities in air quality and associated health problems, specifically increased risk of asthma in residents close to 101. o Conservation: Expand tree planting to include streets with no trees currently o Climate and Safety Adaptation: Consider the impacts of flooding in flood-prone areas and increase resilience Climate and Safety The policy framework focusing on Climate and Safety was held on March 16 at 6pm. In attendance were 2 members of the CAC and 5 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, White and from either Sunshine Gardens, Winston Serra, Avalon/Brentwood, or Downtown. Participants worked in Downtown or outside SSF and have generally been to General Plan Update meetings (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results). At this meeting, the project team provided an overview of natural hazards and climate change and previously conducted community engagement around the topic. The following list describes key themes from previous engagement upon which the policy framework draws: ● Colma Creek that manages flooding and sea level rise, restores ecology, increases public access, and improves public access to the San Francisco Bay and Bay Trail. ● A comprehensive sea level rise strategy ● An integrated street, urban forest, and green infrastructure network Described below are each goal for Climate and Safety and outcomes that each framework strives for: Goal #1: The City proactively advances community resilience and is prepared for climate disruption Goal #2: Critical facilities have the necessary capabilities and can continue operations after all future hazards. Goal #3: The City minimizes the risk to life and property from seismic activity and geologic hazards in South San Francisco. 156 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 6 Goal #4: A resilient community that protects existing and future development from sea level rise and flooding through a continuum of adaptation solutions, including constructing levees / seawalls, expanding green infrastructure, and elevating new development. Goal #5: A transformed Colma Creek that mitigates flooding and sea level rise, restores native ecologies, and increases access to and along the creek. Goal #6: A City prepared for the combined impacts of extreme heat and poor air quality. Goal #7: The City minimizes the risk to life and property from wildfire in South San Francisco Following the presentation, the project team conducted a live poll to gather insight on the frameworks and how well they align to the community. Participants were asked their perspective on the following and the agreement to participant values (rated from 0 to 5, with 5 being the most agreed upon): ● New City capital projects should account for [Sea Level Rise (SLR)]: 4.4 ● Levees and seawalls provide a great way to protect buildings: 3 ● Nature-based solutions are a great way to protect ecosystems: 4.4 ● New development in SLR risk areas should use adaptation measures: 4.2 ● New development in SLR risk areas should build on, fill, or elevate buildings: 3 ● Property sales should disclose SLR risk areas: 4.6 ● Use Green infrastructure in Colma Creek to reduce flooding: 4.6 ● Prioritize low-income or marginalized groups in weatherization programs: 4.2 *Please see appendix for full poll results Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to discuss the draft framework. The following is a summary of the conversation: ● Spread awareness about how to stay cool during heat waves, including cooling centers (location, hours, and for whom) and in-home practices that consider safety of residents ● Increase individual engagement and awareness through emergency and non-emergency education ● Focus on outreach to individuals and communities by collaborating with partners and leveraging creative means ● Implement city-funded programs that promote sustainable best practices ● Continue considering the capabilities of critical facilities ● Consider hazard mitigation and outreach with accessibility—consider how the community needs to get information ● Comments associated with other policy frameworks: o Conservation: Expand urban forests to help reduce heat days and work with PG&E to implement these in their corridors o Land Use and Housing: Increase housing near transit o Noise: Integrate noise pollution as a hazard and mitigate its impact Community Health and Social Equity The policy framework focusing on Health and Equity was held on March 17 at 6pm. In attendance was 1 member of the CAC and 10 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, Hispanic, and from one of the following neighborhoods (Avalon/Brentwood, Downtown, Westborough, not from SSF). Participants work in either East of 101, El Camino Real, Westborough, or not in SSF. Most participants have been to a General Plan Update meeting, but some have not (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results). At this meeting, the project team provided an overview of inequities and health risks and previously conducted community engagement around the topic. The following list describes key themes from previous engagement upon which the policy framework draws: ● Impacts of future growth ● Noise, traffic and pollution impacts ● Renters, teachers, and people of color are priced out 157 7 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes ● Housing unaffordability has led to overcrowding ● Increase in houseless Latinos, older adults, and people with disabilities ● Welcoming and diverse community ● Latino community feels ignored ● Mental health center for youth and young adults ● More grocery stores ● Community food gardens Described below are each goal for Health and Equity and outcomes that each framework strives for: Goal #1: Be a leader by collaborating across department and jurisdictions to incorporate equity considerations into policies and programs. Goal #2: Engage all residents in decisions that impact their lives. Goal #3: Be a leader in promoting healthy communities through collaboration, prevention, and education. Goal #4: Close the gap of healthy food options for low-income residents in the city. Goal #5: Support safe housing and shelter throughout South San Francisco. Goal #6: Protect vulnerable households from displacement Goal #3: Reduce air pollution exposure near freeways and industrial uses. Following the presentation, the project team conducted a live poll to gather insight on the frameworks and how well they align to the community. Participants were asked their perspective on the following and the agreement to participant values (rated from 0 to 5, with 5 being the most agreed upon: ● Ensure that SSF staff, boards and commissions are reflective of diversity: 4.6 ● Hire staff who speak multiple languages (Spanish, Mandarin, and Tagalog): 3.6 ● Have multilingual interpretation and translation at community meetings: 3.6 ● Encourage resident ownership (condos, cooperatives, and CLTs): 5 ● Develop an anti-displacement plan: 4.6 ● Partner with local shelter to provide more cots for emergencies: 4.4 ● Create a Community Drop-in Center for people without homes: 4.5 ● Work with developers to create a grocery store Downtown or East of 101: 4 ● Buildings near Lindenville must reduce indoor air pollution: 3.8 *Please see appendix for full poll results Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to discuss the draft framework. The following is a summary of the conversation: ● Describe the decisions behind metrics used as key performance indicators for the policy frameworks ● Provide age-friendly outcomes that specifically create opportunities for seniors, including daycare, senior action commission, and meals on wheels ● Embrace creativity with anti-displacement strategies including COVID19 protections phasing out, increased ADU capacity, resources for displaced or houseless youth and college students, homesharing, and disability financing ● Make the correlation clear between these frameworks and the upcoming Housing Element Update ● Partner with institutions like Kaiser that have data available for further study ● Consider the community’s capacity to engage on these frameworks where there are so many meetings in such a small timeframe ● Consider help and support from the County ● Comments associated with other policy frameworks: o Parks and Public Facilities: Provide age-friendly outcomes that specifically create opportunities for seniors, including daycare, senior action commission, and meals on wheels o Economic Development: Include small businesses in anti-displacement conversations o Economic Development: Create space for small business ventures, perhaps through pop-ups 158 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 8 o Economic Development: Engage workers in the conversation and discuss data on small businesses o Mobility: Consider the intersection of health, equity and transportation, specifically by offering micro mobility options, shared car uses, and transit to services and amenities Mobility The policy framework focusing on Mobility was held on March 18 at 11:30am. In attendance were 2 members of the CAC and 14 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, White, and from either Sunshine Gardens or outside SSF. Participants mostly work outside SSF or East of 101 and have been to a General Plan Update meeting. In addition to these questions, participants were asked about their transportation habits. Most participants either drive to work alone or on the train (pre-pandemic) and expect to be in the office only for important meetings or 0-1 days post-pandemic (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results). At this meeting, the project team provided an overview mobility and transportation in SSF and previously conducted community engagement around the topic. The following list describes key themes from previous engagement upon which the policy framework draws: ● Residential parking ● Safety and maintenance ● Trail connections ● Multimodal facilities ● Traffic Described below are each goal for Mobility and outcomes that each framework strives for: Goal #1: Safe for people of all ages and abilities regardless of mode Goal #2: Comfortable and convenient for all modes. Goal #3: Proactively managed traffic congestion and parking Goal #4: Development patterns that reduce vehicle miles, curb emissions, and increase livability Goal #5: Equitable access to transit service Goal #6: Reasonable travel times for all mobility needs Goal #7: Easy access to play, fitness, and active transportation networks Goal #8: Transit stations are first choice for regional travel and a destination in their own right Following the presentation, the project team conducted a live poll to gather insight on the frameworks and how well they align to the community. Participants were asked the following questions: ● What factor would most incentivize you to change your mode of travel? o Reduced transit fares: 11% o Better bicycle infrastructure: 0% o Improved sidewalks and crossing: 0% o Increasing parking costs: 11% o More frequent transit service: 55% o New transit modes: 22% ● What is the most important factor in deciding your mode of travel? o Speed: 25% o Ease of Access: 25% o Comfort: 0% o Health: 0% o Privacy: 0% o Multiple Factors: 50% *Please see appendix for full poll results 159 9 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to discuss the draft framework. The following is a summary of the conversations: ● Increase the frequency, reliability, cleanliness and affordability of transit ● Focus on parking and the current deficit and note the shortcomings of parking permits ● Create a system that is flexible and bends to the unique needs of riders, for example, families or seniors ● Create a seamless rider experience no matter the transit agency, including payment—collaborate across agencies and public spaces ● Consider a bus express lane on Highway 101 ● Focus on areas with intersecting mobility and affordability issues, like Old Town ● Diversify mass transit and consider reimplementing the 1949 El Camino Real system ● Revisit the assumption that residents ‘will not use cars’ ● Improve safety with lighting and trail upgrades and maintenance ● Ensure that the infrastructure between transit modes is accessible and safe no matter the time of day ● Work with SamTrans specifically to reduce cost inefficiencies ● Consider the impacts of on-demand vehicle transit on taxis ● Consider future technology and its impacts, in particular, autonomous vehicles ● Incentivize transit and EV usage ● Comments associated with other policy frameworks: o Social Equity: Implement a system that responds to residents for different claims, like 311 calls Land Use The policy framework focusing on Land Use was held on March 23 at 6pm. In attendance were 5 members of the CAC and 26 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, White or Asian, from outside SSF, Winston Serra, Sunshine Gardens, Downtown, Sign Hill, or Westborough. Participants mostly work outside SSF, in Downtown or East of 101 and have been to a General Plan Update meeting before (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results). At this meeting, the project team provided an overview of land use designations and the city’s land use preferred alternative. The following list describes key themes integrated into the preferred alternative upon which the policy framework draws: ● Maintain industrial in Lindenville and East of 101 ● Create new, vibrant residential neighborhoods in East of 101 and Lindenville ● Produce a range of housing types for different income levels and household types ● Celebrate the history, culture, and diversity of the Downtown Described below are each goal for Land Use and outcomes that each framework strives for: Goal #1: Complete 20-minute neighborhoods, where residents can access most of their everyday needs within a short walk, bike, or transit trip. Goal #2: Transit-oriented communities that mix high quality development, affordable housing, and improved mobility options. Goal #3: A diverse range of housing options that create equitable opportunity for people of all ages, races/ethnicities, abilities, socio-economic status, and family types to live in South San Francisco. Goal #4: A diverse supply of affordable housing options. Goal #5: Opportunities for residents to live in healthy and safe housing options and promote sustainability in housing development. Goal #6: Foster a diverse economy and range of businesses by maintaining, beautifying, and expanding spaces for neighborhood commercial, including retail, restaurants, and small offices. Goal #7: Spaces for research and development, life sciences, and high-tech employment opportunities and operations. 160 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 10 Goal #8: Opportunities for industrial, manufacturing, and warehousing, in Lindenville and East of 101. Goal #9: A network of attractive, pedestrian-oriented, human-scale and well-landscaped streets and civic spaces throughout the city. Goal #10: High level of quality in architecture and site design in all renovation and construction of buildings. Goal #11: Collaboration with new private development to take collective action to achieve plan goals. Following the presentation, the project team conducted a live poll to gather insight on the frameworks and how well they align to the community. Participants were asked their perspective on the following and the agreement to participant values (rated from 0 to 5, with 5 being the most agreed upon): ● Access from all neighborhoods to a mix of uses is important: 4.2 ● Childcare and pre-k facilities should be expanded: 3.8 ● Health food options should be expanded: 3.6 ● Affordable housing should be allowed in all neighborhoods equitably: 3.7 ● More housing should be allowed near transit: 3.7 ● Housing should be created for seniors: 3.6 ● Housing should be created for multigenerational families: 3.7 ● Housing should be allowed on school or church sites: 2.7 ● It is important to maintain industrial jobs: 3.5 ● We should have an industrial preservation program: 3.2 ● We should grow life sciences and technology businesses: 3.3 *Please see appendix for full poll results Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to discuss the draft framework. The following is a summary of the conversations (including chat conversations throughout the session): ● Focus on the creation of neighborhoods that are walkable and have a sense of community that celebrates local and historical culture ● Collaborate county-wide to offer not only low-income housing, but also more general affordable housing, and consider eliminating R1 zoning ● Factor the plans of transit agencies when building transit-oriented development ● Balance building height, affordable housing, and mixed-use land uses ● Consider the implications of parking and traffic with more development, but also how transit intersects with this ● Concern for the plan not integrating everything the community has said over the past year ● Consider amenities provided to employees and collaborate to give the public access ● Create affordable housing for local residents, not driven by the biotech industry ● Create community spaces, like a community garden ● Work with R&D to create inclusivity ● Comments associated with other policy frameworks: o Parks and Public Facilities: Dedicate more park space per resident o Parks and Public Facilities: Reevaluate the amount of schools available to residents and the quality of education based on class size o Economic Development: Provide resources and aid to small businesses, specifically non-english speaking businesses o Economic Development: Increase opportunities for local businesses and utilize corporate money to reinvest in the local economy o Mobility: Create safer pedestrian and bike streets o Health and Environmental Justice: Consider the inequities with pollution across the city o Housing: Consider housing plan for young individuals priced out o Housing: Develop a metric for gentrification and displacement 161 11 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes East of 101 The policy framework focusing on East of 101 was held on March 24 at 11:30am. In attendance were 2 members of the CAC and 17 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, White, from outside SSF, and work either outside SSF or in East of 101. Participants have been to a General Plan Update meeting before. In addition to these questions, participants were asked about their mobility habits. Most participants drove alone pre-pandemic, and expect to be in the office 0-1 days post-pandemic. Most participants noted that more frequency in transit would incentivize alternative mobility mechanisms (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results). At this meeting, the project team provided an overview of land use designations and the sub area’s land use preferred scenario. The following list describes key themes integrated into the preferred scenario upon which the policy framework draws: ● Create residential and mixed -use neighborhoods near the Caltrain station ● Develop housing affordable to people earning a variety of income levels ● Ensure appropriate services and amenities to support new residential and employment growth ● Continue to encourage a mix of life science, biotech, technology, and industrial businesses ● Emphasize sustainability and resilience, particularly in relation to climate change and sea level rise ● Improve connections to the East of 101 areas, including new streets, public transportation, and pedestrian and bike networks ● Retain industrial land uses to support business diversity ● Ensure intensified commercial and industrial uses do not overburden transportation system and infrastructure ● Add new parks and open spaces Described below are each goal for East of 101 and outcomes that each framework strives for: Goal #1: A new transit-oriented community with a diverse mix of uses and places and programming to inspire creativity and social interaction that welcome all South San Francisco residents Goal #2: Sufficient housing to provide for a range of housing types for different income levels and household types and that sustains services and amenities to support residents and businesses. Goal #3: A cluster of life sciences as an economic engine for the City and an international hub while blending new emerging industries into the district. Goal #4: A cluster of industrial businesses as a hub for the region. Goal #5: A well-connected and accessible district with high-quality transit and walking and biking paths that seamlessly connect East of 101 with Downtown, Lindenville, and the rest of the City Goal #6: Minimize vehicle trips through parking requirements, Transportation Demand Management, and alternatives travel modes. Goal #7: Steward the San Francisco Bay, Colma Creek, and its habitat. Goal #8: Build in flexibility for East of 101, the San Francisco Bay shoreline, and Colma Creek to evolve over time, responding and adapting to climate disruption Following the presentation, the project team conducted a live poll to gather insight on the frameworks and how well they align to the community. Participants were asked their perspective on the following and the agreement to participant values (rated from 0 to 5, with 5 being the most agreed upon: ● Housing should be allowed near transit: 3.5 ● Priority housing sites should be designated: 3.3 ● Public land should be used for housing: 2.6 ● Parking minimums should be removed to encourage housing: 2.6 ● New development along Colma Creek should use context-sensitive design: 3.7 ● It is important to maintain industrial jobs: 4.5 ● We should have an industrial preservation program: 4.3 ● We should grow life sciences and technology businesses: 3.7 162 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 12 *Please see appendix for full poll results Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to discuss the draft framework. The following is a summary of the conversations: ● Create and dedicate public spaces, especially parks and open space and a community center ● Balance housing with needs of residents and build out amenities and services accordingly, especially food and groceries ● Increase housing in the sub area, specifically very low- and low-income housing ● Better connect trails, entrances, and exits throughout the area for pedestrians and bicyclists ● Identify office space and its relationship to open space ● Build out ferry capacity with public and employees ● Increase accessibility to the area to attract travelers ● Create resiliency on the shoreline ● Consider the safety of parks for individuals when designing and allocating spaces ● Collaborate with adjacent jurisdictions and SFO Airport on sea level rise projects and the implications each project has on each other ● Enable wildlife well-being by creating building setbacks and flexibility on the Bay Trail ● Ensure that tax burdens don’t fall on residents and make sure corporations are paying their fair share ● Add a retired section to the demographics ● Highlight parks in the sub area in the presentation ● Consider the marinas and residents of this area Lindenville The policy framework focusing on Lindenville was held on March 25 at 11:30am. In attendance was 1 member of the CAC and 12 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, White, from outside SSF, Downtown, Sunshine Gardens, Westborough, or Orange Park. Most participants work outside SSF, in Downtown, or in East of 101 and have been to a General Plan Update meeting before. In addition to these questions, participants were asked about their mobility habits. Most participants drove alone pre-pandemic and expect to be in the office 0- or 4-days post-pandemic. Most participants noted that new transit modes would incentivize alternative mobility mechanisms (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results). At this meeting, the project team provided an overview land use designations and the sub area’s land use preferred alternative. The following list describes key themes integrated into the preferred alternative upon which the policy framework draws: ● Celebrate the history and culture ● Preserve small businesses ● Preserve industrial uses to maintain a base of higher-paying jobs that match skill sets of residents ● Incorporate housing affordable to varying income levels ● Transform Colma Creek into a public amenity and transform area around it into a mixed-use neighborhood ● Consider the impacts of future growth, including potential displacement and traffic impacts, on Downtown, Orange Park, and other surrounding areas Described below are each goal for Lindenville and outcomes that each framework strives for: Goal #1: Create a new residential neighborhood centered along Colma Creek within a short walk of Downtown amenities and services that provides a range of housing types for different income levels and housing types. Goal #2: Expand living, working, and shopping options in Lindenville. Goal #3: Transform Colma Creek and create new open spaces to provide opportunities for social interaction, recreation, flood protection, and urban ecology. Goal #4: A cluster of industrial businesses as a hub for the region. 163 13 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes Goal #5: Support and preserve a core area of light industrial and service uses that provide good paying jobs for South San Francisco residents. Goal #6: Proactively support the industries, artists, institutions, and programs that spur the creative economy. Goal #7: Construct safe, comfortable, and accessible pedestrian and bicycle facilities that invite people of all ages and abilities with improved connections to Downtown, El Camino, and East of 101. Following the presentation, the project team conducted a live poll to gather insight on the frameworks and how well they align to the community. Participants were asked their perspective on the following and the agreement to participant values (rated from 0 to 5, with 5 being the most agreed upon): ● Priority housing sites should be designated: 3 ● New development along Colma Creek should use context-sensitive design: 3.7 ● Parking minimums should be removed to encourage housing: 2.3 ● Lot assembly should be encouraged to facilitate housing: 2.7 ● It is important to maintain industrial jobs: 4 ● We should have an industrial preservation program: 3.5 ● Buffer residential uses from industrial uses: 3.6 *Please see appendix for full poll results Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to discuss the draft framework. The following is a summary of the conversations: ● Focus on a seamless traffic experience on Spruce for vehicles, bikers, and pedestrians alike ● Preserve industrial buildings, specifically light industrial or local business industrial ● Align the arts district to account for inaccessible artist rent (for living and business) and consider city-led financial support ● Ensure the park spaces are built out and not simply living on paper ● Create shared community spaces in parks, like a community center ● Balance market rate and affordable housing to reduce affordable housing costs ● Provide more details and specifics on the arts district ● Consider additional access points to/from the area and freeway access ● Include amenities and ideas for the existing residents, not only future residents ● Discourage high rises that would change the character of the area Parks, Conservation and Cultural Resources The policy framework focusing on Parks was held on March 25 at 6pm. In attendance were 2 members of the CAC and 20 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, White, from Sunshine Gardens or Westborough, and not working in SSF. Most participants have been to a General Plan Update meeting before (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results). At this meeting, the project team provided an overview of parks/open space and conservation/cultural resources and previously conducted community engagement around the topic. The following list describes key themes from previous engagement upon which the policy framework draws: ● Downtown needs a community center, parks, and gathering spaces. ● Sunshine Gardens needs a park. ● The community needs more senior services and programming and connections to services. ● Residents expressed desire for another pool. ● Residents should have improved access to recreational facilities at public schools. ● There is a need for more daycare, childcare, and after school programs. ● Parks need to be safe and have better lighting. ● Public art should be incorporated into parks. 164 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 14 ● Parks and walking trails need to be better maintained. ● There should be more community events. ● Colma Creek that manages flooding and sea level rise, restores ecology, increases public access, and improves public access to the San Francisco Bay and Bay Trail. ● Steward the San Francisco Bay ● An integrated street, urban forest, and green infrastructure network ● Preserve and improve access to San Bruno Mountains and Bay Area trail ● Some concern on the interactions between coyotes and other wildlife and developed communities near the San Bruno Mountains. Described below are each goal for Parks, Conservation and Cultural Resources and outcomes that each framework strives for: Parks Goal #1: Expand the network of parks and gathering spaces throughout the city, accommodating the physical and social needs of users of all ages and abilities. Parks Goal #2: Improve access to parks, gathering spaces, and public amenities in Downtown. Parks Goal #3: Expand the amount of open space in South San Francisco and ensure it is accessible to the public. Parks Goal #4: Provide convenient and safe trail and other pedestrian connections throughout the community. Parks Goal #5: Provide quality recreational programming and facilities that provide recreational opportunities to all residents, regardless of ability, neighborhood, or economic background. Parks Goal #6: Provide appropriate resources and staffing to ensure parks and recreational facilities are adequately funded and maintained. Parks Goal #7: Provide quality public facilities and services to South San Francisco residents Parks Goal #8: Provide quality childcare and preschool programs citywide. Conservation Goal #1: Support nature in the city to encourage healthy ecosystems, improve air and water quality, improve public health, and adapt to a changing climate. Conservation Goal #2: Steward the San Francisco Bay and its habitat. Conservation Goal #3: Protect threatened and endangered wildlife and plant species in South San Francisco. Conservation Goal #4: Improve Colma Creek water quality and re-establish habitat along the corridor. Conservation Goal #5: Preserve important historic architectural resources for the aesthetic, educational, economic, and scientific contribution they make to South San Francisco’s identity and quality of life. Conservation Goal #6: Protect sites, features, places, or objects that are of cultural value to one or more California Native American Tribes. Following the presentation, the project team conducted a live poll to gather insight on the frameworks and how well they align to the community. Participants were asked their perspective on the following and the agreement to participant values (rated from 0 to 5, with 5 being the most agreed upon): ● Develop community gardens, mini parks, and plazas: 4.3 ● Develop parks in all neighborhoods: 4.7 ● Improve public access to SSFUSD facilities: 4 ● Develop Colma Creek as an amenity: 3.5 ● Convert vacant buildings or sites into recreational facilities: 4.1 ● Improve ped. access to parks, recreational facilities, and trails: 4.4 ● Provide more community events, festivals, and classes: 4 ● Match programming with community wants and needs: 4.3 ● Expand childcare, preschool, and after school programming: 4.2 ● Equitably provide public facilities and services in all neighborhoods: 4.4 ● Develop shuttle services and “pop-up” services: 3.8 ● Discourage use of invasive, non-native plants in landscape areas: 3.8 ● Establish standards and guidelines for new construction near the Bay: 4.3 ● Establish a Wildlife Watch program: 3.4 165 15 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes ● Establish standards and guidelines for construction along Colma Creek: 3.8 ● Encourage the voluntary conservation and re-use of historical structures: 3.7 ● Explore the feasibility of a Downtown Historic Commercial District: 3.8 ● Expand resources (historic maps, markers, or self-guided walking tours): 2.7 ● Include the history of Native Americans at Colma Creek: 3.6 *Please see appendix for full poll results Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to discuss the draft framework. The following is a summary of the conversations: ● Increase the amount of parks and ensure every resident is within ¼ mile of a park or open space ● Acknowledge the lack of parks in Sunshine Gardens and Avalon and align the vision of parks with residents ● Open park space on school property (fields, tracks, etc.) as an interim step while building more park space, specifically in Sunshine Gardens ● Build a school in Sunshine Gardens to account for influx of youth ● Consider a park on San Bruno Mountain ● Ensure that plans being developed on the policy frameworks here are seen through and involve the community in the process ● Secure park space in Old Town before properties get sold ● Increase opportunities and access to parks, including the Bay Trail ● Adopt cultural heritage in park space through kiosks, gardens, artwork, and information ● Acknowledge the physical and mental health importance of parks ● Invest in aging or existing parks for much needed need upgrades ● Create a joint agreement with schools to develop the surrounding area and implement sustainable design in the facilities ● Create a community center, community garden space, child center, and community pool ● Plant trees to help mitigate the climate crisis and provide heat escapes for seniors, like the trees on hillside ● Implement a pop-up program for recreation and flexible spaces for small local businesses ● Encourage residents to landscape with native ecology ● Continue to workshop with youth and underrepresented communities ● Create space for sports, like a baseball and soccer field ● Ensure that all parks are safe for all ages, including against theft of seniors, and include emergency buttons ● Study the impacts of surrounding businesses and pollution on Colma Creek, like the Costco Gas Station ● Provide information on ongoing projects that provide public open space, like Kilroy Oyster Point Housing The policy framework focusing on Housing was held on March 29 at 6pm. In attendance were 2 members of the CAC and 20 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, White, Hispanic, or Asian, and from Westborough or Downtown. Most participants work outside SSF and have been to a General Plan Update meeting before (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results). At this meeting, the project team provided an overview of housing and the Housing Element Update process in addition to previously conducted community engagement around the topic. The City presented their vision for housing: ● Ensure a high quality of life for all residents by providing a diverse supply of housing affordable to all income levels and people living with disabilities. ● Promote housing options for households with distinct needs, including multigenerational families, empty nesters, and younger and older adults. ● Encourage new housing production while also preserving affordable housing and protecting vulnerable residents from housing instability and displacement. 166 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 16 ● Focus new housing in complete neighborhoods with access to retail and services, parks and open space, and transit. ● Make progress to achieving a balance of jobs and housing through promoting the production of new housing. ● Enhance the safety and aesthetics of all neighborhoods. Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to provide comment on housing topics. The following is a summary of the conversations: ● Clarify the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation and the housing numbers needed to achieve it at each income level ● Balance the current lack of parking with new residents expected with additional housing ● Share housing ideas for East of 101 ● Increase the ratio of housing to open park space ● Explain the consequences of failing to meet the RHNA allocation ● Focus on housing affordability with more units being planned and consider trusts to enable their feasibility ● Share the location of planned housing sites ● Explain the process from identifying sites to construction ● Implement sustainable building practices for new construction ● Keep current zoning that spaces out homes ● Create affordability for all generations of residents and prevent displacement ● Consider ADUs to meet RHNA ● Create affordability for essential workforce (teachers, firefighters, etc.) ● Implement a strategy to keep Biotech from driving the housing market ● Build near transit and build dense ● Balance job opportunities and housing units ● Build a range of housing, including the missing middle housing ● Strategize a mechanism to retain the value of housing despite changing zoning, but also balancing more housing to prevent displacement ● Consider home ownership in new housing developments ● Engage at-risk of displacement residents in these conversations ● Acknowledge that housing is a human right and focus on this right over profits ● Explain affordable housing resell restrictions Please note, a housing policy framework was not presented at this meeting. Rather, the housing policies will be identified in a parallel Housing Element Update process. For more information, please visit https://www.letstalkhousing.org/. Downtown The policy framework focusing on Downtown was held on March 31 at 6pm. In attendance were 2 members of the CAC and 18 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, White or Hispanic, from Downtown, and work either Downtown or outside SSF. Most participants have been to a General Plan Update meeting before, but many have not or were not sure. In addition to these questions, participants were asked about their mobility habits. Most participants drove alone pre-pandemic and expect to be in the office 3- or 5-days post-pandemic. Most participants noted that new transit modes would incentivize alternative mobility mechanisms (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results). At this meeting, the project team provided an overview of land use designations and the sub area’s land use preferred scenario. The following list describes key themes integrated into the preferred scenario upon which the policy framework draws: ● Celebrate the history and culture of Downtown ● Encourage retention of existing and local businesses and protect historic buildings 167 17 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes ● Promote new residential, mixed use, and employment uses to add business patrons ● Focus new improvements on Grand Avenue ● Create new open space types and amenities ● Construct safe, comfortable, and accessible pedestrian and bicycle facilities ● Protect residents/businesses from displacement ● Advance the social, cultural, environmental, and physical goals of the community Described below are each goal for Downtown and outcomes that each framework strives for: Goal #1: Support existing neighborhood commercial and provide opportunities to expand commercial Downtown. Goal #2: Promote new residential, mixed use, and employment uses to add business patrons and residents in order to create a sustainable and thriving Downtown, while maintaining a scale and character that is complementary to existing uses. Goal #3: Create new opportunities to live Downtown and protect existing residents against threats of displacement. Goal #4: Foster contextual building design and development that benefits residents. Goal #5: Construct safe, comfortable, and accessible pedestrian and bicycle facilities that invite people of all ages and abilities to access Downtown amenities and services, Caltrain, Colma Creek and employment in East of 101 and Lindenville. Goal #6: Celebrate the history and culture of Downtown and its residents through arts and cultural resources. Goal #7: Create new, accessible open space types and amenities that will accommodate the physical and social needs of users of all ages and abilities. Following the presentation, the project team conducted a live poll to gather insight on the frameworks and how well they align to the community. Participants were asked their perspective on the following and the agreement to participant values (rated from 0 to 5, with 5 being the most agreed upon): ● Support current neighborhood commercial and provide expansion opportunities: 3.4 ● Create new opportunities to live Downtown: 3.5 ● Protect existing residents against threats of displacement: 4.1 ● New buildings are at scale and similar to current and past character: 2.9 ● Create new opportunities for gathering in Downtown: 3.8 ● Make it easier and safer to walk and bike Downtown: 3.1 ● Protect Downtown’s history and character and support local arts: 3.8 ● Transform Colma Creek into a walkable amenity: 3.4 *Please see appendix for full poll results Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to discuss the draft framework. The following is a summary of the conversations: ● Create open spaces for all ages that are safe, clean, and accessible ● Integrate more community gathering spaces in parks, specifically Cypress Park ● Consider a community center with a large parking garage that caters to the needs of youth, small business, non-English speaking residents, artists, and seniors ● Increase the opportunities for affordable housing, and eliminate barriers for non-English speakers seeking affordable housing options ● Account for limited land availability in the area with planning for community amenities ● Increase transit options and availability to reduce the need for cars, but also balance parking and planned housing ● Maximize affordable housing, but also create opportunities for market rate housing to support local economy ● Engage the working residents and at-risk of displacement residents in this effort ● Consider re-implementing the benches downtown 168 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 18 ● Preserve the character of downtown with design standards ● Make downtown the anchor for multiple generations ● Integrate new park space with other amenities that are centrally located, like a park on a parking garage ● Consider a vacant property penalty to ensure small businesses and artists can afford rent ● Define what qualifies as affordable housing in SSF 169 19 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes Appendix Sustainability Menti Polls 170 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 20 171 21 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes Climate Menti Polls 172 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 22 173 23 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes Health Menti Polls 174 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 24 175 25 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes Mobility Menti Polls 176 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 26 177 27 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes Land Use Menti Polls 178 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 28 179 29 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes East of 101 Menti Polls 180 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 30 181 31 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes Lindenville Menti Polls 182 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 32 183 33 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes Parks Menti Polls 184 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 34 185 35 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes Housing Menti Polls 186 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 36 187 37 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes Downtown Menti Polls 188 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 38 189 City of San Jose: Diridon Station Area Civic Engagement Report 2018 October 31, 2018 190 This page intentionally left blank. 191 Acknowledgements SAAG (Station Area Advisory Group) Bill Souders, San Jose Downtown Residents Association (Homeowner) Boris Lipkin, California High Speed Rail Authority Carl Guardino, Silicon Valley Leadership Group (SVLG) Charlie Faas, San Jose State University Chris Augenstein, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Chris Enders, San Jose Downtown Association Dan Mountsier, Alameda Business Association Edward Saum, Shasta Hanchett Park Neighborhood Association Ernst Calais, Adobe Systems Harvey Darnell, North Willow Glen Neighborhood Association Jean Cohen, Santa Clara County & San Benito Counties Building and Construction Trades Council Jeffrey Buchanan, Working Partnerships USA Jim Goddard, SAP at San Jose Jon Pedigo, PACT Jonathan Martinez, Cahill & Georgetown Home Owners Associations Kathy Sutherland, Delmas Park NAC Kevin L. Christman, Gardner Neighborhood Association Kiyomi Honda Yamamoto, Greenbelt Alliance Laura Winter, St. Leo’s Resident Leslee Hamilton, Guadalupe River Park Conservancy Leslye Corsiglia, SV @Home Liz Scanlon, CalTrain (staff) Madison Nguyen, The Silicon Valley Organization Maria Noel Fernandez, SV Rising Jeff Hosea, Google Miguel Marquez, Santa Clara County Nadia Aziz, Law Foundation of Silicon Valley Nicole Brown, Lofts on the Alameda Norma Camacho, Santa Clara Valley Water District Pete Kolstad, Market Almaden NAC Sarah McDermott, South Bay AFL-CIO Labor Council Sondra Weber, Plant 51 Shannon Alloway, San Jose Downtown Residents Association (Former Homeless Resident) Shiloh Ballard, Silicon Valley Bike Coalition Stephen McMahon, San Jose Unified School District Teresa Alvarado, SPUR Walter Wilson, Minority Business Consortium Whitney Morris, San Jose Downtown Residents Association (Renter) 192 SAAG Alternates Andrew Tubbs, Delmas Park NAC Ben Pacho, Silicon Valley Bike Coalition David Bini, Santa Clara County & San Benito Counties Building and Construction Trades Council Deborah Arant, Shasta Hanchett Park Neighborhood Association Derrick Seaver, San Jose Downtown Association Eddie Truong, The Silicon Valley Organization Elizabeth Fama, Plant 51 Eloy Wouters, St. Leo’s Resident Glen Williams, Santa Clara County Greg Peralta, Lofts on the Alameda Larry Clark, Alameda Business Association Jaclyn Tidwell, SPUR Jaye Bailey, San Jose State University Jeremy Taylor, Gardner Neighborhood Association Jim Lawson, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Jodi Starbird, Guadalupe River Park Conservancy John Ingco, North Willow Glen Neighborhood Association Kelly Doyle, California High Speed Rail Authority Ken Caveney, SAP at San Jose Matt Vander Sluis, Greenbelt Alliance Matthew Warren, Law Foundation of Silicon Valley Melanie Richardson, Santa Clara Valley Water District Melissa Reggiardo, CalTrain Michael Parrish, Guadalupe River Park Conservancy Nathan Ho, Silicon Valley Leadership Group (SVLG) Nathan Svoboda, San Jose Downtown Residents Association Paul Escobar, San Jose Downtown Residents Association Pilar Lorenzana, SV@Home Raj Saklikar, Cahill & Georgetown Home Owners Associations Reginald Swilley, Minority Business Consortium Steve Adamo, San Jose Unified School District City of San Jose Lori Severino, Civic Engagement Program Manager for the Diridon Station Area Kim Walesh, Deputy City Manager Lee Wilcox, Chief of Staff Loren Haley, Real Estate Development Manager Nanci Klein, Director of Real Estate Bill Ekern, Diridon Project Manager Consultant Team Plan to Place Dave Javid, Principal Leah Chambers, Outreach Specialist Blaze Syka, Web and Graphic Design Raimi + Associates Matt Raimi, Principal Kym Dorman, Principal 193 City of San Jose: Diridon Station Area Civic Engagement Report 2018 Table of Contents Executive Summary 1. Introduction Overview Purpose of the Civic Engagement Process Purpose of the Report Structure of the Report Planning Context 2. Community Engagement Process Overview Engagement Activities Station Area Advisory Group Solution Groups Community Forums and Community Meetings Pop-Up Workshops Stakeholder Meetings Online Feedback Form Walking Tours Project Website 3. Key Themes Overview Issues Desired Outcomes Housing and Displacement Jobs, Education, Economic Development Land Use, Design, and Parking Public Space, Creeks, and Trails Transportation and Transit Environmental Sustainability Online Feedback Form Results 4. Conclusion i-x 112456 1515161721232526272929 3131324143505865717678 81 October 31, 2018 194 City of San Jose: Diridon Station Area Civic Engagement Report 2018 Table of Contents (continued) Appendix (separate document) Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Potential Solutions from Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG) + Public Activity/Event Log Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG) Solution Groups Community Forums Community Meetings Pop-Up Workshops Stakeholder Meetings Online Feedback Form From the Public Comments on the Draft Report October 31, 2018 195 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | i Executive Summary for the Diridon Station Area Civic Engagement Report Introduction (Chapter 1) San Jose’s Diridon Station is a major regional transit facility and, over the coming years, will experience a significant increase in transit service and ridership due to the addition of BART and High Speed Rail, Caltrain electrification, and the expansion of Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) bus and commuter rail service. The City San José adopted the Diridon Station Area Plan (“DSAP”) in 2014 to guide development in support of these major transportation investments. The DSAP envisions a high-density, mixed-use, vibrant, transit- supportive neighborhood that expands Downtown. Since the adoption of the DSAP, Google expressed an interest in building a master-planned, mixed-use development in the Diridon Station Area. In June of 2017, the City and Google entered into an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement for the sale of about 20 acres of City-owned lands to Google. City Council is tentatively scheduled to make a decision on this land sale in December 2018. Google’s interest in the area, among other factors, served as the impetus for the City of San José to undertake an extensive civic engagement process between February and September of 2018. The purpose was to spur community conversation about issues and opportunities, refine the vision for the Diridon Station Area, and help inform the City’s negotiations with Google. The primary goal of the engagement process was to provide a balanced, inclusive, and effective two-way dialogue with a broad range of the San José community. This report documents and summarizes the input gathered through the engagement process. 196 ii Civic Engagement Process (Chapter 2) The civic engagement process included a variety of methods to share information and gather input on the community’s hopes, issues, and ideas for the Diridon Station Area in general and, more specifically, a potential Google project. At the core of the process was the convening of the Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG), which included 38 community members appointed by the City Council. In addition to the ten SAAG meetings and 11 Solution Group (subcommittee) meetings, the City held seven Community Forums and Meetings, two walking tours, six pop-ups at neighborhood events, and five presentations to stakeholder groups. The project website (www.diridonsj.org) had nearly 22,000 page views, and more than 600 people completed an Online Feedback Form. Overview of the Civic Engagement Process 197 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | iii Key Themes (Chapter 3) This community dialogue generated a wide range of ideas. Housing and displacement were the dominant topics of SAAG discussions and of public comments. There was extensive discussion about the housing crisis currently facing San José and concerns about the future if Google were to locate a major office development, as well as opportunities to add homes near transit, support new affordable housing, and address displacement. The other issues and opportunities raised most frequently were related to: revitalization of Downtown and the Diridon Station Area; job opportunities and social equity; community benefits; expectations of Google and others; growth impacts and public services; High Speed Rail impacts; safety and homelessness; environmental sustainability; and effects on San Jose’s identity. The most frequent hopes and goals expressed by community members were summarized as “Desired Outcomes” by topic: Housing and Displacement; Jobs, Education, and Economic Development; Land Use, Design, and Parking; Public Space, Creeks, and Trails; Transportation and Transit; and Environmental Sustainability. The preliminary list of Desired Outcomes was based on SAAG discussions and initial public outreach. Feedback gathered through engagement efforts in September and October, including review of the Draft Report, reinforced these preliminary outcomes and resulted in refinements. The most significant change was the addition of Environmental Sustainability as its own topic. The complete list of Desired Outcomes can be found at the end of this Executive Summary. This not a priority list of recommendations or a consensus vision for the potential Google project and the Diridon Station Area. Rather, the Desired Outcomes represent a variety of perspectives from the community, highlighting where there appears to be general agreement and where there were the greatest differences in opinion. 198 iv Next Steps (Chapter 4) The input gathered through the civic engagement process has been valuable in shaping Google’s initial design thinking and illuminating top community priorities. The input will continue to inform a variety of decisions related to the Diridon Station Area, including but not limited to the City’s Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Google as part of the land sale process this fall and future agreements on community benefits. It will also help inform implementation of and future updates to the Diridon Station Area Plan, including the development review of private development proposals by Google and others. At a citywide level, the input can help inform existing efforts such as those related to affordable housing, anti-displacement, workforce development, innovation, and sustainability. The graphic to the right shows the three ways in which input may be used. As planning and development efforts for the Diridon Station Area progress, the City will continue to convene the SAAG and engage the San José community. For example, in October 2018, the City kicked off a major engagement effort for the Diridon Integrated Station Concept Plan, a collaborative effort among four public agencies to expand and reconfigure Diridon train station for future transit services. Ways That Input from the Civic Engagement Process Will Be Used Appendix The Appendix to this report includes a significant amount of detailed information on the civic engagement process. This includes: Frequently Asked Questions about the potential Google development and civic engagement process, a full list of Potential Solutions (ideas for how to achieve the Desired Outcomes), an event log that lists all activities in chronological order, meeting summaries, copies of notes taken at community events, and comment letters from the SAAG and public. 199 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | v Housing and Displacement | Desired Outcomes The following Desired Outcomes reflect a nearly universal concern for the housing crisis; however, there was a wide range of nuanced perspectives about how to meaningfully address it and the implications for the potential Google development in the Diridon area. General Principles • Everyone involved takes responsibility to address the housing crisis, including but not limited to the City, Google, and other companies/developers. • The City adopts more and stronger tools to help fight displacement, supplementing the existing programs and policies. • More affordable housing is generated throughout the city, focusing on high density housing in Urban Villages • The strategy for addressing housing issues integrates homeless services. • The ultimate goal is no direct/indirect displacement from San Jose, and no increase in homelessness. Development of the Diridon Station Area • The Diridon Station Area has dense, affordable housing across all incomes for current and future residents and workers. • At least 25% of housing units are offered at below-market rates for lower-income households (ranging from extremely low to moderate). • Developers build inclusionary Housing units on-site or within the Diridon Station Area, rather than pay in-lieu fees or build outside of the area. • There is no direct and indirect displacement of existing lower-income residents from the Diridon Station Area and nearby neighborhoods due to gentrification spurred by this development. • New development provides compensation and relocation assistance if redevelopment of existing housing occurs. Citywide Impacts and Benefits New resources generated by Google and other companies/developers go to: • Affordable housing development, focusing on areas well-served by transit (including within the Diridon Station Area itself); • Acquiring, rehabilitating, and preserving the affordability of existing multi-family housing properties in neighborhoods at the greatest risk of gentrification; • Community ownership models to increase homeownership opportunities (e.g., Community Land Trusts, etc.) – when building new housing or preserving existing housing; and • Organizations that provide legal assistance and education to tenants, which includes the legal defense of low-income Santa Clara County tenants facing eviction proceedings. 200 vi General Principles • New development offers quality jobs that pay living wages (i.e., cover the cost of housing in San Jose). • New development helps diversify San Jose’s economy such that residents of all skills and educational levels have more opportunities. • There are strong career pipelines that help existing residents and youth get good jobs in the tech industry and other higher-paying sectors. • Local schools are supported with additional resources and innovation to provide quality education to local youth. • New development protects, supports, and involves local, small businesses and non-profits. Development of the Diridon Station Area Google and other companies/developers in the Diridon Station Area: • Adhere to responsible contracting standards and use Project Labor Agreements to ensure fair and safe working conditions for contract and construction workers. • Partner with small, local businesses in both the construction and operation phases (such as through procurement policies, catering, events, etc.) • Provide worker retention to ensure service workers retain their jobs and do not face mass layoffs if building owners or future tenants change. • Adopt a local hiring policy. • Reduce barriers to employment based on race, gender, immigration status, and previous incarceration. Citywide Impacts and Benefits New resources generated by Google and other companies/developers go to: • Early childhood education and childcare for lower-income households. • Local job training in high growth sectors, such as construction, IT, manufacturing, healthcare, and business (such as pre-apprenticeship and apprenticeship programs in trade industries). • Local, existing schools to use as the school district sees fit. • Restorative justice programming in schools. • Partnership/mentorship programs through San Jose State University (SJSU) and local community colleges. Jobs, Education, and Economic Development | Desired Outcomes As reflected in the following Desired Outcomes, Community Members want to enhance educational and economic opportunities for all residents of San José, with a range of perspectives on prioritizing social equity and leveraging Google’s strengths to support access to jobs in tech. 201 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | vii Land Use, Design, and Parking | Desired Outcomes There was strong agreement among community members for the following Desired Outcomes, reflecting general support for a well-designed, high-density, mixed-use station area that integrates with Downtown, incorporates historic features and public art, and is sensitive to the surrounding neighborhoods. Land Use New development in the Diridon Station Area: • Optimizes development density to take full advantage of the transit investments. • Includes a complementary mix of commercial, office, and residential uses, with emphasis on affordable housing. • Incorporates ground floor retail in strategic locations and amounts. • Incorporates public spaces, including open space along the creeks. • Has a coherent development pattern that is varied and interesting, yet has a consistent feel. • Is an extension of the Downtown core, rather than a separate district, with a strong sense of place. Design • The design of buildings and public spaces are oriented to the human-scale to support an active street life and accessibility for abilities. • Tech campuses are open, permeable, and integrated with surroundings such that employees support local businesses and that the public has access to amenities. • New development has an appropriate interface with existing neighborhoods and mitigates impacts, such as those related to traffic, parking, transit routes, and noise. • Public art and historic/cultural preservation are integrated early into project design and plan implementation to enhance and protect existing character and identity. • New buildings create an interesting Downtown skyline. Parking • The supply of parking is proactively managed to adapt to changes in travel patterns overtime and to support goals for reduced car travel. • Existing parking plans and programs that were developed with community input form the foundation for parking management in the Diridon Station Area. • Parking structure are future-proof (i.e., designated to allow for re-purposing if no longer needed). • The amount of land dedicated to single-use parking is minimized, and parking is not a visually prominent aspect of the built environment. • There is a shared parking district for private development, transit users, and the SAP Center. • There is sufficient parking for modes other than cars. • Parking impacts on neighborhood streets are minimized. 202 viii Public Space, Creeks, and Trails | Desired Outcomes The following Desired Outcomes had the highest level of agreement among community members, who seek a safe, accessible, and connected public realm that reflects San José’s unique identity. The following outcomes mainly apply to development within and surrounding the Diridon Station Area. • Parks, open space, plazas, and trails in the Diridon Station Area are safe, visible, well-maintained, and accessible to everyone. • The area has a range of public space types at a variety of scales (e.g., pocket parks, green roofs, plazas, community gardens, etc.) and opportunities for accessing nature. • There is a signature plaza near Diridon Station and Santa Clara Street that provides space for community gathering and special programming, in addition to circulation functions. • Public spaces are activated through temporary and permanent programming such as public art, pop-up retail, and events. • Partnerships with the business community and neighborhood groups advance projects, implement programming, and help keep spaces maintained. • There is an interconnected network of “green fingers” with inviting pedestrian and bicycle facilities. • The Guadalupe River and Los Gatos Creek trail systems are linked. • Los Gatos Creek is daylighted at Park Avenue, with restored habitat and a continuous off-street trail. • Riparian habitat along the creeks is enhanced. • New development faces creeks and other open spaces. 203 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | ix Transportation and Transit | Desired Outcomes There was very strong agreement among community members for the following Desired Outcomes, reflecting the significant interest in making the area supportive of transit use and safer for pedestrians and bicyclists, while also proactively managing vehicle traffic, parking, and emerging modes of travel. The following outcomes mainly apply to development within and surrounding the Diridon Station Area. • There are pedestrian-friendly streets with small blocks, safe crossings, wide sidewalks, and amenities such as street trees and benches. • There are direct street, trail, and bike connections to Diridon Station, Downtown, adjacent neighborhoods, and the regional network – with emphasis on improved east-west links. • The safety of major intersections is improved, especially the Bird Ave/280 interchange. • Traffic congestion is minimized during construction and on adjacent residential streets. • The Diridon Station Area greatly exceeds citywide targets for reduced car travel. • The transit system is high quality, affordable, convenient, and frequent. • The capacity of the transit system is designed for future growth, and the transportation system as a whole is flexible and adaptable. • Transit infrastructure is designed to avoid impacts to homes, parks, businesses, and community facilities. • The various modes of transit that intersect at Diridon Station are inter-connected. • Bus routes and the light rail system provide direct connections to Diridon Station from the airport and neighborhoods throughout the city, including South San Jose and Berryessa. Environmental Sustainability | Desired Outcomes The following Desired Outcomes were added following review of the Draft Report to fully capture the community’s interest in integrating nature, enhancing habitat, using innovative green building techniques, and minimizing pollution. The following outcomes mainly apply to development within and surrounding the Diridon Station Area. • New development minimizes adverse environmental impacts, including contributions to global climate change. • New development serves as a model for eco-district planning, design, and implementation. • New development adheres to Climate Smart San José pillars and strategies and LEED Gold or Platinum standards for green building. • Creeks and other natural resources are integrated early into projects, using principles of healthy ecosystem design. 204 x PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR FORMATTING 205 1 Introduction Overview San Jose’s Diridon Station is located immediately west of Downtown San Jose and near the SAP Center. For years, Diridon Station has served as a major transit facility for the region - with Amtrak rail, VTA light rail, Caltrain, Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) commuter rail, and local and regional bus services. Over the next 10 to 20 years, planned transit improvements will significantly expand transit capacity at Diridon Station. These transit improvements include the electrification and modernization of the Caltrain system (which will result in more frequent and faster service), the extension of BART service, and the addition of California High Speed Rail (HSR) service. The expanded transit will make the Diridon Station one of the most active transit hubs in California. It will be the only location in the Bay Area where BART, Caltrain, Amtrak, and High Speed Rail all converge. In 2014, the City of San José adopted the Diridon Station Area Plan (DSAP) to guide development around Diridon Station and support these major transportation investments. As described under Planning Context below, the DSAP envisions a high-density, mixed-use, vibrant, transit-supportive neighborhood that expands Downtown. Since the adoption of the DSAP, a number of factors have prompted the City to rethink parts of the Diridon Station Area Plan and conduct the civic engagement process described in this report. First, the DSAP envisioned a major league ballpark in the heart of the Diridon Station Area. This ballpark is no longer a possibility and thus the plan needs to be updated to reflect this change. Second, Google expressed an interest in building a master-planned, mixed-use development in the Diridon Station Area. In June of 2017, the City and Google entered into an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) for the sale of about 20 acres of City-owned lands to Google. City Council is tentatively scheduled to make a decision on this land sale in December 2018. (See the Planning Context 206 2 section below for additional information.) In addition to the Google project, there are other developers seeking entitlements to build in and around the Diridon Station Area. There has also been progress on the major transit improvement projects. The City of San José and the transit agencies recently launched a collaborative planning effort for a new integrated station. This planning process is beginning this Fall (2018) and will result in a Diridon Integrated Station Concept Plan. Completion of the first phase of this work is expected to occur by summer 2019. Lastly, the regional economic context has changed since the 2008-14 period, when the national recession was the backdrop to the original planning process for the Diridon Station Area. Now, the regional economy is booming, adding hundreds of thousands of jobs. Meanwhile, new housing construction has lagged relative to demand, leading to a significant housing shortage. Housing prices for both rentals and ownership are increasing rapidly, gentrification of lower-income neighborhoods is occurring throughout the Bay Area, and wages are not keeping up with the cost of housing for many people. These factors are pushing out (or threatening to push out) residents of San José. The City has been working on a variety of fronts to address the housing crisis and implement its long-term strategies under the General Plan. Given this regional and citywide context, the prospect of Google building a mixed-use development in Downtown San José presents an opportunity to implement the City’s plans for the Diridon Station Area and advance Downtown and citywide goals. It is also important to understand and address the potential for negative impacts that could come from this large-scale development. Purpose of the Civic Engagement Process The above factors served as the impetus for the City of San José to undertake an extensive civic engagement process in February 2018. The purpose was to spur community conversation about issues and opportunities, refine the vision for the Diridon Station Area, and help inform the City’s negotiations with Google. The primary goal was to provide a balanced, inclusive, and effective two-way dialogue with a broad range of the San José community. As described in Chapter 2, the engagement process included a variety of methods to share information and gather input on hopes, concerns, and ideas for 207 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 3 the future of the Diridon Station Area in general and, more specifically, the potential Google project. First, the City convened the Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG), which included 38 community members appointed by the City Council. From February 2018 through September of 2018, the City held 10 meetings with the SAAG plus an additional 11 meetings with SAAG subcommittees, called Solution Groups. Each meeting offered opportunity for public comment. The civic engagement process also included the following activities to involve the general public: • Community Forums and Community Meetings held in neighborhoods outside of Downtown • Pop-up workshops at special events throughout San José • Stakeholder meetings (presentations and discussions with community groups) • An online feedback form • A website with information on the project (www.diridonsj.org) Through these efforts, there were an estimated 1,200 in-person encounters with community members. In addition, the website has nearly 22,000 page views. The input gathered through the engagement process will inform a variety of decisions related to the Diridon Station Area, including but not limited to: • Agreements with Google, including the Memorandum of Understanding (2018) and the Development Agreement • Google’s development concepts and design thinking • Private development proposals by other property owners, companies, and real estate developers • Implementation of and future updates to the Diridon Station Area Plan, Downtown Strategy, and other applicable plans • Transit improvements and station modifications 208 4 Purpose of the Report This report summarizes the civic engagement process that occurred between February and September of 2018. More specifically, the report summarizes the Key Themes (including the Top issues and opportunities and Desired Outcomes) and documents the range of specific ideas generated by the SAAG and the public (included as a list of Potential Solutions in the Appendix). Together, this input reflects the values, aspirations, and concerns of the community with respect to the potential Google development and Diridon Station Area in general. It also provides specific ideas for consideration in the decision-making processes listed above. The report is not a priority list of recommendations or a consensus vision for the potential Google project and the Diridon Station Area. Rather, the report documents the variety of perspectives from the community, highlighting where there appears to be general agreement and where there were the greatest differences in opinion. It is also intended to demonstrate how community input may be utilized. The target audiences for this report include: the City Council, City Administration (staff), Google, Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG), general public, transit agencies and other public agencies, non-profits, developers, and companies. 209 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 5 Structure of the Report The report includes the following chapters: • Chapter 1: Introduction. This chapter provides an overview of the process and the report, followed by background information on the Diridon Station Area Plan, the potential Google development, and other applicable planning efforts. • Chapter 2: Community Engagement Process. This chapter describes the civic engagement activities completed between February and September 2018 and the outreach methods used throughout the process. • Chapter 3: Key Themes. This chapter summarizes the key issues and opportunities discussed by the SAAG and the community, and details the Desired Outcomes for the Diridon Station Area and the potential Google project. It is organized by the major topics discussed during the project: o Housing and Displacement o Jobs, Education, and Economic Development o Land Use, Design, and Parking o Public Space, Creeks, and Trails o Transportation and Transit o Environmental Sustainability • Chapter 4: Conclusion. This chapter provides a brief summary of the key themes and an overview of the next steps in the civic engagement process for the Diridon Station Area, including work efforts that will build upon input received to date. • Appendix. The Appendix includes additional background information (Frequently Asked Questions), the full list of Potential Solutions (ideas for achieving the Desired Outcomes), an engagement activity log, meeting summaries, and notes and photos (where applicable) from each of the engagement activities. 210 6 Planning Context The Diridon Station Area is outlined in Figure 1.1. It is a subdistrict of Downtown San José. The Downtown area is generally bounded by Taylor Street to the north, San José State University and City Hall to the east, Interstate 280 to the south, Figure 1.1: Location of the Diridon Station Area Plan Boundaries 211 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 7 and the railroad tracks to the west. State Route 87 runs in a north/south direction and generally divides the Diridon Station Area from the rest of Downtown. Los Gatos Creek flows into the Guadalupe River at the confluence of Santa Clara Street on the west side of State Route 87. Downtown San José has long been the subject of City-led planning activities, transportation investments, and economic development initiatives over the past decades. When discussing the vision for the Diridon Station Area and how a Google development would fit in, it is critical to understand and build upon these past planning efforts. Indeed, countless hours by residents, businesses, advocacy organizations and City staff went into developing and implementing these plans. The purpose of this section is to provide background context for the input received through the civic engagement process. This section includes a summary of the Diridon Station Area Plan, Envision San José 2040 General Plan, and Downtown Strategy, as these plans overlap to guide the future development of Downtown. It then describes the potential Google development, including an overview of the land sale and development process. Diridon Station Area Plan (DSAP) In 2014, the City Council adopted the Diridon Station Area Plan (DSAP) to transform the 240-acre area into a vibrant, transit-oriented destination for people to live, work, visit, and play. This high-level land use plan was created over five years, with extensive involvement from the 31-member Diridon Station Area Good Neighbor Committee. The Diridon Station Area (according to the DSAP) is envisioned as a new urban- style mixed-use area with: improved parks, trails and public spaces; safe, convenient pedestrian and bike connectivity; a greater variety and level of transit service; and new housing, shops, and jobs. Once developed, the area would also help generate significant ongoing annual revenues that support the provision of city-wide public services including public safety, transportation improvements and other critical city services. The DSAP divides the Diridon Station Area into three zones to define the long- term focus of land use development (see Figure 1.2). The northern zone was envisioned as a mid-intensity business district in an urban format. The southern zone is envisioned to have primarily residential and neighborhood-serving uses, with a mix of existing housing and new higher density infill development. The central zone, which includes the Diridon Station and the SAP Center, is envisioned to have a mix of high-intensity office and entertainment-oriented uses, as well as new public plaza adjacent to the station. The plans for a major league baseball 212 8 stadium in the central zone have since changed. The DSAP process included an Environmental Impact Report under the California Environmental Quality Act, which allowed for a significant increase in development, as shown in the Table 1.1. Table 1.1: New Development Capacity under the Diridon Station Area Plan Land Use Type Unit Office 4,963,400 square feet Residential 2,588 homes Retail/Restaurants 424,100 square feet Hotel 900 rooms Figure 1.2: The three “Identity Zones”, from the Diridon Station Area Plan 213 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 9 General Plan The Envision San José 2040 General Plan is the foundational planning document that will guide the development of the city over the next three decades. The City Council unanimously adopted the General Plan in 2011, after three years of extensive community input from more than 5,000 residents and more than 50 public meetings. The General Plan calls for 360,000 new jobs and 120,000 new homes by 2040, and identifies how this new development would fit within the City’s neighborhoods, districts, and corridors. A critical goal of the General Plan is to create a vibrant Downtown, as community input emphasized a desire for an expanded and more prominent commercial, social, and cultural destination that properly represents a city of 1 million people. Accordingly, the General Plan originally allowed for 48,500 new jobs and 10,360 new housing units in Downtown. The General Plan establishes about 70 Urban Villages as the primary targets for new residential growth, promoting infill housing and neighborhood-serving retail in accessible clusters spread throughout the city. The General Plan emphasizes job growth in Downtown (including the Diridon Area) and other employment- oriented Growth Areas to support goals for reducing car travel, congestion, and environmental impacts and for promoting economic opportunities for San José residents and long-term fiscal sustainability for the City. Since people are willing to travel farther distances from their home to stations than from stations to their workplaces, locating employment uses on lands closest to major transit hubs is most effective at supporting transit ridership. The Diridon area is the most strategic location to accommodate job growth because it has the City’s most significant transit station, which is planned to expand with additional intercity and interregional services in the coming decade (as described above). Downtown Strategy The City adopted the “Downtown Strategy” planning document in 2000 with the goal of transforming the city center into a more vibrant urban core with a wider mix of uses, higher density development, and transportation improvements. The City is updating the Strategy, primarily to increase the General Plan’s development capacity for the Downtown area. Specifically, the update will transfer 10,000 jobs (approximately 3 million square feet of commercial development) and 4,000 dwelling units from other growth areas to Downtown. The Downtown Strategy update also includes amendments so that future development Downtown is consistent with planned regional transportation improvements, such as BART. 214 10 Potential Google Development Early in 2017, Google expressed interest in building a master-planned, mixed-use, transit-oriented development in the Diridon Station Area, consistent with the overall vision of the DSAP. Based on preliminary discussions with Google, the master plan would include about 6-8 million square feet of office/R&D space and retail/commercial amenities on about 50 acres. This level of development would result in an estimated 20,000 jobs. The preliminary development concept is to integrate with the surrounding community through open-style urban design and active, high-quality public spaces. They also want to demonstrate innovation in workplace design and sustainability. In pursuit of this vision, Google has acquired private parcels in and around the Diridon Station Area and would like to acquire about 20 acres from the City of San José to incorporate into their master planned development (see Table 1.2 and Figure 1.3). In June of 2017, the City and Google entered into an Exclusive Negotiations Agreement (ENA) for the potential sale of these lands, as a practical and timely way to implement key elements of the DSAP. Table 1.2: Summary of Lands under Consideration for Sale to Google Size Existing Uses City-owned Land 2 sites (7 parcels) totaling 13.4 acres Surface parking lots for SAP Center and the San José Fire Department Training Facility SARA Land 5 sites (9 parcels) totaling 6.5 acres Surface parking lots for Caltrain users and SAP patrons, Stephen’s Meat site, Patty’s Inn, and a building currently used by San Jose Taiko 215 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 11 Figure 1.3: Map of the City-owned and SARA sites 216 12 Some of the land under consideration for sale to Google was owned by the “Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency” (SARA) and was recently transferred to the City to sell for economic development purposes by the end of 2018, under the State’s plan for the dissolution of Redevelopment Agencies. The properties under consideration for sale to Google are mostly developed with parking lots, and there is no housing. The ENA specified that in order to sell the land to Google, the City and Google must negotiate and agree to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and a Purchase and Sale Agreement (PSA). This will then be followed by a Development Agreement as the project specifics are developed. • The MOU will outline a high-level statement of the vision and goals for the development, the approach to a Community Benefits Plan (to be included in a Development Agreement), and expectations related to the development process. The purpose of the MOU is to clarify the intended use of the land and to provide certainty for both the City and Google to advance to the next stage of the project. • A PSA is a legally binding document that will set out the prices and terms for the land sales (real estate transactions). • A Development Agreement is a legally binding contract between a City and a developer that is negotiated during a development review process. The agreement sets the obligations of both parties and contracts the developer to provide benefits to the City, such as infrastructure improvements, public open space, or monetary payment into funds, in exchange for certainty about development standards and requirements that apply over the course of the development, from project entitlement through construction. The MOU can be considered a high-level preview of the Development Agreement. Before construction could occur, Google must submit a proposal to the Planning Department and apply for land use entitlements. This initiates the formal development review process, which includes environmental impact analysis, any legislative actions such as rezoning or plan amendments, and Development Agreement negotiation. City Council will have ultimate approval of the project, with recommendations from the Planning Commission and other advisory bodies. Following project approval, Google would begin applying for building permits. It is expected that the project would be constructed in several phases over at least 10 years. 217 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 13 City Council is tentatively scheduled to consider the MOU and PSA on December 4, 2018. The development review process is anticipated to begin in 2019 and last at least two years. Civic engagement will continue throughout this period. Additional information on the potential Google development and associated process can be found in the Frequently Asked Questions Document, which is located in the Appendix. 218 14 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR FORMATTING 219 2 Community Engagement Process Overview The City conducted a civic engagement process between February and October of 2018 with multiple platforms to share information and gather input related to the future of the Diridon Station Area, including a potential Google development. As described in the previous chapter, the primary goal of the civic engagement process was to provide a balanced, inclusive, and effective two-way dialogue with a broad range of representatives from the San Jose community. The City aimed to involve all interested community members and stakeholders by sharing information, offering meaningful opportunities to provide input, and informing participants about how their input will be shared and used. 220 16 Engagement Activities Between February and October of 2018, the Diridon Station Area Civic Engagement process included over 50 community engagement activities, ranging from Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG) meetings and community forums to stakeholder presentations, pop-up workshops, and an online feedback form. There were an estimated 1,200 in-person encounters with members of the public, and the website (www.diridonsj.org) had close to 6,000 unique visitors and nearly 22,000 page views. The City hired Plan to Place (led by Dave Javid) and Raimi + Associates (led by Matt Raimi) as consultants to assist with the community engagement process. City staff collected email addresses at each of the engagement events and through the project website, maintained an email list for the project, and sent occasional updates on the process, such as when new events were scheduled. The following sections describe the objectives, meeting format, communication and documentation, and schedule of events for each type of activity. Please refer to the Appendix for the meeting summaries and raw notes from each of the meetings, as well as an event log that lists all activities in chronological order. Figure 2-1: Overview of the Diridon Station Area Civic Engagement Activities 221 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 17 Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG) The SAAG formed the core of the community engagement effort. The City Council appointed 38-member organizations to the SAAG in January 2018. The SAAG represents a range of stakeholder perspectives, including neighborhood associations, public agencies (including transportation, water, and education agencies), employers (including Google), and specific interest groups (including housing, labor, business, environment, regional planning, and transportation organizations). The SAAG met 10 times between February and October, with meetings held approximately one to two times per month. Objectives The City and its consultants shared background information and facilitated focused discussions with the SAAG to gather input on short-term and future decisions related to the Diridon Station Area, including the potential Google development. The SAAG was not a formal decision-making body and was not asked to vote or agree on recommendations at the end of the process. Rather, the SAAG’s role was to give input in the following ways: • Clarify community interests, aspirations, and concerns; • Help identify desired outcomes and potential solutions; • Serve as sounding board for initial development and design concepts; • Help ensure that diverse perspectives are included in the engagement process; and • Assist the broader community in understanding and engaging with the process. City staff and the consultant team worked with the SAAG to determine the desired goals of the meetings and overall process, as well as the information needed to provide context for the discussions. The first set of meetings included background presentations and discussions aimed at identifying the aspirations and concerns related to the potential Google project and the future of the Diridon Station Area. For example, the City invited Google representatives to share their high-level vision for the area. The SAAG also discussed how the civic engagement process would help inform future planning in the area. The initial questions asked of the group generally included: 222 18 Community Aspirations and Preferences • What would you like to see in the Google development itself? In the broader Diridon Station Area? • What other community benefits would you like the Google project to consider? • What are the top priorities? Potential Approaches to the Challenges that Come with Development • What are the key challenges or issues that will need to be addressed as the Diridon Station Area develops? • What are potential models, solutions, or options that should be considered? SAAG members were given the opportunity to present their ideas or vision to the group and what they believed was their constituents’ highest priority for the future of the area. The 5 minute presentations were characterized as mini “TED Talks”, and covered a range of topics related to housing, jobs, education, transportation and open space. (The video recording of the presentations is available on the SAAG page of the project website: www.diridonsj.org). Subsequent meetings were designed to delve deeper into the major topics that were identified by the SAAG and explored through the Solution Group Meetings (described in the next section). City staff, the consultant team and SAAG members that participated in various Solution Groups, reported the overall themes and list of Desired Outcomes and Potential Solutions back to the larger group for each topic. Staff then compiled, refined, and organized the Desired Outcomes into subtopics and facilitated a group discussion to gauge overall level of agreement with these statements (see Chapter 3 for the list of Desired Outcomes and other Key Themes). At the October 10th meeting, the SAAG provided feedback on the Draft Civic Engagement Report. SAAG members and the public were invited to submit comments in writing as well; staff received six emails/letters from SAAG members and four comment letters from the public (included in the Appendix). Throughout the process, the SAAG was encouraged to draw upon its own outreach to represent their respective community interests. For example, prior to the City’s civic engagement process, Silicon Valley Rising conducted a nearly 1,000-person survey of San José residents and a series of townhalls attended by over 700 residents, and summarized the findings in a report called “Envisioning Community: Our community’s expectations for the San Jose Google mega- campus.” Silicon Valley Rising and its coalition members channeled this feedback into the SAAG process. 223 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 19 Typical Meeting Format All meetings were held in the Committee Wing Rooms of City Hall (118-120). The format of the meetings typically included a short presentation by the City and consultant team with updates related to ongoing engagement activities and planning efforts in the Diridon Station Area (e.g., status update on transit projects and development activity in the pipeline). The majority of the meetings were reserved for discussion with the SAAG about key topics. Every meeting also included an opportunity for public comment for those in attendance (typically two minutes per speaker at the end of the meeting). Communication and Documentation In compliance with the City’s Sunshine Ordinance and Brown Act, staff posted meeting agendas to the project websites at least one week in advance of each SAAG meeting. Meeting agendas were also emailed to SAAG members prior to each meeting. For most meetings, staff sent a pre-meeting email with a detailed agenda and relevant information to help prepare for the discussions. Most of these resources were posted on the project website under “Background”. The consultant team and City staff summarized all of the input from the SAAG and public in meeting notes that were posted to the project websites and distributed back out to the SAAG. Each meeting was videotaped, with the recordings and PowerPoint presentations posted to the project website. Meeting Schedule The following is the list of the 10 SAAG meetings held between February and October 2018, along with the main agenda items for each meeting. SAAG Orientation Meeting - February 28, 2018 • Provided an orientation on the overall engagement process to the SAAG members • Discussed SAAG roles, responsibilities, and schedule • Through an interactive exercise, provided an opportunity for the SAAG members to meet their colleagues and build relationships SAAG Meeting #1 - March 21, 2018 • Reviewed existing conditions in the Diridon Station Area and past planning efforts (e.g., Diridon Station Area Plan) • Discussed the specific roles and responsibilities of the SAAG • Reviewed the draft meeting topics, and follow up on the list of background information/data desired • Discussed the overall community engagement process 224 20 SAAG Meeting #2 - April 9, 2018 • Provided an understanding of the Brown Act and City’s Sunshine Ordinance • Google representatives provided an overview of Google’s high-level design principles and inspiration • Reviewed the existing conditions data • Discussed the overall objectives and intent of the Solution Groups SAAG Meeting #3 - April 30, 2018 • Provided an update on transportation improvements planned at Diridon Station • Heard from SAAG members about what inspires them and their ideas for the Diridon Station Area through “TED” Talks • Finalized the timing of and assignments to the Solution Groups • Shared an update on all planned engagement activities SAAG Meeting #4 - May 23, 2018 • Received a presentation from Google representatives on their early design thinking for the Diridon Station Area • Heard from SAAG Members about what inspires them and their ideas for the Diridon Station Area • Shared an update on all planned engagement activities SAAG Meeting #5 - June 27, 2018 • Heard from SAAG Members about what inspires them and their ideas for the Diridon Station Area through additional “TED” Talks • Discussed preliminary results from the Housing Solution Group SAAG Meeting #6 - July 9, 2018 • Completed the “TED” Talks • Received report-backs from the Land Use, Public Space, and Transportation Solution Groups SAAG Meeting #7 - August 13, 2018 • Received an update on transit projects • Received report-backs from the Jobs and Housing Solution Groups • Reviewed the outline for the Civic Engagement Comprehensive Report SAAG Meeting #8 - August 29, 2018 • Received an update on current development in the Diridon Station Area and the Downtown Design Guidelines • Clarified the group’s top Desired Outcomes and Potential Solutions SAAG Meeting #9 – October 10, 2018 • Reviewed the Draft Civic Engagement Comprehensive Report and provided feedback, including report-backs from small group discussions 225 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 21 • Received an update on the One Engine Inoperative study (analyzing potential changes to airspace protections on downtown development capacity) • Reflected on the SAAG experience Solution Groups The Solution Groups were subcommittees comprised of SAAG members to have focused discussions around the key topic areas: • Housing, Displacement, and Gentrification; • Jobs, Education, and Economic Development; • Transportation, Access and Traffic; • Parks, Public Space, Sustainability and Neighborhood Quality of Life; and • Land Use and Design. Every SAAG member was encouraged to volunteer for one to two groups, and a majority of the SAAG was involved with at least one group (see the Appendix for the SAAG members that attended each of the Solution Group meetings and for the meeting facilitators assigned to each group). Objectives The purpose or objectives of the Solution Groups was defined as the following: • Explore issues and opportunities, and develop desired outcomes and potential approaches to present to the SAAG; and • Develop a list of potential solutions for each topic that could be considered in the MOU and (later) Development Agreement discussions with Google. Each group was asked to confirm the overall themes for each topic area, then discuss the related background information, refine the topics, and prepare a list of Desired Outcomes in the first meeting. In the second meeting, the group identified potential solutions, or ideas or models that can be explored to help achieve the desired outcomes. The Housing group met three times to provide enough time to cover that topic area, given the local and citywide implications. Staff reported the results of their discussions back to the SAAG. The purpose of the “report-backs” was to enhance a shared understanding of the key issues, desired outcomes, and potential solutions, and discuss the overlap between topic areas. SAAG members were asked to uncover the commonalities and possible tension points that needed further exploration. Typical Meeting Format The Solution Group meetings were held in multiple rooms around City Hall depending on availability, but primarily in the Committee Wing Rooms or the City 226 22 Manager’s conference room. The meetings were facilitated by City staff and consultants, and members were asked to identify data or information needs that could help support the process. Every meeting was open to the public and included times for public comment. Communication and Documentation In compliance with the City’s Sunshine Ordinance and Brown Act, staff posted the meeting agendas to the project websites at least three days in advance. Meeting agendas and relevant meeting material were also emailed to SAAG members prior to each meeting. The consultant team and staff summarized all of the input from the Solution Groups in meeting notes that were posted to the project websites and distributed to the SAAG. Meeting Schedule There were eleven total Solution Group meetings held between May and July of 2018. Each of the five Solution Groups met twice, except for the Housing group which met three times to provide enough time for that group and public in attendance to discuss this important topic. The following are the dates the Solution Groups met. • Land Use and Urban Design Meeting #1 - May 15, 2018 • Public Spaces, Parks, Open Spaces and Neighborhoods Meeting #1 - May 16, 2018 • Housing, Displacement and Gentrification Meeting #1 - May 17, 2018 • Transportation and Access Meeting #1 - May 22, 2018 • Jobs, Education and Economic Development Meeting #1 - May 24, 2018 • Public Spaces, Parks, Open Spaces and Neighborhoods Meeting #2 - June 4, 2018 • Transportation and Access Meeting #2 - June 6, 2018 • Land Use and Urban Design Meeting #2 - June 7, 2018 • Housing, Displacement and Gentrification Meeting #2 – June 11, 2018 • Jobs, Education and Economic Development Meeting #2 - June 25, 2018 • Housing, Displacement and Gentrification Meeting #3 - July 10, 2018 Summaries of the Solution Group meetings can be found in the Appendix 227 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 23 Community Forums and Community Meetings The City of San Jose hosted multiple communitywide events in neighborhoods throughout the City. This included four Community Forums in late June and three Community Meetings in September. Each event included a presentation to share information, followed by small group discussions to gather input. Objectives As advertised in the event notices, meeting participants were invited to: • Learn about the Diridon Station Area, including planned transit improvements and a potential Google development; • Share their feedback; and • Ask questions. The presentations at both the Community Forums and Community Meetings allowed City staff to share relevant background information about the Diridon Station Area planning efforts, the potential Google project, and the community engagement process. The purpose was to increase understanding and awareness and to provide context for the small group discussions. The focused discussions with meeting participants at the Community Forums sought to identify the range of initial hopes, concerns, and ideas for the Diridon Station Area and a potential Google project, as well as write down questions and provide answers when possible. In the small group discussions, facilitators asked participants to complete the following sentences to prompt input: • “My vision for the Diridon Station Area is…” • “Google coming to San Jose could be good for me if…” • “What I fear most about this possible development is…” • “One potential solution that I’d like considered is…” • “One remaining question I have is…” The main purpose of the Community Meetings in September was to report back and gather feedback on the preliminary Desired Outcomes. These vision statements were divided into subtopics aligning with the Solution Groups and derived mainly from SAAG discussions, but also based on input received through other engagement activities (see Chapter 4 for additional detail on the Desired Outcomes). In the small group discussions, participants could focus on specific topics or provide feedback on all topics. The discussion prompts included: • Which of these Desired Outcomes are most important to you? • Are there any you disagree with? If so, why? • Is there something missing from this list? 228 24 Typical Meeting Format The community forums and meetings included a short background presentation by City staff to share information on the Diridon Station Area and community engagement process. City staff and consultants then facilitated small group discussions to gather input. Staff wrote down the verbal comments from participants onto flipcharts. The forum held at Mayfair Community Center on June 23 was presented in Spanish by fluent Spanish speakers, and two of the four small groups were facilitated in Spanish. Every other Community Forum and Meeting offered simultaneous interpretation of the presentation in both Spanish and Vietnamese. Mandarin interpretation and American Sign Language were also offered at each of the Forums, although only one person requested Mandarin interpretation at one of the Forums. Of the five groups at the Gardner Community Meeting, one involved Spanish facilitation and interpretation. Two of the three small groups at the Vietnamese-American Community Center were facilitated in Vietnamese. One of the two small groups at the Mexican Heritage Plaza meeting was facilitated in Spanish. Each forum and meeting offered light refreshments and supervised activities for children to encourage and support broad attendance at the events. Communication and Documentation City staff and the consultant team prepared digital postcards for the forums and meetings, which were emailed to the SAAG, other community leaders such as City Council, and the project email list. The City posted the meeting notices through its social media outlets and through digital ad boosts on Facebook. Staff also advertised these events at the SAAG meetings, and asked SAAG members to help advertise the events through their communication channels. Each forum and meeting description and agenda were also posted to the project website at least one week in advance of the first Community Forum and Meeting of each round. Most of the noticing materials was available in Spanish and Vietnamese, in addition to English. This included the social media posts. The digital postcard was translated into Spanish for the Community Forums and into both Spanish and Vietnamese for the Community Meetings. During the small group discussions, staff took notes on flipcharts. Following the Community Forums and Community Meetings, City staff and the consultant team took photos of all flipchart notes, transcribed the notes (and translated them into English if necessary), compiled and analyzed the feedback, and prepared a 229 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 25 summary. Photos of the notes and a transcription of comments from the Community Forums and from the Community Meetings are included in the Appendix of this report. The powerpoint presentations used at these events were posted to the project website, including the Spanish and Vietnamese versions handed out at the Community Meetings. Event Schedule The following is a complete list of the Community Forums and Meetings. • Community Forum #1 - Leininger Center at Kelley Park - June 20, 2018 • Community Forum #2 - Southside Community Center - June 21, 2018 • Community Forum #3 - Mayfair Community Center (presented in Spanish) - June 23, 2018 • Community Forum #4 - Bascom Community Center - June 26, 2018 • Community Meeting #1 - Gardner Community Center - September 10, 2018 • Community Meeting #2- Vietnamese-American Community Center - September 11, 2018 • Community Meeting #3 - Mexican Heritage Plaza - September 25, 2018 Pop-Up Workshops “Pop-up workshops” (or tables with information about the project) were held at six planned community events throughout the City from June through September of 2018. The pop-up workshops provided an opportunity to share information and gather additional input using similar discussion prompts used at the Community Forums and Meetings. Objectives Pop-up workshops offered a method for informing and engaging the community in an informal manner and using an interactive activity to gather feedback. The specific objectives of the Pop-up workshops were to: • Reach a broad cross-section of the community; • Educate the public about the civic engagement effort; • Gather input on hopes, concerns, and ideas for the Diridon Station Area (the first two workshops); and • Get feedback on preliminary Desired Outcomes and Potential Solutions (the last four workshops). 230 26 Typical Format The Pop-up Workshops involved setting up a table and several boards, including one with background information and 1-2 for collecting input. At the first two pop-up workshops, participants were asked to write their response to the following questions on sticky notes and place them on the boards: • What would a successful Diridon Station Area look like? • What major issues should be addressed as the area develops? • What ideas or solutions should be considered? For the second set of pop-up workshops (the last four workshops), the boards listed the emerging Desired Outcomes and top Potential Solutions. Participants were asked to place a dot next to 3 strategies for each of the five topic areas (aligning with the Solution Groups) to reflect their priorities. These prompts for input were generally consistent with those asked at the Community Forums and Community Meetings. Communication and Documentation City staff emailed the project email list, and encouraged SAAG members to help advertise the pop-up workshops through their communication channels. The pop-up workshops were also advertised at the SAAG meetings. Each workshop description was also posted to the project website in advance of each workshop. Following the Pop-up workshops, City staff and the consultant team took photos of the boards and compiled the feedback into a summary, which is included in the Appendix to this report. Schedule of Events • SPUR San Jose Annual Member Event - June 6, 2018 • Dancin’ on the Avenue (Willow Glen) - June 16, 2018 • National Night Out - August 7, 2018 • District 2 Village Fest - August 18, 2018 • Stroll on the Alameda - August 26, 2018 • Viva Calle - September 23, 2018 Stakeholder Meetings City staff were invited to present at five stakeholder meetings with various groups between July and September 2018. Objectives The main objectives of the stakeholder meetings were to: 231 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 27 • Describe the overall project objective and process and share background information; • Provide a platform for stakeholders to share their input during times and locations that are convenient for them (e.g., existing regularly planned meetings); and • Discuss issues and opportunities with community members. Typical Meeting Format Stakeholder meetings generally consisted of a presentation, followed by questions/answers and comments by meeting participants. Communication and Documentation City staff coordinated the planning and logistics of the stakeholder meetings with members of the SAAG. Meeting participants provided feedback on the issues, opportunities, and desired outcomes for the Diridon Station Area. Staff only took notes at the Downtown Residents meeting. This feedback is documented in this report. Schedule of Events The following is a list of the stakeholder meetings that City staff attended. • Silicon Valley Organization (SVO)/Chamber - July 27, 2018 • Downtown Residents Association - August 2, 2018 • Willow Glen Neighborhood Association - September 13, 2018 • San Jose Downtown Association - September 14, 2018 • Construction Financial Management Association - September 19, 2018 Online Feedback Form An online/mobile Feedback Form was also used to gather community input. The Feedback Form mirrored in-person activities held in September to gather input at a key interval in the engagement process, as staff worked toward confirming and refining the Desired Outcomes by topic. The online platform using Survey Monkey was launched on September 14, 2018 and was accessible through September 30, 2018. Objectives The objective of the online form was to get feedback on the preliminary Desired Outcomes for the Diridon Station Area, based initial community input. The information was identical to what was shared at the Community Meetings, providing an alternate format to gather input for those that could not attend the 232 28 meetings in person or a supplemental format for meeting attendees to provide more detailed feedback. The Desired Outcomes were organized by the following subtopic: Housing and Displacement, Jobs and Education, Land Use, Public Space, Creeks and Trails, Transportation, Parking, and Design. Participants were free to provide input on any or all topics, including write-in comments for each subtopic, and could provide other general ideas and comments at the end of the form. Communication and Documentation The Online Feedback Form was advertised at the SAAG meetings and Community Meetings, and through the City’s social media channels. Staff also emailed the project email list and encouraged SAAG members and other community leaders to help advertise the Online Feedback Form through their communication channels. Survey Monkey generated a results document, which is included in the Appendix. A total of 716 forms were submitted, although the number of responses declined as questions progressed, with about 500 completing the full form. Here is a summary of the responses to the demographic questions asked at the end of the form: • Of the 500 respondents that provided their emails, nearly half reported to live in the four of the five zip codes closest to the station: 95125, 95112, 95126, and 95110. Five responses (1%) were from 95113, which includes the core area of Downtown, mainly developed with commercial and public uses. • The vast majority of respondents live in San Jose (93% of 491 responses). • Of those who answered the question, 63% reported that they had not participated in any Diridon Station Area civic engagement effort his year. The remainder participated in a variety of activities including attending SAAG meetings, pop-ups and stakeholder meetings. • A slight majority of respondents are male (54% of 471), with 44% female and 2% gender neutral. • There was a diverse age distribution based on the 469 responses to this question, although youth and young adults under the age of 25 were vastly under-represented relative to the population. o Under 18 years old: 0.2% o 18 to 24 years old: 2% o 25 to 34 years old: 18% o 35 to 44 years old: 28% o 45 to 54 years old: 28% o 55 to 64 years old: 17% o 55+ years old: 6% 233 CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 29 • The majority of respondents were homeowners (78% of 477) and white/Caucasian (66% of 455). These numbers are disproportionately high relative to San José, which is about 27% white/Caucasian and has about 56% owner-occupied units.1 There were 1,092 unique write-in comments to the open-ended questions. Staff coded these comments according to the key themes, to provide an additional data point for characterizing the range of perspectives. Key findings of this analysis are included in Chapter 3. Walking Tours City staff led two walking tours of the Diridon Station Area on Saturday, May 19th and Wednesday, May 30th of 2018. Members of the public were invited to gain a better understanding of the context of the area and explore opportunities. The walking tour route was as follows: 1. Diridon Historic Station 2. Dancing Pig and AT&T 3. Fire Training Center 4. Santa Clara Housing Authority 5. Private residential development 6. Sprouts and Orchard Supply 7. Private residential development 8. Patty’s Inn/Taiko 9. Lot D and Los Gatos Creek 10. SAP Center 11. Northern Industrial sites 12. Autumn Parkway extension 13. Guadalupe River Park 14. Trammel Crow Office/Residential Project Website A project website (www.diridonsj.org) was set up in April 2018 and accessible throughout the engagement process. It was used as the main online portal to communicate upcoming events and post meeting materials (e.g., agendas, presentations, meeting minutes, summary notes). The website was also used to share background information and resources, including a Frequently Asked 1 San José Demographics Fact Sheet, available at: https://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/780 . 234 30 Questions (FAQ) document. As noted above, the site was viewed by about 6,000 unique visitors and had nearly 22,000 page views through October 2018. In addition, the City maintained a webpage for the Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG) to post meeting agendas, minutes, and recordings to comply with the Sunshine Ordinance and Brown Act: http://www.sanjoseca.gov/index.aspx?NID=6000. Objectives The key objectives of the project website were to house information organized as follows: • HOME page. The Home page includes a brief description of the engagement process and the information included on the website, a snapshot of Upcoming Events with links to individual pages for each event, and Project Updates, with links to summary information from past events and other available resources. • ABOUT page. The About page provides a more detail description of the Diridon Station Area, and background information about the Potential Google Project, such as Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ), and the anticipated steps in the negotiation and development process. • SAAG page. This page includes the SAAG roster and links to each of the individual SAAG and Solution Group meeting pages, where agendas, summaries, images, and video recording links are posted. • ENGAGEMENT page. This page on the website houses a link to all of the engagement activities that were held and planned, as well as a conceptual timeline of the events from the beginning of the process in February 2018. • BACKGROUND page. Resources related to the Diridon Station Area that were provided to the SAAG are housed on this page and organized by major topic (e.g., Land Use, Public Space, Housing, Transportation, and Jobs). • CONTACT page. This page on the website includes contact information for both City staff and the consultant team for additional questions or comments, and a portal to provide an email address to be added to the email list for updates on events. 235 3 This chapter summarizes the key themes from the engagement process. The key themes are based on input from the Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG) and analysis of the frequently made comments through the other public engagement methods. This chapter begins with an overview of the top Issues and Opportunities raised by participants most frequently. This includes topics for consideration, existing problems, concerns about the future, and opportunities created by a master planned Google development in the Diridon Station Area. The next section lists the top Desired Outcomes. Desired Outcomes are high-level statements of the desired end state and generally include the hopes, aspirations, visions and goals expressed by community members. The Desired Outcomes are organized by topic: Housing and Displacement, Jobs, Education, and Economic Development; Land Use and Design; Public Space (including Creeks and Trails), and Transportation (including Transit and Parking). The full range of Desired Outcomes are presented with an indication of where there is general agreement and where there is not. The next chapter lists the Potential Solutions, or ideas for how to achieve the Desired Outcomes provided by community members. These include actions, mechanisms, policies, programs, projects, or partnerships. Some are highly specific, others are general. The full range of suggestions raised by community members are presented without analysis. See the Appendix for a complete collection of comments received, organized by engagement method. These categories of input (Issues, Desired Outcomes, and Potential Solutions) align with the questions asked throughout the process. The initial phase of outreach asked the SAAG and general public about their hopes for a Google project, vision for the Diridon Station Area, concerns/fears about the potential 236 development, and ideas for how to address the challenges and take advantage of opportunities. This community dialogue generated a wide range of input—from high level to detailed, from focused on the station area or surrounding neighborhoods to having a citywide or even regional implications, and from urgent to far in the future. While some input was intended to be specific to the relationship with Google, many of the comments could apply to other developers and companies located in the Diridon Station Area. These distinctions were made where applicable. Chapter 4 describes how the community input may apply to future implementation and planning efforts that go beyond the Google project and Diridon Station Area. The following sections summarize these top 10 issues and opportunities: 1. Housing and Displacement 2. Revitalization of Downtown and the Diridon Station Area 3. Job Opportunities and Social Equity 4. Expectations of Google and Others 5. Community Benefits 6. Growth Impacts and Public Services 7. High Speed Rail Impacts 8. Safety and Homelessness 9. Environmental Sustainability 10. Effects on San Jose’s identity Housing and Displacement Housing and displacement was the dominant topic of SAAG discussions and of public comments. The SAAG talked extensively about the housing crisis currently facing San José and the region, as well as concerns about escalated housing costs for the future if Google were to locate a major office development in the Diridon Station Area. They also pointed out opportunities presented by a Google development to add housing, support affordable housing, and reduce displacement. Here is a summary of the key issues raised during these discussions: 237 • There is a significant lack of affordable housing relative to the high demand created by the booming economy. Lower-income service workers are particularly affected, but moderate-income professionals are also struggling to afford housing. In response, more and more households are either living in overcrowded conditions, falling into homelessness, or leaving the city. Cities in the region have failed to support housing growth commensurate with the demand driven by tech industry job growth. Resources and policies dedicated to providing affordable housing and preventing displacement have been insufficient. While the City has some programs and policies to help with the affordable housing crisis, many SAAG members called for more and stronger tools. • It is assumed that new office development by Google would generate both high-paying tech jobs and lower-paying service jobs. New tech workers would drive up housing prices even more, while service workers may not get paid enough to afford housing in San José. This will worsen the housing shortage and affect neighborhoods citywide, including the east side. Increased housing costs would force people to work more and/or move farther away – leading to longer commutes, adverse environmental impacts, and lower quality of life. The number of people experiencing homelessness could increase. • There could be widespread redevelopment and property turnover in the Diridon Station Area and adjacent neighborhoods, leading to direct and indirect displacement of existing residents. Lower-income residents are more likely to be people of color, so their displacement could make San José less diverse over time. In addition, redevelopment of older buildings and historic resources within and surrounding the Diridon Station Area could result in the loss of existing character and heritage. • This project presents opportunities to generate affordable housing within the Diridon Station Area and throughout the City if Google commits to providing funds through an impact fee. As a master developer, they may be able to deliver on more housing and amenities compared to a collection of smaller developers and more than required by the current DSAP. Implementation of the Diridon Station Area Plan would increase housing opportunities near a major transit hub, which supports strategies for accommodating housing demand. Through the public engagement methods, many people provided personal accounts of the housing crisis: long commutes, financial strain, loss of neighbors to displacement, anxiety from the threat of losing their own home, seeing or experiencing homelessness, etc. There is an overall concern about the ability to 238 afford housing and fear of being pushed out of San José, particularly from neighborhoods close to future public transit. People often referred to the home price increases and displacement of residents in Mountain View. There were consistent calls for the engagement process to focus more on housing issues and for there to be a city plan to address housing demand, displacement, and homelessness. There is a strong sense of urgency and desire to do more now to mitigate displacement pressures. Revitalization of Downtown and the Diridon Station Area When asked about hopes at the initial SAAG meetings, much of the input reflected the desire to think big and do something bold—to design a distinctive, world-class development and to make Diridon a model for sustainable, equitable, and resilient development. Several SAAG members emphasized the potential for supporting local businesses, catalyzing downtown development, and strengthening Downtown as a desirable place to live and a vibrant, dynamic cultural hub. The SAAG generally sees a master development by Google as a major opportunity to implement the Diridon Station Area Plan and help achieve its vision for transforming the area into a mixed use, walkable neighborhood— integrated into Downtown and sensitive to adjacent residential uses. The Desired Outcomes for Public Space, Transportation, Creeks/Trails, Land Use, and Design are generally consistent with the adopted Diridon Station Area Plan, as described in the following section. The opportunity for revitalization could resolve existing issues with “dead zones” (i.e., areas of inactivity that feel unsafe and unwelcoming). The project is an opportunity to activate the neighborhood through redevelopment and new amenities as well as programming such as art, events, and temporary features in the short-term. Also related to place-making are the opportunities for preserving historic resources and culturally significant features, for capitalizing on Los Gatos Creek as a focal point for community gathering and amenities, and for designing new development with environmental stewardship in mind. Several SAAG members representing neighborhood groups thanked Google for reaching out and listening, and look forward to working with them to make the potential development a reality. 239 Job Opportunities and Social Equity Throughout the process multiple SAAG members emphasized the potential for the development to generate a significant amount of local jobs, support local small businesses, and catalyze economic opportunities beyond just the Diridon Station Area. With respect to Jobs, the SAAG expressed an overall concern about the social equity effects of Google coming to San Jose, including concerns about new service jobs not paying enough for workers to afford living in San José, impacts on citywide housing prices and subsequent displacement of lower income households, and the potential for the benefits to bypass long-time residents. Currently, many residents, particularly on the east side, are “job patching” - or needing to piece together income from a variety of jobs and business ventures. There are also concerns about the quality and mobility opportunities of subcontracted jobs, as contracting out certain work is a common business practice among Google and other tech companies. Some community members also expressed concerns about racial inclusion at Google, which has low shares of Latino employees relative to San José’s population. The SAAG discussed the links between jobs and housing and recognized the need to provide more affordable housing—allowing lower-wage workers to live near their place of employment and reducing displacement pressures so that existing residents could stay and benefit from the investments and opportunities presented by a Google development in the Diridon Station Area. During the public engagement process, community members frequently expressed concern over the well-being of lower-income people and vulnerable populations. Some talked about growing inequity and the increasing resentment between the “haves” and “have nots”. There were also concerns about equitable funding for public schools and school closures due to declining enrollment caused by displacement of low-income families. These concerns for social equity reflect an overarching goal to create a San José that is better for all people. Community Benefits The term “community benefits” was raised consistently throughout the process, mainly in the context of affordable housing, job training, educational programs, transportation improvements, and/or public space. There is general agreement that Google should provide some benefits to San José beyond the project itself 240 and that agreements with Google should set forth a plan for this contribution. There is desire to begin work on citywide issues now and not wait until Google buildings are built and occupied. (Note: The City Council’s intent is for a Community Benefits Plan to be a part of the Development Agreement, which would be negotiated by the City and Google during the development review process and be subject to City Council approval. Community engagement will continue throughout the development review process. Refer to Chapter 4 and the FAQ’s in the Appendix for additional information). Several members of the SAAG view the land sale as having significant leverage to negotiate community benefits with Google and would prefer to have Google commit to clear requirements as part of—or before—the land sale. They have advocated for a Community Benefit Agreement (CBA) as the specific tool for ensuring the Google project results in citywide benefits and mitigates impacts.1 They state this is needed due to the lack of applicable City policies, such as a commercial linkage fee that would generate funds for affordable housing and anti-displacement efforts. They want the CBA to require Google to contribute to an affordable housing fund and commit to other benefits. They suggest that the value of these benefits should take into account the value of the Google development with the transit improvements in place, any requested up-zonings, and other policy decisions that add value (“value capture”). They also suggest that a committee of community, labor, and faith leaders should lead the negotiation of the CBA and oversee its implementation and enforcement. Proponents of this approach suggest that a CBA would provide strong enforceability (because they can be legally binding and enforceable by the community signatories) and increase community support. Other mechanisms for generating community benefits raised at SAAG meetings include Commercial Linkage Fees, Tax Increment Financing, special assessments, and dedicating revenues from the sale of land. Expectations of Google and Others The SAAG discussed whether Google should be treated similarly to other employers, versus having different expectations of Google as a large organization 241 with a large development proposal. In general, the SAAG wants the City and Google to think big and the community should ask for what they want. They want Google to be a partner in addressing existing issues, mitigating impacts, and maximizing benefits to San José. The arguments for treating Google differently than a typical development include: the public’s role in this project (i.e., major transit investments and the sale of public land for a portion of the master plan), anticipated City Council legislative decisions (i.e., plan amendments and rezoning to increase development capacity); the large scale of the project; research on the impacts of tech-driven growth on working families; the different economics for Google as a user-developer compared to traditional real estate developers; and Google’s willingness to offer community benefits to Mountain View. Several SAAG members, however, questioned the ability, desirability, and fairness of the City to request or demand different requirements or extra fees from Google, noting that it does not seem like the City would do this for other developers, land owners, or companies that are planning to locate in San Jose. They questioned the implications of treating Google in this manner. While some suggested that the Desired Outcomes should set a standard for all businesses looking to locate in San José, there is also concern about unintended consequences of requirements on small, local businesses. There was much discussion among the SAAG and public about the role of Google in addressing the housing crisis. Many recognize the housing crisis as a regional/statewide issue, and believe that Google cannot be expected to solve it. While there is strong desire to set the bar high for Google and the City with respect to mitigating displacement, this sentiment is balanced with a desire to set attainable goals. Some community members want to make sure that the City balances housing needs with job growth goals, and does not push “too much” such that San José misses out on the net benefits of a Google project or worse, has to deal with the negative effects of Google locating somewhere else without the positive fiscal impacts of the local jobs. A suggestion is to focus on the delta of how Google project could amplify existing challenges, and avoid the expectation that they will solve every existing problem. On the other hand, some community members do not want Google to assert “too much” influence over the City and for the City to give up “too much” to Google. They do not want to end up with weak or unenforceable agreements. They want accountability—for Google and the City to fulfill their commitments. They call for transparency in this decision-making process to ensure that decisions are made in the public interest. The Potential Solutions offered by community members with these concerns often echoed the suggestions from some SAAG members on Community Benefit Agreements and related mechanisms. 242 There was recognition that, in the past decades, San Jose has at times needed to incentivize or subsidize development to come to San José, and questions about whether the City will give subsidies to Google or other developers. (Note: the City Council has directed no subsidy of Google and Google has not asked for subsidies.) There were also some concerns about selling public land to Google. Some community members want the City to lease the land or otherwise keep it for public use over the long-term. Some say that given the housing crisis, the best use of the land is for affordable housing. As a philosophy, some feel that publicly-owned land should not be sold for private development. (Refer to the FAQ’s in the Appendix for additional information on the negotiation process). Growth Impacts and Public Services The SAAG discussions and public comments typically recognized the benefits and rationale of high density development in the Diridon Station Area as part of a transit-oriented growth strategy. Some see the specific benefits of concentrating office space next to Diridon Station, noting the opportunity for people to commute by transit from all over the greater Bay Area, and support improving transit service to strengthen the links to affordable housing in other areas. However, some community members reacted to the prospect of a major master planned development by Google with strong concerns about job and population growth in San Jose in general. Community members with this reaction often co- referenced traffic congestion, parking shortages, the loss of open space, and general sense of over-crowding as concerns. Some expressed concern about housing prices going up too much, but do not want more housing construction in San Jose. There were multiple comments that recognize the possibility for growth impacts but still support investment in the Diridon area. Many community members discussed public services, including fire, police, roads, libraries, community centers, public open space, and schools. There are concerns about the potential impact of new development on these services. There are also concerns about the quality of existing services throughout San José and the recognition that new commercial development can increase revenues for the City to improve services. 243 High Speed Rail Impacts Another consistent theme is related to the construction of High Speed Rail tracks and increase in train service through residential neighborhoods. Neighborhood representatives consistently raised concerns about the potential loss of homes, businesses, and public open space. Several members of the public reinforced concerns about high speed rail impacts, such as increased noise. Safety and Homelessness An underlying theme of many of Issues and Desired Outcomes discussed is safety. It was often raised in the context of the transportation network, homelessness, accessibility, and/or the use of public spaces. For example, there is concern about the safety of roadways for pedestrians, especially at major intersections and in construction zones. Some people explained that using Diridon Station felt unsafe at certain times of the day and called for more security. Similarly, many community members said they avoid the creek-side parks and trails because they are often occupied by homeless people. There was a general desire to humanely address homelessness, in part to make creek trails and public spaces feel more welcoming to families, in addition to the concerns summarized under Housing above. As described under Revitalization, development of the Diridon Station Area, including redevelopment of parking lots and vacant industrial properties, is seen as an opportunity to increase use of public spaces and improve the security of the area. Environmental Sustainability One of the strongest reactions to the Draft Report was the lack of focus on environmental sustainability, including green building, eco-district planning, habitat enhancement, and integration of nature into development. While this was not a major topic of early conversations, there was an emerging desire by the SAAG and public to ensure that the Google project and the Diridon Station area incorporate cutting-edge sustainable design. Residents see an opportunity for new development to increase people’s connection to nature and the creeks. In addition, many of the comments received throughout the process are related to desires for improved connectivity, walkability, and transit services —leading to reductions in auto-oriented trips, less pollution, and mitigation of related growth 244 impacts. Overall, the comments addressed the desire to be good stewards of natural resources and to plan for resiliency. In response to this substantial public comment and SAAG feedback, a new topic was added to the Desired Outcome list in the following section. San Jose’s Identity At the heart of many of the SAAG discussions and public comments is the effect of new growth and development on San Jose’s collective identity. Currently, many community members take pride in San Jose’s ethnic diversity and unique quality of life. Some cite its history as a welcoming place for new immigrants and the working class to live and organize. There are concerns about the negative impact that a major development by Google could have on the community fabric and sense of place – mainly due to displacement from San Jose due to rising housing costs but also with respect to the tech company’s relationship to the Diridon Station Area and city in general. Many community members conveyed desires for Google to be integrated into the neighborhood (not isolated); for development to reflect an understanding and respect for San Jose’s history; for the area to convey a sense of welcoming and belonging for all through its small businesses, art, events, and design; and for the decision-making process related to the Google project to involve impacted communities. Ultimately, the project should help preserve – and not undermine – San Jose’s cultural diversity. For some community members, the fear of widespread displacement leads them to oppose to the sale of City-owned lands to Google and to the potential Google project in general. An organized group of San José community members consistently attended civic engagement events to express this opinion, as well as their distrust in Google and the decision-making process. This included protests at two Station Area Advisory Group meetings, in addition to participation in small group discussions at the Community Forums and Community Meetings. 245 This section presents the Desired Outcomes, which are the aspirations for the Diridon Station Area. The Desired Outcomes are based primarily on SAAG discussions at the nine SAAG meetings through August and the 11 Solution Group meetings (attended by a subset of SAAG members who self-selected to focus on specific topics), although the Desired Outcomes also reflect the key themes from the general public engagement (please refer to Chapter 3 for a description of each engagement method). City staff compiled the initial round of feedback into a preliminary and comprehensive set of Desired Outcomes, based primarily on the SAAG Solution Group and report-back discussions. This list is a reflection of the most frequently made comments per topic or subtopic. Staff refined this list based on SAAG feedback at the August 29th meeting, at which SAAG members were asked to gauge their level of agreement with each set of Desired Outcomes. Staff then augmented the Desired Outcomes based on the input from the public throughout the process and released the Draft Report for review. Staff hosted several engagement activities in September and October 2018 to get feedback on the initial set of Desired Outcomes, including an Online Feedback Form, three Community Meetings, and a SAAG meeting. The outreach on the Draft Report resulted in refinements to some of the outcomes and additions of new ones, but affirmed high levels of agreement for most Desired Outcomes. (Refer to the end of this chapter for a summary of the Online Feedback Form results across topics and to the Appendix for the full results.) The full list of Desired Outcomes is included in the following sections. The order in which outcomes are listed within each topic does not necessarily reflect the frequency, importance, or level of agreement among SAAG members or the public. Additional context to clarify the intent of the outcome and the range of perspectives, including any points of contention, have been added below each of the Desired Outcome statements. The amount of discussion for each statement does not necessarily reflect the time spent discussing the concept at SAAG meetings or public events. The Desired Outcomes for Housing/Displacement and Jobs/Education fall into three categories: General Principles, Development of the Diridon Station Area (DSA), and Citywide Impacts and Benefits. The Desired Outcomes for the other topics mainly apply to development of the Diridon Station Area or Downtown. The Housing/Displacement and Jobs/Education have extra categories because there was substantial discussion about the citywide implications on the housing, 246 displacement, education, and job opportunities, as well as about requiring Google to provide funding for community benefits at the citywide scale for these topics. Depending on the mechanism, other developers and employers could also pay into a system to support community benefits. The focus on other topics were physical improvements to the Diridon Area. By framing the input as Desired Outcomes for the area (and for citywide efforts in the case of Housing/Displacement and Jobs/Education), the focus became identifying commonly-held community values that can guide both a Google development and San José’s future. In some instances, Solution Groups conducted a ranking exercise of the Desired Outcomes and/or Potential Solutions. The results of the voting exercises are included in a separate text box to show the priorities of a subset of the SAAG. The Appendix includes the full list of Potential Solutions generated by the SAAG and public. This includes other ideas that are not already reflected in the Desired Outcomes or that provide more detailed suggestions on how to achieve the Desired Outcomes. Potential Solutions, which provide more detail on how to achieve the Desired Outcomes, can be found in the Appendix. 247 Housing and Displacement This topic includes Desired Outcomes and Potential Solutions for housing and displacement, including the number, type and affordability of housing units produced; and displacement through gentrification. As noted above, these topics were some of the most discussed at the SAAG meetings and throughout the civic engagement process. Desired Outcomes The following outcomes are grouped into three categories reflecting the various geographic scales of the housing issue. First are General Principles that would apply to the City, Google, and other stakeholders when planning for housing and preventing displacement; these represent the general themes of what community members want to see for this topic. Next are outcomes related specifically to development within the Diridon Station Area and could be implemented through the development review process. Last are outcomes related to Citywide Impacts and Benefits and how any resources generated by Google and other developers should be used at this scale to address housing goals. The Citywide Impacts and Benefits list is based on the results of the ranking exercise completed by the SAAG’s Housing, Displacement, and Gentrification Solution Group (provided below) – with revisions to reflect additional SAAG discussion and public input. General Principles Everyone involved takes responsibility to address the housing crisis, including but not limited to the City, Google, and other companies/developers. People are tired of the blame game and want everyone to do what they can to help solve the housing crisis. There needs to be a clear plan for addressing displacement and generating affordable housing to meet demand, with roles for everyone. In other words, addressing the affordable housing crisis will take action from the City of San José, taxpayers, and residential and commercial developers. As discussed above under “Expectations of Google and others,” there was much discussion about the role of Google. With respect to the housing crisis, some SAAG and community members pointed out that the housing crisis is a regional issue with multiple causes and Google should not be expected to solve it alone, while others called for Google to provide enough housing to meet all of the projected demand resulting from its office development. Some do not want the City to use the regional nature of the problem as an excuse for not doing its part or for not requiring Google to 248 mitigate its growth impacts, and want to ensure that the City is an equal partner in addressing the housing crisis. There was strong agreement that many of the solutions should be citywide. The City adopts more and stronger tools to help fight displacement, supplementing the existing programs and policies. Community leaders who have been involved in previous efforts to strengthen tenant protections called for additional tools and stronger regulations to aggressively fight displacement. This mirrors calls from the general public for the City to do more to protect them from high housing prices pushing them out of San Jose. Examples include further strengthening the rent control ordinance and protections under the Ellis Act (refer to the Potential Solutions list in the Appendix for other specific ideas from the SAAG and public). More affordable housing is generated throughout the city, focusing on high density housing in Urban Villages. This reflects the citywide need for more affordable options throughout the city, as well as concerns that the Diridon Station Area may take on too much of the housing demand and that redevelopment with high density housing in established neighborhoods – rather than in Urban Villages – would inadvertently lead to more displacement. It was also suggested to include publicly owned land as a focus for more affordable housing and for the City to have faster permit processes to facilitate high density residential development. The strategy for addressing housing issues integrates homeless services. In addition to generating more affordable housing and preventing displacement due to gentrification, the strategy must incorporate more homeless services as a means for helping people and getting people into permanent housing. This also includes more resources for treating people with mental illness and for serving vulnerable populations. The ultimate goal is no direct/indirect displacement from San José, and no increase in homelessness. This reflects the top concern among the general public. Nearly all SAAG members seemed to agree that displacement from San José is a major concern, and that minimizing it should be a goal for the Google project. Some community members feel that the City should reject the idea that anything less than zero displacement is an acceptable outcome. However, there was much discussion on the various ways of interpreting the intention of the displacement-related outcomes, with questions about the definition of “indirect”, the ability to link displacement to a single cause, the feasibility of 249 mandating “zero” displacement, and the potential tension between avoiding displacement with other goals for the city and Station Area – such as infill development that increases the housing supply. There is some concern that a ‘zero displacement’ policy would be so absolute and inflexible that it could force San José to turn away new workplace development and associated resources for addressing the housing crisis and providing community benefits. Some community members expressed desire to quantify this concept to predict displacement and track outcomes, while others suggest a process-oriented approach by committing to “make every effort” or “use every policy lever” to prevent displacement. Several people at the Community Meetings suggested that the goal should be to “decrease homelessness,” as this implies that we are okay within maintaining existing levels. Development of the Diridon Station Area The Diridon Station Area has dense, affordable housing across all incomes for current and future residents and workers. The SAAG generally agreed on the need for high density, affordable housing near the station. Some SAAG members and the public specifically advocated for extremely low-income and moderate-income households within the broad range of “lower-income”. This reflects concerns for the most vulnerable populations, as well as for the “missing middle” (i.e., the lack of housing options for people that do not qualify for subsidies yet have a hard time affording market rates). While several members of the public called for Google to build housing for their workers as part of their master development, the SAAG generally called for housing to be open to existing residents that want better transit access, not just future workers. At least 25% of housing units are offered at below-market rates for lower-income households (ranging from extremely low to moderate). The SAAG discussed this specific goal several times. It is based on the Urban Village target. The current requirement in the DSAP is 15%. There was concern about the feasibility of requiring this higher level for Google or other specific development projects without stifling development – and then getting no housing. The counter-perspective is that Google could handle this affordability level because they have greater financial capacity than the typical developer (see “Expectations of Google and others” discussion above). Others, particularly members of the public, want to see higher affordable targets than 25%. This outcome could be a target for all development within the area, rather than a 250 requirement for each individual project, which would encourage 100% affordable projects as part of the overall housing strategy. Developers build Inclusionary Housing units on-site or within the Diridon Station Area, rather than pay in lieu fees or build outside of the area. This reflects desires to develop a mixed-income, integrated neighborhood, to maximize affordability around transit recognizing that lower-income households have higher transit dependency, and to get subsidized units built ASAP rather than deferred to a future project. However, there is tension with the desire to generate funds for the construction and preservation of affordable housing. There is no direct and indirect displacement of existing lower-income residents from the Diridon Station Area and nearby neighborhoods due to gentrification spurred by this development. This reflects concerns about redevelopment directly displacing people, as well as rising rents pushing out existing residents. Many SAAG members feel that the priority should be low-income people, while some think this principle should apply to all residents. As with the general “no displacement” concept citywide, there were discussions about how to interpret this outcome with respect to the Diridon area. Several SAAG members suggest re-phrasing this as “Limit direct displacement to the highest degree possible and fully mitigate any remaining displacement with new affordable housing.” New development provides compensation and relocation assistance if redevelopment of existing housing occurs. Citywide Impacts and Benefits New resources generated by Google and other companies/developers go to: • Affordable housing development, focusing on areas well-served by transit (including within the Diridon Station Area itself); • Acquiring, rehabilitating, and preserving the affordability of existing multi- family housing properties in neighborhoods at the greatest risk of gentrification; • Community ownership models to increase homeownership opportunities (e.g., Community Land Trusts, etc.) – when building new housing or preserving existing housing; and • Organizations that provide legal assistance and education to tenants, which includes the legal defense of low-income Santa Clara County tenants facing eviction proceedings. 251 Solution Group Ranking Exercise The SAAG Solution Group on Housing, Displacement, and Gentrification suggested that Google provide resources (i.e., funding) to the City and/or non- profit partners to reduce displacement resulting from new jobs. Staff prepared a list of potential strategies for distributing resources to achieve the desired outcomes related to housing, based on the Housing Solution Group discussions. Staff then asked the SAAG members to rank them in order of importance and compiled the results. The group completed the exercise verbally during their third meeting on July 10; participants included: Gardner Neighborhood Association, Law Foundation of Silicon Valley, PACT, Silicon Valley Bike Coalition, South Bay AFL-CIO Labor Council, SV Rising, SV@Home, and Working Partnerships USA. The following table shows the top five strategies, which were refined and incorporated into the top Desired Outcomes. See the Appendix for the complete results. They are listed here to reflect the priorities of a subset of SAAG members. The 5 top strategies for distributing resources to achieve the desired outcomes •Acquire land and build affordable housing, focusing on areas well-served by transit (including within the Diridon Station Area itself). •Acquire, rehabilitate, and preserve affordability of existing multi-family housing properties in neighborhoods at the greatest risk of gentrification. •Build high density housing outside of the Diridon Station Area, including the East Side. •When building new housing or preserving existing housing, utilize community ownership models to increase homeownership opportunities (e.g., Community Land Trusts, etc.). •Increase funding support for organizations that provide legal assistance and education to tenants; fund the legal defense of low-income Santa Clara County tenants facing eviction proceedings. Housing, Gentrification and Displacement Solution Group - Ranking Exercise Results 252 Pop-up Workshop Exercise Community members placed 50 dots on the board for Housing and Displacement strategies over the course of the five pop-up-workshops. The top two priorities from the Pop-up workshop dot exercise were: “Build more affordable housing throughout the city, focusing on areas well-served by transit” (32% of the dots for this topic), and “Build more housing to help meet the demands of regional job growth and reduce commute distances (30% of dots).” Community Meetings Based on frequency of comments received at the Community Meetings held in September, the most important issues and Desired Outcomes were related to: • Preventing displacement from San José (based on top concern about rising housing costs) • Homelessness • Increasing the affordable housing requirement for the Diridon Station Area • Prioritizing local residents for rental housing • Streamlining the permitting process for housing projects • Strengthening rent control Online Feedback Form About 670 people reacted to the Desired Outcomes for Housing and Displacement using the Online Feedback Form. Agreement for these outcomes ranged from 51% and 76% (based on selecting “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”). While there was strong support for the concepts, this topic had the highest level of disagreement, with 12-31% of respondents saying they “Disagree” or “Strongly Disagree” with each of the outcomes. Based on the write-in comments, some of the reasons for disagreement with the Housing and Displacement outcomes include: • The City should balance housing needs with job needs, so that the City can raise more revenues for affordable housing and public services. • The City is growing too much. • There is concern about high density (multi-family) housing. There should be more single-family housing and/or greater protections for existing low density neighborhoods. • Job growth should be the emphasis for this project, not housing. 253 • At least some of the extra resources generated by Google and others should go to improving public services like police and schools – not just housing. • There should be more focus on improving transit to better link jobs and affordable housing in other areas. • The outcomes should call out specific target populations such as teachers and seniors. • There should be more emphasis on citywide impacts, not just the Diridon Station Area. • Google should provide on-site housing. • There should be more emphasis on housing for the “missing middle” or moderate income families. • There should be more emphasis on resolving the homeless issue, such as by funding housing and services for the homeless. • Affordable housing and homeless services should not be concentrated downtown. • Homelessness is a separate issue that the City needs to address on its own; it is not Google’s responsibility. • It is the City’s, not Google’s, responsibility to address the housing crisis. Refer to the end of this chapter for a summary of the Online Feedback Form results across topics and to the Appendix for the full results. Conclusion Input from the public reinforced the Desired Outcomes for Housing and Displacement. Community members emphasized the urgency to address the housing crisis with more affordable housing options and the importance of preventing further displacement if Google were to build offices in San Jose. There were many cautionary tales about gentrification and suggestions to learn from mistakes made in other Bay Area cities. There was a general call to action for the City, Google, and other stakeholders to do everything possible to reduce displacement pressures. However, the feedback on the initial Desired Outcomes, particularly the Online Feedback Form, revealed that many community members also want to make sure that any requirements of Google are feasible and are balanced with other community goals. While concern over the housing crisis was nearly universal, there is a wide range of nuanced perspectives about how to meaningfully address it and the implications for the potential Google development in the Diridon area. 254 Jobs, Education, and Economic Development This section includes a variety of topics related to the production of jobs within the Google development; indirect business and employment opportunities; the relationship between jobs and housing; education and job training for existing residents; and the fiscal and economic benefits to the City. Desired Outcomes As with the Housing and Displacement section, the following outcomes are grouped into three categories reflecting the various geographic scales: General Principles, Development within the Diridon Station Area, and Citywide Impacts and Benefits. The lists in the last chapter are based on the results of a ranking exercise completed by the SAAG’s Jobs, Education, and Economic Development Solution Group – with minor revisions to reflect the SAAG discussion during the report-back. See below for the results of the ranking exercise, for reference. General Principles New development offers quality jobs that pay living wages (i.e., cover the cost of housing in San Jose). Some SAAG members feel strongly that all jobs should offer living wages, including subcontracted service jobs.2 There is a concern about mandating wages at the project level, especially without knowing the specific job types. This outcome also relates to the desire for balanced job and housing growth, with some members of the public wanting to see new housing built for Google employees before any jobs are added so as to avoid displacement. Several people at the Community Meetings suggested that the definition of living wages should be the “full cost of living in San José,” not just housing costs. New development helps diversify San Jose’s economy such that residents of all skill and educational levels have more opportunities. This reflects an underlying theme of enhancing social equity and economic mobility and ensuring benefits accrue to the most vulnerable and disadvantaged people in San José. The Google project should offer a range of opportunities for jobs and job training, not just high-tech. 255 There are strong career pipelines that help existing residents and youth get good jobs in the tech industry and other higher-paying sectors. This reflects the desire to maximize local hiring and ensure that people are preparing to take advantage of new opportunities for quality jobs. Local schools are supported with additional resources and innovation to provide quality education to local youth. The Google partnership presents a major opportunity for innovation and greater support of the local education system for preparing ethnically diverse students for jobs of the future. This is a high priority for some members of the public. At the October SAAG meeting, several members emphasized the importance of K-12 education, and the opportunity for Google to work with schools to improve STEM and computer science education. New development protects, supports, and involves local, small businesses and non-profits. This reflects concerns about the effect of rising rents, and the desire to prevent the displacement of existing local businesses and non-profits. Community members suggested proactive outreach to impacted businesses to assist with relocation. It also reflects concerns about the potential for an insular tech campus that provides free amenities to its employees and the desire to also promote local spending and integration into the community. In addition, there should be intentional engagement with under-represented minority-owned businesses such as through a mandate for a percentage of contracts to go to under-represented groups. Non-profits connect people to resources and will have higher demand for services as housing/economic insecurity grows, and therefore, should be supported. New taxes on small businesses should be avoided. Development of the Diridon Station Area Google and other companies/developers in the Diridon Station Area: Adhere to responsible contracting standards and use Project Labor Agreements to ensure fair and safe working conditions for contract and construction workers. Several SAAG members consistently pointed to the potential for Google to rely heavily on contract workers that would face disparities in working conditions compared to their direct employees (such as lower wages and fewer benefits), based on research of existing business practices in the tech industry. They call for a commitment to hiring companies recommended by www.responsiblecontractorguide.com to ensure good working conditions for 256 services workers. In addition, they point to Project Labor Agreements, which establish the terms and conditions of employment for construction projects, in order to promote quality, stable job opportunities for local workers, quality construction, and community benefits. Partner with small, local businesses in both the construction and operation phases (such as through procurement policies, catering, events, etc.). This supports the General Principle of supporting local businesses, and the desire for the Google project to enhance economic opportunity in general, not just by adding high-tech jobs. Provide worker retention to ensure service workers retain their jobs and do not face mass layoffs if building owners or future tenants change. SAAG members point to examples of worker retention policies. Adopt a local hiring policy. This idea reflects a very common public sentiment that new jobs should prioritize local residents. Reduce barriers to employment based on race, gender, immigration status, and previous incarceration. There is desire for Google and other tech companies to reflect San José’s diversity, recognizing the current underrepresentation of many population segments in the technology industry today. Examples include: “ban the box” and sanctuary campus policies. At the October 10, 2018 SAAG meeting and in reaction to the Draft Report, there were questions about how these Desired Outcomes apply to smaller businesses and developments within the area over time. The underlying concern is that small, local business would have a hard time implementing some of these policies, compared to larger, wealthier companies like Google, and that costly requirements could have the unintended consequence of pushing out small local companies. There should be careful consideration of the feasibility and implications of these requirements. Another concern is that some of these policies such as local hiring and worker retention are worthwhile goals but could be difficult to implement and administer as requirements that run with the land and could be particularly onerous on smaller, infill projects and retailers, if required for development other than Google. 257 Citywide Impacts and Benefits New resources generated by Google and other companies/developers go to: • Early childhood education and childcare for lower‐income households; This reflects the understanding that the early years of childhood are critical to lifelong success, and there is currently a large unmet need among lower-income households for affordable, quality educational programs. In addition, providing more affordable daycare options allows great flexibility for families to work, save money, and invest in other critical needs like housing. Several people at the Community Meetings suggested that childcare resources should go to all residents, not just low-income households. • Local job training in high growth sectors, such as construction, IT, manufacturing, healthcare, and business (such as pre‐apprenticeship and apprenticeship programs in trade industries); The City has established effective workforce development and apprenticeship programs that could scale up to serve more people if there was additional funding. The focus should be on high growth sectors that offer clear career pathways to quality jobs. Many members of the public emphasized the need for workforce pipelines to ensure that local youth can enter the high-tech sector, and several specifically suggested apprenticeship programs. • Local, existing schools to use as the school district sees fit; The local school system’s biggest challenge to preparing youth for the jobs of the future is the lack of funding; adding new programs often causes more administrative burden than it’s worth and does not address the underlying need for more resources in order to meet basic needs, such as paying its teachers and bus drivers enough to afford the high cost of living in San José. Some community members think the emphasis of educational resources should be on leveraging Google’s strengths and modernizing K-12 education to prepare youth for technology-related careers; this should include upgrading the curriculum, use of technology, and professional development for teachers and faculty. 258 • Restorative justice programming in schools; This refers to an alternative approach to traditional disciplinary actions like suspension and expulsion, which have lifelong impacts on educational and employment opportunities; instead, it uses peer mentoring and social interventions to help troubled youth stay in school and be successful. Since there are clear racial disparities in school discipline practices, this supports goals for diversifying the tech sector. • Partnership/mentorship programs through San Jose State University (SJSU) and local community colleges. The intent is to help connect San José youth to the job opportunities, recognizing the value of direct relationships in supporting educational attainment, particularly for disadvantaged and under- resourced students. The emphasis is on public and local colleges, since private schools tend to be more expensive and colleges outside of the city are less likely to serve local residents. Solution Group Ranking Exercise Similar to the ranking exercise for the Housing Solution Group, the SAAG Solution Group on Jobs, Education, and Economic Development suggested that Google provide resources (i.e., funding) to the City and its partners to strengthen the educational system and promote economic opportunity for San José residents. They also suggested policies that should apply to Google (and could apply to other large developers/companies that develop in the Diridon area). Staff prepared two lists of potential solutions based on the Solution Group discussions, and asked the SAAG members to select up to 5 or 6 of the ideas and rank them in order of importance. The Jobs, Education, and Economic Development Solution Group completed the exercise after the second meeting by emailing in their responses for staff to compile. Participating organizations included: Alameda Business Association, Law Foundation of Silicon Valley, San Jose State University, San Jose Unified School District, Santa Clara & San Benito Counties Building and Construction Trades Council, Silicon Valley Bike Coalition, South Bay AFL-CIO Labor Council, SV Rising, and Working Partnerships USA. For the Jobs exercise, some participants selected their top 1-4 choices for each set of ideas, because they had concerns about the other strategies. 259 The tables above illustrate the top things that Google and other companies and developers could do as part of developing in the Diridon Station Area, and the top programs that Google or others could help fund to achieve the desired Things that Google and others could do as part of developing in the Diridon Station Area: •Commit to Responsible Contracting standards to ensure contracted it out jobs are good quality jobs with fair and safe working conditions. •Use Project Labor Agreements, to stabilize the terms and conditions of employment in construction jobs, to help ensure quality job opportunities for local workers. •Partner with local businesses in and around the Diridon Station area through catering, events, and patronage (e.g., via at procurement policy) •Provide worker retention to ensure service workers retain their jobs and do not face mass layoffs if building owners or future tenants change service providers during operations. •Adopt a local hiring policy to provide jobs for residents. Jobs, Education and Economic Development Solution Group – Ranking Exercise Results (1) Programs that Google or others could help fund to achieve the desired outcomes: •Provide funding for early childhood education and childcare for lower-income households. •Increase resources for pre-apprenticeship and apprenticeship programs in trade Industries. •Establish a fee or Levy to generate extra revenue for local, existing schools to use as the district sees fit •Increase resources for local job training and high growth sectors, such as construction, it, manufacturing, Healthcare and business. •Provide resources for restorative justice programming in schools. •Support partnership / mentorship programs through San Jose State University (SJSU) and local community colleges. Jobs, Education and Economic Development Solution Group – Ranking Exercise Results (2) 260 outcomes related to jobs, education and economic development. These were refined and incorporated into the top Desired Outcomes. See the Appendix for the complete results. They are listed here to reflect the priorities of a subset of SAAG members. Pop-up Workshop Exercise Community members placed 32 dots on the board for Jobs, Education, and Economic Development strategies over the course of the five pop-up-workshops. The top two priorities from the Pop-up workshop dot exercise were: “Support new jobs that pay living wages - enough to support a family and cover housing prices” (41% of dots for this topic), and “Increase support for K-12 schools to prepare youth for jobs of the future” (22% of dots). Community Meetings Based on frequency of comments received at the Community Meetings held in September, the most important issues and Desired Outcomes were related to: • Ensuring quality education for all students • Local hiring preference and pipelines • Provide training for non-tech jobs • Living wages • Childcare • Impacts on schools • Proactive outreach to impacted businesses to assist relocation Online Feedback Form About 550 people reacted to the Desired Outcomes for Jobs, Education, and Economic Development using the Online Feedback Form. Based on selecting “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”, agreement for all but one of the outcomes exceed 60%. With agreement at 82%, the outcome statements with the highest agreement include: “New development offers quality jobs that pay living wages” and “Local schools are supported with additional resources and innovation to provide quality education to local youth.” The outcome with the lowest agreement was “Restorative justice programming in schools” (53%). It is possible that many people that completed the Online Feedback Form are not familiar with this concept and additional information would have been helpful, based on the high share of “Neutral” responses (31%). 261 Refer to the end of this chapter for a summary of the Online Feedback Form results across topics and to the Appendix for the full results. Conclusion There was general agreement among the SAAG Solution Group on Jobs, Education, and Economic Development that the strategy for maximizing citywide benefits should build upon existing resources and programs, rather than creating new ones. But it was also suggested that the focus should be on effectiveness, regardless if a program is new or existing. The group also discussed the links between jobs and housing, recognizing the need to provide more affordable housing so lower-wage workers can live near their place of employment and to reduce displacement pressures so that existing residents can stay and benefit from the investments and opportunities presented by a Google development in the Diridon Station Area. Input from the public reinforced most of the Desired Outcomes derived from SAAG discussions. While many community members expressed optimism about the increase in job opportunities and potential to leverage Google’s innovation capabilities, there was some skepticism about the ability for all to benefit from a Google development in San José. 262 Land Use, Design, and Parking This section addresses land use mix, density, building height, site layout, urban design, architectural style, parking, block length, sense of place, neighborhood quality of life, and the relationship between the Diridon Station Area and Downtown. Desired Outcomes The following outcomes mainly apply to development within and surrounding the Diridon Station Area. Land Use New development in the Diridon Station Area: Optimizes development density to take full advantage of the transit investments. This reflects a desire to locate the highest density development within walking distance to Diridon Station to maximize the number of people who take transit. Overall, there was general agreement that higher density development should be located closest to the Diridon Station. (Refer to the Growth Impacts discussion under Issues above for counterviews on development at the city scale). Includes a complementary mix of commercial, office, and residential uses, with emphasis on affordable housing. The SAAG generally recognized the need for a diverse mix of uses in the Diridon Station Area and the need to focus on affordable housing. Public comments also identified the need for a diverse mix of uses in the Diridon Station Area as opposed to focusing on a single use. However, there were differences of opinion about the amount and location of specific uses within area. Some community members think the emphasis should be commercial development to best support the transit investments and/or generate more revenue for citywide purposes (local schools, public services, etc.). Some believed that more high-density, affordable housing should be located near transit in the central zone of the DSAP while others believed that the greatest intensity of jobs should be adjacent to Diridon Station. There is also concern about the compatibility of new office buildings with existing residential uses in the southern zone of the Diridon Station Area, such as the impact on parking. 263 Incorporates ground floor retail in strategic locations and amounts. The SAAG and the public almost unanimously agreed that having retail and other active uses at the ground floor of new buildings is critical to the vibrancy and pedestrian-oriented character of the Diridon Station Area. There was a concern that retail uses should not be required in all areas, since it could add to the cost of housing and/or lead to vacant storefronts which would have the opposite effect on street life (deadening rather than activating). Thus, it should be located in “strategic locations and amounts” to ensure that there is a critical mass of commercial uses in certain areas. Additionally, both the SAAG and the public wanted to ensure there is space and support for small, local “mom and pop” businesses. Incorporates public spaces, including open space along the creeks. This outcome was added based on comments on the Draft Report and based on a SAAG suggestion to ensure that the land use mix explicitly reflects natural resources and public spaces. Feedback on the Desired Outcomes revealed some of the strongest support for the public space concepts, reinforcing the importance of this land use to the community. Has a coherent development pattern that is varied and interesting, yet has a consistent feel. This reflects the idea to create a strong sense of place for the area, balancing diversity of building types with the need for consistency so the area doesn’t feel disjointed. Some community members want to avoid having all “glass boxes” and encouraged more creative design. Is an extension of the Downtown core, rather than a separate district, with a strong sense of place. There was significant agreement with this concept by both the SAAG and the public that Diridon should be connected to Downtown and not a separate district. Concerns were raised about creating a completely new district without physical, psychological, and design connections. Ideas for how this can be achieved include improved roadway access, consistent landscaping, signage, and marketing. Design The design of buildings and public spaces is oriented to the human-scale to support an active street life and accessibility for all abilities. 264 There was nearly unanimous agreement and many comments about the need to make the Diridon Station area walkable, human-scaled, and pedestrian- oriented. Recommendations included locating buildings near the street, activating ground floor uses, creating walkable block sizes, designing streets with wide sidewalks and slower traffic speeds, and adding landscaping to create an attractive environment. Accessibility was raised as an important component of human-centered design. Tech campuses are open, permeable, and integrated with surroundings such that employees support local businesses and that the public has access to amenities. This desired outcome came up frequently with both the SAAG and public. They want Google and other companies to avoid creating walled-off and insular campuses. They did not want these companies to provide free meals and services internal to the campuses, but rather, encourage employees to leave the buildings and patronize local businesses. Additional comments identified the need for providing pedestrian circulation between buildings on the street level, making sure that buildings are not too large, and ensuring permeable spaces between buildings (e.g., streets, paseos, trails). New development has an appropriate interface with existing neighborhoods and mitigates impacts, such as those related to traffic, parking, transit routes, and noise. This theme came up consistently among the SAAG and general public. It reflects the concern that large-scale redevelopment can have impacts on the residents and businesses in adjacent areas. The concerns were both about construction, since it will occur over a long period of time, and on-going impacts such as spill-over parking in residential areas. Public art and historic/cultural preservation are integrated early into project design and plan implementation to enhance and protect existing character and identity. This Desired Outcome reflects the many comments related to historic resources and preserving the cultural identity of the area, which is more than just buildings that qualify for historic preservation under City, State, or federal regulations. There was also a desire to be proactive in identifying, preserving, revitalizing and/or repurposing historic features – rather than waiting for individual development projects to come along. For example, there is strong interest in inventorying and preserving iconic commercial signage. Further, there were many comments requesting public art to be incorporated into development to enhance the sense of place. Overall, there was strong support from the SAAG and the public for this outcome, with some comments about 265 ensuring balance so that historic preservation did not prohibit development. Community members also suggested supporting local artists, and reflecting San José’s diverse culture through integrating public art in a variety of scales and methods. New buildings create an interesting Downtown skyline. This outcome recognizes that airport-related height limits have led to relatively short buildings in Downtown San José compared to other large cities, and that those height limits encourage new development to be built at the same heights with flat tops in order to max out their floor area potential – creating a flat skyline. There is desire to make Downtown San José feel more like other downtowns of international cities, which have varied building heights and rooftop designs. When raised in SAAG discussions, the desire for an “interesting” skyline was balanced with the need to optimize density in the Diridon Area. As a counter perspective, one SAAG member suggested “thinking inside the box” and embracing the height limitations – focusing on vertical activation to fill the volume with interesting public life. Parking The supply of parking is proactively managed to adapt to changes in travel patterns overtime and to support goals for reduced car travel. There was general agreement from the SAAG that parking management is critical to the success of an urban, transit-oriented district such as the Diridon Station Area. However, some SAAG members want to proactively drive changes in travel patterns to achieve other desired outcomes such as reduced driving and increased transit use, rather than react to changing demand. Several expressed the desire to balance this goal with the current need to provide enough parking for the SAP Center, transit station, and new and existing development. The public was more likely to express concerns about parking shortages, particularly people that live in other parts of San José and rely more on driving. Existing commuters that use Diridon Station and attendees of the SAP Center expressed concern about access in the future given the development of parking lots and increase in demand for transit services. Existing parking plans and programs that were developed with community input form the foundation for parking management in the Diridon Station Area. Significant work has been done to develop and implement parking management plans in the area. Several SAAG members note that future plans should respect the past work, and that future plans for parking should not just 266 start from scratch. This sentiment was echoed by several members of the public, who want to ensure continued implementation of existing programs that are working well (Downtown and east of Downtown). Parking structures are future-proof (i.e., designed to allow for re-purposing if no longer needed). Community members that advocate for this outcome refer to changing travel patterns, such as autonomous vehicles, ride sharing services, and increased public transit use, which will likely reduce the need for parking overtime. As such, parking structures should be designed so that they can be repurposed for other uses if no longer needed for parking. The amount of land dedicated to single-use parking is minimized, and parking is not a visually prominent aspect of the built environment. There was recognition that development of the Diridon Station Area is an opportunity to replace parking lots with buildings and public spaces that add to the sense of vibrancy and safety. In new development, parking should be provided belowground, in well-designed structures, or otherwise tucked away. The intent of this design principle is to make the area more attractive and promote transit use and other modes, over car travel. In addition to parking, new development should consider placing other infrastructure below ground (such as stormwater treatment), rather than taking up valuable surface land. There is a shared parking district for private development, transit users, and the SAP Center. This relates to the first Parking outcome in that the SAAG generally wants to ensure that parking for the area is managed comprehensively. There is recognition that the existing and future uses are complementary, and that shared parking could help reduce the overall amount of parking needed. There is concern, however, that shared parking may not be feasible or acceptable to the private development, and Google may end up requiring dedicated and secure parking for their employees that is not shared with the general public. There is sufficient parking for modes other than cars. This Desired Outcome reflects the discussion that parking should be more than just about cars. Parking for bikes and other vehicles (some of which might not yet be developed) should be planned for. Parking impacts on neighborhood streets are minimized. Neighbors living within and near the Station Area have concerns about spill- over parking on nearby residential areas if too little parking is provided in the 267 Diridon Station Area to meet demand. In addition to taking up street parking, there are concerns about extra traffic on local streets as people circulate looking for parking (see Transportation below). Pop-up Workshop Exercise Community members placed 58 dots on the board for Land Use and Design strategies over the course of the five pop-up-workshops. The top two priorities from the Pop-up workshop dot exercise are to: “Focus on human-scaled design to create a safe, vibrant, and attractive pedestrian experience” (28% of dots for this topic), and “Preserve historic buildings and other features that provide a sense of character to the station area” (22% of dots). Note that parking strategies were grouped with Transportation for the pop-up workshop exercise. Community Meetings Based on frequency of comments received at the Community Meetings held in September, the most important issues and Desired Outcomes were related to: • Supporting artists and reflecting culture in public art • Providing sufficient parking • Parking impacts on the neighborhoods • Space for medical uses • Commercial uses Online Feedback Form Between 479 and 542 people reacted to the Desired Outcomes for Land Use, Design, and Parking using the Online Feedback Form. Based on selecting “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”, agreement was at least 72% for each of the Design outcomes, 71% for the Land Use outcomes, and 54% for the Parking outcomes. The outcomes with the highest agreement include: Development in the Diridon Station Area optimizes development density to take full advantage of the transit investments (88%), “The design of buildings and public spaces is oriented to the human-scale to support an active street life and accessibility for all abilities” (83%), and “New development has an appropriate interface with existing neighborhoods and mitigates impacts, such as those related to traffic, parking, transit routes, and noise.” The outcome with the lowest agreement is “Existing parking plans and programs that were developed with community input form the foundation for parking 268 management in the Diridon Station Area”. This statement also had a high share of “Neutral” responses at 35%, indicating that many respondents are likely not aware of the existing programs to have a strong opinion. Refer to the end of this chapter for a summary of the Online Feedback Form results across topics and to the Appendix for the full results. Conclusion Overall, there was very high level of agreement between SAAG members and between the SAAG and general public on the majority of topics related to land use and design. There was overwhelming agreement that the Diridon Station Area should be an extension of the Downtown, that the Google development should be integrated with the other buildings in the Diridon Station Area rather than a walled-off campus, that there should be high-quality design and varied architecture, and that the new neighborhood should be walkable and pedestrian- oriented. There was also agreement that a diverse mix of uses was critical to creating a vibrant neighborhood. However, there were differences in opinion about the overall mix of uses and the location of each use within the Diridon Station Area, concerns about the impact of new development on traffic, housing costs and adjacent neighborhoods, and the overall amount of parking in the Diridon Station Area. From a process perspective, the concept of value capture was consistently raised during SAAG discussions. As discussed above under “Community Benefits”, the concept is that the value of community benefits should take into account transit improvements in place, any requested up-zonings, and other policy decisions that add value. The SAAG Solution Group on Land Use discussed the need for value capture tools to help ensure that the public is able to receive some benefit from these changes. 269 Public Space, Creeks, and Trails This topic includes parks, open space, green space, creek corridors, trails, and the public realm. It overlaps with the Environmental Sustainability, Land Use, Design, and Transportation topics. Desired Outcomes The following outcomes mainly apply to development within and surrounding the Diridon Station Area. Parks, open space, plazas, and trails in the Diridon Station Area are safe, visible, well-maintained, and accessible to everyone. This reflects desires for public spaces to be more family-friendly, safe, clean, and inviting to all. Safety includes visibility to enhance the sense of security and deter criminal activity. Visibility also promotes access and better utilization of the existing spaces. Access among people of all ages, physical abilities, and income levels is important to community members. For example, there is desire to make recreational programs more affordable. The area has a range of public space types at a variety of scales (e.g., pocket parks, green roofs, plazas, community gardens, etc.) and opportunities for accessing nature. This should include urban agriculture, cultural spaces, and vertical activation of public spaces on top of buildings, not just at the ground level and within parks. Other desired amenities include more children’s play areas, regularly programmed/activated spaces, and greenery overall. This includes protecting existing community resources and providing more community facilities in surrounding neighborhoods, such as childcare facilities. There is a signature plaza near Diridon Station and Santa Clara Street that provides space for community gathering and special programming, in addition to circulation functions. This intention is to provide a focal point for the neighborhood and a safe place for people to hang out before and after events at the arena, taking advantage of the significant pedestrian activity around the transit station. Programming could include late night activities, food trucks, entertainment, outdoor dining, pre- and post-event gathering for SAP center, and other active uses. 270 Public spaces are activated through temporary and permanent programming such as public art, pop-up retail, and events. Activating public spaces is intended to improve the safety and security, as well as make the area a more vibrant, interesting place to live, work, and visit. Partnerships with the business community and neighborhood groups advance projects, implement programming, and help keep spaces maintained. This reflects desires for more collaboration and innovative use of resources to ensure that spaces are upgraded, better utilized, and maintained at a higher quality. It recognizes the constraints on City services and capacity of other community members to work together to improve the neighborhood. A suggestion is for new development to fund the long-term maintenance of public spaces in the area. There is an interconnected network of “green fingers” with inviting pedestrian and bicycle facilities and public restrooms along creek trails. This reinforces the open space framework in the DSA, which calls for a well- landscaped system of trails, paseos, and sidewalks. It also reflects a key theme for improved connectivity. Community members commonly suggested adding restrooms in public spaces, particularly along the creek trails. The Guadalupe River and Los Gatos Creek trail systems are linked. This project offers the opportunity to close existing gaps in the trail network within the Diridon Station Area. Several community members suggested that this outcome include the connection to the Three Creeks Trail, which is immediately south of the station area. Los Gatos Creek is daylighted at Park Avenue, with restored habitat and a continuous off-street trail. The intent of this outcome is to improve the creek corridor for salmon and other wildlife, allow for safer pedestrian/bicycle connectivity, and improve the aesthetics of the area. There were questions about the hydrological implications and feasibility. Riparian habitat along the creeks is enhanced. This speaks to the inconsistent quality of the riparian corridor as urbanization has encroached on the creeks to various degrees throughout the Station Area. The intent is to improve the wildlife habitat, water quality, and flood protection of the creek corridor. 271 New development faces creeks and other open spaces. The intent is to activate the public spaces and enhance connections between buildings and the natural environment. It reflects the general desire to design development to take better advantage of the creeks through open spaces, site planning, and architecture. One suggestion is to create a “river walk” along Los Gatos Creek with trailside amenities such as sidewalk cafes. Solution Group Ranking Exercise The SAAG Solution Group on Parks, Public Space, Sustainability, and Neighborhood Quality of Life identified a list of Potential Solutions and categorized them into Major Capital projects and Nearer-term projects. They then completed a ranking exercise in which they ranked the top solutions from each category. Staff separated out the top “guiding principles for designing new development” from the Nearer-term list to better reflect how these ideas could be incorporated into the Google project and other decisions. See the three tables on the following pages for the top solutions, and the Appendix for the complete results. The top ranking ideas are generally reflected in the Desired Outcomes above, and are listed here to reflect the priorities of a subset of SAAG members (representing Delmas Park Neighborhood Association, Greenbelt Alliance, Guadalupe River Park Conservancy, North Willow Glen Neighborhood Association, Plant 51, San Jose Downtown Residents Association, Shasta Hanchett Park Neighborhood Association, SPUR, and St. Leo's residents). The ranking exercise reflects extensive overlap with the Land Use, Design, and Transportation topics. For example, it reinforced desires to improve key pedestrian/bicycle connections, activate spaces that are currently dead zones, and incorporate historic/cultural resources and public art. 272 Top 5 Major Capital Solutions •Include a Diridon Central Plaza as a Signature plaza destination (more than just a drop- off), located on Santa Clara Street with late-night activities, food trucks, entertainment, outdoor dining, pre- and post-event gathering for SAP Center and other active uses. •Connect the Guadalupe River and Los Gatos Creek trail system as it goes under 280 so pedestrians and bikers can cross in a safe manner; integrate with Three Creeks trail systems. •Daylight Los Gatos Creek. •Provide better connections so residents can get to the many existing parks and open spaces that already exist nearby, overcome existing barriers and isolation. •Make the 280/Bird overpass safer for walkers and bikers, including children. Parks, Public Space, and Sustainability Solution Group – Ranking Exercise Results (1) Top 4 “Near-term” Solutions •Save and showcase neon and historic signs from local businesses (late 40’s-early 70’s) in the Diridon Area. •Improve key pedestrian/bicycle connections (e.g. create inviting, well-lit, pedestrian/bike connections under 87 freeway to Children’s Discovery Museum). •Employ early activation and programming for residents throughout the construction phase (e.g., pop-up retail, food trucks, social/educational events, kids activities, signage and VR experiences to learn about history and future development plans). •Compile comprehensive list of historic resources in the Diridon Area. Parks, Public Space, and Sustainability Solution Group – Ranking Exercise Results (2) 273 Pop-up Workshop Exercise Community members placed 49 dots on the board for Parks and Public Space strategies over the course of the five pop-up-workshops. The top two priorities from the Pop-up workshop dot exercise are to: “Include a central plaza next to the Station as a signature destination space (more than just a drop-off)” (22% of dots for this topic), and “Connect the Guadalupe River and Los Gatos Creek trail systems” (27% of dots). “Provide better pedestrian/bicycle connections between residents and existing parks and open spaces” also received a high share of the dots for this topic (20%). Community Meetings There was strong support for the Desired Outcomes under this topic at the Community Meetings held in September. Based on frequency of comments received, the most important issues were related to: • Connecting and maintaining the creek trails Top 9 Guiding Principles for Designing New Development •Design all streets as “Complete Streets” with multi-modal connections for bikes/pedestrians and traffic calming. •Restore and creatively re-use other historic resources. •Comprehensively integrate public art into design from the beginning into buildings, streets, and open spaces; use public art (temporary as well as permanent) and landscaping to draw people along. •Use “greenfingers” of parks open space as catalysts for new development. •Avoid creating “dead zones” of inactivity; fix scary, problematic spots. •Scale new development appropriately where it interfaces with existing development. •Use neighborhoods as testbeds for new ideas. •Ensure that new buildings provide more “eyes” on new and existing parks. •Integrate open spaces into places where people will (and do) live and work. Parks, Public Space, and Sustainability Solution Group – Ranking Exercise Results (3) 274 • Leveraging the Google development to daylight the Los Gatos Creek at Park Avenue • Protecting existing community resources (such as the Gardner Health Center) and adding new Community Centers and childcare facilities • Making recreational programs more affordable • Providing restrooms along creek trails Online Feedback Form About 530 people reacted to the Desired Outcomes for Public Spaces, Creeks, and Trails using the Online Feedback Form. Agreement for these outcomes ranged from 68% and 91% (based on selecting “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”). This topic, along with Transportation, had the highest levels of agreement. The outcome with the highest agreement (and the second highest across all topic areas) was: “Parks, open space, plazas, and trails in the Diridon Station Area are safe, visible, well-maintained, and accessible to everyone.” Next was “The area has a range of public space types at a variety of scales (e.g., pocket parks, green roofs, plazas, community gardens, etc.) and opportunities for accessing nature” (87%). “New development faces creeks and other open spaces” had the lowest level of agreement (68%), but also a high share of “Neutral” responses (26%). Refer to the end of this chapter for a summary of the Online Feedback Form results across topics and to the Appendix for the full results. Conclusion Overall there is general agreement between SAAG members and between the SAAG and the public that parks, trails and open spaces should be a critical element of any revitalization efforts. The SAAG’s main concern is about improving the quality of existing spaces and the connectivity between parks and trails. However, in general, the general public tended to make more comments about building new public spaces, safety, and environmentally-friendly design from the public compared to the SAAG. 275 Transportation and Transit This section focuses on the transportation system as a whole, including transit services in the Diridon Station Area. There is extensive overlap between this topic and Land Use, Parking, and Public Spaces (including Trails). Desired Outcomes The following outcomes mainly apply to development within and surrounding the Diridon Station Area. There are pedestrian-friendly streets with small blocks, safe crossings, wide sidewalks, and amenities such as street trees and benches. This reflects the general desire to make the area more walkable and promote an active street life. Several members of the public want to see car-free zones without parking lots and other accommodations for gas-powered vehicles. Several people at the Community Meetings suggested that this should include “bike- and scooter-friendly” as well, using facilities like bike lanes and separated cycle tracks. There are direct street, trail, and bike connections to Diridon Station, Downtown, adjacent neighborhoods, and the regional network – with emphasis on improved east-west links. Connectivity was a common theme in discussions about necessary improvements to the Diridon Station Area, recognizing that the existing gaps in the networks and that the railroad tracks, SR 87 freeway, and creeks serve as barriers to east-west transportation. There should be emphasis on the first and last mile connections to the station to increase transit ridership. The bicycle network should include safe bike paths, interconnected trails, and abundant bike parking. The safety of major intersections is improved, especially the Bird Ave/280 interchange, in support of the traffic safety initiative. While there was general desire for enhancing the safety of intersections for pedestrians, the emphasis was on safe walking routes for children and enhancing the I-280 interchange. 276 Traffic congestion is minimized during construction and on adjacent residential streets. Many members of the public are concerned about existing traffic congestion and want it to get better and not worse. Among SAAG members, there is both the desire to reduce delay at intersections and the recognition that traffic congestion encourages the use of other modes of travel. They discussed the pros and cons of managing streets for vehicle flow and speed. Managing traffic during construction is important for minimizing disturbance to residents and businesses and to ensure emergency access. Maintaining pedestrian safety during construction is also important to residents. The Diridon Station Area greatly exceeds citywide targets for reduced car travel. The City of San Jose General Plan sets an ambitious target for shifting travel patterns in favor of walking, biking, and transit - away from automobile use - for environmental, social, and economic purposes. In order to achieve this citywide goal by 2040 and counteract the parts of the city where this mode shift will be more difficult to attain, the Diridon Station Area must go well beyond the citywide target. As an overarching principle, it should be easy and affordable for people to get to and from the Diridon Station area. The transit system is high quality, affordable, convenient, and frequent. This reflects existing challenges related to the quality and price of transit services. Improvements are needed to the transit system to successfully manage traffic and parking demand and to achieve the vision for a vibrant, walkable area. Some community members specifically want to see Google and other companies subsidize public transit use for all workers and to rely on public transit rather than private shuttles. Funding for long-term operations and maintenance will be important for achieving the high quality aspiration overtime. The capacity of the transit system is designed for future growth, and the transportation system as a whole is flexible and adaptable. Infrastructure, including improvements to Diridon Station, should accommodate the substantial increase in passengers projected for the future. This also reflects the commonly expressed need to consider and accommodate new and emerging transportation technologies. 277 Transit infrastructure is designed to avoid impacts to homes, parks, businesses, and community facilities. This refers mainly to the design of the High Speed Rail system through the Diridon Station Area and adjacent neighborhood to the south. Previous planning documents have shown alignments and designs that would directly impact existing uses, and residents have been working with High Speed Rail to minimize these construction impacts. There are also concerns about the safety of at-grade crossings and the operational effects of increased train frequency through the neighborhoods. SAAG members representing the neighborhoods most affected by the high speed rail project have advocated for an alignment that is elevated above the freeway interchange to avoid the construction and operational impacts on residential areas. The various modes of transit that intersect at Diridon Station are inter-connected. Community members want the station to have short, seamless, and well-timed transfers between transit services (Caltrain, BART, High Speed Rail, light rail, and buses) in order to be user-friendly, promote transit use, and manage passenger flows. People want to have integrated transit passes that promote smooth transfers between services. Bus routes and the light rail system provide direct connections to Diridon Station from the airport and neighborhoods throughout the city, including South San Jose and Berryessa. It was common to hear from community members living in north or east San José that the light rail system does not provide a direct route to Diridon Station, making it impractical to take transit to arena events or to link to commuter transit options. More direct routes with lower travel times would increase the chances of riding transit to access the Diridon Station Area. A seamless connection to the airport and its long-term parking facilities would help manage parking demand in Diridon. Pop-up Workshop Exercise Community members placed 48 dots on the board for Transportation and Transit strategies over the course of the five pop-up-workshops. The top priority from the Pop-up workshop dot exercise was: “Provide more bike and pedestrian facilities, including trails, to enhance connectivity with Downtown and adjacent neighborhoods” (31% of the dots for this topic). Next highest were: “Reduce traffic congestion and delay at intersections” and “Consider emerging and future 278 transportation modes (e.g., autonomous vehicles, electric scooters,” which each got 17% of the dots. Community Meetings Based on frequency of comments received at the Community Meetings held in September, the most important issues and Desired Outcomes were related to: • Traffic impacts and congestion • Transit, including the affordability, long-term funding for operations and maintenance, and encouraging Google to rely on public services rather than its own private shuttles • Emphasizing access and safety for bicyclists and scooters, in addition to pedestrians • Connection between Diridon and the airport Online Feedback Form About 520 people reacted to the Desired Outcomes for Transportation and Transit using the Online Feedback Form. Agreement for these outcomes ranged from 71% and 92% (based on selecting “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”), making this the topic area with the most agreement. The outcome with the highest level of agreement across all Desired Outcomes, not just for this topic, was “There are pedestrian-friendly streets with small blocks, safe crossings, wide sidewalks, and amenities such as street trees and benches.” The outcomes with the next highest levels of agreement include: “There are direct street, trail, and bike connections to Diridon Station, Downtown, adjacent neighborhoods, and the regional network – with emphasis on improved east-west links” (91%) and “The various modes of transit that intersect at Diridon Station are inter-connected” (90%). Of the 1,092 write-in comments through the Online Feedback Form, about 20% were related to improving transit, providing more pedestrian/bike facilities, and/or reducing parking. This was the most common focus of the write-in comments. In addition, about 9 percent were related to concerns about increasing traffic congestion and/or insufficient parking. Refer to the end of this chapter for a summary of the Online Feedback Form results across topics and to the Appendix for the full results. 279 Conclusion The SAAG generally sees the project as an opportunity to improve existing problem areas and advance city goals for alternative modes of transportation. The public input generally aligned with the SAAG’s desire to take advantage of the Station Area as a transit hub to reduce car travel and promote a walkable neighborhood. The Desired Outcomes reflect the shared concern among the SAAG and general public about the quality of transit service, with emphasis on first and last mile connections to the station and links between modes. The public, however, was more likely to raise traffic congestion. The Desired Outcomes in bold indicate the top outcomes, based on responses to the Online Feedback Form (highest level of agreement and/or lowest level of disagreement). 280 Environmental Sustainability This section addresses natural resources, green building, and environmental impacts. There is overlap between this topic and Land Use, Design, Public Spaces, Creeks, and Trails. For example, a previous Desired Outcome is to enhance riparian habitat. Desired Outcomes The following outcomes mainly apply to development within the Diridon Station Area. New development minimizes adverse environmental impacts, including contributions to global climate change. The Audubon Society, Sierra Club, and California Native Plant Society, among other community members, called for reducing vehicle emissions, protecting environmental resources, and integrating nature into the new development. New development serves as a model for eco-district planning, design, and implementation. Community members suggested many ways to design the entire neighborhood for sustainability, such as by providing district-level utility systems (e.g., energy), green infrastructure (e.g., stormwater management), and urban agriculture. It should serve as template for other projects of this size and for areas like Diridon. Google has demonstrated a commitment to environmental sustainability in Mt. View, and this is an important opportunity for San José. New development adheres to pillars and strategies (see figure below) and LEED Gold or Platinum standards for green building. There are high expectations for a Google development to achieve a high level of environmental sustainability. This includes energy conservation, water re- use, use of permeable pavement and green materials, and other measures. Creeks and other natural resources are integrated early into projects, using principles of healthy ecosystem design. The intent is to ensure that the design of new development and infrastructure projects consider the opportunities and constraints presented by Guadalupe River and Los Gatos Creek, as important and defining aspects of the area. Design should minimize impacts on creek corridors and enhance habitat for wildlife and humans, such as through creek setbacks, native plant landscaping, 281 and bird-safe design. Integrating nature into the urban environment would benefit public health, in addition to the ecosystem. The Audubon Society and Sierra Club suggested that the Diridon Station Area Plan should incorporate the Urban Habitat Design Guidelines. Conclusion This section was added after the Draft Report was released for public review, in response to comments. There was strong agreement among the SAAG to more explicitly reflect goals for environmental sustainability. Some members of the public also want this topic to be a top consideration in the planning and design of new development in the Diridon Station Area. There is optimism that Google can be a leader in innovative green building and EcoDistrict planning. 282 This section summarizes the Online Feedback Form results (see Appendix for full results). Figure 3-2 shows the seven Desired Outcomes with the highest agreement/lowest disagreement and the seven with the lowest agreement/highest disagreement. The top seven outcomes fall within two topics area: Transportation/Transit and Parks, Public Space, and Trails. Most of the bottom outcomes fall under Housing and Displacement, with one under Parking and one under Jobs, Education, and Economic Development. 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Desired Outcomes with Highest Agreement/Lowest Disagreement Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree 283 There were 1,092 unique write-in comments to the open-ended comments. These comments reinforced the top Issues described at the beginning of this chapter and provide insight on the levels of agreement and disagreement for the Desired Outcomes. The frequency of comments by subtopic provide an indicator of the range of overall opinions held by community members. For example, of the write- in comments: 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Desired Outcomes with Lowest Agreement/Highest Disagreement Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree 284 • About 15 percent were related to the opportunity for revitalization of the Downtown/Diridon area (Issue #2). • About 14% were related to housing and displacement concerns (Issue #1). • About 9 percent included the word “homeless” or “homelessness” (Issues #1 and #8). • About 8 percent were related to safety (Issue #8). • About 8 percent were related to job opportunities and/or social equity (Issue #3). • About 5 percent directly expressed support for the potential Google development, while 1.6 percent explicitly stated opposition for the project. 285 4 Through the Engagement Process, community members identified a range of aspirations and concerns related to a potential Google development in the Diridon Station Area. The top issue is the fear of displacement from San José due to rising housing prices. The top opportunity is for the revitalization of the Diridon area and expansion of the Downtown. Other top issues and opportunities were related to social equity, job and educational opportunities, safety, homelessness, high speed rail impacts, and environmental sustainability. The effect on San José’s identity was an underlying theme of many comments, and expectations related to Google’s role and the possibility for “community benefits” were prominent discussion topics. Input was synthesized into “Desired Outcomes”, based on initial input, to collectively reflect the most frequent goals and aspirations expressed by community members. Together, the top Issues and Opportunities and the Desired Outcomes reflect the Key Themes of the civic engagement process. The Desired Outcomes for development in the Diridon Station Area are divided into six topics: 1. Housing and Displacement 2. Jobs, Education, and Economic Development 3. Land Use, Design, and Parking 4. Public Space, Creeks, and Trails 5. Transportation and Transit 6. Environmental Sustainability There are also Desired Outcomes for how any extra resources generated by the Google project could be used at the citywide level to minimize impacts and maximize benefits related to Housing and Jobs. The community engagement phase conducted in September and October largely reinforced the Key Themes described in the first draft of this Report, although 286 reactions to the preliminary Desired Outcomes surfaced some specific disagreements and new ideas. For example, several comments pointed out the lack of environmental sustainability goals reflected in the outcomes, and this topic was since added to the Report. All other ideas not listed in the set of Desired Outcomes (Chapter 3), including specific actions and policies for achieving Desired Outcomes, are listed as Potential Solutions in the Appendix. As described in Chapter 1, Introduction, the input gathered through the engagement process has been and will continue to inform a variety of decisions related to the Diridon Station Area, including but not limited to agreements with Google; initial development concepts and design thinking; private development proposals by others; updates to the Diridon Station Area Plan and other applicable plans; and transit improvements and Diridon Station modifications. The input can also inform Citywide efforts. The three “buckets” under which the input may be considered is shown in Figure 4.1. The next steps in the Google project are described in Chapter 1 of this report. To summarize, City Council is tentatively scheduled to consider the MOU and PSA in on December 4, 2018. The development review process is anticipated to begin in 2019 and last at least two years, and construction could take another 10 years beyond project approval. Community engagement will continue throughout this process, including negotiations of a Development Agreement with a specific Community Benefits Plan. This could include regular updates and discussions with the Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG), among other engagement methods. Figure 4.1: How Input May be Used Current work efforts related specifically to the Downtown/Diridon area that have already drawn upon or could consider feedback in this report includes the Diridon Integrated Station Concept Plan (“Concept Plan”), Downtown Transportation Plan, and the Downtown Design Guidelines. The Concept Plan is a joint effort by the City of San José, VTA, Caltrain, and the California High Speed Rail Authority to collaboratively plan for a new, expanded intermodal station that 287 integrates existing and future transit services at Diridon. Work began fall 2018 and the initial phase is expected to be complete by summer 2019. The City is leading the public outreach and community engagement process for the Concept Plan, and intends to utilize the project website www.diridonsj.org as the primary venue for sharing information. Applicable citywide efforts may include affordable housing, anti-displacement policies, workforce development programs, climate change mitigation and adaption, civic innovation, and parks and trail projects, among other focus areas. For example, the City Council recently adopted a Housing Crisis Response Workplan and Affordable Housing Investment Plan, which together outline strategies for reaching housing production goals. The City is also participating in PolicyLink’s “All-In Cities Anti-Displacement Network” and Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s “Committee to House the Bay Area” (CASA) to learn from peers and understand best practices. Information from both of these workgroups is anticipated to inform the development of an anti-displacement strategy for San José. The creation of the City’s anti-displacement strategy and implementation of equitable housing development strategies will consider and build upon the input received through the civic engagement process. Many of the SAAG members and community members that have participated in the process have also been active in advocating for housing and anti-displacement strategies in other City forums. The City will continue to engage these residents, leaders, and organizations as it advances strategies to address the housing crisis. In the coming years, the City intends to convene the Diridon Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG) on an as-needed basis and to conduct other community engagement activities. The City greatly values the time, energy, and thoughtful input from the SAAG and other community members. As the Google project, Downtown planning, Diridon Station improvements, and citywide efforts for equitable and sustainable development evolve, the San José community will continue to have an important voice in the process. 288 SSF Facilitation of Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities | PLAN to PLACE Scope + Fee www.plantoplace.com SSF FACILITATION SEVICES SCOPE AND FEE (updated 8.13.24) The following scope of work has been updated per the City’s request to include additional activities, building off of the approach in the RFP for Facilitation Services for Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities. Task 1 - Project Kick-Off and Management This task will include an initial kick-off meeting with the project team and regular team check-ins throughout the duration of the project to assess the efficacy of our outreach and course correct as needed. Rachael Sharkland will be the point of contact and conduit between the Plan to Place team and the City, to review strategy, timeline and deliverables. The Plan to Place team will participate in a kick- off meeting to: • Discuss the project goals, key issues, and project milestones; • Confirm expectations for work products and refine the scope of work and budget as necessary; and • Discuss project roles and responsibilities. Task 2 – Community Engagement Work Plan Plan to Place will collaborate with City staff to prepare a dynamic engagement strategy to be refined throughout the course of the project. This will be a living, shared resource that all members of the team will have access to update throughout the project. The engagement strategy will be designed to: • Outline goals and objectives for facilitating community conversations; • Confirm schedule, format, and resources for all engagement activities through the shared resource; • Identify target demographic and interest groups, methods of multilingual communication (including Spanish, Tagalog, and Simplified Chinese) and engagement with hard-to-reach groups and special needs populations, and metrics to analyze progress and effectiveness; • Articulate a range of communication strategies to effectively reach target segments of the community; • Confirm messaging and collateral for the promotion of events and online questionnaires; • Specify outreach tools including social media outlets to reach specific audiences in addition to traditional mailing and survey tools; • Complete engagement analytics throughout the process to assess whether our engagement approach is reaching target communities; and • Confirm coordination, facilitation and roles and responsibilities. 289 SSF Facilitation of Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities | PLAN to PLACE Scope + Fee www.plantoplace.com Task 3 - Develop Outreach Materials Plan to Place will prepare messaging for City staff’s review to effectively communicate the background and intention of the effort to re-purpose the decommissioned MSB and West Orange Library. It will be important to articulate that this is a discrete effort and unique opportunity for residents to create a shared vision for enhancing valuable community resources. Consistent and identifiable messaging will be used across promotional and outreach materials for in-person and online engagement, including: • Outreach/Promotional collateral – Using the City’s style guide and document templates, Plan to Place will provide language and graphics for electronic formats (media release, e-blast notice, City newsletter, and social media postings). • Fact Sheets/FAQs - In an effort to set accurate expectations and understanding of this effort, Plan to Place will collaborate with the City team through an iterative process to prepare project messaging templates (Fact Sheets or FAQs) that will continue to evolve throughout the duration of the project. This important collateral will be critical in helping identify the overall project objectives and helping provide answers to common questions, how information will be disseminated and how the input gathered will be used to inform the process. These materials will help emphasize the importance of input from diverse perspectives. It is anticipated that City staff and Plan to Place will co-create the language for these documents, and Plan to Place will maintain, organize and simplify the language to ensure the messaging is up to date and user-friendly. • Online feedback form (see task 4.4) – Plan to Place will collaborate with the City to craft one online feedback form to supplement the community conversations and site tours and create parity for residents and community members unable to attend in-person events. Task 4 - Organize And Facilitate Community Conversations Task 4.1. Community Open Houses (2) Plan to Place will collaborate with City staff to hold up to two in-person community-wide open houses to provide community members and decision makers a forum to learn about and share input on the future of the MSB and West Orange Library, and related planning process. It is anticipated that live polling and interactive exercises that encourage storytelling and participatory decision-making will be used to garner feedback. We will coordinate simultaneous interpretation for both open houses. For each open house, Plan to Place will prepare outreach materials, content, and engagement activities for City staff’s review. Anticipated roles and responsibilities for staff include: • Plan to Place will work with City staff to identify the overall purpose, approach, objective, target audience and anticipated outcome of each open house. • Plan to Place will assist with preparation of outreach materials including messaging for email blasts and social media posts, and preparation of postcards or flyers using the templates prepared in previous tasks. 290 SSF Facilitation of Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities | PLAN to PLACE Scope + Fee www.plantoplace.com • Plan to Place will prepare public-facing agendas, and internally annotated agendas as a resource to get to and through each event. • Plan to Place will prepare content for each workshop for City staff’s review. • Plan to Place will lead facilitation at each open house and prepare and manage interactive in-meeting activities to foster input, and ensure meetings are engaging and accessible. • City staff will lead meeting logistics to confirm meeting space and a/v capabilities. • City staff will coordinate childcare and refreshments for each meeting. • Plan to Place will coordinate with translation services to translate material and provide live interpretation as needed in Spanish, Tagalog and simplified Chinese. Those services will be billed separately directly to the City outside of Plan to Places budget. • Plan to Place will provide meeting summaries after each open house. Task 4.2. Hosted Tours of MSB and West Orange Library (2) City staff to prepare for tours of the Municipal Services Building and the West Orange Library and one member of Plan to Place will attend the two tours that will occur before on separate days from the Community Open Houses, to gather input that that will help inform the Open Houses. Anticipated roles and responsibilities: • City staff to plan and facilitate two walking tours on the day of each of the two Community Open Houses. • Plan to Place to attend the walking tours to observe conversations and take notes to be incorporated into the Summary Report. Task 4.3. Additional Meetings – Focus Group Meetings (8) Plan to Place will help coordinate and facilitate up to eight focus group meetings with community members. Plan to Place will work with City staff to identify meeting participants and to prepare agendas and discussion prompts for each meeting. It is anticipated that the initial set of 4 meetings will be 50-min virtual meetings leaders of community groups including those that represent sub-population that are not always equitably included in the public planning process, to ensure all perspectives are represented. An additional up to 4 meetings will be reserved for focus group discussions with community groups or pop-up events, ideally during existing meetings or events that are well attended, to share information about the process and gather valued input from diverse perspectives. Anticipated roles and responsibilities: • Plan to Place will team with City staff to identify meeting participants, draft meeting agendas and content, and coordinate and schedule the meetings. This will include drafting an email to participants and tracking RSVPs. 291 SSF Facilitation of Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities | PLAN to PLACE Scope + Fee www.plantoplace.com • City staff will lead meeting logistics (physical location set up) and Plan to Place will assist with meeting logistics as needed, including virtual platform settings. • Plan to Place will co-facilitate meetings. • Plan to Place will coordinate with translation services to translate material and provide live interpretation as needed in Spanish, Tagalog and simplified Chinese. Those services will be billed separately directly to the City, outside of Plan to Place’s budget. • Plan to Place will summarize the key takeaways from each meeting. Task 4.4. Online Feedback Form (1) Plan to Place will prepare content for an online feedback form for City staff’s review. The feedback form will capture demographic information and responses to prompts similar to those asked in the in-person community open houses to provide an equitable opportunity for input. The online feedback forms will be concise and accessible on a computer or mobile device and translated in Spanish, Tagalog and simplified Chinese, through a budget set aside outside of Plan to Place’s budget. Plan to Place will coordinate the translation of the feedback forms through translation services that will be billed separately. Plan to Place will summarize the results into a key themes memo supported by summary graphics and direct quotes. The feedback forms are anticipated to be administered and analyzed through Google Forms, or an equivalent software. Task 5 - Community Engagement Summary Report Plan to Place will prepare a final summary report to analyze and synthesize community input received to provide the foundation for future decision making about the potential redevelopment of the MSB and West Orange Library. Plan to Place will also prepare a short presentation of the results and present that at a City Council meeting. The summary report will be visually compelling and include graphics about recommended next steps for redevelopment. Plan to Place Direct Costs / Expenses An expense budget has been allocated for Plan to Place for travel and material expenses related to the two workshops. Additional budget of up to $2,000 has been set aside to purchase gift certificates for CBO’s support throughout the process. Additional Expenses – City to Budget outside of Plan to Place contract It is anticipated that City staff will cover expenses related to Child Care, Refreshments, and Translation and Interpretation Services and printing of materials for the Open House and additional meetings, through a budget outside of the contract with Plan to Place. 292 SSF Facilitation of Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities | PLAN to PLACE Scope + Fee www.plantoplace.com BUDGET 293 294 295 Facilitation Services for Community Discussion of Decommissioned City Facilities, and Consideration of Potential Alternatives City Council Meeting August 28, 2024 Government Code Section 54957.S SB 343 Agenda Item: Item #9 08/28/2024 REG CC 296 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends City Council adopt a resolution approving a Consulting Services Agreement with Plan to Place, LLC based on their qualifications and experience. 297 Decommissioned Facilities MSB WOL 298 Council Guidance •Presented to Council on June 26, 2024 •Council directed staff to: •Move forward with inclusive community engagement process •Include additional meetings in the Scope of Work, in addition to the two Community Open Houses •Allow for more time for community input 299 Selection Process • Request for Proposals issued May 28, 2024 (due June 28). • City received 8 proposals. • Panel of four staff reviewed and scored the proposals. • Three firms were invited to interview. •Panel of three staff conducted the interviews. 300 Recommended Firm Staff recommends Plan to Place, LLC based on: •Their expertise in facilitating sensitive community conversations •Their backgrounds in community engagement, urban design, landscape architecture, and the creative arts •Feedback from references 301 Proposed Scope of Work •Community Open Houses (2) •Hosted Tours of the MSB and West Orange Library (2) •Focus Group Meetings & Pop-up Events (8) •Engagement with Community-Based Organizations •Online Comment Form •Outreach Materials •Final Report and Presentation to City Council •Total Hours: 330+ hours,Total Budget: $79,920 302 Proposed Timeline Community Summary Report Presentation to Council Early 2025 Community Engagement Throughout Fall 2024 Project Kick-off September 2024 303 Alternatives •Alternative 1 – Reduced scope, or check-in halfway through •Alternative 2 – Eliminate outreach effort and remove the Municipal Services Building as a Housing Opportunity Site •Alternative 3 - Proceed with community engagement and remove the Municipal Services Building as a Housing Opportunity Site 304 Process to Remove MSB from the City's Certified Housing Element 1.Identify suitable alternative sites (in high-resource areas with sufficient capacity to create affordable housing) 2.Consider and approve a Housing Element Amendment 3.Submit Amendment to State HCD for review and approval/denial 4.If approved, and if necessary, amend the General Plan and rezone alternative sites ❖ This would not resolve the issue of what happens to the Municipal Services Building next; it simply removes it from the Housing Element. 305 Next Steps Staff recommends City Council adopt a resolution approving a Consulting Services Agreement with Plan to Place, LLC based on their qualifications and experience. Or provide alternative direction. 306 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-783 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:9a. Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consulting Services Agreement between the City of South San Francisco and Plan to Place,LLC for Facilitation Services for Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities in an amount not to exceed $79,920 WHEREAS,the Municipal Services Building and the West Orange Library are two City-owned facilities that have been decommissioned and the community-serving uses replaced by the Library |Parks &Recreation Center in October 2023; and WHEREAS,in March 2024,the City released a Request for Proposals for a lessee to operate and provide preschool and/or other community services at the former West Orange Library building;and no response was received by the May 2024 deadline.; and WHEREAS,over the past year,the City has received significant public comment regarding the future use of the City-owned Municipal Services Building; and WHEREAS,Council has directed staff to facilitate a community engagement effort to hear from the community regarding the desired future use of the Municipal Services Building and West Orange Library sites; and WHEREAS,the City released a Request for Proposals for Facilitation Services for Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities and received eight qualified responses to the RFP and,upon evaluation by a proposal review panel and an interview panel,and upon negotiation,City staff recommends selecting Plan to Place, LLC for the work and entering 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 Plan to Place,LLC in an amount not to exceed $79,920 for the Facilitation Services for Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities,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 Plan to Place,LLC a signed contract and all other necessary documents,subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™307 File #:24-783 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:9a. 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 8/23/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™308 Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] DATE City of South San Francisco and _______________ Page 1 of 16 CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND NAME OF CONSULTANTS THIS AGREEMENT for consulting services is made by and between the City of South San _______________ as of _______________ 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 _______________, 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 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 Section 2. COMPENSATION. City hereby agrees to pay Consultant a sum not to exceed ____________________ proposal, for services to be performed and reimbursable costs incurred under this Agreement. In the event Exhibit A, 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 309 Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] DATE City of South San Francisco and _______________ Page 2 of 16 Consultant for services rendered 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 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; 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; 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. 310 Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] DATE City of South San Francisco and _______________ 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 ( 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 C 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. 311 Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] DATE City of South San Francisco and _______________ 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 locality within the state where the work hereby contemplates to be performed as 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 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 312 Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] DATE City of South San Francisco and _______________ 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 Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, maintain 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 313 Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] DATE City of South San Francisco and _______________ 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 -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. 314 Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] DATE City of South San Francisco and _______________ 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 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 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, 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. 315 Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] DATE City of South San Francisco and _______________ 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 insurance policy includes a self-insured retention that 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- 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 . 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 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 a. Obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such insurance from any sums due under the Agreement; 316 Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] DATE City of South San Francisco and _______________ 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. 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 317 Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] DATE City of South San Francisco and _______________ 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 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. 318 Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] DATE City of South San Francisco and _______________ 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 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 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 319 Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] DATE City of South San Francisco and _______________ 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 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 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 320 Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] DATE City of South San Francisco and _______________ 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 "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 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 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. 321 Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] DATE City of South San Francisco and _______________ 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 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 ___________________________ 322 Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] DATE City of South San Francisco and _______________ Page 15 of 16 ___________________________ ___________________________ ___________________________ 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. 323 Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:11.14.2016] DATE City of South San Francisco and _______________ Page 16 of 16 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO Consultants ____________________________ _____________________________________ City Manager NAME: TITLE: Attest: _____________________________ City Clerk Approved as to Form: ____________________________ City Attorney 2729962.1 324 Exhibit A. Scope of Work The following is the scope of work for Facilitation Services for Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities. Task 1 - Project Kick-Off and Management This task will include an initial kick-off meeting with the project team and regular team check -ins throughout the duration of the project to assess the efficacy of our outreach and course correct as needed. Rachael Sharkland will be the point of contact and conduit between the Plan to Place team and the City, to review strategy, timeline and deliverables. The Plan to Place team will participate in a kick-off meeting to: • Discuss the project goals, key issues, and project milestones; • Conflrm expectations for work products and reflne the scope of work and budget as necessary; and • Discuss project roles and responsibilities. Task 2 – Community Engagement Work Plan Plan to Place will collaborate with City staff to prepare a dynamic engagement strategy to be reflned throughout the course of the project. This will be a living, shared resource that all members of the team will have access to update throughout the project. The engagement strategy will be designed to: • Outline goals and objectives for facilitating community conversations; • Conflrm schedule, format, and resources for all engagement activities through the shared resource; • Identify target demographic and interest groups, methods of multilingual communication (including Spanish, Tagalog, and Simplifled Chinese) and engagement with hard -to-reach groups and special needs populations, and metrics to analyze progress and effectiveness; • Articulate a range of communication strategies to effectively reach target segments of the community; • Conflrm messaging and collateral for the promotion of events and online questionnaires; • Specify outreach tools including social media outlets to reach speciflc audiences in addition to traditional mailing and survey tools; • Complete engagement analytics throughout the process to assess whether our engagement approach is reaching target communities; and • Conflrm coordination, facilitation and roles and responsibilities. Task 3 - Develop Outreach Materials Plan to Place will prepare messaging for City staff’s review to effectively communicate the background and intention of the effort to re-purpose the decommissioned MSB and West Orange Library. It will be important to articulate that this is a discrete effort and unique opportunity for residents to create a shared vision for enhancing valuable community resources. Consistent and identiflable messaging will be used across promotional and outreach materials for in- person and online engagement, including: • Outreach/Promotional collateral – Using the City’s style guide and document templates, Plan to Place will provide language and graphics for electronic formats (media release, e-blast notice, City newsletter, and social media postings). 325 • Fact Sheets/FAQs - In an effort to set accurate expectations and understanding of this effort, Plan to Place will collaborate with the City team through an iterative process to prepare project messaging templates (Fact Sheets or FAQs) that will continue to evolve throughout the duration of the project. This important collateral will be critical in helping identify the overall project objectives and helping provide answers to common questions, how information will be disseminated and how the input gathered will be used to inform the process. These materials will help emphasize the importance of input from diverse perspectives. It is anticipated that City staff and Plan to Place will co-create the language for these documents, and Plan to Place will maintain, organize and simplify the language to ensure the messaging is up to date and user-friendly. • Online feedback form (see task 4.4) – Plan to Place will collaborate with the City to craft one online feedback form to supplement the community conversations and site tours and create parity for residents and community members unable to attend in -person events. Task 4 - Organize And Facilitate Community Conversations Task 4.1. Community Open Houses (2) Plan to Place will collaborate with City staff to hold up to two in-person community-wide open houses to provide community members and decision makers a forum to learn about and share input on the future of the MSB and West Orange Library, and related planning process. It is anticipated that live polling and interactive exercises that encourage storytelling and participatory decision-making will be used to garner feedback. We will coordinate simultaneous interpretation for both open houses. For each open house, Plan to Place will prepare outreach materials, content, and engagement activities for City staff’s review. Anticipated roles and responsibilities for staff include: • Plan to Place will work with City staff to identify the overall purpose, approach, objective, target audience and anticipated outcome of each open house. • Plan to Place will assist with preparation of outreach materials including messaging for email blasts and social media posts, and preparation of postcards or fiyers using the templates prepared in previous tasks. • Plan to Place will prepare public-facing agendas, and internally annotated agendas as a resource to get to and through each event. • Plan to Place will prepare content for each workshop for City staff’s review. • Plan to Place will lead facilitation at each open house and prepare and manage interactive in - meeting activities to foster input, and ensure meetings are engaging and accessible. • City staff will lead meeting logistics to conflrm meeting space and a/v capabilities. • City staff will coordinate childcare and refreshments for each meeting. • Plan to Place will coordinate with translation services to translate material and provide live interpretation as needed in Spanish, Tagalog and simplifled Chinese. Those services will be billed separately directly to the City outside of Plan to Places budget. • Plan to Place will provide meeting summaries after each open house. Task 4.2. Hosted Tours of MSB and West Orange Library (2) City staff to prepare for tours of the Municipal Services Building and the West Orange Library and one member of Plan to Place will attend the two tours that will occur before on separate days from the Community Open Houses, to gather input that that will help inform the Open Houses. 326 Anticipated roles and responsibilities: • City staff to plan and facilitate two walking tours on the day of each of the two Community Open Houses. • Plan to Place to attend the walking tours to observe conversations and take notes to be incorporated into the Summary Report. Task 4.3. Additional Meetings – Focus Group Meetings (8) Plan to Place will help coordinate and facilitate up to eight focus group meetings with community members. Plan to Place will work with City staff to identify meeting participants and to prepare agendas and discussion prompts for each meeting. It is anticipated that the initial set of 4 meetings will be 50-min virtual meetings leaders of community groups including those that represent sub-population that are not always equitably included in the public planning process, to ensure all perspectives are represented. An additional up to 4 meetings will be reserved for focus group discussions with community groups or pop-up events, ideally during existing meetings or events that are well attended, to share information about the process and gather valued input from diverse perspectives. Anticipated roles and responsibilities: • Plan to Place will team with City staff to identify meeting participants, draft meeting agendas and content, and coordinate and schedule the meetings. This will include drafting an email to participants and tracking RSVPs. • City staff will lead meeting logistics (physical location set up) and Plan to Place will assist with meeting logistics as needed, including virtual platform settings. • Plan to Place will co -facilitate meetings. • Plan to Place will coordinate with translation services to translate material and provide live interpretation as needed in Spanish, Tagalog and simplifled Chinese. Those services will be billed separately directly to the City, outside of Plan to Place’s budget. • Plan to Place will summarize the key takeaways from each meeting. Task 4.4. Online Feedback Form (1) Plan to Place will prepare content for an online feedback form for City staff’s review. The feedback form will capture demographic information and responses to prompts similar to those asked in the in- person community open houses to provide an equitable opportunity for input. The online feedback forms will be concise and accessible on a computer or mobile device and translated in Spanish, Tagalog and simplifled Chinese, through a budget set aside outside of Plan to Place’s budget . Plan to Place will coordinate the translation of the feedback forms through translation services that will be billed separately. Plan to Place will summarize the results into a key themes memo supported by summary graphics and direct quotes. The feedback forms are anticipated to be administered and analyzed through Google Forms, or an equivalent software. 327 Task 5 - Community Engagement Summary Report Plan to Place will prepare a flnal summary report to analyze and synthesize community input received to provide the foundation for future decision making about the potential redevelopment of the MSB and West Orange Library. Plan to Place will also prepare a short presentation of the results and present that at a City Council meeting. The summary report will be visually compelling and include graphics about recommended next steps for redevelopment. Plan to Place Direct Costs / Expenses An expense budget has been allocated for Plan to Place for travel and material expenses related to the two workshops. Additional budget of up to $2,000 has been set aside to purchase gift certiflcates for CBO’s support throughout the process. Additional Expenses – City to Budget outside of Plan to Place contract It is anticipated that City staff will cover expenses related to Child Care, Refreshments, and Translation and Interpretation Services and printing of materials for the Open House and additional meetings, through a budget outside of the contract with Plan to Place. 328 Exhibit B. Compensation Schedule 329 Exhibit C. Insurance Certificates [To be inserted] 330 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-846 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:10. Report regarding an ordinance adding Chapter 8.78 (“Mooring Regulations”)to the South San Francisco Municipal Code to provide regulations for mooring in the City’s navigable waterways.(Rich Lee,Assistant City Manager; Kimia Mahallati, Assistant City Attorney) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council introduce an Ordinance adding Chapter 8.78 (“Mooring Regulations”)to the South San Francisco Municipal Code to provide regulations for mooring in the City’s navigable waterways, and waive further reading. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION As of July 9,2024,there were six vessels in the Oyster Point Cove area that were not connected to a slip at a dock and occupying public property,otherwise known as “anchor-outs.”The presence of anchor-out vessels in the Oyster Point area has been an ongoing issue for the City of South San Francisco.In addition to being a blight on the City’s navigable waterways,anchor-out vessels are a health and safety risk to water quality.The purpose of this addition to the South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC)is to provide the City with the authority to more effectively manage these vessels and ensure that the navigable waterways are used for recreational purposes and not for habitation,as well as to prevent the degradation in water quality and loss of aquatic habitat that may occur from unregulated anchor-outs. The City of Oakland,City of Sausalito,the Richardson Bay Regional Agency and the Counties of Contra Costa, Sacramento,and Solano have all adopted local ordinances in coordination with the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC)to supplement those in the State Boating and Waterway codes to establish rules around how long and where mariners can anchor,and to enable enforcement if the anchoring rules are not followed.The proposed SSFMC Chapter 8.78 largely follows the model of the City of Sausalito’s ordinance. The collaborative efforts in the North Bay and Delta regions provide for better enforcement and compliance than a singular agency adopting and enforcing a mooring ordinance,as non-compliant vessels would likely shift to agencies that do not have a mooring ordinance in place.Staff has apprised other agencies in San Mateo County of the City’s ordinance to encourage a regional approach in San Mateo County. Notable Ordinance Provisions Other than authorized vessels,SSFMC 8.78.070 states that vessels must have authorization from the Chief of Police to be in the harbor or marina areas for longer than 10 hours. Pursuant to SSFMC 8.78.110 (B),vessels left in City waters or beached for 72 or more consecutive hours may be moved or caused to be removed by the South San Francisco Police Department.The registered and legal owner of the vessel can secure the release of the vessel by providing proof of ownership and payment of the costs and expense of removal, impoundment, and/or storage of the vessel. Violation of SSFMC Chapter 8.78 is a misdemeanor and may be subject to a fine not to exceed $500 and/or imprisonment for up to 30 days. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™331 File #:24-846 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:10. FISCAL IMPACT The City was able to partner with the San Mateo County Harbor District (Harbor District)to remove three vessels that burned in November 2023.The Harbor District was able to utilize its funding through the California State Parks Division of Boating and Waterways (DBW)Surrendered and Abandoned Vessel Exchange (SAVE) grant. While adoption of this ordinance does not have a fiscal impact,the City will likely need to augment its operating budget in the future and enter into on-call agreements to remove and store vessels that are in violation of SSFMC Chapter 8.78 due to the limited amount of SAVE grant funds that the Harbor District is able to utilize in partnership with the City in the future. RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN SSFMC Chapter 8.78 promotes the Quality of Life element from the City’s Strategic Plan.Namely,to Build and Maintain a Sustainable City with high quality and accessible services,amenities and facilities for all residents. CONCLUSION It is recommended that the City Council introduce an Ordinance adding Chapter 8.78 to the South San Francisco Municipal Code to provide regulations for mooring in the City’s navigable waterways,and waive further reading. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™332 Mooring Regulations SSFMC Chapter 8.78 August 28, 2024 333 Background/TimelineBackground/Timeline 334 September 2023 3 335 November 2023 4 336 November 2023 5 337 November 2023 6 338 November 2023 7 339 February 2024 8 340 June 2024 9 341 July 2024 10 342 Mooring RegulationsMooring Regulations 343 8.78.020 Definitions 12 (b) City Waters – all navigable waterways of South San Francisco, including, but not limited to Oyster Point: 344 8.78.020 Definitions 13 (d) Marine debris: A vessel (or part of a vessel) that is unseaworthy/not unreasonably fit or capable of being made fit to be used as a means of transportation by water. 345 8.78.030 Marine debris 14 (d) Marine debris may be removed, destroyed, and disposed of in accordance with California Harbors and Navigation Code Sections 550 through 552. 346 8.78.040 Public nuisance 15 Public nuisance for any person owning, leasing, occupying, or in possession of any vessel in City waters: •Constitutes serious threat to public health & safety •Dangerous condition that is detrimental to public health, safety, or welfare •Any condition in violation of City’s building code that would constitute substandard housing •Discharge of refuse •Any condition that violates the City’s fire code 347 8.78.060 Waters of Oyster Point declared open water area 16 Waters of Oyster Point are for active recreational boating. Not for building, constructing, maintaining, or mooring. 348 8.78.070 Ten-hour limitation 17 Other than permitted vessels in the harbor and marina, no person may moor or beach a vessel in City waters for more than 10 hours without written permission of the Chief of Police. 349 8.78.110 Penalty for violation 18 Misdemeanor Fine not exceeding $500 and/or imprisonment for not more than 30 days. SSFPD may remove vessel left in City waters or beach for 72 ore more consecutive hours 350 Mooring Regulations City of South San Francisco THANK YOU 351 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-850 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:10a. Ordinance adding Chapter 8.78 (“Mooring Regulations”) to the South San Francisco Municipal Code to provide regulations for mooring in the City’s navigable waterways. WHEREAS, the Oyster Point Cove area is a unique and valuable scenic and natural resource that provides an environment for a wide range of aquatic and wildlife species; and WHEREAS, protecting the City’s water and waterfront through the removal of marine debris, elimination of refuse and toxic materials and abating public nuisances is essential to the health and well being of the public; and WHEREAS, its navigable waterways, including the Oyster Point area, have been subject to vessels that have been abandoned, beached, and anchored; and WHEREAS, these vessels are a blight to the City’s recreational area as well as detrimental to water quality health and safety; and WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco desires to more effectively manage and control its navigable waterways; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that adoption of this ordinance is necessary for the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, based on all of the information at the August 28, 2024 City Council meeting, both written and oral, including without limitation the public comment, staff reports, minutes, and other relevant materials (hereafter the “Record”), the City Council finds that under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061, addition of this Ordinance does not constitute a project under CEQA as it will not result in any direct or indirect physical change to the environment and therefore review under CEQA is not required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15060. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1.Findings The City Council of South San Francisco finds that all Recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2.Addition of Title 8, Chapter 78 The City Council hereby adds Title 8, Chapter 78 (“Mooring Regulations”) to the South San Francisco Municipal Code to read as follows: City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 1 of 5 powered by Legistar™352 File #:24-850 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:10a. CHAPTER 8.78 MOORING REGULATIONS 8.78.010 Purpose These regulations are enacted to ensure that mooring installation, use and maintenance does not impair the public’s health, safety and welfare; or does not result in degraded water quality, loss of aquatic habitat, or interference with navigation. 8.78.020 Definitions. For purposes of this chapter: (a) Beached. A vessel shall be deemed “beached” when such craft rests on the mud or other bottom or does not float freely at ordinary low tide. (b) “City waters” means any and all navigable waterways of South San Francisco, including but not limited to, all of the property owned and/or held in trust by the City covered by the waters of Oyster Point. (c) “Oyster Point” means the land abutting the waters of Oyster Point generally located in the area East of Oyster Point Boulevard, East of Gull Drive, Northeast of Forbes Boulevard, and North, South and East of Marina Boulevard. (d) “Marine debris” shall have the same meaning as set forth in California Harbors and Navigation Code Section 550(b) or successor statute as it currently exists or may hereinafter be amended. As of the date of adoption of this chapter, “marine debris” means “a Vessel or part of a Vessel, including a derelict, wreck, hulk, or part of any ship or other watercraft or dilapidated Vessel, that is unseaworthy and not reasonably fit or capable of being made fit to be used as a means of transportation by water.” (e) “Moor” means the fixing of a vessel in one location temporarily or permanently by mooring, anchoring, grounding, or any other means. (f) “Marina facilities” means the Oyster Point Marina and the Oyster Cove Marina and any successor facilities, in the event of a name change of the current Marina facilities. (g) “Person” shall be understood to include natural persons, firms, partnerships, associations, companies or corporations, singular and plural. (h) “Personal watercraft” shall have the same meaning as set forth in California Harbors and Navigation Code Section 651(s) or successor statute as it currently exists or may hereinafter be amended. As of the date of adoption of this chapter, “personal watercraft” means a vessel 13 feet in length or less, propelled by machinery, that is designed to be operated by a person sitting, standing, or kneeling on the vessel, rather than in the conventional manner of sitting or standing inside the vessel. Such vessels are commonly referred to as “jet skis.” (i) “Recreational vessel” shall have the same meaning as set forth in California Harbors and Navigation Code Section 651(t) or successor statute as it currently exists or may hereinafter be amended. As of the date of adoption of this chapter “recreational vessel” means a “Vessel used primarily for pleasure.” City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 2 of 5 powered by Legistar™353 File #:24-850 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:10a. (j) “Vessel” shall have the same meaning as set forth in California Harbors and Navigation Code Section 550(a) or successor statute as it currently exists or may hereinafter be amended. As of the date of the adoption of this chapter, “vessel” includes “every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation by water.” (k) “Water structure” includes structures of every kind and nature, not included in the definitions of vessel, which exist on, over or above the water, including, but not limited to, piers, wharves and docks. 8.78.030 Marine debris. Marine debris may be removed, destroyed and disposed of in accordance with California Harbors and Navigation Code Sections 550 through 552, or successor statutes. 8.78.040 Discharge of refuse. If moored for longer than 72 hours, a person must be required to provide receipt, proof of proper sewage disposal, or be subject to an inspection to confirm a holding tank is operable on the vessel. Absent the above, no person may discharge or permit to be discharged into City waters any refuse, treated or untreated sewage, petroleum or petroleum matter, paint, varnish, or any other noxious chemical or foreign matter of any kind. 8.78.050 Public nuisance. (a) Nuisance Defined. It is a public nuisance for any person owning, leasing, occupying or having charge or possession of any vessel in City waters to maintain the same in such a manner that any one or more of the conditions or activities described in the following subsections are found to exist: 1.The keeping, storage, depositing, or accumulation on, or attachment to, a vessel, barge, or object for an unreasonable period of any personal property, including but not limited to abandoned, wrecked, dismantled, or inoperative vessel(s) or equipment for a vessel, engine parts and/or equipment, appliances, furniture, containers, scrap metal, wood, building materials, junk, rubbish, or debris which constitutes a serious threat to public health, and/or safety. 2.Any dangerous condition that is detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. 3.Any condition in violation of the City’s building code that would constitute substandard housing as defined therein. 4.Discharge of refuse and/or other substances in violation of City Municipal Code § 14.08.210 “General discharge regulations.” 5.Any condition which violates the City’s fire code. (b) Nuisance Abatement. The nuisance shall be abated in accordance with the provisions set forth in Chapter 8.54 of the Municipal Code. 8.78.060 Waters of Oyster Point declared open water area. (a) The City Council declares that the waters of Oyster Point are and shall be an open water area acquired, City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 3 of 5 powered by Legistar™354 File #:24-850 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:10a. owned and maintained by the City for the purpose of providing active recreational boating and an unobstructed water vista for those using and enjoying the area of Oyster Point. The City Council finds that the use of the waters of Oyster Point for the purpose of mooring vessels and for the purpose of building, constructing, and/or maintaining other water structures without the consent of the City is inconsistent with the use of the area for active recreational boating, and for the purpose of providing an unobstructed water vista. (b) It is unlawful for any person to moor any vessel, or to place, build, construct or maintain any water structure, in the waters of Oyster Point. (c) It is unlawful for any person to go upon, board, occupy, reside, or dwell upon, or be present upon any vessel moored in the waters of Oyster Point, or any water structure placed, built or constructed in the waters of Oyster Point. 8.78.070 Ten-hour limitation. Other than those vessels lawfully permitted to be within the harbor and marina facilities, it is unlawful for any person to moor or beach any vessel in City waters in excess of 10 hours without first obtaining the written permission of the Chief of Police. 8.78.080 Beached vessels. Except in an emergency and except for those vessels lawfully docked in harbor and marina facilities, it shall be unlawful for the owner or person in control or custody of any vessel to beach in City waters. 8.78.090 Speed and safety. (a) Within City waters, due caution must be observed at all times. No person shall operate a vessel within City waters in a reckless or negligent manner, nor shall any person operate a vessel at a speed that will endanger life, limb, property, or wildlife. (b) No person shall use, operate or navigate any recreational vessel or any personal watercraft at a speed in excess of five miles per hour in any portion of the City waters within 500 feet of any shoreline. 8.78.100 Personal watercraft. No person shall permit or allow any personal watercraft to land at or depart from any shoreline in any portion of the City. 8.78.110 Penalty for violation. (a) Any person violating any of the provisions of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof may be punished by a fine not exceeding $500.00, or by imprisonment in the County Jail for a period not exceeding 30 days, or by both such fine and imprisonment. (b) In addition to the penalties imposed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section for violations of Municipal Code sections 8.78.060 and/or 8.78.070, the South San Francisco Police Department may remove or cause to be removed any vessel which has been left in City waters or beached for 72 or more consecutive hours. The registered and legal owner of the vessel so removed and impounded shall have the right to secure the release of such vessel upon furnishing proof of ownership and payment of the costs and expense of removal, impoundment and/or storage of the vessel. In addition, the provisions of the Boater’s Lien Law, currently set City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 4 of 5 powered by Legistar™355 File #:24-850 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:10a. forth in California Harbors and Navigation Code Section 500 et seq., shall apply. SECTION 3.Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed the Ordinance, and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of this Ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 4. Publication and Effective Date Pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 36933, the City Attorney shall prepare a summary of this Ordinance. At least five (5) days prior to the Council meeting at which this Ordinance is scheduled to be adopted, the City Clerk shall (1) publish the Summary, and (2) post in the City Clerk’s Office a certified copy of this Ordinance. Within fifteen (15) days after the adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall (1) publish the summary, and (2) post in the City Clerk’s Office a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 5 of 5 powered by Legistar™356 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-559 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:11. Report regarding an ordinance amending Chapters 8.72 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code to prohibit the retail sale of polystyrene. (Christina Fernandez, Deputy City Manager) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending Chapters 8.72 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code to prohibit the retail sale of polystyrene. BACKGROUND Polystyrene is a non-recyclable and non-biodegradable product.Due to the harmful impacts of polystyrene on our community’s health and well-being as well as its environmental impacts,the proposed amendment seeks to expand protections to prohibit the retail sale of polystyrene. On March 11,2020,the City Council approved an ordinance adding Chapter 8.72 to the South San Francisco Municipal Code Title 8 regulating the use of disposable food service ware by food facilities.This ordinance is modeled after the County of San Mateo’s Plastic Food Service Ware Ordinance.While city facilities and food vendors,including restaurants,are prohibited from using polystyrene,the retail sale of polystyrene is still allowed within the City of South San Francisco. DISCUSSION At the South San Francisco City Council retreat on January 27,2024,Council identified banning the retail sale of polystyrene as a 2024 Council Priority.As a result,staff analyzed existing polystyrene ordinances throughout the State of California with a special focus on other Bay Area cities. This initiative reflects an effort to balance the City’s goals of building a sustainable city and providing a healthy and safe environment for our residents while ensuring minimal impacts to our business community. The proposed amendment would ban the retail sale of expanded or extruded polystyrene foam products.These products are sometimes referred to as EPS or Styrofoam and may have a #6 resin code on the bottom and are white in color.This would include polystyrene foam containers including cups,bowls,plates,trays,cartons, and hinged or lidded containers (clamshells),and single use coolers and ice chests.Businesses that may be affected include cafeterias,caterers,convenience and liquor stores,mobile food vendors,restaurants,coffee shops,bars and pubs,retail stores,restaurant supply,party supply,drug stores,hardware stores,and supermarkets. Enforcement of this ordinance may include administrative penalties such as citations or fines on behalf of the City.Compliance plans may also be requested of facilities in violation of the ordinance,which would include information on corrective action that the facility would undertake to come into compliance.City staff recommends an effective date of January 1, 2025. Outreach City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™357 File #:24-559 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:11. A goal of the City was to ensure that economic impacts to all businesses,regardless of size,would be minimal. Staff began outreach efforts with a mass mailer sent to over 130 businesses informing them of the City’s consideration of a ban on the retail sale of polystyrene products.Mailers were provided in both English and Spanish.A copy of the mailer may be found as Attachment 1.Business owners were directed to contact the City Manager’s office with any questions or comments on the proposed ordinance. Additionally,the City’s promotors provided extensive outreach in the Downtown and Westborough commercial centers.Promotors provided over 50 businesses with flyers and reported any concerns to the City Manager’s Office. The City also provided a survey online,which was emailed to the business community through the Economic and Community Development email distribution list.A copy of the survey may be found as Attachment 2.The survey garnered 6 responses from a hotel,restaurant,plumbing contractor,catering service,and grocery store. Only the grocery store indicated selling polystyrene or foam products and indicated it would take 4-6 months to sell down their remaining stock.Additionally,the catering company indicated that although it did not sell any polystyrene products,it was not supportive of the ban because the cost of alternative products is cost prohibitive. As a result of door-to-door outreach,City staff learned that one retailer is currently selling polystyrene floral decorations.The store manager was informed that the sale of this product would be prohibited should the ordinance be approved.The manager was also informed that they would either transfer the product to another store or sell down this product by January 1, 2025. With the goal of impacting businesses as minimally as possible,City staff recommends providing an effective date of January 1,2025,to ensure that stores may have time to sell down their remaining product or may transfer the product to another store outside of city limits.Additionally,a transition period following this would focus on education and working with merchants on finding suitable alternatives. FISCAL IMPACT There is no known fiscal impact on the General Fund. RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN The prohibition of the retail sale of polystyrene meets the city’s strategic planning goal #2 -Building and Maintaining a Sustainable City. CONCLUSION It is recommended that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending Chapters 8.72 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code to prohibit the retail sale of polystyrene. Attachment: 1-Business Outreach Packet 2-Business Survey City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™358 Attachment 1 359 360 361 362 363 364 Polystyrene Foam August 28, 2024 South San Francisco City Council Meeting 365 Why 2 366 •33 California municipalities prohibit retail sale of polystyrene foam including: •San Francisco •Palo Alto •Los Gatos •Los Altos •Watsonville •Capitola •Richmond Retail Polystyrene Foam Bans 3 367 •Chapter 8.72 Use of Disposable Food Service Ware •Prohibits food facilities from providing polystyrene based disposable foodservice ware when providing prepared food •Accessories must be compostable when possible •Accessories available upon request Current Ordinance 4 368 •Amends ordinance to include the prohibition of retail sale of polystyrene based products •Products include food ware such as foam cups, plates, bowls, lids, trays •Effective Date of January 1, 2025 •Focus on education & outreach Proposed Amendment 5 369 •Direct mailers to over 130 businesses •Door-to-Door outreach in Downtown and Westborough business centers •Online Merchant Survey 6 Outreach 370 Polystyrene Foam City of South San Francisco City Council Meeting August 22, 2024 THANK YOU 371 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-562 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:11a. Ordinance amending Chapters 8.72 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code to prohibit the retail sale of polystyrene. WHEREAS, on March 11, 2020, the City Council approved an ordinance adding Chapter 8.72 to the South San Francisco Municipal Code Title 8 regulating the use of disposable food service ware by food facilities; and WHEREAS, Chapter 8.60 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code prohibits the use of certain disposable food service ware, including the prohibition of food vendors from dispensing prepared food to customers in disposable food service ware made from polystyrene; and WHEREAS, all city facilities, city sponsored events, and city permitted events are also prohibited from using disposable foodservice ware made from polystyrene. City franchises, contractors, and vendors doing business with the city are prohibited from using polystyrene in city facilities or on city projects within the city; and WHEREAS, while city facilities and food vendors, including restaurants, are prohibited from using polystyrene, the retail sale of polystyrene is allowed; and WHEREAS, businesses within the City were notified of this upcoming ban on July 12, 2024 via letter; and WHEREAS, introduction and adoption of this ordinance is not subject to review under CEQA, pursuant to the general exemption that CEQA only applies to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, and where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15061(b)(3)). A “significant effect on the environment” means a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15382). NOW, THEREFORE, THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO DO HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS. SECTION 1.Findings The People of South San Francisco find that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated into the Ordinance by this reference. SECTION 2.Amendment of Chapter 8.72 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 8.72.020 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code is hereby amended to add subsection (j), to read as follows (additions shown in underline text): (j) The retail sale of Polystyrene based products is prohibited by all vendors, including but not limited to cafeterias, caterers and fraternal clubs, convenience, liquor, and grocery stores, mobile food vendors, carts, food kiosks and stands, restaurants, coffee shops, bars, and pubs, retail stores, restaurant supply stores, party supply stores, drug stores, hardware stores, supermarket take out. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™372 File #:24-562 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:11a. SECTION 3.Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed the Ordinance, and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of this Ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 4.Publication and Effective Date.This ordinance shall be effective on January 1, 2025. Pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 36933, the City Attorney shall prepare a summary of this Ordinance. At least five (5) days prior to the Council meeting at which this Ordinance is scheduled to be adopted, the City Clerk shall (1) publish the Summary, and (2) post in the City Clerk’s Office a certified copy of this Ordinance. Within fifteen (15) days after the adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall (1) publish the summary, and (2) post in the City Clerk’s Office a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™373 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:24-673 Agenda Date:8/28/2024 Version:1 Item #:12. Report regarding the formation of the Eastern Neighborhoods CFD.(Christina Fernandez,Deputy City Manager;Jason Wong,Deputy Finance Director;Noah Christman,Lighthouse Public Affairs;Brian Forbath,Stradling Law;Susan Goodwin, Goodwin Consulting Services) City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/23/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™374 1 File #: 24-673 Agenda Date: 08/28/2024 Version: Item #: TITLE Report regarding the formation of the Eastern Neighborhoods Community Facilities District (Christina Fernandez, Deputy City Manager; Jason Wong, Deputy Finance Director; Noah Christman, Lighthouse Public Affairs; Daniel Jacobson, Fehr & Peers; Susan Goodwin, Goodwin Consulting Group; and Brian Forbath, Stradling,Yocca,Carlson,& Rauth) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended City Council receive an update on the Eastern Neighborhoods Community Facilities District (CFD) and continue the process with a subsequent City Council meeting adopting a Resolution of Intention, setting forth the City’s intention to establish a CFD. BACKGROUND The City of South San Francisco is proudly known as the Industrial City and the Birthplace of Biotechnology. Both uses have intensified over the years with the East of 101 as an economic hub in San Mateo County. Land uses range from life science and biotechnology to light industrial manufacturing and warehousing. Despite the variety of uses, the future success of this economic engine requires modernization and investment in transportation infrastructure to remain economically competitive. In 2019, the City began efforts to improve and modernize transportation infrastructure East of Highway 101 through the creation of the East of 101 CFD. Despite having sufficient property owner support, the COVID-19 pandemic created economic uncertainty for all stakeholders. Thus, these efforts were put on hold with the intention of restarting efforts post-pandemic. In 2022, the City participated in the Oyster Point Mobility Vision Plan, an employer led effort by Oyster Point property owners. This effort provided property owners the opportunity to give their feedback on potential transportation improvements East of Highway 101. These meetings provided the City the opportunity to hear directly from Oyster Point property owners on their transportation needs. These meetings recommended with the City’s transportation master plans laid the groundwork for a new iteration of a Community Facilities District renamed the Eastern Neighborhoods Community Facilities District. The need for infrastructure improvements East of 101 remains as it did in 2019. At the time, the City anticipated employment growth of 55,000 workers by 2040, a near doubling of employment growth. Despite a global pandemic, the City’s General Plan now estimates a near tripling of employment growth of 101,000 workers East of 101 by 2040. Existing infrastructure is insufficient to handle this growth as it was built for lower intensity industrial uses. The private sector has expressed a desire to modernize streets to move people safely and efficiently, providing world-class active transportation and transit infrastructure. 375 2 Recommended Traffic and Transit Solutions The Eastern Neighborhoods CFD (CFD) is made up of projects supported by plans already adopted by the City including the General Plan, Active South City, and Mobility 20/20. The CFD priority list includes feedback received from the Oyster Point Mobility Steering Committee. Modifications were also made in response to stakeholder feedback received during an extensive outreach process. The CFD takes a holistic approach to address the needs of everyone traveling in the East of 101 Area – including walking, biking, transit, auto, and freight. A key goal of the CFD is to improve safety and efficiency for all transportation modes. One example of this is the creation of transit only lanes that separates commuter shuttles and SamTrans buses from traffic congestion. Another priority goal is for the CFD to benefit everyone, regardless of where a property is located. With these goals in mind, the prioritization of the project list was made possible with extensive stakeholder engagement, analysis by transportation planning firm, Fehr & Peers, and thorough review by City staff. Fehr & Peers, in coordination with City staff, prepared complete street studies of all major street corridors East of 101, culminating in the preparation of conceptual designs identifying improvement measures for each street. These key changes improved safety, access, throughput, and connections. The study of all the major street corridors identified include the modernization of Oyster Point, East Grand, Gateway, Forbes, South Airport, and Utah, access to Caltrain, new streets and trails. The Study Corridors may be found in Figure 1 below. 376 3 Figure 1 – Transportation Study Corridors 377 4 Improving the City’s bicycle and pedestrian facilities is another key goal for our East of 101 area. The bicycle facility study identified 5.4 miles of new separated bikeways and trails and adds or improves eight bikeway connections across Highway 101. (Figure 2). Figure 2 – Bicycle Network 378 5 Transit connectivity is key to the success of the modernization of the East of 101 area and emphasized in all of the City’s adopted transportation planning master plans. Caltrain’s new electrified service plan will double service frequency at South San Francisco Station beginning on September 21st, 2024. Prioritizing bus and shuttle connections along key transit routes such as Oyster Point, East Grand, and South Airport will help funnel riders to and from Caltrain. The CFD would create 1.6 miles of transit only lanes, 24 bus stop upgrades, and access improvements at the South San Francisco Caltrain Station and the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal. (Figure 3). Figure 3 – Transit Priority Corridors 379 6 Two high priority corridors, Oyster Point Boulevard and the East Grand Avenue Corridors, were identified by transportation planners and the Oyster Point Mobility Vision Plan as key areas of study. Improvements to these corridors will benefit all modes of travel, including cars, transit, bicycles, and pedestrians. The CFD will also accelerate roadway rehabilitation efforts in the East of 101 area by repaving all city streets, approximately 17 miles (Figure 4) Figure 4 – Roadway Rehabilitation 380 7 Pedestrian improvements incorporating wider sidewalks, landscaping, curb extensions, high-visibility crosswalks, median refuge islands, gap closures, traffic calming, and other features create walkable neighborhoods East of 101. Pedestrian improvements would occur throughout the East of 101 Area, especially focusing along key corridors and nodes consistent with the Active South City Plan (Figure 5). Figure 5- Pedestrian Priority Corridors 381 8 Priority Project List As a result of a comprehensive study of the City’s major transportation corridors East of 101, the most significant and impactful projects were prioritized (Figure 6). These projects are also identified and supported by the City’s master transportation planning documents: General Plan, Active South City, and Mobility 20/20. Many of these projects were also identified as priority projects by the Oyster Point Mobility Steering Committee as well as conversations with local stakeholders. The cost of implementing these projects is estimated to be between $150-$180 million. Figure 6 – Priority Projects 382 9 Tier I Projects Tier I Projects include Roadway Rehabilitation, Oyster Point Boulevard Corridor Improvements, East Grand Avenue Corridor Improvements, Caltrain Station Area Improvements, Forbes Boulevard/Harbor Way Improvements, Poletti Way Improvements, and Gateway Boulevard/Corporate Drive Improvements. Roadway Rehabilitation: • Structural improvements and repaving of all city streets (approximately 17 miles) in the East of 101 area. • Estimated Cost: $20,000,000 (2024 dollars); $31,000,000 (2035 dollars) Caltrain Station Area Improvements • Addresses needs identified in the City’s Caltrain Access Study, including improvements to bicycle and pedestrian facilities, the freeway offramp, traffic signals, and the creation of a new shuttle-only ramp. • Estimated Cost: $16,850,000 (2024 dollars); $27,600,000 (2035 dollars) E. Grand/Caltrain Station Improvements Rendering 383 10 Forbes Blvd/Harbor Way Improvements • Closing gaps in trails and the addition of new signals north of East Grand to connect with existing trails along Forbes Blvd. and Eccles Ave. Pedestrian and bicycle improvements continue on Harbor Way between East Grand Ave. and the new Railroad Ave. • Estimated Cost: $13,290,000 (2024 dollars); $21,720,000 (2035 dollars) Poletti Way Improvements • Creates a Class I bike and pedestrian path between the Bay Trail and the Caltrain Station and a dedicated bus lane between Corporate Dr. and Grand Ave. • Estimated Cost: $6,500,000 (2024 dollars); $10,700,000 (2035 dollars) Poletti Way Improvements Rendering 384 11 Oyster Point Blvd Corridor Improvements • Adds westbound bus lanes, a two-way protected bikeway, and pedestrian improvements. Bike and pedestrian facilities extend as a shared-use path over US-101. Road is widened east of Veterans Blvd. • Estimated Cost: $29,100,000 (2024 dollars); $47,650,000 (2035 dollars) Oyster Point Boulevard Improvements Rendering Gateway Blvd. (North of Grand) & Corporate Drive Improvements • Closes gaps in pedestrian connectivity along Gateway Blvd. and improves street signals. Formalizes Corporate Dr. as city street to provide an alternative route to East Grand Avenue. • Estimated Cost: $5,700,000 (2024 dollars); $9,300,000 (2035 dollars) 385 12 East Grand Avenue Corridors Improvements • Adds bus lanes, a protected bikeway, and pedestrian improvements. Road is widened east of Forbes Blvd./Harbor Way. • Estimated Cost: $20,650,000 (2024 dollars); $33,800,000 (2035 dollars) East Grand Avenue Corridors Improvement Rendering Tier II Projects South Airport & Gateway (South of Grand) Improvements • Adds a two-way protected bikeway and new pedestrian improvements to close a gap in the Bay Trail. • Estimated Cost: $28,950,000 (2024 dollars); $47,300,000 (2035 dollars) 101 Overcrossing and Tanforan/Shaw Connection • Adds a trail crossing over US-101 that connects the Bay Trail with the South Linden Ave. grade separation. • Estimated Cost: $14,850,000 (2024 dollars); $24,280,000 (2035 dollars) Trail Gap Closures • Establishes multi-use trails along the abandoned rail corridor and Colma Creek, primarily south of the Railroad Ave. 386 13 corridor. • Estimated Cost: $9,550,000 (2024 dollars); $15,650,000 (2035 dollars) Utah Avenue Improvements • Implements a road diet and improves intersections to increase vehicular safety and adds pedestrian improvements and a separated bikeway. • Estimated Cost: $10,200,000 (2024 dollars); $16,700,000 (2035 dollars) Utah Avenue Improvements Rendering Produce Avenue/Airport Boulevard (North of Produce) • Adds a traffic signal for the US-101 offramp and onramp. Creates roadway improvements at the Produce Ave./San Mateo Ave./Airport Blvd. intersection. Creates a new bike and pedestrian trail along Produce Ave., transitioning to separated bikeway on Airport Blvd. • Estimated Cost: $13,800,000 (2024 dollars); $22,550,000 (2035 dollars) Tertiary Priority Railroad Avenue Creation • Creates a new street and bike/pedestrian trail along the existing rail corridor between Sylvester Rd. and Littlefield Ave. Redesigns the intersection at East Grand Ave. and Littlefield Ave. Extends the new trail under US-101.Estimated Cost: $22,000,000 (2024 dollars); $36,000,000 (2035 dollars) 387 14 DISCUSSION The City of South San Francisco has seen a variety of industries over its 100-year history. From meatpacking and steel production to biotechnology and pharmaceuticals, the City has adapted to meet the ever-changing needs of business. Still affectionately known as the Industrial City, the City is also now home to over 250 biotechnology and life science companies and is also known as the Birthplace of Biotechnology. The City’s ability to adapt has played a key role in its success as an economic driver in the region. South San Francisco remains committed to fostering healthy business relationships, and upon Council’s direction in March, embarked on an extensive outreach listening session to better understand the challenges facing our business community and to engage with businesses to find solutions. Conversations included sharing shared challenges and potential solutions. The potential CFD area is shown as Figure 7. To meet with 332 property owners covering 479 parcels, the City retained the services of Lighthouse Public Affairs, which is well known for their expertise in business and community outreach. Outreach was a multiphase effort spanning from March through August. In March, a mailer was sent to all property owners and the CFD website, ssf- cfd.com, was launched. In mid to late March, Lighthouse, in consultation with staff, also reached out to property owners through emails, calls, and by going door-to-door. In April, the City hosted six community town halls both virtually and in-person during mid-day and evening hours. This was followed by individual follow up conversations to evaluate stakeholder feedback. A second round of outreach took place in May and June with another round of mailed letters and mass door-to-door outreach to all property owners for whom we’d not yet connected with, the City hosting another six community town halls, dozens of one-on-one follow up meetings, and targeted door knocking. Staff continues to meet with property owners and tenants to answer questions and respond to their concerns. 388 15 Figure 7 - Potential CFD Boundary Map 389 16 Property Owner and Tenant Feedback The vast majority of property owners agree that traffic is an issue, especially congested along the main corridors of Oyster Point Boulevard and East Grand Avenue. There is also consensus across all industry types of a need for greater road safety and improvements. Pavement maintenance was also singled out as a concern. Most biotechnology and life science companies agree that there is a need for safer corridors, new pavement, and better connectivity throughout the cluster. Life Science would also like to see all transportation modes prioritized. The return to work may have been slower than anticipated, however, many biotechnology companies are seeing more congestion in the hub, especially mid-week. There also appears to be a desire for connectivity via bike and pedestrian walkways throughout the cluster to allow employees to leave for lunch and walk to nearby restaurants and amenities on other campuses. City staff have also heard from large tenants who indicate that their employees enjoy using alternate modes of transportation to commute to work and utilize public transportation and the Bay Trail. Warehouse and Industrial uses would also like to see safer corridors and new pavement throughout the East of 101. Many industrial/warehouse property owners indicate that they are facing many financial burdens, especially for smaller property owners and their tenants. Warehouse/Industrial property owners also feel that they are paying too much in taxes. Two property owners indicated that this initiative was designed to push out industrial uses. Some hotel owner/operators see a value in the CFD and benefits it provides to their guests and extends to their employees. Finding front line employees is very difficult in the hotel industry and improvements to transportation infrastructure can make it easier to hire and retain employees in difficult-to-hire positions. Other hoteliers do not wish to add an additional tax line item onto guests’ hotel bills. In response to the feedback received from industrial property owners, the City tailored the rate for a more equitable assessment such that smaller property owners would pay less than larger industrial property owners. Industrial/warehouse will be broken down by square foot of developed area. Buildings with less than 25,000 square feet would pay an annual rate of $0.05 per square foot. For the next 25,000 square feet, they would pay an annual rate of $0.10 per square foot. And for any additional area above 50,000 square feet, the property would be assessed at $0.15 per square foot annually. The breakdown of land use type by square footage by land use types are shown in Figure 8 below. 390 17 Figure 8 — Breakdown of Warehouse/Industrial Versus Other Land Uses 391 18 Financial Model Based upon the feedback received from the business community, below is the recommended CFD financial assessment by business sector: Land Use Type Square Footage Maximum Annual Tax Rate (per square foot) Life Science/Office Any $0.65 Residential Any $0.25 Warehouse/Industrial/Hotel/Other Commercial >50,000 $0.15 25,001–50,000sf $0.10 ≤25,000sf $0.05 Assuming this financial model, the CFD could issue 30-year bonds to raise approximately $118 million, dedicated exclusively to improving transportation and transit which benefits the CFD area. With the escalating revenue stream, and assuming a 6% interest rate. The assessment proposed is for 35 years, providing the predictable revenue stream to support bonding for construction costs. Assessment of Business Support The CFD currently maintains 1,159 total voting acres, with 765 voting acres being required to hit the 66% approval threshold. Currently, 32% of the total voting acres are unknown and therefore listed as unknown. Individualized outreach to these voters, as well as any voters who have yet to provide a firm response in support or opposition of the CFD, is ongoing. Feedback collected through numerous meetings with businesses showed strong support for the City’s efforts to address current and future mobility needs, in general, with more specific comments centering on the cost of the proposal based on type of business. How to Form a Community Facilities District (CFD) Pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (“Mello-Roos Act”), a CFD is a defined geographic area in which the City is authorized to levy annual special taxes to be used to either finance directly the costs of specified public improvements and/or public services, or to pay debt service on bonds issued to finance the public improvements, as well as to pay costs of administering the CFD. CFD formation can be initiated either by a local agency or via a written petition from the registered voters or owners within a proposed district. 392 19 City staff has engaged the services of Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (Goodwin) to perform advisory services relating to all aspects of initiating and forming the CFD. Goodwin has prepared Mello-Roos cash flow analyses as various special tax structures and amounts have been considered and has provided City staff with guidance about alternatives available under the Mello-Roos Act. Additionally, Goodwin will take on the role of Special Tax Consultant and prepare the “Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax” (RMA) as part of the CFD formation process. Goodwin has drafted a term sheet outlining the current deal points, which is attached hereto as Attachment B. Once these deal points are finalized, Goodwin will incorporate the points into the RMA. When the initial participants in the CFD have been confirmed, Goodwin will also prepare the CFD Boundary Map, which will ultimately be recorded with the County Recorder after the first legislative action. The process of establishing a CFD requires at least four City Council meetings: Meeting Number One: Adoption of two resolutions: a Resolution of Intention (ROI) setting forth the City’s intention to establish the CFD, designating the name of the CFD, identifying the services and facilities to be funded by the CFD, stating the City’s intention to levy a special tax annually on property within the CFD to pay for these services and facilities, and approving the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax (RMA) for the CFD, which details how the special tax will be levied on properties within the CFD and sets the maximum special tax rates that can be levied within the CFD. The ROI also sets the date for the required public hearing (30 to 60 days later) on the matters set forth in the ROI. The second resolution, a Resolution of Intention to Incur Indebtedness, sets forth the Council’s intention to issue bonds supported by the special taxes. This resolution also sets a public hearing for the same date. Meeting Number Two: Hold the noticed public hearings at a City Council meeting. Following the public hearings, the City Council is presented with two resolutions: a resolution forming the CFD, and a resolution calling the special tax election (90 to 180 days later) by the landowner voters within the CFD. Between meeting number two and meeting number three, ballots will be distributed to owners of property within the CFD. The materials distributed will include information about the proposed uses of the special tax revenue, the proposed tax rates, the requirements for approval of the CFD, and the method and deadline for returning ballots. Meeting Number Three: Opening and counting of ballots. If the CFD gains the required number of votes for passage, the City Council will adopt a Resolution Confirming Results of Special Election and introduce an ordinance ordering the levy of special taxes within the CFD. Meeting Number Four: Hold a second reading to adopt the special tax ordinance ordering the levy of special taxes within the CFD. After formation of the CFD, a special tax is levied annually on taxable properties that are located within the boundaries of the CFD. FISCAL IMPACT The formation and administration of the CFD will be paid through revenues generated by the CFD and therefore, have no direct fiscal impact on the City’s General Fund. RELATIONSHIP TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN The creation of an Eastern Neighborhoods Community Facilities District meets the city’s strategic goals of 393 20 promoting and preserving the economic vitality of the City. CONCLUSION Traffic remains a top threat to the viability of the business environment in South San Francisco. Economic growth is here, and will continue, bringing with it opportunities and benefits, but also increased transportation challenges. The Eastern Neighborhoods CFD is the City and the business community’s opportunity to come together with a thoughtful, comprehensive solution to ensure that businesses continue to prosper for decades to come. Staff seeks Council feedback and direction concerning possible formation of Eastern Neighborhoods Community Facilities District (CFD), and if appropriate, scheduling of associated City Council meetings to move forward with formation. ATTACHMENTS 1. Engineering Diagrams for Priority Project List 2. Draft Term Sheet for RMA 3. Estimated CFD Bonding Capacity Based on Current Draft Term Sheet 394 Attachment 1 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 Term Sheet: Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax for the Proposed East of Highway 101 CFD Outlined below is the preliminary Term Sheet for the proposed East of Highway 101 Community Facilities District (“CFD”) to be established within the City of South San Francisco (the “City”). The Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax (the “RMA”) shall be drafted consistent with the provisions below, subject to approval by the City Council. Assignment to Special Tax Categories [Capitalized term to be defined in RMA] Each Fiscal Year, the Administrator shall identify the current Assessor’s Parcel numbers for all Taxable Parcels in the CFD. In order to identify Taxable Parcels, the Administrator shall confirm the buildings in the CFD for which a Building Permit has been issued. The Administrator shall then identify the Residential Square Footage, Warehouse/Industrial Square Footage, and Other Non-Residential Square Footage on each Taxable Parcel. The Square Footage Categories shall be classified based on City GIS or Building Permit information, County land use codes, site visits, or other sources of information. Ta ble 1 Special Tax Categories Square Footage Category Land Use Class Residential Square Footage For-Sale Residential and Rental Residential Warehouse/Industrial Square Footage Warehouse and Industrial Property Other Non-Residential Square Footage Office, R&D, Retail, Hotels, & Other Commercial Maximum Special Taxes Once the Square Footage Category has been identified, the Maximum Special Tax for each Taxable Parcel shall be determined based on reference to Table 2 below. Ta ble 2 Maximum Special Tax for Taxable Property Square Footage Category Maximum Special Tax* Residential Square Footage $0.XX per Square Foot Warehouse/Industrial Square Footage First 25,000 SF: $0.XX per Square Foot Middle 25,001 to 50,000 SF: $0.XX per Square Foot Above 50,000 SF: $0.XX per Square Foot Other Non-Residential Square Footage $0.XX per Square Foot *The Maximum Special Tax rates shown above for each Square Footage Category shall escalate as set forth in the “Changes to the Maximum Special Tax” section below. DR A F T Attachment 2 413 Changes to the Maximum Special Tax 1. Annual Escalation of the Maximum Special Tax The Maximum Special Tax rates identified in Table 2 are applicable for fiscal year 2024-25. Beginning July 1, 2025 and each July 1 thereafter, the Maximum Special Taxes shall be increased by an amount equal to two percent (2%) of the amount in effect in the prior Fiscal Year. 2. Changes in Land Use on a Taxable Parcel If Square Footage on a Parcel that had been taxed as Residential Square Footage, Warehouse/Industrial Square Footage, or Other Non-Residential Square Footage in a prior Fiscal Year is rezoned or otherwise changes Land Use, the Administrator shall calculate the Maximum Special Tax for the Assessor’s Parcel based on the new Land Use(s). If the amount determined is greater than the Maximum Special Tax that applied to the Assessor’s Parcel prior to the Land Use Change, the Administrator shall increase the Maximum Special Tax to the amount calculated for the new Land Uses. If the amount determined is less than the Maximum Special Tax that applied prior to the Land Use Change, there will be no change to the Maximum Special Tax for the Assessor’s Parcel. Under no circumstances shall the Maximum Special Tax on any Taxable Parcel be reduced, regardless of changes in Land Use or Square Footage on the Parcel, including reductions in Square Footage that may occur due to demolition, fire, water damage, or acts of God. In addition, if a Taxable Building within the CFD that had been subject to the levy of Special Taxes in any prior Fiscal Year becomes all or part of an otherwise Exempt Use, the Parcel(s) shall continue to be subject to the Maximum Special Tax that had applied to the Parcel(s) before they became an Exempt Use. Method of Levy of the Special Tax Each Fiscal Year, the Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Taxable Parcel up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax for each Parcel for such Fiscal Year until the amount levied on Taxable Parcels is equal to the Special Tax Requirement. “Special Tax Requirement” means the amount necessary in any Fiscal Year to: (i) pay principal and interest on Bonds that are due in the calendar year that begins in such Fiscal Year; (ii) pay periodic costs on the Bonds, including but not limited to, credit enhancement, liquidity support and rebate payments on the Bonds, (iii) create and/or replenish reserve funds for the Bonds to the extent such replenishment has not been included in the computation of the Special Tax Requirement in a previous Fiscal Year; (iv) cure any delinquencies in the payment of principal or interest on Bonds which have occurred in the prior Fiscal Year; (v) pay Administrative Expenses; and (vi) pay directly for Authorized Facilities. The amounts referred to in clauses (i) and (ii) of the preceding sentence may be reduced in any Fiscal Year by: (i) interest earnings on or surplus balances in funds and accounts for the Bonds to the extent that such earnings or balances are available to apply against such costs pursuant to the Indenture; (ii) in the sole and absolute DR A F T 414 discretion of the City, proceeds received by the CFD from the collection of penalties associated with delinquent Special Taxes; and (iii) any other revenues available to pay such costs as determined by the Administrator. Collection of Special Tax The Special Taxes shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem property taxes, provided, however, that prepayments are permitted and provided further that the City may directly bill the Special Tax, may collect Special Taxes at a different time or in a different manner, and may collect delinquent Special Taxes through foreclosure or other available methods. The Special Tax shall be levied and collected from the first Fiscal Year in which an Assessor’s parcel is designated as a Taxable Parcel until the principal and interest on all Bonds have been paid, the City’s costs of constructing or acquiring Authorized Facilities from Special Tax proceeds have been paid, and all Administrative Expenses have been paid or reimbursed. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Special Tax shall not be levied on any Square Footage in the CFD for more than thirty-five (35) Fiscal Years, except that a Special Tax that was lawfully levied in or before the final Fiscal Year and that remains delinquent may be collected in subsequent Fiscal Years. Exemptions Special Taxes shall not be levied in any Fiscal Year on the following: (i) Public Property, except Taxable Public Property, (ii) Owners Association Property, except Taxable Owners Association Property, (iii) Welfare Exemption Property, except Taxable Welfare Exemption Property, (iv) Parcels that are owned by a public utility for an unmanned facility, (v) Parcels that are subject to an easement that precludes any other use on the Parcel, and (vi) for purposes of levying the Special Tax, Parcels that have fully prepaid the Special Tax obligation assigned to the Parcel. Prepayment of Special Tax The Special Tax obligation applicable to a Parcel in the CFD may be fully prepaid or partially prepaid and the obligation of the Parcel to pay the Special Tax permanently satisfied, provided that a prepayment may be made only if there are no delinquent Special Taxes with respect to such Parcel at the time of prepayment. Interpretation of the RMA The City reserves the right to make minor administrative and technical changes to this document that do not materially affect the rate and method of apportioning Special Taxes. In addition, the interpretation and application of any section of this document shall be left to the City’s discretion. Interpretations may be made by the City by ordinance or resolution for purposes of clarifying any vagueness or ambiguity in this RMA. DR A F T 415 City Council Meeting | August 2024 THE EASTERN NEIGHBORHOODS CFD 416 Agenda •CFD Recap •Eastern Neighborhoods CFD •Updated project list •What we’ve heard •Proposed rates •Timeline •Q&A 417 •CFD = community facilities district •Regulated by California law •A special tax district in which property owners tax themselves to fund critical infrastructure improvements •Requires a 2/3 vote in favor •CFD ≠ property tax •Rate, conditions, timeline and other details are determined by the city or agency proposing the CFD •Highly flexible in what can be funded and how targeted the investments are CFD 101 418 East of 101 Growth 2019 35,000 Employees 2024 45,000 Employees 2040 101,000 Employees 10,000 Residents Hotels, restaurants, and services 419 Planning Efforts 2018 2020 2022 2024 Complete Streets Corridor Plans Initial CFD Planning CFD Planning Restarts 420 •Holistic plan: all projects work together and no transportation mode is more important than any another. •Improve safety and access for all. •Everyone benefits, regardless of where your property is located. •Projects are proposed across the Eastern Neighborhoods area. •Proposed projects are supported by plans already adopted by the City: •General Plan •Active South City •Mobility 20/20 The Proposal 421 Proposed CFD Boundaries 422 Potential CFD Projects Project List + Conceptual Renderings 423 •All major streets in the CFD area repaved (17 miles) Roadway Rehabilitation 424 •Transit priority streets incorporate bus and shuttle service, enhanced bus stops, transit signal priority, and transit lanes Transit Priority Corridors 425 •Create walkable ne ighborhoods •Incorporate wider sidewalks, landscaping, curb extensions,high visibility crosswalks and other traffic calming features Pedestrian Priority Corridors 426 •Connect regional transit stations via separated bikeways and trails, facilitating local and cross- town travel for people of all ages and abilities Bicycle Corridors 427 HATILLW W THI SFUND? Priority Tier Corridor Total Cost ($2024) Total Cost ($2035)Project Summary Tier 1: Top Priority Roadway Reconstruction & Repaving $20,000,000 $31,000,000 Structural improvements and repaving of all city streets (approximately 17 miles) in the East of 101 area. Addresses needs identified in the City’s Caltrain Access Study, including improvements to bicycle and pedestrian facilities, the freeway offramp, traffic signals, and the creation of a new shuttle-only ramp. Closing gaps in trails and the addition of new signals north of East Grand to connect with existing trails along Forbes Blvd. and Eccles Ave. Pedestrian and bicycle improvements continue on Harbor Way between East Grand Ave. and the new Railroad Ave. Creates a Class I bike and pedestrian path between the Bay Trail and the Caltrain Station and a dedicated bus lane between Corporate Dr. and Grand Ave. Caltrain Station Area $16,850,000 $27,600,000 Forbes/Harbor $13,290,000 $21,720,000 Poletti Way $6,550,000 $10,700,000 Oyster Point $29,100,000 $47,650,000 Gateway (North of Grand) & $5,700,000 $9,300,000 Corporate Drive East Grand Avenue $20,650,000 $33,800,000 Adds westbound bus lanes, a two-way protected bikeway, and pedestrian improvements. Bike and pedestrian facilities extend as a shared-use path over US -101. Road is widened east of Veterans Blvd. Closes gaps in pedestrian connectivity along Gateway Blvd., and improves street signals. Formalizes Corporate Dr. as city street. Adds bus lanes, a protected bikeway, and pedestrian improvements. Road is widened east of Forbes Blvd./Harbor Way. Tier 2: Secondary Priority South Airport & Gateway (South of Grand)$28,950,000 $47,300,000 Adds a two-way protected bikeway and new pedestrian improvements to close a gap in the Bay Trail. 101 Overcrossing and Tanforan/Shaw Connection $14,850,000 $24,280,000 Adds a trail crossing over US-101 that connects the Bay Trail with the South Linden Ave. grade separation. Trail Network Gap Closures $9,550,000 $15,650,000 Establishes multi-use trails along the abandoned rail corridor and Colma Creek, primarily south of the Railroad Ave. corridor. Implements a road diet and improves intersections to increase vehicular safety, and adds pedestrian improvements and a separated bikeway. Adds a traffic signal for the US-101 offramp and onramp. Creates roadway improvements at the Produce Ave./San Mateo Ave./Airport Blvd. intersection. Creates a new bike and pedestrian trail along Produce Ave., transitioning to separated bikeway on Airport Blvd. Tier 3: Tertiary Priority Widens Gull Drive to four lanes and adds Class II bike lanes along it. Utah Avenue $10,200,000 $16,700,000 Produce Avenue/Airport Boulevard (North of $13,800,000 $22,550,000 Produce) Gull Drive $6,500,000 $10,650,000 Railroad Avenue $22,000,000 $36,000,000 Creates a new street and bike/pedestrian trail along the existing rail corridor between Sylvester Rd. and Littlefield Ave. Redesigns the intersection at East Grand Ave. and Littlefield Ave. Extends the new trail under US-101. $112M ($2024) $182M ($2035) $77M ($2024) $126M ($2035) $28M ($2024) $47M ($2035)428 HATILLW W THI SFUND? Priority Tier Corridor Total Cost ($2024) Total Cost ($2035)Project Summary Tier 1: Top Priority Roadway Reconstruction & Repaving $20,000,000 $31,000,000 Structural improvements and repaving of all city streets (approximately 17 miles) in the East of 101 area. Addresses needs identified in the City’s Caltrain Access Study, including improvements to bicycle and pedestrian facilities, the freeway offramp, traffic signals, and the creation of a new shuttle-only ramp. Closing gaps in trails and the addition of new signals north of East Grand to connect with existing trails along Forbes Blvd. and Eccles Ave. Pedestrian and bicycle improvements continue on Harbor Way between East Grand Ave. and the new Railroad Ave. Creates a Class I bike and pedestrian path between the Bay Trail and the Caltrain Station and a dedicated bus lane between Corporate Dr. and Grand Ave. Caltrain Station Area $16,850,000 $27,600,000 Forbes/Harbor $13,290,000 $21,720,000 Poletti Way $6,550,000 $10,700,000 Oyster Point $29,100,000 $47,650,000 Gateway (North of Grand) & $5,700,000 $9,300,000 Corporate Drive East Grand Avenue $20,650,000 $33,800,000 Adds westbound bus lanes, a two-way protected bikeway, and pedestrian improvements. Bike and pedestrian facilities extend as a shared-use path over US -101. Road is widened east of Veterans Blvd. Closes gaps in pedestrian connectivity along Gateway Blvd., and improves street signals. Formalizes Corporate Dr. as city street. Adds bus lanes, a protected bikeway, and pedestrian improvements. Road is widened east of Forbes Blvd./Harbor Way. Tier 2: Secondary Priority South Airport & Gateway (South of Grand)$28,950,000 $47,300,000 Adds a two-way protected bikeway and new pedestrian improvements to close a gap in the Bay Trail. 101 Overcrossing and Tanforan/Shaw Connection $14,850,000 $24,280,000 Adds a trail crossing over US-101 that connects the Bay Trail with the South Linden Ave. grade separation. Trail Network Gap Closures $9,550,000 $15,650,000 Establishes multi-use trails along the abandoned rail corridor and Colma Creek, primarily south of the Railroad Ave. corridor. Implements a road diet and improves intersections to increase vehicular safety, and adds pedestrian improvements and a separated bikeway. Adds a traffic signal for the US-101 offramp and onramp. Creates roadway improvements at the Produce Ave./San Mateo Ave./Airport Blvd. intersection. Creates a new bike and pedestrian trail along Produce Ave., transitioning to separated bikeway on Airport Blvd. Tier 3: Tertiary Priority Widens Gull Drive to four lanes and adds Class II bike lanes along it. Utah Avenue $10,200,000 $16,700,000 Produce Avenue/Airport Boulevard (North of $13,800,000 $22,550,000 Produce) Gull Drive $6,500,000 $10,650,000 Railroad Avenue $22,000,000 $36,000,000 Creates a new street and bike/pedestrian trail along the existing rail corridor between Sylvester Rd. and Littlefield Ave. Redesigns the intersection at East Grand Ave. and Littlefield Ave. Extends the new trail under US-101. $112M ($2024) $182M ($2035) $77M ($2024) $126M ($2035) $28M ($2024) $47M ($2035)429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 Outreach Outreach 438 •The CFD area has: •980.8 acres •479 parcels, from 0.05 to 23 acres in size •332 property owners •Diversity of property uses: The CFD Area: Large & Diverse •Warehouse •Hotel •R&D Flex •C/I Misc. •Restaurant •Biotech •Financial •Hospital •Auto/Sales Repair •Service Station •Light Manufacturing •Office: Multi -Story •Office: Single -Story •Indoor Recreation •Food Processing •Parking Structure 439 What We’ve Done •Created SSF-CFD.com •Two rounds of mailed letters •Two rounds of door-to-door outreach •Two rounds of community town halls (6 per round) •Dozens of 1:1 meetings •Countless emails and calls •Targeted door knocking to unresponsive property owners 440 What We’ve Heard •Property owners want: •Safer corridors •Upgraded streets •Better connectivity throughout the area •All transportation modes respected and benefitted 441 What We’ve Heard •Property owners are concerned about: •Equitable assessment of rates •Financial burden for property owners and their tenants •Another tax and where that revenue is going •Who is causing the problems •Forcing out land uses •Timeline for implementation 442 Moving Forward With Funding 980.8 ACRES 332 PROPERTY OWNERS 479 PARCELS REQUIRES 66.7% VOTE OF PARCEL OWNERS TO PASS VOTES BASED ON LOT SIZE –ONE VOTE PER ACRE OF PARCEL GOVERNED BY CITY COUNCIL WITH E101 ADVISORY PANEL Moving Forward With Funding 443 Financial Model 444 •Property owners will be assessed a rate per square foot of developed area on their parcels •Proposed initial max.rates (per square foot of developed area): •Life Science &Office:$0.65 •Residential:$0.25 •Warehouse/Industrial/Other •first 25,000sf :$0.05 •second 25,000sf:$0.10 •anything in addition:$0.15 •At these rates,CFD could generate approx.$118M over 30 years Maximum Tax Rates 445 Bonds could be issued in Spring 2025 •1st installment in Dec. 2025 •2nd installment in Apr.2025 30 year bond Option to issue another tranche of bonds,if necessary Bonds 446 Next Steps 447 NEXT STEPS 448 Staff seeks Council feedback and direction concerning possible formation of an Eastern Neighborhoods Community Facilities District (CFD), and if appropriate, scheduling of associated City Council meetings to move forward with formation. 449 SSF -CFD.com Thank You 450 Agenda Item 9. 24-737 Report regarding a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consulting Services Agreement between the City of South San Francisco and Plan to Place, LLC for Facilitation Services for Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities, and consideration of potential alternatives. (Nell Selander, Economic and Community Development Director, and Megan Wooley-Ousdahl, Principal Planner) Legislation Text Attachment 1 - Facilitation Procurement Paper Review Scoring Attachment 2 - Facilitation Procurement Interview Scoring Attachment 3 - Plan to Place Firm Description and Staff Bios Attachment 4 - Plan to Place Proposal_submitted 06-28-2024 Attachment 5 - Plan to Place Scope of Work_revised_v2 SB 343 - Item #9 Public Comment_Redacted SB 343 - Item #9 Public Comments_Redacted SB 343 - Item # 9 Contract Services Agreement Faciliation Services Presentation 1 Public Comment • Guest User at August 28, 2024 at 4:19pm PDT Neutral I'm Alex Shoor, the Executive Director of Catalyze Silicon Valley. We provide community engagement services and offered a proposal for this bid. While we don't want to oppose the City's decision on this bid, we do want to raise concerns a) with this bid process and b) with the way local government evaluates community-based organizations that provide these services. 1) The City of South San Francisco's RFP issued included a maximum budget of $40k maximum. Our proposal was under this amount. The winning bid is nearly double the City's max budget. That seems incongruent with the RFP. 2) This leads to our second point. The hourly rates in our proposal would save the City of South San Francisco a significant amount of money compared to the winning bid. Yet the money the City would save didn't seem to be a factor in the evaluation. This is part of what we see, broadly speaking, as an inherent bias in the way community-based organizations are evaluated by local governments for contracts like these. We compete against much bigger entities with bigger budgets yet aren't positively scored for our mission, our connection to our communities, and the fact that the individuals paid to do the work for CBOs usually live in the communities where they work. In the future, we suggest the City of San Francisco not issue a scope of work that exceeds what is outlined in the RFP, consider cost and hourly rates as a key factor in the decision, and explore other factors that eliminate systemic bias against small, community-based organizations. Catalyze SV is happy to discuss this more with you if you'd like. Please contact me at alex@catalyzesiliconvalley.org to continue the discussion. Gratefully - Alex