HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-03-26 e-packet
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
REGULAR MEETING
MUNICIP AL SERVICE BUILDING
COMMUNITY ROOM
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 26, 2008
7:30 P.M.
PEOPLE OF SOUTH SAN FRANC][SCO
You are invited to offer your suggestions. In order that you may know our method of conducting
Council business, we proceed as follows:
The regular meetings of the City Counciil are held on the second and fourth Wednesday of each month at
7:30 p.m. in the Municipal Services Building, Community Room, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San
Francisco, California.
Public Comment: For those wishing to address the City Council on any Agenda or non-Agendized item,
please complete a Speaker Card located at the entrance to the Council Chamber's and submit it to the
City Clerk. Please be sure to indicate the Agenda Item # you wish to address or the topic of your public
comment. California law prevents the City Council from taking action on any item not on the Agenda
(except in emergency circumstances). Your question or problem may be referred to staff for
investigation and/or action where appropriate or the matter may be placed on a future Agenda for more
comprehensive action or a report. When your name is called, please come to the podium, state your
name and address (optional) for the Minutes. COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES
PER SPEAKER. Thank you for your cooperation.
The City Clerk will read successively the items of business appearing on the Agenda. As she completes
reading an item, it will be ready for Council action.
PEDRO GONZALEZ
Mayor
KARYLMATSUMOTO
Mayor Pro Tern
MARK N. ADDIE GO
Councilman
RICHARD A. GARBARINO
Councilman
KEVIN MULLIN
Councilman
RICHARD BATTAGLIA
City Treasurer
KRISTA MARTINELLI -LARSON
City Clerk
BARRY M. NAGEL
City Manager
STEVEN T. MATTAS
City Attorney
PLEAS:E SILENCE CELL PHONES AND PAGERS
HEARING ASSISTANCE EQUIPMENT AVAILABLE FOR USE BY THE HEARING IMPAIRED AT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
INVOCATION
PRESENTATIONS
· Cancer Awareness Fundraiser: "Team South City Cares presents GO PURPLE!"- presented
by Jennifer Obina, South San Francisco High School Senior.
AGENDA REVIEW
PUBLIC COMMENTS
ITEMS FROM COUNCIL
· Announcements
· Committee Reports
· Discussion and decision on whether to join in Mayors' letter against illegal guns.
· Consideration of Sub-committee recommendation to close the Farmer's Market for the 2008
Season.
CONSENT CALENDAR
I. Motion to approve the minutes of March 12,2008.
2. Motion to confirm expense claims of March 26,2008.
3. Motion to accept the 130/148 Beacon Street Trench Repair Project as complete in
accordance with plans and specifications.
4. Resolution authorizing the acceptance of$120,401.00 from the State under the
Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) Program and amending the
Police Department's fiscal year 2007/2008 Operating Budget.
5. Resolution updating designation of positions and applicable disclosure categories for the
City of South San Francisco.
6. Resolution opposing state legislation to permit the towing of triple tractor trailers on
state highways in California.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
MARCH 26, 2008
PAGE 2
PUBLIC HEARING
7. Richard Avelar & Associates/Applicant
Petroni Jr., Robert P & M F/Owner
Moonlight & Sunrise Ct.
P08-0007: PUDM08-0001 & DR08-0004
Modification of Planned Unit Development and Design Review allowing the
replacement of the exterior siding with different material than originally approved for 45
dwellings, situated on Moonlight and Sunrise Courts, in the Medium Density Residential
(R-2-H-P) Zoning District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.18,20.78 & 20.85.
ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS
8. Consideration of a resolution making findings and adopting a Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the Miller Avenue Parking Structure Project.
9. An Ordinance amending Chapter 6.76 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code to
Implement the Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act of 2006.
COUNCIL COMMUNITY FORUM
ADJOURNMENT
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
MARCH 26, 2008
PAGE 3
I-iol1orable Ivlayor and Council, Thank you for allowing 111e this tin1e to speak.
There are SOl11e questions that need answering.
Why are you building this stnlcture?
Who are you building this structure for?
What is the cunent cost estin1ate?
In Decen1ber it was $11,814,000, that was before you n1ade the wise decision to put utilities
underground, like you would require any other building owner to do.
The proposed Miller Avenue Parking Structure will have 256 parking spaces and 13,700 sf of
con1mercial space.
Per testil110ny at the Decel11ber Council n1eeting, 200 spaces for pell.11it parking, 56 for other.
Of those 56 other spaces, there will be only 8 handicap spaces and 7 regular 111etered spaces on
the ground floor.
You are losing 60 spaces frOl11 the 3 lots it will be built on
You are losing 39 spaces from the lot you have eall.11arked to sell to help pay for this
You will lose a n1inil11um of 8 street parking spaces on Miller to widen the sidewalk and put in a
left hand tUll.1lane into the parking lot.
The maxin1ul11 gain of parking spaces you will have is 149, BUT
YOU ARE ADDING 13,700 SF OF COMMERlCAIL SPACE ON THE GROUND FLOOR.
PER ZONING, you can't put office on the ground floor. This area is zoned for retail or
restaurant only on the ground floor
If you used that space for retail, it would require 69 n10re parking spaces,
IF THAT SPACE WAS USED FOR RESTAURANT, YOU WOULD REQUIRE 266 SPACES.
YOU ARE ONLY ADDING 149.
YOU ARE NOW IN A NEGATIVE SITUATION. YOUR PARKING DISTRlCT WILL
HAVE 117 LESS AVAILABLE SPACES BEFORE THE BUILDING WAS BUILT.
Because of the traffic, there will be a right turn only out of this structure, you are dun1ping 1110re
traffic onto Linden Avenue and Grand Avenue where you are already il11pacted. The person who
lives anywhere west of the structure in South San Francisco will now have to go around the
block and n10st likely use the busiest streets to do so.
DO YOU KNOW, IN YOUR GENERAL PLAN, THE CITY'S INTENTION WAS TO
EXPLORE ONE WAY STREETS ON MILLER AVENUE AND ON BADEN AVENUE?
MILLER A VEUNE WOULD BE GOING WEST, UP THE STREET, BUT THIS P ARIZING
STRUCTURE HAS A RlGHT HAND TURN ONLY WHICH WOULD GO EAST, DOWN
THE STREET..
YOU COULDN'T CHANGE THE DIRECTION OF THOSE NARROW ONE WAY STREETS
BECAUSE YOU HAVE TRAFFIC COMING OFF THE FREEWAY GOING WEST ON
MILLER AVENUE AND YOU CURRENTL Y HAVE TRAFFIC GOING EAST ON BADEN
TOWARD THE FREEWAY.
YOUR TRAFFIC CONSULTANT HAS NOT ADDRESSED THIS.
At the very least, THIS STR"UCTURE SHOULD BE ACROSS THE STREET BECAUSE IT IS
EASERIR TO GET IN AND OUT, TURN RIGHT TO GO HOME.
The City should have close n1eter parking where you now propose the structure. Your custon1ers
will use the closer parking. THE PERMIT P ARIZING LOTS SHOULD ALL BE ACROSS THE
STREET IN THE CURRENTLY EMPTY LOTS.
This structure would also be a banier, cutting off any possibility of future high density housing
developn1ent in the DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL AREA, or adjacent to it.
Do you also know that your general plan calls for a
"PEDESTRIAN ORlENTED DEVELOPMENT. A DEVELOPMENT DESIGNED WITH AN
EMPHASIS ON THE STREET SIDEW ALIZ AND ON PEDESTRlAN ACCESS TO THE
BUILDING, RATHER THAN AN AUTO ACCESS AND PARKING AREA?"
Yes, your downtown merchants have been asking for better parking for years, but NO WHERE
IN ANY STAKEHOLDERS REPORT, IN ANY GENERAL PLAN, IS A STRUCTURE
MENTIONED.
IT IS MENTIONED IN THE STAIZEHOLDERS REPORT THAT THE CURRENT PARKING
IS NOT USED PROPERLY. YOU HAVE A SERlOUS MISMANAGEMENT OF WHAT
YOU HAVE THERE.
How many people going to a grocery store will use this garage, not many. Mr. Addiego, you
owned a grocery business, you and other business people on the Council know how important
convenient parking is to your customers.
You have allowed a huge chinese restaurant, an exercise facility, 2 national nal11ed coffee places
to operate business in this town, WAIVING the required parking of your zoning ordinances. The
restaurant and gym use parking for over 2 hours during the day and often late at night.
HOW LATE IS THAT GARAGE OPEN FOR? THIS AND MANY OTHER QUESTIONS
SHOULD BE ANSWERED NOW, NOT "PROGRAMED IN LATER". WHAT WOULD YOU
REQUIRE OF ME IF I WERE BUILDING DOWNTOWN?
You have 500/0 vacancy in cunent n1ismanaged lots.
How does the cost of this structure and the fact that the "original parking district" still exists,
affect owners of property in this district? Are the downtown merchants responsible for any cost
if the City fails to sell bonds and/or have the Redevelopn1ent Agency cover costs?
Property owners of the Original parking district agreed that they would have to pay for
deficiencies for parking improvel11ents.
Have you notified every property owner in the D-C of this?
It is easy to talk pie in the sky, but your Mitigated Negative Declaration, your Redevelopment
Agency Economic Staff Report, recommending approval of this, IN CONCEPT, and all
conespondence and information to the public has been poor and unacceptable for the people of
South San Francisco to accept this structure, as proposed.
WHY DO YOU WANT TO ADD BUSINESS ON MILLER WHEN THERE IS NONE?
The Redevelopn1ent Staff Report for EconOl11ic feasibility repOlis an annual loss to the City of
$93,000 to $278,000. per year based on 2006 dollars. With costs to build increasing through
December by 150%, the City could conceivably have $139,500 to $417,000 losses annually.
By the way, why is your zoning update also looking at developing housing on the East side of
101? How would that help your downtown? Consider zoning to allow high density housing
with their own downtown, so people can have shopping and recreation where they live, IN
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO..
Why are you doing this?
F or who are you doing this?
Look at the BIG picture.
Is this the best for South San Francisco's Future?
Again, I don't want to be part of the problem, I want to be pari of the solution for a thriving
South San Francisco. Again, I volunteer n1Y services to this City, for the future, for the
betterment of this City.
F act Sheet
Did you know.. ...
That the City of South San Francisco wants to build a 4 1/2 story parking
structure, which would loom over 60' over the downtown neighborhood?
That this structure will only have a 1 foot setback from its neighbors,
eliminating nearly all direct sunlight from entering on the sides close to the
structure. (Source: City Council Meeting Minutes, December 12,2007, page 6, "Miller
Avenue Parking Structure Shadow Analysis 1/31/08.")
That your parking rates have been increased in the downtown
neighborhood area to pay for this structure? (Source: City Council Meeting
Minutes, July 11,2007, page 6.)
That this structure will have 256 spaces (a maximum net increase of 149
spaces of what is currently available, and the City proposes 200 spaces be
for permit parkine:. (Source: City Council Meeting, DVD, Dec. 12,2007,2 hr., 24 min.)
That the proposed parking structure is expected to lose money each year, so
that the SSF Redevelopment Agency will have to contribute $ $93,000 to
$278,000 per year (*Based on 2006 dollars cost of $7,000,000 to $9,000,000)
to keep it in the black? (Source: Redevelopment Agency Staff Report, Downtown Parking
Garage, February 14,2007 Page 2.)
*Estimated project cost escalated to $11,814,000 at Dec. 12,2007 Council
Meeting. With Cost up 1500/0, would this mean expected annual losses will
be up 1500/0? (Source December 12, 2007 City Council meeting, Minutes, Page 6)
That the City Staff has decJlared that this huge building would cause NO
significant environmental impact to the neighborhood, for traffic increases,
shade, and loss of views for these affected neighbors? (Source: Revised Initial
Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration.)
Do you feel you have been well-informed by the City?
IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PROPOSED
PARKING STRUCTURE, PLEASE ATTEND THE UPCOMING PUBLIC
HEARING AND / OR SIGN THIS PETITION EXPRESSING YOUR
CONCERN.
Wednesday March 26, 7:30 pm
South San Francisco Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive
Subject: Consideration of Miller Avenue Parking Structure Negative Declaration
(APNs 012-312-040 through 012--312-070)
PETITION
IN SUPPORT OF ADEQUATE CONSIDERATION
OF MILLER AVE. PARKING STRUCTURE PROJECT
Dear City Council of South San Francisco:
We, the undersigned, are concerned about the proposed Miller Avenue Parking Structure,
which is proposed to be located on the 300 block of Miller Ave. in South San Francisco. We
feel that the City should show that it has clearly sought public input on the benefits and
drawbacks of this project. We ~eel that the city should show that this is the best use of
public funds, and will benefit the businesses and citizens of South San Francisco.
~_\'c;:;:~~~
~ r e...~?c \ \
d- ~ S '~~c....'<-\.N~ "\Jr
(,$'0 - S ~'1 - C)3;L\..(
* * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
5S\=-
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
~
. Ph:/,-'~ m,;"s~v
, /
;;2 D l E.V{ (..~L'J P 7:r..J 4-Ve
~ 'S~) S~(' 0,,-1 " I 'f
I' L,'r s: i~-e t~ rf1 !jOv~ 00. (cn->'t
* * * *//-;;;)
~",d;. //
-F,..5:L;r ~J,
) 3 ) fLu, L----i Dr
/s cJ $" <j( c; 0"5 2. i{
/V\ X c; J.ovl@" 0 I ~ ( 0 ~
* * * * * * * * *
Signature 00/ c4~
Name: r hi L II (' LA- (C..(t. \. c- <Q.
Address: (0'1- G r::-- e <e V\ t.,.....- l.9 c.::> cJ. ~ R.. S .5 F
Phone: t ~o '577 ,- 8"~ G
Email:
*********(J A 0
Signature: LAW ~0o C
Name: kbf.UAJ ?DL~
,
Address: ~~ 5 fW J( uJaJO lYHf tJ
Phone: ~itL~anu.;)(J:) LA Itfi) 333-3Qy9
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
~~--
-
)n ;::;;5+ S SF
5 ~f> S9P7
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
Address:
* * * * * * * * *
~t5~
WV"' ~~~~
;)?:/5 t'lL ~ woo cL l3Y
---1R'3'J 5~. ~62f\
'0)~ \-t\' ~OD'. Le~
Signature:
Name:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
~"t{r- -
O~I~ ~Q~
_ , '}o jb . ~ltuilL-
103) . '5<ts0} - gt/fcA
J l) n~JY{J\'\VlU e ~M). (d"'-
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
Jeffw;t Iltt.
Jr;;; F P ~e Y -POL;
z,~ 5 f'lJ Gtuxvn ;i3Y.
( e1- z~ 2Jo- OJ I.J 5'
* * * * * * * * *
Signature: d/av;;:fIJA<f'r" <{/
/ ~
Name: C /7 4ft ~S L L? ;? I ( c4--
I
Address: J/ y 1lr--eA/fGvrJvQ 1) .~
Phone: '(I)-- s- {; ( -ro <a -.-::J-j
Email: r-y r f~ <t:L S 6 r J'l~ hul. 11 e/-
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
~h iA ~~\lC C~
~~ A ~)KlC(4-
~(lf IS ~ ~ Arlw-C){,)? \J I"
G rD-- er)J--()8~O
~ b'\ I L C c<- ~=-- \. r~'\.Ul), (' --<J'VJI\... _
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
~~~.
ELll!tbtll-t 10 L \
Y v~ iJ I k\ lLXJod
l60 5f}q - 545 I
Address:
Phone:
Email:
*~~~
t> .
&~4 vo L\
4~sWdd. u.w d
~85f) 5(f 7- 'JlI t;J
* * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email :
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
Fact Sheet
Did you know.. ...
That the City of South San Francisco wants to build a 4 1/2 story parking
structure, which would loom over 60' over the downtown neighborhood?
That this structure will only have a 1 foot setback from its neighbors,
eliminating nearly all direct sunlight from entering on the sides close to the
structure. (Source: City Council Meeting Minutes, December 12, 2007, page 6, "Miller
Avenue Parking Structure Shadow Analysis 1/31/08.")
That your parking rates have been increased in the downtown
neighborhood area to pay for this structure? (Source: City Council Meeting
Minutes, July 11,2007, page 6.)
That this structure will have 256 spaces (a maximum net increase of 149
spaces of what is currently available, and the City proposes 200 spaces be
for permit parkin2. (Source: City Council Meeting, DVD, Dec. 12,2007,2 hI., 24 min.)
That the proposed parking structure is expected to lose money each year, so
that the SSF RedevelopmeIllt Agency will have to contribute $ $93,000 to
$278,000 per year (*Based on 2006 dollars cost of $7,000,000 to $9,000,000)
to keep it in the black? (Source: Redevelopment Agency Staff Report, Downtown Parking
Garage, February 14,2007 Page 2.)
*Estimated project cost escalated to $11,814,000 at Dec. 12,2007 Council
Meeting. With Cost up 150%, would this mean expected annual losses will
be up 1500/0? (Source December 12, 2007 City Council meeting, Minutes, Page 6)
That the City Staff has declared that this huge building would cause NO
significant environmental impact to the neighborhood, for traffic increases,
shade, and loss of views for these affected neighbors? (Source: Revised Initial
Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration.)
Do you feel you have been well-informed by the City?
IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PROPOSED
PARKING STRUCTURE, PLEASE ATTEND THE UPCOMING PUBLIC
HEARING AND / OR SIGN THIS PETITION EXPRESSING YOUR
CONCERN.
Wednesday March 26, 7:30 pm .
South San Francisco Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive
Subject: Consideration of Miller Avenue Parking Structure Negative Declaration
(APNs 012-312-040 through 012-312-070)
PETITION
IN SUPPORT OF ADEQUATE CONSIDERATION
OF MILLER AVE. PARKING STRUCTURE PROJECT
Dear City Council of South San Francisco:
We, the undersigned, are concerned about the proposed Miller Avenue Parking Structure,
which is proposed to be located on the 300 block of Miller Ave. in South San Francisco. We
feel that the City should show that it has clearly sought public input on the benefits and
drawbacks of this project. We feel that the city should show that this is the best use of
public funds, and will benefit the businesses and citizens of South San Francisco.
* * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
f
*1 i4 \ !
Vlt\ V {^:::i~
V\'L\ Vf>'(j~,~~,
~ H' 3/0 ,pI N \2 AV~_, _ S' ~ r-:,'
() \ D "' 3 '3 ~ - L-X b ~
V I \L\ tvY:1"" (loB V\ u. ~ 0 () -' L- Q,'Y\
- \
?~
{l~=
: ~ ,,111 /e if ~S<;tJA::5:' 4/'#k
c;2 C;-J)/~l){/AlF c+ -<;~ff
?5ZJ ~/Y71-~;2Lf-/
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
'<;;;:~:~/k/ (~~~( ~O
c:: c ft- /? / 'vie /'---c
<:g:;-;. &~l?J~41v
,d; - p "71 ~ 4/~-7
--~
* * * * * * * IJ ~ /J /7 C) /}
Signature: I ~~ J/)1A)'-O~f.z!....
Name: 0 ) C /-1 f1 /C. P Jv\ 0 0 D Y'
Address: 43 {; ~It Ie r<vl1 DAVE..
Phone: (;..5 fJ 9 )~';2.. - 6' t? ;28"
Email:
* * * * * * * * ":/j .
r ./
Signature:
/a~~
11 r G< ~ Yn (-if...-
.;7-31 3.~' ia'l/l<- ~ &.1;(~.9*ff{J
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature: ~~d -
Name: 5 (j /1 r;. n~fl sf /1- b4"-
Address: S <t ; Crt:t~cI It l/ e
Phone: (<050 yo i - LJ.() (/ k-
Email:
I1tJy-l~ M ~~
SS F elf- 9f()rfO
* * * * * * * * *
Signature: .~ e( e r"" c~ ~\cU'V\.oV\~ ~ i.--
Name: \lece..v'oc<:- \\er\^~c)C')
Address: CO 36 nuI'J..o,^" e k\-~ ~ !!:C
Phone: ~ <;'OJ ~ 3 4~S - 8 '1
Email:
ss~ ~,-'\409 0
* *-1!.Afll ~
;:::MgJ V;61M--
~d. &:, /7J tT~; Fi etb -LY2.
t::ou-.;lfJ~ -7'V 7h
OVSTmE KV (~/JOL-COh1
* * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
rk.-----
.~ ff;
~b t41t-ftSf" cd.
l5() <J. 1)5 5;''=.AtJ
/
SSF eft- 7YD&J
,
pr IV~ t"s t ~ fL q<!Of3D
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
"
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
F act Sheet
Did you know.. ...
That the City of South San :Francisco wants to build a 4 1/2 story parking
structure, which would loom over 60' over the downtown neighborhood?
That this structure will only have a 1 foot setback from its neighbors,
eliminating nearly all direct sunlight from entering on the sides close to the
structure. (Source: City Council Meeting Minutes, December 12, 2007, page 6, "Miller
Avenue Parking Structure Shadow Analysis 1/31/08.")
That your parking rates have been increased in the downtown
neighborhood area to pay for this structure? (Source: City Council Meeting
Minutes, July 11,2007, page 6.)
That this structure will hav,~ 256 spaces (a maximum net increase of 149
spaces of what is currently available, and the City proposes 200 spaces be
for permit parkin2:. (Source: City Council Meeting, DVD, Dec. 12,2007,2 hr., 24 min.)
That the proposed parking structure is expected to lose money each year, so
that the SSF Redevelopment Agency will have to contribute $ $93,000 to
$278,000 per year (*Based on 2006 dollars cost of $7,000,000 to $9,000,000)
to keep it in the black? (Source: Redevelopment Agency Staff Report, Downtown Parking
Garage, February 14,2007 Page 2.)
*Estimated project cost esc~lllated to $11,814,000 at Dec. 12, 2007 Council
Meeting. With Cost up 150cYo, would this mean expected annual losses will
be up 1500A.? (Source December 12,2007 City Council meeting, Minutes, Page 6)
That the City Staff has declared that this huge building would cause NO
significant environmental impact to the neighborhood, for traffic increases,
shade, and loss of views for lthese affected neighbors? (Source: Revised Initial
Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration.)
Do you feel you have been well-informed by the City?
IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PROPOSED
PARKING STRUCTURE, PLEASE ATTEND THE UPCOMING PUBLIC
HEARING AND / OR SIGN THIS PETITION EXPRESSING YOUR
CONCERN.
Wednesday March 26,7:30 pm
South San Francisco Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive
Subject: Consideration of Miller Avenue Parking Structure Negative Declaration
(APNs 012-312-040 through 012-312-070)
PETITION
IN SUPPORT OF ADEQUATE CONSIDERATION
OF MILLER AVE. PARKING STRUCTURE PROJECT
Dear City Council of South San Francisco:
We, the undersigned, are concerned about the proposed Miller A venue Parking Structure,
which is proposed to be located on the 300 block of Miller Ave. in South San Francisco. We
feel that the City should show that it has clearly sought public input on the benefits and
drawbacks of this project. We feel that thecity should show that this is the best use of
public funds, and will benefit the businesses and citizens of South San Francisco.
Name:
;i~:n:e: * * ~~ cR (lcUL'
Name: r Jrwi&-\ V\O.- L. GGLtLt ^
\1.~c:v&sLdL (pArt 55}
((pEi:J) 46.7 d- - d4q )
~-b5 @ ~1 (, t'\~ (----
;i:a::e: * *J1f2 @ ~ '
\ c6~ GOJll
SOD ltb:)d&>V-)e (:;t 00~
( L,G0) l~lrr - y;~ ~
b~ -6j @ P(~C .bcll t Vl,.eJ-
Address:
5l5D
Phone:
Email:
Address:
Phone:
Email :
* * * * *
**A
~-<-~
Iv\. ~ "-'- G: \ \ ~ ;; S'ov--
..2..1.o 2- -G rt^ "'-c::^- Pt-\t"L
b~D - f?-'1-z..-lbOO
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
~/ifj
. 7~,,---- .. . ~ /.J)?;uc.-
/1?Oj)fa ~\~ ~ U;1- ?t4J,Jo~,
N=tf) he' -Q~ Placp5/J1.J &tlA10
(y 50- tC) T j- Cfs-q .
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
So~ ::. .F
..
********* ()
Signature: ~ ~. ~~ "
Name: 3:> ~"""'........<-- ~~ ~ ~
* * * * * * * * *
/ff~~
/:/ '\ I () t!.-. i~lc i?u L, IlC.-
(,..;/ . .. v
//)76 m:?e-d)"'6 ~~~_ :SSp-
0S0 - ~'7/ ~ ~/6P
Jnr> b-..\ I.JLe /l~70UJ~ CopY
Address:
Phone:
Email:
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
2. \. '\ ~ :. ..-: u- 'f\ \JL.
~ (0 - ~ \( 3>p. b 1 q L\.
t >0_ :; J~
//
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone::
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:.
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
Fact Sheet
Did you know.. ...
That the City of South San l8'rancisco wants to build a 4 1/2 story parking
structure, which would loom over'60' over the downtown neighborhood?
That this structure will only have a 1 foot setback from its neighbors,
eliminating nearly all direct sunlight from entering on the sides close to the
structure. (Source: City Council Meeting Minutes, December 12,2007, page 6, "Miller
Avenue Parking Structure Shadow Analysis 1/31/08.")
That your parking rates have been increased in the downtown
neighborhood area to pay for this structure? (Source: City Council Meeting
Minutes, July 11,2007, page 6.)
,
That this structure will hav.~ 256 spaces (a maximum net increase of 149
spaces of what is currently available, and the City proposes 200 spaces be
for permit parking. (Source: City Council Meeting, DVD, Dec. 12,2007,2 hr., 24 min.)
That the proposed parking structure is expected to lose money each year, so
that the SSF Redevelopment Agency will have to contribute $ $93,000 to
$278,000 per year (*Based OIn 2006 dollars cost of $7,000,000 to $9,000,000)
to keep it in the black? (Source: Redevelopment Agency Staff Report, Downtown Parking
Garage, February 14,2007 Page 2.)
*Estimated project cost escalated to $11,814,000 at Dec. 12,2007 Council
Meeting. With Cost up 150'0/0, would this mean expected annual losses will
be up 1500/0? (Source December 12,2007 City Council meeting, Minutes, Page 6)
That the City Staff has declared that this huge building would cause NO
significant environmental iInpact to the neighborhood, for traffic increases,
shade, and loss of views for these affected neighbors? (Source: Revised Initial
Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration.)
Do you feel you have beE~n well-informed by the City?
IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PROPOSED
PARKING STRUCTURE, PLEASE ATTEND THE UPCOMING PUBLIC
HEARING AND / OR SIGN THIS PETITION EXPRESSING YOUR
CONCERN.
Wednesday March 26,7:30 pm
South San Francisco Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive
Subject: Consideration of Miller Avenue Parking Structure Negative Declaration
(APNs 012-312-040 through 012-312-070)
PETITION
IN SUPPORT OF ADEQUATE CONSIDERATION
OF MILLER AVE. PARKING STRUCTURE PROJECT
Dear City Council of South San Francisco:
We, the undersigned, are concerned about the proposed Miller Avenue Parking Structure,
which is proposed to be located on the 300 block of Miller Ave. in South San Francisco. We
feel that the City should show that it has clearly sought public input on the benefits and
drawbacks of this project. We feel that the city should show that this is the best use of
public funds, and will benefit the businesses and citizens of South San Francisco.
* * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
M
t:1I ;
f#/! JI111[~r Av-L
b50 - 87/ - 11/~
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
r7dftt1f~p~/ l ~
fV\~ ~5;IL\
~ 'L-\ ""'"\ \ \ 1eV /\veL ..
(PS 0 -- C\"'5l.- -133'1
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
~~~i
~ -Sf! 19 1\1 ,/6 /) l?..
'~71 ~ J7Cj (
---:.-
tv1
/55
650 ~
* * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
;%J (lf1 ~
f?fberL) 1(; b/(lf1('t20
~5c1 Ht) l~ A-v-c: ) 06-F
l.P50. '61~. ;;2"5
.-
Or-
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
PETITION
IN SUPPORT OF ADEQUATE CONSIDERATION
OF MILLER AVE. PARKING STRUCTURE PROJECT
Dear City Council of South San Francisco:
We, the undersigned, are concerned about the proposed Miller Avenue Parking Structure,
which is proposed to be located on the 300 block of Miller Ave. in South San Francisco. We
feel that the City should show that it has clearly sought public input on the benefits and
drawbacks of this project. We feel that the city should show that this is the best use of
public funds, and will benefit the businesses and citizens of South San Francisco.
* * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Emai1:
*~'r ~'
I~ ~ S. :;~F
() - '~IA it OJl
** ~
~~~ - ---- -
MCJrl(O~A'-<> 7C~/~S .
cXt) 7 e~.~~~ ~,S: \K
If, SiD - (Cj $' . 3 ~6 1.
*~ 9(y~w-
C;G~
Lib
r
~OJ1J- ~L\0e-
'(;(JIb I) ?,O'L--
~r
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
Fact Sheet
Did you know.. ...
That the City of South San F'rancisco wants to build a 4 1/2 story parking
structure, which would loom over 60' over the downtown neighborhood?
That this structure will only have a 1 foot setback from its neighbors,
eliminating nearly all direct sunlight from entering on the sides close to the
structure. (Source: City Council Meeting Minutes, December 12,2007, page 6, "Miller
Avenue Parking Structure Shadow Analysis 1/31/08.")
That your parking rates have been increased in the downtown
neighborhood area to pay for this structure? (Source: City Council Meeting
Minutes, July 11,2007, page 6.)
That this structure will have 256 spaces (a maximum net increase of 149
spaces of what is currently available, and the City proposes 200 spaces be
for permit parkin2:. (Source: City Council Meeting, DVD, Dec. 12,2007,2 hr., 24 min.)
That the proposed parking structure is expected to lose money each year, so
that the SSF Redevelopment Agency will have to contribute $ $93,000 to
$278,000 per year (*Based on 2006 dollars cost of $7,000,000 to $9,000,000)
to keep it in the black? (Source: Redevelopment Agency Staff Report, Downtown Parking
Garage, February 14,2007 Page 2.)
*Estimated project cost escalated to $11,814,000 at Dec. 12,2007 Council
Meeting. With Cost up 150<<Yo, would this mean expected annual losses will
be up 1500/0? (Source December 12, 2007 City Council meeting, Minutes, Page 6)
That the City Staff has declared that this huge building would cause NO
significant environmental impact to the neighborhood, for traffic increases,
shade, and loss of views for these affected neighbors? (Source: Revised Initial
Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration.)
Do you feel you have be{~n well-informed by the City?
IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PROPOSED
PARKlNG STRUCTURE, PLEASE ATTEND THE UPCOMING PUBLIC
HEARING AND / OR SIGN THIS PETITION EXPRESSING YOUR
CONCERN.
Wednesday March 26, 7:30 pm
South San Francisco Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive
Subject: Consideration of Miller Avenue Parking Structure Negative Declaration
(APNs 012-312-040 through 012-312-070)
PETITION
IN SUPPORT OF ADEQUATE CONSIDERATION
OF MILLER AVE. PARKING STRUCTURE PROJECT
Dear City Council of South San Francisco:
We, the undersigned, are concerned about the proposed Miller Avenue Parking Structure,
which is proposed to be located on the 300 block of Miller Ave. in South San Francisco. We
feel that the City should show that it has clearly sought public input on the benefits and
drawbacks of this project. We feel that the city should show that this is the best use of
public funds, and will benefit the businesses and citizens of South San Francisco.
* * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email :
*****
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* *~ C~
71-w14M ~r?...( fJ ~
32-1 Yl1. ,11t'~'1 A1/e
.....
t:rlr.., ?'4- 7'" 'J S
I
f
~~"...- ---
.f2-Il'~~-"'\ - t&~/(~!?7/
)"l- I /1/1 L I (t V /~ LJ .4f- (,
Ct~tJ--~r;-f~ Irtr;
~~'VLJ '-z.'l)~l @ ~ 'l-1-;..1 I.. L 0 7/"-
***~ ;41 ~.~
t"'; 111// //I~y Af/. If f'A,J. JI/f {AH/2//(e:
}b/ Jll//lrcr 41/ #- {. .
~)o - flt;- r~T
/( It- J1 i v/t !~ If? ~ / - (I tVf
*'******* ~
Signature: & /Uf. -~
Name: ~ I:-'Yl C '$' Y' 5 (' Ii VZ i 7A-/c~
Address: 7 r;, / ,;11' ,. / /.ey 1r/*-
fro ~ )k-tr---- f~ .
,k~/~/~<<tJ 1/"(CJ1A
~ 1::-r
/t1 Jl1 ~7(j!lY^
f!1if/t/J ~p~
t; -D Y05 <:
Phone:
Email:
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
d~~
::rO se' A LV.4-1< z:...
32) MI/J_EI< 4v&. ~f-rli!
C S 0 - B 7 3 - / / 3D
J'C'Sl. 4./\/4 Y"CZ. lIt/? &/.jr'Y>Jf.-t , COn]
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
~{~~-1-4 RoZ.~""&l
,
~ l y'Y\ \ IJle-r A u-rL #- ~
{p-rD ;:)7 ~ /L, ~ '+?
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
0vA-~ ~___----
.
~"'-n" \<...e.z..Q.f'l.~L
:'2... \ N\l\\~,(" I~ve. ;$ ~
(p~ <t,l\-Ol\.Ql:J
* * * * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
* * * * * * *
Signature:
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email :
~Q.o,'~
t\J\ c.\..Q J\\~ tu;I ~~
~\ i,['f\....\\.(>.fl Plve.... ~ ~
l.o')b ~Sl \~ D'-1.'1'O
*~
l)CVo'( g ,.~
l~\ S,/I1I~~ 3
(PSt) ---67(.- 600?-
* * * * * * * * * -
Signature: /~
Name: M OtA1 ~ -eO If (l n ~
Address: 5 L'\ La c, U,.ytJU
Phone: 59'BSB t~
Email:
Signature:
Name:
.~ twt ---
. M. ~
\ fiJlL( AV~ ~~
lfJDr Q41-rXh1
* * * * * * * * *
Address:
Phone:
Email:
j}\.,/i };J .~ i
\
\"-.. "'--------
.-'~,..,.,.~..,_~..r_~...__
- ----------'-
~~--~--,.;-_.~_....
February 29, 2008
The Honorable Pedro Gonzalez
City Hall Annex
315 Maple Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
NV\lS
Dear Mayor Gonzalez:
Congratulations on your recent inauguration as the new Mayor of the City of South San Francisco.
We would like to invite you to join us -:-. and more than 250 other Mayors from around the nation - in taking
on the issue of illegal guns. Together, we represent more than 50 million Americans. As Mayors, our highest
responsibility is to enforce the law and protect the people we serve. One of the most difficult challenges we
face in meeting this responsibility is preventing criminals from illegally obtaining guns and preventing those
who do get them from using them. This is not a conservative or liberal issue; that's why our group of mayors
includes Democrats, Republicans, and mdependents. We are not interested in fighting ideological battles.
The polarizing rhetoric of gun politics only obscures the tragic reality we see too often: violent criminals
with easy access to fIrearms.
Mayors Against megal Guns aims to bring national attention to the problem of illegal guns and gun
violence. The coalition is not about gun control. It is about crime control. Our coalition has been working
with mayors and the law enforcement community throughout the country to keep guns out of the hands of
criminals. We urge you to join us as we work together on local enforcement initiatives, and as we work to
convince our federal representatives to give our police officers the tools and resources they need to do their
jobs. Despite the overheated rhetoric that often occurs on both sides of the debate on guns, we believe that
there is enormous common ground for all those who both respect the 2nd Amendment and seek to crack down
on crune_
If you would like to join Mayors Against Illegal Guns, please sign the attached Statement of
Principles and email it or fax it to 212-788-6815. Also, for your reference, enclosed is a background
document about the coalition and a current list of member mayors. For more information about the
coalition's activities, please visit the coalition web site at www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org.lfyou have
additional questions, please contact Arkadi Gemey, NewY ork City Mayor's Office, at 212-7 8&-546 I or
Dina Siegal, Boston Mayor's Office, 617-635-3817.
Thank you for your consideration, ;and we look forward to working with you toward our common
goals of combating the flow of illegal guns and making our communities safer.
Sincerely,
~n
~}4( )!7~:J
Thomas M. Menino
Mayor of Boston
~~~
Michael R. Bloomber~_/
Mayor of New York City
About Our Coalition
Mayors Against Illegal Guns is dedicated to making America's cities safer by cracking down on
illegal guns. Every year, 30,000 Americans are killed as a result of gun violence, destroying
families and harming communities. Iv1ayors have a responsibility to protect their communities by
punishing gun offenders and traffickers, holding irresponsible gun dealers accountable, and
demanding access to trace data that is critical to law enforcement efforts to combat illegal gun
trafficking.
On April 25, 2006, an initial group of 15 mayors, hosted by Boston Mayor Thomas Menino and
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, held a summit in New York City to discuss strategies for
stopping the flow of illegal guns into America's cities. The mayors attending the summit drafted
and signed a statement of principles to guide their efforts.
At the time, the Coalition set as its goal to grow to 50 members by the end of 2006, but that goal
was surpassed more than 6 months ahead of schedule. The Coalition's bipartisan ranks have now
grown to more than 250 mayors from more than 40 states, and the statement of principles has
been endorsed by major national organizations such as the US Conference of Mayors and the
National League of Cities.
The Coalition offers several services to help member mayors in their fight against illegal guns. It
highlights successful strategies from across the country. It keeps them updated not only on model
local legislation, but also on relevant bills as they are considered in state capitals and in
Washington. It also connects members to experts in the field who can help develop new
initiatives. The Coalition's website is www.mavorsagainstillegalguns.org
Members of Mayors Against illegal Guns
Mayor Larry P. Langford, Birmingham, Alabama
Mayor Thomas Henderson, Center Point, Alabama
Mayor Carroll L. Watson, Lincoln, Alabama
Mayor Samuel L. Jones, Mobile, Alabama
Mayor Ron Davis, Prichard, Alabama
Mayor James Perkins, Jr., Selma, Alabama
Mayor Johnny Ford, Tuskegee, Alabama
Mayor Carolyn Floyd, Kodiak, Alaska
Mayor Dan Coody, Fayetteville, Arkansas
Mayor Patrick Hays: North Little Rock Arkansas
Mayor Jimmy Delshad, Beverly Hills, California
Mayor Marsha Ramos, Burbank, California
Mayor Donald Burr, Campbell, California
Mayor Cheryl Cox, Cbula V ista, California
Mayor Robert Wasserman, Fremont, California
Mayor Marc Searl, Hemet, California
Mayor Beth Krom, Irvine, California
Mayor H. Manuel Ortiz, lrwindale, California
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Los Angeles, California
Mayor Rob Schroder, M~!1~z, California
Mayor Ron Tussing, Billings;- Montana
Mayor Chris Beutler, Lincoln, Nebraska
Mayor Mike Fahey, Omaha, Nebraska
Mayor Donald A. Groesser, Ralston, Nebraska
Mayor Kevin G. Sanders, Asbury Park, New Jersey
Mayor Joseph V. Doria, Jr., Bayonne, New Jersey
Mayor Jason J. Varano, Berkeley Township, NewJersey
Mayor Gwendolyn A. Faison, Camden, New Jersey
Mayor Sophie Heymann, Borough of Closter, New Jersey
Mayor Carol Foster, Corbin City, New Jersey
_ Mayor James Carroll, Demarest, New Jersey
Mayor Chester Eiland, Downe Township, New Jersey
Mayor Joseph R. Smith, East Newark, New Jersey
Mayor Robert L. Bowser, East Orange, New Jersey
Mayor Jun Choi, Edison, New Jersey
Mayor J. Christian Bollwage, Elizabeth, New Jersey
Mayor David Delle DOD...'1a, Guttenberg, New Jersey
Mayor Beth Ann Haven, Haddon Heights, New Jersey
Mayor John F. Bencivenga, Hamilton, New Jersey
Mayor James C. DiNardo, Hazlet Township, New Jersey
Mayor Meryl Frank, Highland Park, New Jersey
Mayor Wayne Smith, Irvington, New Jersey
Mayor Jerramiah Healy, Jersey City, New Jersey
Mayor Gregg David, Kenilworth, New Jersey
Mayor James Burke, Kingwood, New Jersey
Mayor Brian A. Reid, Lacey Township, New Jersey
Mayor Eugene Kulick, Little Falls, New Jersey
Mayor Frank W. Minor, Logan Township, New J~:rsey
Mayor Mary C. Garvin, Longport, New Jersey
Mayor Walt Craig, Lower Township, New Jersey
Mayor Michael Fressola, Manchester Township, New Jersey
Mayor Frank M. North, Merchantville, New Jersey
Mayor James A. Gallos, Borough onvlilford, New Jersey
Mayor Donald Cresitello, Morristown, NewJersey
Mayor James Manning, Jr., Neptune Township, New Jersey
Mayor Cory Booker, Newark, New Jersey
Mayor Peter C. Massa, North Arlington, New Jersey
Mayor Francis M. VI omack, IlL North Brunswick, New Jersey
Mayor Raody George, North Haledon, New Jersey
Mayor Jaoice G. Allen, North Plainfield, New Jersey
Mayor Michael Luther, Parsippany- Troy Hills, New Jersey
Mayor Samuel Rivera, Passaic, New Jersey
Mayor Jose Torres, Paterso~ New Jersey
Mayor Harry L. Wyant, Phillipsburg, New Jersey
Mayor Gary Giherson, Port Republic, New Jersey
Mayor Mohamed Khaimllah, Prospect.park, New Jersey
Mayor Pasquale Menna, Borough of Red Bank, New Jersey
Mayor Earl Gage, Salem, New Jersey
Mayor Emilia Siciliano, Shrewsbury, New Jersey
Mayor Barry H. Zagnit, Borough of Spotswood, New Jersey
Mayor Douglas Palmer, Trenton, New Jersey
Mayor Betty Simmons, Victory Gardens, New Jersey
Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh, West Windsor, New Jersey
1',1ayor John E. McCormac, Woodbridge, New Je;rsey
Mayor Orlando Ortega, Jr., Portales, New Mexico
Mayor David Coss, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Mayor Gerald Jennings, Albany, New York
Mayor Ann Thane, Amsterdam, New York
Mayor Steve Gold, Beacon, New York
Mayor Byron Brown, Buffalo, New York
Mayor Wayne J. Hall Sr., Hempstead, New York
Mayor Richard Scalera, Hudson, New York
Mayor Noam Bramson, New Rochelle, New York
Mayor Michael Bloomberg, New York, New York
Mayor Robert Duffy, Rochester, New York
Mayor Brian U. Stratton, Schenectady, New York
Mayor Matthew J. Driscoll, Syracuse, New York
Mayor David R. Roefaro, Utica, New York
Mayor Michael P. Manning, Watervliet, New York
Mayor Philip lunicone, Yonkers, New York
Mayor Terry Bellamy, Asheville, North Carolina
Mayor Kevin F<?y, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
Mayor John R. Bost,. Clemmons, North Carolina
Mayor Bill Bell, Durham, North Carolina .
Mayor Yvonne J. Johnson, Greensboro, North Carolina
Mayor Charles Meeker, Raleigh, North Carolina
Mayor Dennis Walaker, Fargo, North Dakota
Mayor Dan Pillow, Addyston, Ohio
Mayor Donald Plusquellic, Akron, Ohio
Mayor Joseph Harper, Arlington Heights, Ohio
Mayor Mark Mallory, Cincinnati, Ohio
Mayor Frank JackSon, Cleveland, Ohio
Mayor Danny Stacy, Cleves, Ohio
Mayor Michael Coleman, Columbus, Ohio
Mayor Rhine McLin, Dayton, Ohio
Mayor Theodore Shannon, Fairfax, Ohio
Mayor Thomas J. Longo, Garfield Heights, Ohio
Mayor Joseph C. Hubbard, Glendale, Ohio
Mayor Alan Zaffiro, Golf Manor, Ohio
Mayor Daniel Gieringer, Harrison, Ohio
Mayor Deborah Seay, Lincoln Heights, Ohio
Mayor Jo Ann Toczek, Linndale, Ohio
Mayor Jim Brown, Lockland, Ohio
Mayor Thomas E. O'Grady, North Olmsted, Ohio
Mayor Earl M. Leiken, Shaker Heights, Ohio
Mayor John Smith, Silve11on, Ohio
Mayor Kevin C. Patton, Solon, Ohio
Mayor Carleton S. Finkbeiner, Toledo, Ohio
Mayor Marcia L. Fudge, Warrensville Heights, Ohio
Mayor Barry Porter, Wyoming, OlUo
Mayor Jay Williams, Youngstown, Ohio
Mayor Kathy Taylor, Tulsa, Oldahoma
Mayor Rob Drake, Beaverton, Oregon
Mayor Ed Pawlowski, Allentown, Pennsylvania
Mayor John B. Callahan, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
Mayor Helen Thomas, Darby, Pennsylvania
Mayor Joseph Sinnott, Erie, Pennsylvania
Mayor J. Richard Gray, Lancaster, Pennsylvania
Mayor Michael Nutter, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Mayor Lulce Ravenstahl, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Mayor Tom McMahon, Reading, Pennsylvania
Mayor F. Raymond Shay, Upper Darby, Pennsylvania
Mayor Jolm S. Brenner, York, Pennsylvania
Mayor David Cicilline, Providence, Rhode Island
Mayor Joseph Riley, Charleston, South Carolina
Mayor Robert D. Coble, Columbia, South Carolina
Mayor Joseph T. McElveen, Jr., Sumter, South Carolina
Mayor Dave Munson, Sioux Falls, South Dakota
Mayor Bill Haslam, Knoxville, Tennessee
Mayor Tom Beehan, Oak Ridge, Tennessee
Mayor A C Wharton, Shelby County, Tennesse(~
Mayor Will Wynn, Austin, Texas
Mayor Bill White, Houston, Texas
Mayor Richard Ward, Hurst, Texas
Mayor Bob Kiss, Burlington, Vermont
Mayor William B. Euille, Alexandria, Virginia
Mayor Paul D. Fraim, Norfolk, Virginia
Mayor Annie M. Mickens, Petersbmg, Virginia
Mayor James W. Holley Ill, Portsmouth, Virginia
Mayor L. Douglas Wilder, Richmond, Virginia
Mayor Peter B. Lewis, Auburn, Washington
Mayor Greg Nickels, Seattle, Washington
Mayor Bill Baarsma, Tacoma, Washington
Mayor James J. Schmitt, Green Bay, Wisconsin
Mayor John M. Antaramian, Kenosha, Wisconsin
Mayor Dave Cieslewicz, Madison, Wisconsin
MayorTom Barrett, Milwaukee, Wisconsin .
Mayor Gary Becker, Racine, Wisconsin
Mayor Andrew Halverson, Stevens Point, Wisconsin
Mayor David Ross, Superior, Wisconsin
Mayor Larry Nelson, Waukesha, Wisconsin
Mayor Theresa M. Estness, Wauwatosa, Wisconsin
STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES
Whereas: 30,000 Americans across the country are killed every year as a result of gun violence,
destroying families and communities in big cities and small towns; and
Whereas: As Mayors, we are duty-bound to do everything in our power to protect our residents,
especially our children, from harm and there is no greater threat to public safety than the threat of
illegal guns;
Now, therefore, we resolve to work together to fmd innovative new ways to advance the following
principles:
o Punish - to the maximum extent ofthe law - criminals who possess, use, and traffic in
illegal guns.
o Target and hold accountable irresponsible gun dealers who break the law by knowingly
selling guns to straw purchasers.
o Oppose all federal efforts to restrict cities' right to access, use, and share trace data that is
so essential to effective enforcement, or to interfere with the ability of the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms to combat illegal gun trafficking.
o Work to develop and use techrlologies that aid in the detection and tracing of illegal guns.
o Support all local, state, and federal legislation that targets illegal guns; coordinate
legislative, enforcement, and litigation strategies; and share information and best practices.
o Invite other cities to join us in this new national effort.
(Signature)
(Mayor's Name - please print)
(Mayor's Office AddreSej')
(City, State, Zip)
(Mayor's Telephone)
(Mayor's Email Address)
(Staff Contact Name)
(Staff M~ember's Telephone)
(Staff Position)
(Staff Email)
To join Mayors Against Illegal Guns, please fill in the information above and return this form to the
coalition via fax at 212-788-6815. Alternatively, you can email a PDF of the signed statement to
infa@mayorsagainstillegalguns.arg.
.
~ . ~:~
Ic ("l
>< ....
~ ~
v C
~4l~~ Staff Report
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
March 26, 2008
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Susan Kennedy, Assistant to the City Manager
CONSIDERATION OF STATUS OF THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
FARMERS' MARKET FOR THE 2008 SEASON
RECOMMENDATJiJN
The Farmers' Market Sub-Committee recommends the closing of the Farmers' Market for the 2008
season. The City Council should consider the recommendation and, by motion, provide direction to staff
as to the status of Farmers' Market in 2008.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
As a result of the Council's discussion of the Farmers' Market at the Annual Retreat, staff was directed
to work with the Council Sub-Committee (Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto and Councilman Garbarino) to
pursue alternative sites to Orange Memorial Park for the 2008 Market Season. Each of the sites is
discussed below.
The pavilion at the South San Francisco BART Station was found to be financially prohibitive due to the
fact that BART wants to charge at least $500 per month in rent for the space. The parking area at Terra
Bay Recreation Center would compete: with other prograrnrning needs and rentals for very limited
parking. A joint effort with Kaiser Hospital was also discussed, but they prefer to continue their market
efforts during the week so more of their employees are able to partiCipate.
A joint effort with the School District, utilizing the parking lot at the District Office just off of El
Camino Real was also pursued. A letter was sent to the Board of Trustees requesting a discussion.
Time constraints and the potential lack of site availability every weekend throughout the Market Season
removed this site from consideration.
Another option discussed with the Sub-Committee was the parking lot at City Hall. While there has been
some positive input from downtown merchants on this location, the sub-committee feels there is
significant potential for issues with parking and other logistics in this location.
The Sub-committee intends to continue exploring a partnership with the School District for 2009,
subject to site availability and other logistical issues.
Staff Report
Subject: (Status of Farmers' Market for 2008 Season)
Page 2
FUNDING
If the motion to close the market passes, there will be no expenditure of funds.
CONCLUSION
The Farmers' Market Sub-committee recommends closing the South San Francisco Farmers'
Market for the 2008 season.
Susan E. Kennedy
Assistant to the City
By:
:MINUTES
DRAFT
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
REGULAR MEETING
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING
COMMUNITY ROOM
\VEDNESDA Y, MARCH 12,2008
AGENDA ITEM #1
CALLED TO ORDER:
7:30 p.m.
Before proceeding to Roll Call, Mayor Gonzalez announced that effective as ofthe April 9, 2008
the RDA and City Council regular meetings would permanently begin at 6:30 and 7:00 p.m. respectively.
ROLL CALL:
Present:
Councilmen Addiego, Garbarino and Mullin,
Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto and Mayor Gonzalez.
Absent:
None.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Led by Mayor Gonzalez.
INVOCATION:
Given by Pastor John Cantley, Grace Covenant
Church.
PRESENTATIONS
. Certificate of Recognition presented to Alta Loma Middle School Cheer Squad.
City Council members presented a Certificate of Recognition to the Cheer Squad from Alta
Lorna Middle School that had recently attained the honor of National Champions in the Show
Cheer Category at the Cheerleaders of America Bay Cities National Open Championship.
Recreation and Community Services Supervisor Tim Chenette introduced the group of talented
young women who brought honor to South San Francisco as follows: Iris Tobar, Jasmin
Orozco, Danielle Bautista, Arianna Bautista, Katzandra Whigham, Stacy Prokopos, Jessica
Moran, Nicole Ruiz, Karina Cuevas, Rachel Portnov, Andrea Fernandez, Candace Chappell,
Nicole Arretche, Alyssa Sirianni, Maryann DeFrense, Jacqueline Contreras.
· County placement of proposed women's gender specific program facility - presented by
Sherriff Greg Munks.
Sherriff Munks began his presentation by introducing several members of his staff in attendance
and noted the presence of San Mateo County Supervisor Adrienne Tissier and her staff,
including Brian Perkins, who supported the project. Sheriff Munks explained that the proposed
women's gender specific program facility would be located on County property in South San
Francisco. The facility would house up to 40 minimum security female inmates. Booking and
release of inmates would not occur at the facility.
Sheriff Munks opined that the facility is necessary to alleviate the overcrowded conditions at the
County's women's correctional facility located in Redwood City, which Grand Juries have
found to be inadequate. He further explained that the dorms in the current facility are not
suitable for the provision of treatment services to amenable inmates, and explained that he was
working closely with the health department to develop cutting edge gender specific
programming for the facility. The proposed facility would thus accomplish the dual goals of
addressing overcrowding and the administration of gender specific programming for the future,
the latter of which had been the subject of a summit sponsored by Supervisor Tissier. Sheriff
Munks advised that the County estimated it could convert the present structure on the property
to a functional and secure correctional facility for roughly $500,000.
Sheriff Munks responded to concerns regarding visiting hours and associated loitering with a
plan to establish a sign-up procedure for visits. He explained that visitors to the current facility
arrive an hour early to sign -up for visits. Thus, he opined an advanced appointment procedure
would reduce and/or eliminate visitor loitering.
Councilman Mullin requested that the Sheriff s Office organize community meetings to address
South San Francisco residents' concerns. He opined that the suggested visitor appointment
process would reduce potential visitor loitering.
SheriffMunks agreed to host community meetings on the subject of the proposed facility.
Councilman Garbarino commented that after a tour of the women's correctional facility in
Redwood City he was concerned about the ability of children to have meaningful visits with
their incarcerated mothers. He suggested that the new facility could address such issues. He
further observed that a court could mandate placement of the facility in South San Francisco
and that under such circumstances, the community would have little or no input in the process.
He suggested that by attending community meetings, residents and the City would have the
opportunity to have their concerns regarding the facility addressed.
Sheriff Munks acknowledged limitations on the visiting quarters at the present facility. He
noted that over half of San Mateo County's incarcerated women have small children and that
such children are five times more likely to end up in jail. The proposed facility would
incorporate a reunification program intended to break both recidivism and the generational
incarceration cycles.
Councilman Addiego thanked Supervisor Tissier for encouraging him to take a tour of the
women's correctional facility in Redwood City. He noted that the section of the facility that
housed the choices program exuded hope and opined that such rehabilitative efforts are
tantamount to improving our prison system.
Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto noted her support for the program and thanked Supervisor Tissier
for her presence and for allowing the Council and residents to provide input on the matter.
However, she expressed concern about moving the facility into a South San Francisco
neighborhood and wanted to make sure that South San Francisco's residents were taken into
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
MARCH 12, 2008
PAGE 2
account in the process. She further requested confirmation from the Sheriff that visits would be
by appointment only, and expressed concern over the length of visiting hour times.
Sheriff Munks confirmed that an appointments only visiting policy was planned. He opined
that visiting hours may be reduced from 10:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., but could not make a
commitment to close visiting hours at 8:00 p.m. due to state requirements.
Mayor Pro Tern Matsumoto then noted the Sheriffs report stated that 10 of the 40 beds
proposed at the facility would be allocated for the work furlough program. She also questioned
planned staffing at the facility and the proposed location of the exercise yard.
SheriffMunks stated that the work flllrlough program was no longer being proposed at the
facility. In response to staffing questions, he noted that from a security standpoint, adequate
staffing was planned. He opined that allocations for additional treatment staffing may be
necessary. Sheriff Munks then advised that the exercise yard would be placed in what is
presently a walled-in sally port which would be modified to include a screened-in open air
ceiling.
Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto then questioned whether the planned temporary operation of the
facility for 5-6 years was realistic.
Sheriff Munks responded that the plan called for a new County women's correctional facility to
be built by 2011, or 2012 at the latest. At that time, all female inmates would be brought back
to the county facility and operations at the proposed North County Facility in South San
Francisco would cease.
Mayor Gonzalez questioned whether locations outside of South San Francisco were under
consideration. He also questioned expected inmate turnover and whether medical services
would be provided at the facility.
Sheriff Munks explained that the South San Francisco site presented a good opportunity
because the building was already configured as a correctional facility. He further noted that,
generally, men or women sentenced to County jail do no more than 1 year oftime with the
average sentence length being 3-6 months. Regarding medical services, the Sheriff explained
that the plan calls for nurses, including a nurse practitioner, and psychological support onsite.
AGENDA REVIEW
City Manager Nagel recommended continuation of agenda item No.9, consideration of the
Miller A venue Parking Structure, to the Council's March 26th regular meeting.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Robert Vernon of Shelter Shelter Network appeared to discuss the importance of programs to
help individuals affected by homelessness. He explained that he was homeless eight years ago
when he entered the Project 90 Program located on Baden Avenue in South San Francisco. He
opined that the Council's support for the program allowed him to become successful in life and
obtain a career. He expressed gratitude for the Council's continued support of the Maple Street
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
MARCH 12,2008
PAGE 3
Shelter Network program, which benefits a significant number of South San Francisco
residents.
Jennifer Obina, a senior at South San Francisco High School, appeared to advise Council and
residents of a cancer fundraiser, entitled Team South City Cares. The team hoped to raise
$1000 by participating in a relay for life at Stanford's Roble Field on April II th and lih. She
further requested that Council and residents participate in the GO PURPLE event on April loth
by wearing purple to support the team's cause.
Resident Marie Baldisseri, President of the League of Women Voters of North and Central San
Mateo County, appeared and read a letter (Attachment I hereto) on behalf of the League which
included the following points: The League supports Sheriff Munks' proposed women's gender
specific program facility. The League expressed concerns regarding overcrowding at the
current women's facility, which it opined had reached a crisis point. The League hoped that the
programs offered at the facility would give incarcerated women the tools to become positive
members of society and empower them to be good mothers. For many affected women, the
program would represent the first opportunity to become contributing citizens.
Patricia Marques of the Commission on the Status of Women appeared and expressed support
for the women's gender specific program facility proposed by Sheriff Munks. She opined that
at the present women's correctional facility, offerings are limited, because the center is only
able to provide programming for 11 inmates. She explained that the Commission held meetings
with incarcerated women to learn how to change behavior upon release, and noted that the
proposed program could achieve such rehabilitation. Ms. Marques opined that the placement of
the facility at an existing county structure is fiscally responsible. She observed that support
from local entities is crucial to the county's effort to help female inmates make a successful
transition back into the community.
ITEMS FROM COUNCIL
. Announcements
. Committee Reports
Councilmembers reported on attendance at community meetings and events, announced
upcoming programs such as the Centennial Multicultural event planned for March 29th and the
Picnic planned for July 4th. Council further spoke regarding public improvements made through
the Improving Public Places Program and noted staff s efforts, including worker's contributions
at the Water Quality Control Plant. Specific items for further action and/or consideration were
set forth as follows:
Councilman Mullin recounted events related to his participation with Councilman Garbarino in
the Council's Sub-committee on the Women's Proposed Gender Specific Program Facility,
including, a tour of the women's correctional facility in Redwood City accompanied by
Supervisor Tissier and Brian Perkins. He stated that he was impressed with the choices
program operated at the facility and was encouraged by the County's comprehensive plan to
create the program at the proposed facility. He stressed the importance of the County's promise
to hold community meetings on the subject and noted that he looked forward to a collaborative
approach at the proposed site.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
MARCH 12,2008
PAGE 4
Councilman Garbarino echoed Councilman Mullin's comments regarding their work on the
sub-committee relating to the correctional facility. He noted strong support for the choices
program and the hope it inspires.
Councilman Addiego asked the City Clerk to comment on recent County changes to polling
locations in South San Francisco.
City Clerk Martinelli-Larson advised that the County had recently consolidated polling places in
the City and removed City Hall as a polling location. These changes caused confusion on the
day ofthe February 5, 2008 Primary Election. The City Clerk's Office advised the County of
its concerns and the County re-designated City Hall as a polling place for upcoming elections.
The City Clerk urged voters to check County-issued sample ballots to determine their respective
polling locations in advance of the April 8, 2008 Special Election.
Councilman Addiego then commented on an ACORN event that he and Mayor Gonzalez
attended, in which a petition for universal healthcare was presented.
Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto noted Caltrain's assurance of$50 million in committed funding for
relocation of the Caltrain Station in South San Francisco. She also urged residents to maintain
awareness of plans to propose a new main library and relayed students' interest in City
governrnent internships, which she learned of while working with local high school leadership
programs.
Mayor Gonzalez reminded the publk of the memorial service planned for late Congressman
Tom Lantos on March 26th at 7:00 p.m. at the South San Francisco Conference Center. He also
congratulated Margaret de Larios, a senior at South San Francisco High School, and a recent
participant in the City's Youth Governrnent Day Program, who received an award from the
Governor.
City Manager Nagel requested selection of a Councilmember to work on the committee
responsible for selecting the consultant to work on the master plan for the former PUC property.
Mayor Pro Tern Matsumoto was selected.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Motion to approve the minutes of January 30, 2008, which were approved by the
Planning Commission on March 6, 2008, and the February 27, 2008 special and regular
meetings.
2. Motion to confirm expense c:laims of March 12,2008 in the amount of$I,898,819.74.
3. Motion approving the sculpture, Puzzle People, for the Loan Art Program at the Orange
Memorial Park Sculpture Garden.
Item pulledfrom Consent Calendar by Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto.
4. Resolution No. 25-2008 approving plans for the use of Proposition IB Funds to the City
for Fiscal Year 2007-2008 in the amount of$I,007,000.00.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
MARCH 12,2008
PAGE 5
Item pulledfrom Consent Calendar by Mayor Pro Tern Matsumoto.
5. Resolution No. 26-2008 awarding Phase II of the replacement of two playground
structures in the Westborough Common Greens Area of Greendale between
Kent/Crofton and Radburn, utilizing a cooperative purchasing agreement on Castro
Valley's bid. 2007-2008 CIP Project No. 51-13232-0824.
6. Resolution No. 27-2008 allowing the access and internal roadways at Centennial Towers
- Terrabay Phase III - to be considered a private road and accepting Tower Place as the
name of said road. Centennial Towers (Terrabay PHIII) on San Bruno Mountain.
Item pulledfrom Consent Calendar by Councilman Garbarino.
7. Resolution No. 28-2008 expressing support for Proposition 99, a ballot measure
initiative entitled the "Homeowners and Private Property Protection Act" appearing on
the June 3, 2008 Ballot and Resolution No. 29-2008 expressing opposition to
Proposition 98, a ballot measure initiative entitled the "California Property Owners and
Farmland Protection Act" appearing on the June 3, 2008 Ballot.
Motion - Councilman Addiego/Second - Councilman Garbarino: to approve Consent Calendar
Items Nos. 1,2,5 and 7. Unanimously approved by voice vote.
Item No.3: Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto questioned whether the Cultural Arts Committee would
consider placing some of the artwork it did not choose in other priority locations.
Director of Parks and Recreation Ranals advised she would encourage the Commission to
pursue this course of action.
Motion - Mayor Pro Tern Matsumoto/Second - Councilman Mullin: to approve consent
Calendar Item No.6. Unanimously approved by voice vote.
Item No.4: Mayor Pro Tern Matsumoto questioned whether the funding source for the
item was in addition to capital improvements funding (CIP).
Director of Public W orks Whitt:~ so confirmed.
Motion- Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto/Second- Councilman Garbarino: to approve
Consent Item Calendar Item No.4. Unanimously approved by voice vote.
Item 6: Councilman Garbarino questioned whether Council had reviewed this item in the past.
Chief Planner Kalkin advised that the item was a follow-up to a project that had previously
come before Council.
Motion- Councilman Garbarino/Second- Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto: to approve
Consent Calendar Item No.6. Unanimously approved by voice vote.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
MARCH 12,2008
PAGE 6
PUBLIC HEARING
8. Public hearing regarding and consideration of Resolution No. 30-2008 approving a five -
month time extension (PCA08-000 1) of a residential planned unit development,
tentative subdivision map, design review and lot, setback and parking restriction
exceptions related to property located at III Chestnut Avenue (APN 011-312-090) in
the High Denisty (R-3-L) Zone District.
Public Hearing Opened: 9:06 p.m.
Senior Planner Steve Carlson explained the item related to approval of an application for a time
extension through July, which would be the maximum amount oftime permitted under the
South San Francisco Municipal Code.
Yolanda Manzoni, the attorney for the project applicant at 111 Chestnut appeared and requested
the limited extension in order to effectuate changes requested by the Planning Department,
including the introduction of more common areas to minimize conflict between property
owners.
Public Hearing Closed: 9:12 p.m.
Mayor Pro Tern Matsumoto expressed support for the project with the caveat that it be finished
by July.
Chief Assitant City Attorney Woodruff advised that there was no need for formal inclusion of
the caveat in the resolution. He noted that if the project was not finalized by July, the
Commission and staff should take expiration of the deadline into consideration.
Motion - Councilman Garbarino/Second - Councilman Mullin: to approve Resolution No. 30-
2008. Unanimously approved by voice vote.
ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS
9. Consideration of a resolution making findings and adopting a Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the Miller Avenue Parking Structure Project.
Council determined to continue this item to its regular meeting scheduled for March 26, 2008.
10. Review ofCDBG Subcommittee's proposed CDBG nonprofit agency funding
recommendations, hearing of agency petitions and finalization of funding
recommendations.
Chief Assistant City Attorney Woodruff advised that although certain Councilmembers might
be conflicted out of participating in Council action related to Community Development Block
Grant ("CDBG") funding, all members could listen to the staff report and community groups'
appeals.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
MARCH 12,2008
PAGE 7
Community Development Coordinator Adams explained that the CDBG Sub-committee met
last month to review community applications for the fund and made recommendations regarding
distribution.
Although Council would not be formalizing the recommendations and/or taking any action until
a later meeting, representatives of the applicant groups appeared to request consideration of
their respective programs as follows:
Lisa De Zordo, the Associate Executiive Director for the Boys and Girls' Club of San Mateo
County appeared and advised that the requested CDBG grant funding would be applied towards
the Paradise Valley Boys and Girls' Club located next to Martin School in South San Francisco,
which would be closed if the agency could not secure additional funding sources.
Mayor Pro Tern Matsumoto questioned whether the agency would be satisfied with partial
funding of the monies it sought to raise and whether it had sought Redevelopment funds.
Ms. De Zordo confirmed that the agency would be pleased with partial funding and would
continue to seek other sources of funding such as from the Redevelopment Agency.
Susan Murchison representing CORA. advised of its need for funding to support its shelter
program for individuals affected by domestic violence and abuse.
Diane Papan appeared on behalf of John's Closet to seek funding for its program, which
provides clothing to needy children and honors the courage and determination of less fortunate
members of society.
Rosa Guerra of Shelter Network in Daly City thanked the sub-committee for including Shelter
Network among its list of programs recommended for CDBG funding. She stated that the
Council's continued support of the program helps keep it in existence.
Tippy Irwin, the Director of Ombudsman Services, appeared to request funding for the program,
which provides services to 780 of the City's most vulnerable residents housed in long term care
facilities within City bounds.
Lois Ward from HIP Housing, a provider of affordable housing to South San Francisco
residents for many years, appeared to thank the sub-committee for including HIP among its list
of programs recommended for CDBG funding. She requested an upwards adjustment of $5000
over the recommended funding allocation.
Kristina Knudsen of Rebuilding Together appeared and thanked the sub-committee for
recommending funding for the program. She advised that Rebuilding Together would be taking
on 5 projects in South San Francisco in the near future, including the National Rebuilding Day
on April 26th from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. and the installation of heating and water improvements in
two homes.
City Manager Nagel advised Council that it could discuss the presentations by the community
groups, but noted that individual Councilmembers would need to identify conflicts due to their
affiliations with certain groups and abstain from related discussion.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
MARCH 12,2008
PAGE 8
Councilman Mullin advised he was conflicted from discussing and/or taking any action with
respect to funding for applicants North Peninsula Neighborhood Services, HIP Housing and
Shelter Network.
Councilman Garbarino stressed the difficulty involved in making the decision to allocate the
very limited amount of CDGB funding available. He requested that applicants with little
history in our community re-apply for CDGB funding once history had been established. He
further explained that the sub-committee had made a determination to provide a grant of at least
$5000 to each applicant selected for funding to ensure substantive and/or meaningful use of the
funds.
In response to comments from various Councilmembers, Community Development Coordinator
Adams advised that all applicants were inforn1ed of the subcommittee's recommendations and
made aware of funding opportunities outside of CDBG grants, including Redevelopment
funding where appropriate.
COUNCIL COMMUNITY FORUM
Per Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto's request, Council addressed the issue of attendance at various
meetings and events scheduled for March 28th.
ADJOURNMENT
Being no further business, Mayor Gonzalez adjourned the meeting in honor of James
Lineberger, Wanda Earlene Greer, Mary Louise Chimenti and Eugenio Bonaguidi at 9:48 p.m.
Submitted by:
Approved:
Pedro Gonzalez, Mayor
City of South San Francisco
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
MARCH 12,2008
PAGE 9
THE LEAGUE
OF WOMEN VOTERS
Attachment 1
NORTH and CENTRAL SAN MATEO COUNTY
March 12,2008
South San Francisco City Council
City Hall
400 Grand Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council Members:
The League of Women Voters of North and Central San Mateo County supports Sheriff Greg
Munks' recommendation for a pilot women's rehabilitation program designed to ease overcrowding
at the county's women's jail.
A current grand jury finding echoed a previous grand jury investigation from 2005-2006; both grand
juries agreed overcrowded conditions at the San Mateo County Women's Correctional Facility have
reached a crisis point, and temporary measures must be implemented immediately. The 2006 grand
jury called the jail "a crowded disgrace." Overcrowding in the women's jail, according to the report,
has resulted in "egregiously inadequate" visiting facilities, lack of space for classrooms, little flexibility
to separate potentially hostile inmates, and no accommodation for mothers to visit with their
children.
A new women's jail is urgently needed to replace the current facility, which is operating at 171 percent
of capacity; the earliest that the new jail could be built would be about five years from today.
Because of the anticipated delay in building a new Women's Correctional Facility, the hope is to
establish a pilot program for 40 low-risk women into an intensive, gender-specific rehabilitation
program in the North County Correctional Facility in the South San Francisco court and probation
complex. In this proposed facili~v, the women will receive a variety of programs designed to
successfully transition them back into the community, thus reducing the unfortunately high rate of
recidivism.
These programs can not be offered in the current women's jail due to lack of space. Why wait five
years or more to introduce these life changing programs, when moving to the South San Francisco
site will enable their trial and implementation? Let's help turn these women's lives around now, by
giving them the "tools" they need to be positive contributors to society, as well as, good mothers.
The Leagues of Women Voters of San Mateo County support a corrections system which has as its
primary goal, rehabilitation-that is the prevention of recidivism--with emphasis on alternatives to
incarceration. Many will say the programs to be trialed will give these women a second chance. In
reality, most of them never had a first chance. This proposal will offer a first chance, and perhaps
the only chance, for many women to make a positive contribution to society.
Sincerely,
~ 80.9~ '
Marie Baldisseri
President
III i'F\JI\JSLLA AVE. sura: I SA\. t\L\TEO, CA 94401 650.342.5853 FAX b:"iO.588.08S1 WWW.NCSMC.CA.UVVNET.ORG
Agenda Item #2
I certify that the demands set forth on this payment register are
accurate and funds are available for payment.*
DATED:
3!JoIDZl
*Note: Items below do not include payroll related payments
Checks:
Date
Amount
03/12/08
03/19/08
$
898,168.23
701,741.28
Electronic Payments:
Date
Amount
To
Neopost
Union Bank
Description
Citywide Postage Meter Replenishment
Sewer Debt Service
03/10/08
03/14/08
4,000.00
119,697.91
Total Payments $
1,723,607.42
This is to certify that the above bills were confirmed at the
regular council meeting held March 26, 2008.
MAYOR
COUNCIL MEMBER
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
1
PAGE
12-08
03
CK DATE
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
CK
117913
117913
117913
117913
117913
117913
117913
117743
117934
117752
117831
117775
11 7774
117893
117835
117892
117892
117805
117870
117738
117738
117738
117738
11 7777
117777
117892
117927
117856
11 7844
11 7 8 24
117824
11 7824
#
THRU
THRU
THRU
THRU
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
WIRE-JUDGEMENT
WIRE-JUDGEMENT
JAN08 CCT PASS THRU
2/25 WIRE-JUDGEMENT
JAN08 CCT PASS THRU
2/14 WIRE-JUDGEMENT
JAN08 CCT PASS THRU
BUSINESS LICENSE FEE REFUND
PARKING TAX ADVANCE
PASS
PASS
PASS
PASS
2/6
2/27
AMOUNT
REFUND
PARKING CITATION REFUND
PARKING CITATION REFUND
PARKING CITATION REFUND
POLICE SECURITY OVRPYMT REFUND
MIDDLE SCHOOL BASKETBALL
LIBRARY LOST ITEM FEE REFUND
BUSINESS CARDS-MATSUMOTO
MASTER BUSINESS CARDS-CITY COUNCIL
MILEAGE EXP REIMB
3/28 POLICE & FIRE AWARDS BANQUET
CELL PHONE CHGS-GARBARINO
CELL PHONE CHGS-GONZALEZ
CHGS-ADDIEGO
CHGS-MATSUMOTO
I ICE-BOARDS & COMM VACANCIES
I ICE
C PLIES
EIMB
EIMB
I' N-ADMISSION
E
I' N-ADMISSION
PHONE
CELL
CELL
00
00
00
00
00
00
50
00
64
nn
00
00
00
00
99
30
74
40
00
10
61
61
09
00
00
02
00
00
75
00
00
00
33
015
840
79
530
60
31
50
75
50
2
2
4
9
2
4
100
100
940
200
625
100
407
80
998
57
100
57
90
60
11
43
485
37
41
37
32
32
1
105
SSF CONFERENCE CENTER
SSF CONFERENCE CENTER
SSF CONFERENCE CENTER
SSF CONFERENCE CENTER
SSF CONFERENCE CENTER
SSF CONFERENCE CENTER
SSF CONFERENCE CENTER
BARBOSA. PATRICK F
TRUX TRANSPORT INC
BROOKS, SHIREY
KSANDER, GEORGE
CRUZ, SONIA
CRUZ, BRYON
ROLDAN, LESLIE
LAU, MELANIE
~~~KY POINT LLC
POINT LLC
LEZ, PEDRO
SULA COUNCIL OF L
MOBILITY
MOBILITY
MOBILITY
MOBILITY
JOURNAL CORPORAT
JOURNAL CORPORAT
POINT LLC
SA OF CALIFORNIA
LS, SARA
NELLI-LARSON, KRI
NATIONAL INSTITUT
NATIONAL INSTITUT
NATIONAL INSTITUT
VENDOR NAME
ACCOUNT NUMBER
.....v.......
ROCKY
10-00000-2400
10- 0 0000 -24 00
10-00000-2400
10-00000-2400
10-00000-2400
10-00000-2400
10-00000-2400
10-00000-3201
10-00000-3202
10-00000-3301
10-00000-3301
10-00000-3301
10-00000-3505
10-00000-3534
10-00000-3550
10-01110-4250
10-01110-4250
10-01110-4310
10-01110-4380
10-01110-4410
10-01110-4410
10-01110-4410
10-01110-4410
10-02110-4230
10-02110-4230
10-02110-4250
10 - 02110 -4251
10-02110-4310
10-02110-4330
10-02110-4330
10-02110-4330
10-02110-4330
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
1'.CCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
PROGRAM NAME
EXPENS2
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
NON EXPENSE
NON
NOJ:.
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
EXJJENSE
NON EXPENSE
EXP2NSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
NON
NON
NON
CLERK
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK
CITY
CITY
CITY
NON
NON
NON
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
2
PAGE
2-08
03-
CK DATE
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
CK #
117844
117944
117944
117892
117870
117870
117738
117809
117927
117936
117843
117719
117739
11 7 84 3
117719
117927
117861
117861
117936
117861
117799
117799
117799
117799
117795
117944
11 7944
117738
117738
117830
117944
117944
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
EXP REIMB
PHONE CHARGES
CELL PHONE CHARGES
MASTER BUSINESS CARDS-CITY MGRS
3/28 POLICE & FIRE AWARDS BANQUET
POLICE & FIRE AWARDS BANQUET
PHONE CHARGES
ULTING SVCS CENTENNIAL
NCE ADMIN
PHONE/ACCESSORIES
3/2-MOISANT
2/29-FUJITOMI
CELL
CELL
3/7-FUJITOMI
FINANCE DEPT/ACCTG
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
PASTRIES FOR RECRUITMENT EXAMS
PASTRIES FOR RECRUITMENT EXAMS
PASTRIES FOR RECRUITMENT EXAMS
PASTRIES FOR RECRUITMENT EXAMS
2008 CALOPPS ANNUAL
CELL PHONE CHARGES
CELL PHONE CHARGES
CELL CHARGES
CELL CHARGES
PLANN EVIEW SVCS
CHARGES
CHARGES
-3/2
1/27-ZELAYA
2/24-MOISANT
FEE
2/18
W/E
W/E
W/E
W/E
W/E
HELP
HELP
PHONE
TEMP HELP
TEMP HELP
TEMP HELP
MISC
CELL
TEMP
TEMP
3/28
AMOUNT
00
60
50
73
00
00
61
20
00
25
45
00
53
17
00
00
30
63
29
32
26
52
26
06
00
74
50
09
65
OIJ
05
61
20
62
210
485
41
41
32
188
120
397
637
200
980
538
200
220
12
106
69
65
8
13
8
49
500
62
408
63
32
570
888
533
4
2
2
1
9
1
KRI
L
L
NAME
MARTINELLI-LARSON
VERIZON WIRELESS
VERIZON WI:l.ELESS
ROCKY POINT LLC
PENINSULA COUNCIL OF
PENINSULA COUNCIL OF
AT&T MOBILITY
GROUP 4/ARCHITECTURE
TBS-MBA OF CALIFORNIA
U S BANK
MANPOWER INC
ACCOUNTEMPS
ATR INTERNATIONAL INC
WillPOWER INC
_"-CCOUNTEMPS
TBS-MBA OF CALIFORNIA
OFFICE DEPOT
OFFICE DEPOT
S
INC
VENDOR
U BANK
OFFICE DEPOT
GALLIS'
GALLIS'
GALLIS'
GALLIS'
FOSTER CITY, CITY OF
VERIZON WIRELESS
VERIZON WIRELESS
AT&T MOBILITY
AT&T MOBILITY
KNAPP WOLLAM, ALLISON
VERIZON WIRELESS
VERIZON WIRELESS
INC
INC
NUMBER
10-02110-4380
10-02110-4410
10-02110-4410
10-05110-4250
1005110-4380
10-05110-4380
10-05110-4410
10-05120-4210
10-06110-4251
10-06110-4560
10-06210-4201
10-06210-4201
10-06210-4201
10-06210-4201
10-06210-4201
10-06210-4251
10-06210-4301
10-06210-4301
10-06210-4301
10-09110-4301
10-09110-4380
10-09110-4380
10-09110-4380
10-09110-4380
10-09110-4390
10-09110-4410
10-09110-4410
10-10110-4410
10-10110-4410
10~10413-4201-1305
10-10520-4410
10-10520-4410
ACCOUNT
PROGRAM NAME
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERI
COMMUNITY OUTREACH
FINANCE ADMINISTRATI
FINlL~CE ADMINISTRATI
ACCOUNTING
ACCOUNTING
ACCOUNTING
ACCOUNTING
ACCOUNTING
ACCOUNTING
ACCOUNTING
ACCOUNTING
ACCOUNTING
HUMAN RESOURCES
nmn.. RESOURCES
RESOURCES
RESOURCES
RESOURCES
RESOURCES
RESOURCES
RESOURCES
COMM DEV
COMM DEV
DEVELOPER
INSPECTION
INSPECTION
CITY CLERK
CITY Mlu'lAGER
CITY MANAGER
CITY MANAGER
CITY MANAGER
Hill'!AN
HUMAN
HUMAN
HUMAN
ECONOMIC
ECONOMIC
PLANNING
~...V"'''''''''''~
HUMAN
&
&
BUILDING
BUILDING
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
3
PAGE
O~
0."1-12
CK DATE
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
CK
117854
117854
117892
117927
117742
117742
117927
117799
117821
117821
117892
117838
117762
117929
117790
117892
11 78 92
11 7862
117862
117821
117821
117839
117845
117764
117879
117879
117911
117892
117872
117892
117888
117872
#
RADIOS
PORTABLE
iNVOICE/DESCRIPTION
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
FD LETTERHEAD
FIRE ADMIN/480
SUPPLIES
H MTG-AMR BLS CONTRACT
PREV/480 N CANAL
TS FOR CPTF E-WASTE EVENT
PREV HP SUPPLIES
MTG FOOD
NESS n
CAL S ES
CAL S ES
ROLA HARGERS FOR
C NG ALLOWANCE
INVESTIGATION
INVESTIGATION
CANAL
N
CARD~
OPER
UNIFORM
UNIFORM
UNIFORM
AMOUNT
6
THRU
7/1/2007
2007-2008
ADMIN
ER
OPER
CARDS
POLICE
STA
00
00
20
14
09
50
00
50
13
62
30
40
36
20
55
66
65
97
97
65
60
93
14
80
00
00
23
41
19
40
08
72
750
1,350
68
571
413
116
230
27
133
2
74
43
557
487
246
151
155
21
8
-8
290
305
90
345
640
98
294
415
44
43
1
NAME
PETE
PETE
ROCKY POINT LLC
TBS-MBA OF CALIFORNIA
TBS-MBA OF
GALLIS'
HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTION
HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTION
ROCKY POINT LLC
LIFE-ASSIST INC
CARDIO QUICK SYS, LLC
TELECOMMUNICATIONS ENG
EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT
POINT LLC
POINT LLC
AMERICA
AMERICA
CALIFORNIA
MA
NANNARONE
NANN ARONE
BANK OF
BANK OF
VENDOR
44
811
189
1
ROCKY
ROCKY
OFFICE
OFFICE
HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTION
HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTION
LONGS DRUG STORE
MBA OF CALIFORNIA
CDW GOVERNMENT INC
PUBLIC SAFETY TRAINING
PUBLIC SAFETY TRAINING
SPRINT
ROCKY POINT LLC
PENINSULA UNIFORMS
ROCKY POINT LLC
REMEDIOS, MICHAEL
PENINSULA UNIFORMS
INC
INC
DEPOT
DEPOT
ACCCUNT NUMBER
10-11110-4210
10-11110-4210
10-11110-4250
10 -11110 -4251
10 -11110 -4302
10 -11110 -4302
10-11210-4251
10-11/.10-4302
10-11210-4302
J.0-11210-4302
10-11223-4250
10-11610-4302
10-11610-4302
10-11710-4302
10-11710-4340
10-11710-4340
10-11710-4340
10-11730-4301-1101
10-11730-4301-1101
10-11730-4302-1101
10-11730-4302-1102
10 -12310-4250
10-12310-4365
10-12410-4301
10-12410-4330
10-12410-4330
10-12410-4410
10-12620-4340
10-12710-4340
10-12720-4301
10-12720-4330
10-12720-4340
PROGRAi'1 NAME
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRi'_TION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRl\TION
FIRE PREVENTION
PREVENTION
PREVENTION
PREVENTION
ENFORCEMENT
AI
,S
ALS
SUPPRESSION
SUPPRESSION
Sl'PPRESSION
SUPPRESSION
STATION SUPPLIES
STATION SUPPLIES
STATION SUPPLIES
STATION SUPPLIES
RECORDS
RECORDS
COI~M(''NICATIONS
COMMUNICATIONS
CO~lMUNICATIONS
COMt~UNICATIONS
INVESTIGATION
AD[\'l.INISTRATIC
PATROL
PATROL
PATROL
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
CODE
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
FIRS
FIRE
FIRE
PATROL
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
4
PAGE
'}
03~12~
CK DATE
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
CK #
11 78 72
117872
117872
117872
117872
117872
117872
117935
11 78 72
117846
117833
117850
117776
117842
117861
117861
117796
117738
117832
117944
117944
117909
117909
117938
117938
117938
117852
117825
117808
117825
117936
117909
THRU
7/1/2007
2007~2008
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
& ALTERATIONS
FISCAL YEAR
& ALTERATIONS
UNIFORM
UNIFORM
UNIFORM
UNIFORM
UNIFORM
UNIFORM
UNIFORM
CONTRACT
UNIFORM
CANINE EXP REIMB
CANINE EXP REIMB
CANINE EXP REIMB
CANINE EXP REIMB
CANINE EXP REIMB
FOR
AMOUNT
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
SEMINAR REGISTRATION
CELL PHONE SERVICE
PRINTING
CELL PHONE CHARGES
CELL PHONE CHARGES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
CREDIT
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
NORCAL EQUIPMENT RENTAL
SUPPLIES
72
32
89
04
58
99
04
14
05
00
00
00
00
00
62
81
00
30
65
66
54
75
07
90
31
55
56
76
15
77
90
45
4
434
97
403
173
259
752
364
331
55
80
80
80
80
80
27
6
20
47
147
62
210
71
54
995
-260
276
151
252
570
252
291
7
INC
VENDOR NAME
PENINSULA UNIFORMS
PENINSULA UNIFORMS
PENINSULA UNIFORMS
PENINSULA UNIFORMS
PENINSULA UNIFORMS
PENINSULA UNIFORMS
PENINSULA UNIFORMS
TURBO DATA SYSTEMS
PENINSULA UNIFORMS
MCH.'\LE, BARTON
KUCHAC, MICHAEL
MOLYNEUX, BLAKE
CURMI, SEAN
MAHON, "
OFFICE INC
OFFICE
FRED PR EARS
AT&T MO Y
KSM PRI
VERIZON L
VERIZON L
SOUTH C Ul R
SOUTH CUR
ACCOUNT NUMBER
INC
MART"
AND
AND
NORTHWE
NORTHWE
NORTHWE
AND
UNITED RENTALS
UNITED RENTALS
UNITED RENTALS
MOSS RUBBER
INTERSTATE TRAFFIC
GRANITE ROCK COMPANY
INTERSTATE TRAFFIC
U S BANK
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
10-12720-4340
10-12720-4340
10-12720-4340
10-12720-4340
10-12720-4340
10-12720-4340
10-12720-4340
10-12721-4210
10~12721-4340
10-12722-4390
10-12722-4390
10-12722-4390
10-12722-4390
10-12722-4390
10-13210-4301
10-13210-4301
10-13210-4330
10-13220-4410
10-14510-4250
10-14510-4410
10-14510-4410
10-14520-4302
10-14520-4302
10-14520-4302
10-14520-4302
10-14520-4302
10-14520-4302
10-14520-4302
10-14520-4302
10-14530-4302
10-14530-4302
10-14530-4302
PATROL
PATROL
PATROL
PAT1WL
TRAFFIC
TRAFFIC
CANINE
CANINE
CANINE
CANINE
CANINE
ENGINEERING
ENGINEERING
8ENBRAL ENGINEERING
LN,D DEVELOPMENT ENG
ST MAINT & TRAFFIC S
ST MAINT & TRAFFIC S
ST MAINT & TRAFFIC S
STREET MAINTENANCE
STREET MAINTENANCE
PJlTROL
:O~.TROL
PJI_TEOL
J.'iAHE
PROGRAM
GENERAL
GENERAL
STREET MAINTENANCE
STREET MAINTENANCE
STREET MAINTENANCE
STREET MAINTEN~~CE
STREET MAINTENANCE
STREET MAINTENANCE
SIDEWALKS
SIDEWALKS
S IDEl'/ALKS
CURBS
CURBS
CURBS
&
&
&
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
5
PAGE
0]-12-08
CK DATE
0]/12/08
0]/12/08
0]/12/08
0]/12/08
0]/12/08
0]/12/08
0]/12/08
0]/12/08
0]/12/08
0]/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
CK #
117751
117866
117866
117816
117936
117784
117909
11 77 53
117753
117882
117826
117732
117732
117732
117732
117894
117922
117866
117852
117944
117944
117807
117909
117751
117866
117866
117866
117938
117829
117909
117909
117909
ECR
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
TRAFFIC LEGENDS
ORAL BOARD RATES LUNCH MTG
SHARE OF MAINTENANCE COST
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
UNIFORM
UNIFORM
UNIFORM
UNIFORM
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SAFETY CLOTHING
SAFETY CLOTHING
CELL PHONE CHARGES
CELL PHONE CHARGES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
AMOUNT
1
159
1
81
04
93
50
24
32
76
37
62
16
74
16
49
57
49
29
95
69
63
97
50
56
03
50
57
40
29
90
44
19
24
05
14
15
127
96
339
210
188
61
6
47
5
47
995
104
33
25
49
86
93
12
662
61
3,812
12
1,133
675
235
665
206
VENDOR NAME
BROADMOOR LANDSCAPE SU
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
HIGHWAY TECHNOLOGIES
U S BANK
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPOR
SOUTH CITY LUMBER AND
BUCKLES-SMITH ELECTRIC
BUCKLES-SMITH ELECTRIC
R A METAL PRODUCTS INC
INC
SER
SER
SER
SER
UNIFORM
UNIFORM
JAM SERVICES
AMERIPRIDE
AMERIPRIDE
AMERIPRIDE
AMERIPRIDE
NUMBER
UNIFORM
UNIFORM
ROZZI REPRODUCTION
STEVEN ENGINEERING
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
MOSS RUBBER
VERIZON WIRELESS
VERIZON WIRELESS
GRAND AVENUE HARDWARE
SOUTH CITY LUMBER AND
BROADMOOR LANDSCAPE SU
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
UNITED RENTALS NORTHWE
KELLY MOORE
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
S
AND
AND
AND
&
10-14530-4302
10-14540-4302
10-14540-4302
10-14560-4302
10-14560-4330
10-14560-4365
10-14570-4302
10-14570-4302
10-14570-4302
10-14570~4302
10-14570-4302
10-14610-4210
10-14610-4210
10-14610-4210
10-14610-4210
10-14610-4360
10-14610-4360
10-14610-4390
10-14610-4390
10-14610-4410
10-14610-4410
10-14620-4302
10-14620-4302
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
ACCOUNT
& CURBS
MARKINGS
MARKINGS
SIGNALS
SIGNALS
SIGNALS
LIGHTING
LIGHTING
GIGHTING
LIGHTING
LIGHTING
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
PROGRAM NAME
SIDEWALKS
TRAFFIC
TRAFFIC
PARK
PARK
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK MAINTE~rANCE
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK MAINTENANCE
P.o.RK MAINTENANCE
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK NJAINTENANCE
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK
PARK
PARK
PARK
PARK
PARK
PARK
PARK
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
6
PAGE
12-08
03
CK DATE
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
CK
117909
117909
117909
117909
117909
117909
117939
117939
117803
117804
117939
117939
11 793 9
11 7763
117818
117939
117909
117924
117732
117732
117733
117909
117783
117817
117783
117746
117909
117906
117891
117783
117783
117909
#
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL/MAINT
PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL/MAINT
SUPPLIES
PLANTS
PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL/MAINT
PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL/MAL NT
PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL/MAINT
ART STUDIO ROOF REPLACEMENT
PAINT
PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL/MAL NT
SUPPLIES
PLANTS/SUPPLIES
SVC
SVC
UNIFORM
UNIFORM
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
ALARM SERVICES
SUPPLIES
ALARM SERVICES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SANOR-SVC
ALARM SERVICES
ALARM SERVICES
SUPPLIES
AMOUNT
7
92
88
87
38
30
82
39
39
42
84
11
61
40
00
52
39
25
50
39
39
00
44
00
40
00
36
07
85
96
00
00
97
44
75
54
75
503
25
48
177
75
75
6
77
19
18
17
14
94
94
110
43
129
160
112
6,000
92
94
457
420
36
36
548
VENDOR NAME
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
UNITED SITE SERVICES
UNITED SITE SERVICES I
GOLDEN GATE BOLT & SUP
GOLDEN NTJRSERY
UNITED SITE SERVICES
UNITED SITE SERVICES
SITE SERVICES
ANDE CONSTR
OF COLOR
SITE SERVICES
CITY LUMBER AND
ENT GARDENS
I
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
I
I
AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SER
AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SER
AMTECH SAN FRANCISCO E
SOUTH CITY LTJMBER AND
DENALECT ALARM CO
HOME DEPOT/GECF
DENALECT ALARM CO
BLUE RIBBON SUPPLY
SOUTH CITY LUMBER AND
SMART & FINAL
ROCHESTER MIDLAND
DENALECT ALARM CO
DENALECT ALARM CO
SOUTH CITY LUMBER AND
ACCOUNT NUMBER
10-14620-4360
10-14520-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14632-4360
10-14632-4360
10-14632-4360
10-14635-4360
10-14636-4360
10-14636-4360
10-14640-4360
10-14640-4360
10-14710-4210
10-14710-4210
10-14721-4210
10-14721-4360
10-14721-4360
10-14721-4360
10-14722-4360
10-14723-4302
10-14723-4360
10-14723-4360
10-14723-4360
10-14723-4360
10-14723-4360-1472
10-14723-4360-1472
I
I
PROGRAM NAME
MAINTENANCE
MAINTENANCE
MAINTENANCE
r-IAINTENANCE
MAINTENANCE
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK
PARK
PARK r.1AINTENANCE
SCHOOL GROUND MAINT
SCHOOL GROUND MAINT
SCHOOL GROUND MhINT
COMMUNITY GAPDENS/GR
COMMUNITY GARDENS/GR
COMMUNITY GARDENS/GR
STREET TREE MAINTENA
STREET TREE ~~INTENA
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
MAINTENANCE
HAINTENANCE
])ARK
PARK
PARK
PARK
PARK
UNITED
CITY HALL MAINTENANC
CITY HALL MAINTENANC
CITY HALL ,t,AINTENANC
CITY HALL MAINTENANC
CITY HALL ANNEX MAIN
MSB 1.1AINTENANCE:
MSB MAINTENANCE
MSB MAINTENANCE
~1SB MAINTENANCE
MSB MAINTENANCE
MSB MAINTENANCE
MSB MAINTENANCE:
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
7
PAGE
03-12-08
CK DATE
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
CK #
117909
117811
117902
117887
117930
117930
117902
117866
117909
117930
117909
117909
117866
117909
117909
117909
117909
117909
117909
117909
117909
117909
117909
117783
117818
117909
117909
117806
117906
117909
117930
117909
PARTITIONS
TAMARACK LN
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
I.
ITEMS
CANAL
N
AMOUNT
11
677
830
256
70
65
580
27
16
100
10
20
3
11
14
2
o
5
27
12
122
2
1
23
65
00
00
00
00
00
79
44
00
39
44
77
84
90
61
96
94
14
86
41
97
80
00
09
52
62
33
77
52
50
92
75
41
21
34
47
39
-16
37
114
3
VENDOR NAME
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
HARBOR READY MIX
SHAUGHNESSY ROOFING IN
REBARBER ENTERPRISES
TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL
TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL
SHAUGHNESSY ROOFING IN
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
SOUTH CITY LUMBER AND
TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL
AND
AND
SUPPLY HARDWAR
HOUSE OF COLOR
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
ORCHARD
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
CITY LUMBER
CITY LUMBER
CITY LUMBER
ECT ALARM CO
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH
FINAL
SOUTH CITY LUMBER AND
TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL
SOUTH CITY LUMBER AND
GRAINGER
SMART &
ACCOUNT NUMBER
10 4723-4360-1472
10-14723-4360-1472
10-14731-4360
10-14731-4360
10-14731-4360
10-14731-4360
10-14731-4360
10-14731-4360
10-14732-4302
10-14732-4360
10--14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14733-4302
10-14733-4302
10-14733-4302
10-14733-4330
10-14733-4360
10-14733-4360
10-14733-4360
MAINTENANCE
MAINTENANCE
MAINTENANCE
MAINTENANCE
LIBRARY MAINTENANCE
LIBRARY MAINTENANCE
LIBRARY MAINTENANCE
LIBRARY MAINTENANCE
MAINTENANCE
LIBRARY ~AINTENANCE
LIBRARY MAINTENANCE
LIBRARY MAINTENANCE
LIBRARY MAINTENANCE
CORPORATION YARD MAl
CORPORATION YARD MAl
CORPORATION YARD MAl
CORPORATION YARD MAl
YARD MAl
YARD MAl
YARD MAl
NAi'1E
MSB MAINTENANCE
MSB MAINTENANCE
STATION MAINTEN
STATION MAINTEN
STATION I~AINTEN
STATION MAINTEN
STATION MAINTEN
STATION MAINTEN
MAINTENANCE
MAINTENAJ."lCE
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY MAINTENANCE
LIBRARY MAINTENANCE
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
PROGRAM
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
CORPORATION
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
8
PAGE
03~12~08
CK DATE
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
#
117909
117725
117806
117783
117951
11 77 78
117926
117866
117909
117909
117909
117909
117909
117909
117818
117909
117909
117866
117783
117806
117827
117783
117927
117936
117936
117867
117936
117871
117782
117936
117741
117741
CK
AVE
FOUNDATION
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
SUPPLIES
MAINT SERVICE
SUPPLIES
ALARM SERVICES
SUPPLIES3
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
ALARM SERVICES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
ALARM SERVICES
WO LIB/840 W ORANGE
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OPER SUPPLIES
MILEAGE EXP REIMB
LUNCH MTG~SETTING UP
LITERACY BREAKFAST
OPERATING SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES FOR PR EFFORTS
AMOUNT
07
00
67
00
09
00
65
27
40
45
87
67
19
80
67
50
06
29
00
67
41
00
22
21
57
86
90
00
50
73
43
93
14
300
12
75
123
333
286
27
8
38
7
29
5
23
41
50
5
30
75
12
42
75
168
264
693
20
49
30
813
332
111
14
VENDOR NAME
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
ALERT DOOR SERVICE
GRAINGER
DENALECT ALARM CO
ZEE MEDICAL SERVICES
DEA SECURITY SYSTEMS
TAP PLASTICS INC
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
DENAl,ECT ALARM CO
GRAINGER
JOHNSTONE SUPPLY
DENALECT ALARM CO
TBS-MBA OF CALIFORNIA
SYST
AND
INC
#
C
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
BELINDA
PENINSULA LIBRARY
DEMCO SUPPLY INC
U S BANK
BAKER TAYLOR
BAKER TAYLOR
CITY LUMBER
CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
CITY LUMBER
CITY LUMBER
CITY LUMBER
OF COLOR
U S BANK
U S BANK
ORELLANA
U S BANK
SOUTH
SOUTH
SOUTH
HOUSE
SOUTH
SOUTH
ACCOUNT NUMBER
10-14733-4360
10-14733-4360
10-14733-4360
10-14733-4360
10-14733-4390
10~14734-4360
10-14741-4360
10-14741-4360
10-14741-4360
10-14741-4360
10-14741-4360
10-14741-4360
10-14741-4360
10-14741-4360
10-14741-4360
10-14742-4360
10-14742-4360
10-14742-4360
10-14742-4360
10-14742-4360
10-14743-4360
10-14743-4360
10 -15110 -4251
10-15110-4301
10-15110-4302
10-15110-4310
10-15110-4310
10-15110-4310
10-15110-4320
10-15110-4380
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
NAI"1E
CORPORATLON YARD MAL
CORPORATION YAED MAL
~ORPORATION YARD MAL
CORPORATION YARD MAl
CORPORATION YARD MAl
SIGN HILL MAINTENANC
RECREATION BUILDING
RECREATION BUILDING
RECREATION BUILDING
RECREATION BUILDING
RECREATION BUILDING
RECREATION BUILDING
RECREATION BUILDING
RECREATION BUILDING
RECREATION BUILDING
MAGNOLIA CENTER MAIN
MAGNOLIA CENTER MAIN
MAGNOLIA CENTER MAIN
MAGNOLIA CENTER MAIN
MAGNOLIA CENTER MAIN
WESTBOROUGH BUILDING
WESTBOROUGH BUILDING
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY CIRCULA
l,IBRARY CIRCULA
PROGRAM
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
BOOKS FOR
BOOKS FOR
INC
INC
&
&
MAIN
MAIN
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
9
PAGE
08
2
03-
CK DATE
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
CK
11 7741
117741
117741
11 7741
117741
11 7741
117741
117741
117741
117741
117741
117741
117741
117798
117741
117802
11 7741
117858
117936
117798
117798
117741
117741
117741
117741
117741
117741
117741
117741
117741
11 7741
117741
#
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
FOR MAIN LIBRARY
FOR MAIN LIBRARY
FOR
FOR MAIN
FOR MAIN LIBRARY
FOR MAIN LIBRARY
FOR MAIN LIBRARY
FOR MAIN LIBRARY
FOR MAIN LIBRARY
FOR MAIN LIBRARY
FOR MAIN LIBRARY
FOR MAIN LIBRARY
FOR MAIN LIBRARY
LIBRARY BOOKS A/V MATERIALS
FOR MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
&
FOR
FOR
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
LIBRARY BOOKS
BOOKS-MAIN
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS FOR MAIN LIBRARY
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
AMOUNT
15
28
30
15
139
16
180
56
34
54
72
48
30
146
16
02
27
53
16
79
27
31
22
51
00
71
47
00
79
77
84
10
74
16
01
53
79
98
35
27
85
41
11
62
27
38
44
152
63
39
12
12
37
107
50
11
44
137
24
53
72
27
28
15
VENDOR NAME
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
T.l\YLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
& TAYLOR
GALE GROUP, THE
BAKER & TAYLOR INC
GE MONEY BANK/AMAZON
BAKER & TAYLOR INC
NOLO PRESS OCCIDENTAL
S
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
ACCOUNT NUMBER
U BANK
GALE GROUP, THE
GALE GROUP, THE
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-152JO-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10 15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
CIRCULA
CIRCULI,
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
PROGRAM NAME
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
iV\AIN LIBRARY
LIBRP_RY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN r,IBRARY
." n, LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
tV\AIN LIBRARY
fV\AIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
tV\AIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
r~1;l..IN
l.Jr>...LJ.~
MAIN
MAIN
M!\.IN
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
10
PAGE
03-12-08
CK DATE
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
CK #
117741
117741
117741
117741
117741
11 7741
117741
117741
117741
117741
117741
11 7741
11 7741
117741
117741
117741
117936
117886
117802
117886
117886
117886
117802
117936
117747
117747
117747
117900
117802
117876
117900
117741
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS FOR MAIN LIBRARY
BOOKS FOR MAIN LIBRARY
BOOKS FOR MAIN LIBRARY
LIBRARY AUDIO/VIDEO
A/V MATERIALS FOR MAIN LIB
LIBRARY BOOKS A/V MATERIALS
LIB
LIB
LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
&
AUDIO/VIDEO-MAIN LIB
AUDIO/VIDEO-MAIN LIB
AUDIO/VIDEO-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN LIB
BOOKS-MAIN
BOOKS-MAIN
BOOKS-MAIN
LIBRARY BOOKS &
CHILDREN'S PROG
CHILDRENS BOOKS
BOOKS
CREDIT MEMO
BOOKS FOR CHILDRENS COLL
LIBRARY BOOKS & A/V MATERIALS
PUPPETEER-CHILDRENS
FOR CHILDRENS
FOR CHILDRENS
A/V MATERIALS
SUPPLIES
FOR LIBRARIES
PROG
COLL
COLL
BOOKS
BOOKS
AMOUNT
15.16
38.62
32.34
52.69
17.39
16.65
46.97
94.18
14.94
88.18
41.72
196 .17
34.91
96.34
48.32
405.80
54.94
86.60
749.30
95.26
24.37
190.52
46.94
49.83
134.19
143.26
-11.01
26.04
25.81
400.00
204.81
15.42
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
GE MONEY BANK/AMAZON
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
BAKER &
U S BANK
RANDOM HOUSE INC
GE MONEY BANK/AMAZON
RANDOM HOUSE
VENDOR NAME
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TP..YLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
L
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
RANDOM HOUSE
RANDOM HOUSE
BANK
WHOLESALERS
WHOLESALERS
WHOLESALERS
SCHOLASTIC INC
GE MONEY BANK/AMAZON
POWERS, SEAN
SCHOLASTIC INC
BAKER TAYLOR
INC
INC
INC
INC
&
U S
BOOK
BOOK
BOOK
ACCOUNT NUMBER
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-152J.0-4303
100015210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-152]0-4304
10-15220-4301
10-15220-4301
10-15220-4303
10-15220-4303
10-15220-4303
10-15220-4303
10-15220-4304
10-15220-4380
10-15225-4303-1522
10-15225-4303-1522
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
MAIN CIRCULA
MAIN CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
M~IN LIBRARY CHILDRE
MAIN LIBRARY CHILDRE
MAIN LIBRARY CHILDRE
MAIN LIBRARY CHILDRE
LIBRARY CHILDRE
LIBRARY CHILDRE
LIBRARY CHILDRE
LIBRARY CHILDRE
CHILDREN
CHILDREN
PROGRAM NAME
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
MAIN
MAIN
MAIN LIBRII.RY
MAIN
MAIN
MAIN
MAIN
WEST ORANGE
WEST ORANGE
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
11
PAGE
03~1::2-08
CK DATE
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
CK
117802
117741
117858
117741
117858
117741
117910
117789
11 7741
117823
117802
117747
117900
117747
117836
117747
117802
117927
117849
117895
117832
117895
117802
117860
117771
117783
117936
117936
117748
11 7906
117802
117895
#
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
LIBRARY BOOKS & A/V MATERIALS
LIBRARY REFERENCE BOOK
BOOKS
REF-MAIN LIB
COLL
FOR GRAND LIB
BOOKS-GRAND LIB
MAGAZINE SUBS-GRAND
BOOKS-GRAND LIB
MATERIALS FOR GRAND LIB SPANISH
LIBRARY BOOKS & A/V MATERIALS
BOOKS
BOOKS FOR CHILDRENS COLL
CHILDRENS BOOKS FOR LIBRARIES
BOOKS-GRAND
CREDIT MEMO
LIBRARY BOOKS & A/V MATERIALS
PROJ READ/LIBRARY
BANNER FOR TRIVIA CHALLENGE
PROJ READ LIT PROG FOOD
PROJECT READ BOOKMARKS
PROJ READ LEARNING WHEELS FOOD
LIBRARY BOOKS & A/V MATERIALS
OFFICE SUPPLIES
PRINTER REPAIR-CLC
QRT'v ALARM CHARGE-CLC
~T~ ROG SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
TATION EXP
MEWORK ASST
BOOKS & A/V
WORK ASSIST
REIMB
PROG
MATERIALS
SNACKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
P
PROG
AMOUNT
07
34
55
92
10
13
91
97
34
99
60
23
03
94
93
01
34
00
51
89
43
00
11
03
00
00
23
79
25
87
47
39
44
269
129
81
31
60
201
93
148
58
20
32
26
18
53
31
448
149
78
64
305
28
26
64
126
-11
12
99
308
20
202
80
IN
INC
S
S
BOOKBINDER
SMART & FINAL
GE MONEY BANK/AMAZON
SAFEWAY INC
BANK/AMAZON
TAYLOR INC
ESS OCCIDENTAL
~ TAYLOR INC
PRESS OCCIDENTAL
TAYLOR INC
BOOK DISTRIBUT
NAME
TAYLOR
IMAGENES
GE MONEY BANK/AMAZON
BOOK WHOLESALERS INC
SCHOLASTIC INC
BOOK WHOLESALERS INC
LECTORUM PUBLICATIONS
BOOK WHOLESALERS INC
BANK/AMAZON
OF CALIFORNIA
SERVICE
MILT
SAFEW1'.Y
KSM PRINTING
SAFEWAY INC
GE MONEY BANK/AMAZON
OFFICE DEPOT
COMET MICRO SYSTEM
DENALECT ALARM CO
INC
MARTA
SIGN
INC
BANK
BANK
&
MONEY
MBA
S
VENDOR
GE MONEY
BAKER &
NOLO PR
BAKER
NOLO
BAKER
SPANI
EBSCO
GE
TBS
BAKER
IM.l\GE
U
U
10-15225-4304-1522
10-15230-4303
10-15230-4303
10-15230-4303
10-15310-4303
10-15310-4303
10-15310-4303
10-15310-4303
10-15310-4303
10-15310-4303
10-15310-4304
10-15320-4303
10-15320-4303
10-15320-4303
10-15320-4303
10-15320-4303
10-15320-4304
10-15410-4251
10-15410-4380
10-15410-4380
10-15415-4250-1590
10-15415-4302-1563
10-15430-4301
10-15430-4301
10-15430-4302
10-15430-4365
10-15440-4302-1510
10-15440-4302-1537
10-15440-4302-1592
10-15440-4380-1551
10-15440-4380-1551
10-15440-4380-1551
NUMBER
ACCOUNT
PROGRAM NAME
WEST ORANGE CHILDREN
MAIN LIBRARY REFEREN
MAIN LIBRARY REFEREN
MAIN LIBRARY REFEREN
GRAND AVE OPERATIONS
GRAND AVE OPERATIONS
GRAND AVE OPERATIONS
GRAND AVE OPERATIONS
GRAND AVE OPERATIONS
GRAND AVE OPERATIONS
GRk~D AVE OPERATIONS
GRAND AVENUE CHILDRE
GRAND AVENUE CHILDRE
GRk~D AVENUE CHILDRE
GRAND AVENUE CHILDRE
GRAND AVENUE CHILDRE
GRAND AVEN~E CHILDRE
PROJECT READ
PROJECT READ
PROJECT READ
LEARNING CENTER
LEARNING CENTER
LEARNING CENTER
LEARNING CENTER
LEARNING CENTER GRAN
LEARNING CENTER GRAN
I,EARNING CENTER GRAN
LEARNING CENTER GRAN
LEARNING CENTER GRAN
LEARNING CENTER GRAN
PROJECT READ GRANTS
PROJECT READ GRANTS
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
12
PAGE
03-12-08
CK DATE
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
CK #
117892
117927
117936
117738
117921
117829
117819
117950
117950
117861
117845
117927
117927
117927
117769
117746
117855
117937
117937
117766
117914
117912
117918
117919
117916
117915
117941
117772
117940
11 78 96
117754
117801
6-
NEW POSTAL
THRU
7-1-07
I\.CCOMMODATE THE
p"
PR
PR
WITHHELD
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
BUSINESS CARDS
PARKS & REC/33
COMP MEMORY
PHONE CHARGES
CE SUPPLIES
LIES
EXP REIMB
08 COPIER METER USAGE
08 COPIER METER USAGE
CE SUPPLIES
ER DIGITAL SOLUTION AGREEMENT
NING DIV 315 MAPLE AVE/ANNEX
RACT AGREEMENT FOR COPIERS FROM
FLOOR CITY HALL
LIES
LIES
ED MAIL MACHINE mo
EMPLOYEE 3/6/08 ~
EMPLOYER 3/6/08
ND OF MEDICARE T
UNION DED 3/6/0
1'1 DUES 3/6/08 PR
3/6/08 PR
ON 3/6/08
3/6/08 PR
3/6/08 PR
ON 3/6/08
ON 3/6/08
T 3/6/08
T 3/6/08
T 3/6/08
T 3/6/08
OVER
PR
ARROYO DR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
CELL
PARS
PARS
UNIO
UNION DUES
AMOUNT
27
80
27
47
64
69
33
67
00
59
00
88
00
08
73
70
38
72
72
88
40
91
90
61
93
72
13
39
00
81
92
31
82
664
59
68
48
295
667
42
60
278
594
238
830
647
111
179
323
762
762
427
459
904
835
22
110
993
77
57
125
243
276
152
1
1
3
3
1
1
54
1
2
3
VENDOR NAME
ROCKY POINT LLC
TBS-MBA OF CALIFORNIA
U S BANK
AT&T MOBILITY
STAPLES CREDIT PLAN
KELLY MOORE
HOWELL, JOANNE
XEROX CORPORATION
XEROX CORPORATION
OFFICE DEPOT INC
MBA OF CALIFORNIA
TBS-MBA OF CALIFORNIA
TBS-MBA OF CALIFORNIA
TBS-MBA OF CALIFORNIA
CLEAN SOURCE INC
BLUE RIBBON SUPPLY
NEOPOST INC
UNION BANK OF CALIFORN
BANK OF CALIFORN
RONALD
MPLOYEES
FSCME LOCAL 1569
TATIONARY
IDOWS & ORPHANS
OLICE ASSOCIATION
NTERNATIONAL
D WAY
NITY HEALTH CHARI
UNION
SSF
SSF
ACCOUNT NUMBER
10-17110-4250
10-17110-4251
10-17110-4302
10-17110-4410
10-17111-4302
10-17210-4302
10-17270-4302
10-17290-4250
10-17290-4330
J 1-00000-1301
11-00000-1301
11-00000-1301
11-00000-1301
11-00000-1301
11-00000-1302
11-00000-1302
11-00000-1303
12-00000-2005
12-00000-2005
12-00000-2008
12-00000-2012
12-00000-2013
12-00000-2014
12-00000-2015
12-00000-2016
12-00000-2017
12-00000-2018
12-00000-2019
12-00000-2021
12-00000-2021
12-00000-2021
12-00000-2021
PROGRAM NAME
RECREATION SE
RECREATION SE
RECREATION SE
RECREATION SE
PARKS & RECREATION C
RECREATION ADMINISTF
REAL PROGRAM
SENIOR CENTERS
SENIOR CENTERS
NON EXPENSE ACCT
EXPENSE ACCT
EXPENSE ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
EXPENSE ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
COMM
COMM
COMM
COMM
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
NON EXPENSE
NON EXPENSE
&
L
&
&
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
13
PAGE
12-08
03
CK DATE
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
CK #
117757
11 7724
117885
117755
117768
117756
117932
117932
11 7 94 3
117915
117916
117928
11 7944
117859
117859
117840
117859
11 7814
117908
117830
117785
117785
117785
117785
117853
117853
117750
117734
117889
117758
117728
11 7761
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
GARNISHMENT 3/6/08
GARNISHMENT 3/6/08
GARNISHMENT 3/6/08
GARNISHMENT 3/6/08
GARNISHMENT 3/6/08
GARNISHMENT 3/6/08
MEDICAL CARE 3/6/08
DEPENDENT CARE 3/6/08 PR
RETIREMENT HEALTH SAVINGS
3/6/08 PR
3/6/08
3/6/08
TREO
07-08
07-08
SIGN REGULATION-BUS BROCHURE
07-08 GRANT SOCIAL SRVC
ENCROACHMENT DEP RFND
ENCROACHMENT DEl' REFUND
ENVIR REVIEW SVCS-550 GATEWAY
B
B
B
B
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PROG
PROG
PROGRAM
PROGRAM
PROGRAM
PROGRAM
PR
PR
GRANT HH
GRANT HH
UNION DUES
UNION DUES
UNION DUES
CHFFA
CHFFA
CHFFA
CHFFA
IN
POINT
REBID
COMMUNITY CENTER
OYSTER
06-07 DISCLOSURE
06-07 DISCLOSURE
CONSULTING SERVICES
NOTICE-SCRUB/SLURRY SEAL PROJ
CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE NEW
OMP REC CENTER CARPENTRY
OMP REC CTR DRYWALL WORK
PRELIM DESIGN SVCS-JSB TREE REPLANTING
STMT PREP
STMT PREP
FOR PHASE III
INFO
INFO
AMOUNT
276
245
233
225
461
138
100
892
796
310
549
499
65
703
338
150
000
000
500
486
-4
92
53
54
23
54
46
36
67
83
24
00
89
48
32
69
00
00
00
00
98
95
81
00
84
00
00
00
50
79
00
50
59
2
1
37
7
1
2
1
2
8
464
410
828
200
200
320
495
661
770
068
152
3
2
3
19
17
5
VENDOR NAME
TLC ADMINISTRATORS
TLC ADMINISTRATORS
VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER
SSF INTERNATIONAL
SSF POLICE ASSOCIATION
TEAMSTER LOCAL 856
VERIZON WIRELESS
PENINSULA
PENINSULA
LUI, KAI
NORTH PENINSULA
HASKINS, RICHARD E
SOUTH CITY CONCRETE
KNAPP WOLLAM, ALLISON
DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST CO
DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST CO
DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST CO
DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST CO
NORTH
NORTH
MUNIFINANCIAL
MUNIFINANCIAL
BRIAN KANGAS
ANG NEWSPAPER
& ASSOCIATES
IFORNIA TILE INSTAL
EN DRYWALL AND ASSO
LANDER ASSOCIATES
FOULK
RGM
ACCOUNT NUMBER
12-00000-2021
12-00000-2021
12-00000-2021
12-00000-2021
12-00000-2021
12-00000-2021
12-00000-2022
12-00000-2022
12-00000-2022
12-00000-2025
12-00000-2025
12-00000-2027
29-10321-4240
29-10321-4393
29-10321-4393
29-10341-4210
29-10350-4393
40-00000-2304
40-00000-2304
40-10414-4201
46-00000-3613
46-08310-4205
46-08310-4801
46-08310-4810
46-08410-4205
46-10860-4205-1909
50-13231-4210-9710
51-13231-4230-0802
51-13232-4201-0526
51-13232-4210-0526
51-13232-4210-0526
51-13232-4210-0728
NAlVJE
EXPENSE ACCT
EXPENSE ACCT
EXPENSE ACCT
EXPENSE ACCT
EXPENSE ACCT
EXPENSE ACCT
EXPENSE ACCT
EXPENSE ACCT
EXPENSE ACCT
EXPENSE ACCT
EXPENSE ACCT
EXPENSE
CDBG HOUSING REH
CDBG HOUSING REH
CDBG HOUSING REH
CDBG DOWNTOWN RE
CDEG HUMAN SERV
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
PLANNING DEV
NON EXPENSE
MAGNOLIA 89 I.ND
MAGNOLIA 89 AND
MAGNOLIA 89 &~D COST
99 CONF CTR COPS
REDEVELOP OPERATING
GENERAL INFRASTRUCTU
GENERAL INFRASTRUCTU
FACILITIES CAPITAL
FACILITIES CAPITAL
FACILITIES CAPITAL
FACILITIES CAPITAL
FUN
ACCT
COST
COST
ACCT
PROGRAM
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
p
P
P
P
FRANCISCO
REPORT
CITY OF SO SAN
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT
14
PAGE
08
2
03
CK DATE
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
#
117905
117905
117828
117909
117793
117793
117851
117851
117851
117851
117813
117813
117813
117861
117786
117732
117732
117873
117873
117726
117873
11 7 94 8
117897
117881
117806
117738
117738
117898
117852
117909
117869
117770
CK
SUPPORT
SUPPORT
SUPPORT
ANNEX
8
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
"EIM~
A
PHASE
IRRIG
AMOUNT
00
00
29
44
94
14
00
50
13
75
00
50
25
37
98
56
27
71
12
72
38
00
50
89
02
23
19
00
49
26
01
00
975
500
178
56
924
107
497
713
401
238
990
957
853
61
62
244
248
63
106
159
38
164
259
79
391
48
213
110
751
31
92
1,450
3
1
1
4
4
4
4
3
10
9
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
UNIFORM SER
UNIFORM SER
PEREZ
PEREZ
ALEXANDER HAMILTON
PEREZ, OLGA
WATER ENVIRONMENT FEDE
SAN MATEO COUNTY ENVIR
QUILL CORPORATION
GRAINGER
AT&T MOBILITY
AT&T MOBILITY
SAN MATEO COUNTY MOSQU
MOSS RUBBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
PENINSULA BATTERY
COLLICUTT ENERGY
INS
AND
INC
SERVI
VENDOR NAME
ENGINEERING
ENGINEERING
OF CALIFORNIA
CITY LUMBER AND
AMERIPRIDE
AMERIPRIDE
OLGA
OLGA
CONSULT1Ll\ITS
HARRIS & ASSOCIATES
HARRIS & ASSOCIATES
HARRIS & ASSOCIATES
OFFICE DEPOT INC
DISH NETWORK
CONSULTANTS
CONSULTANTS
CONSULTANTS
SKYLINE
SKYLINE
K-119
SOUTH
EWING
EWING
MORI
MORI
MORI
MORI
ACCOUNT NUMBER
51-13232-4210-0822
51-13232-4210-0823
51-13232-4302-0826
51-13232-4302-0826
51-13232-4360-0826
51-13232-4360-0826
71-13235-4201-0556
71-13235-4201-0556
71-13235-4201-0556
71 13235-4201-0556
71-13235-4210-0556
71-13235-4210-0556
71-13235-4210-0556
71-13235-4301-0560
71-13910-4201
71-13910-4210
71-13910-4210
'71-13910-4302
71-13910-4302
71-13910-4310
71-13910-4310
71-13910-4310
71-13910-4360
71-13910-4365
71-13910-4390
71-13910-4410
71-13910-4410
71-13922-4220
71-13922-4302
71-13922-4360
71-13922- 4365
71-13330-4365
P
SEWER
SEWER CAPIT
SEWER CAPIT
CAPIT
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMIHISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
lWMIN:::STRATION
ADMINISTRATION
1',DMINISTRATION
ADMINISTP.ATION
ADMINIS'i'RATION
AD~;rNISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
lWMlNISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ROADS
ROADS
ROADS
ROADS
SHAW ROAD
CAPIT
CAPIT
AND GROUNDS
AND GROUNDS
AND GROUNDS
AND GROUNDS
rUMP STATI
NAME
FACILITIES
FACILITIES
FACILITIES
FACILITIES
FACILITI"S
FACILITIES CAPITAL
SEWER CAPIT
SEWER CAPIT
CAPIT
WQCP
WQCP
WQCP
WQCP
WQCP
WQCP
WQCP
\'IQCP
WQCP
\'IQCP
WQCP
WQCP
WQCP
P
P
P
P
P
CAPrfAL
CAPITAL
CAPIT.z,L
CAPITAL
c.w I TAL
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SANITARY
SANITARY
SANITARY
Sfu~ITARY
SANITARY
SA.'UTARY
SAlUTARY
SANITARY
P?OGRAM
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
15
CK DATE
PAGE
CK #
U-08
03
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
117773
117738
117939
117770
117730
117723
117820
117718
117770
117800
117800
117800
117800
117800
117800
117803
11 77 97
117806
117806
117866
11 7727
117727
117745
117864
117880
117812
117866
117723
117931
117903
117794
117810
SYSTEM
SUPPLIES
MONORAIL
8
8
9
~ NT
~R~V MA~NT-STN#II.9
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
458.00
55.16
204.41
700.00
320.00
201.36
666.22
830.20
275.00
73.44
093.79
314.03
126.39
314.04
235.48
516.34
699.61
262.85
3.32
69.78
40.64
048.69
754.50
722.13
757.48
10.44
106.44
136.42
127.00
386.75
464.31
128.66
1
1
9
2
1
1
2
2
VENDOR NAME
CRANE AMERICA
AT&T MOBILITY
UNITED SITE SERVICES
COLLICUTT ENERGY SERVI
AMERICAN AIR SYSTEMS I
AIRPORT AUTO PARTS INC
HRO
ABS USA
COLLICUTT
INC
GALLS
GOLDEN GATE BOLT & SUP
FRY'S ELECTRONICS
GRAINGER
GRAINGER
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
ALL INDUSTRIAL ELECTRI
INDUSTRIAL ELECTRI
SIDE ENTERPRISES
N CHLOR ALKALI PROD
P WORKS
RINGTON
HARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
.PORT AUTO PARTS INC
>MAS FISH COMPANY
:MENS WATER TECHNOLO
:HER SCIENTIFIC
:H COMPANY
SERVICES
SERVI
I
ENERGY
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
GALLS
GALLS
GALLS
GALLS
GALLS
NUMBER
ALL
71-13930-4365
71-13930-4410
71-13931-4220
71-13931-4365
71-13932-4360
71-13932-4365
71-13932-4365
71-13932-4365
71-13932-4365
71-13941-4365
71-13941-4365
71-13941-4365
71-13941-4365
71-13941-4365
71-13941-4365
71-13941-1365
71-13942-4365
71-13942-4365
71-13942-4365
71-13943-4365
71-13943-4365
71-13943-4365
71-13943-4365
71-13944-4302
71-13944-4365
71-13944-4365
71-13944-4365
71-13944-4365
71-13951-4302
71-13951-4302
71-13951-4302
71-13951-4302
ACCOUNT
PROGRAM NAME
SHAW ROAD
SHAW ROAD
SAN MATEO AVE PUMP S
SAN MATEO AVE PUMP S
INDUSTRIAL PUMPING S
INDUSTRIAL PUMPING S
INDUSTRIAL PUMPING S
INDUSTRIAL PUMPING S
INDUSTRIAL PUMPING S
PRIMARY TREATMENT
PRIMARY TREATMENT
PRIMARY TREATMENT
PRIMARY TREATMENT
PRIMARY TREATMENT
PRIMARY TREATMENT
PRIMARY TREATMENT
SECONDARY TREATMENT
SECONDARY TREATMENT
SECONDARY TREATMENT
STATI
STATI
PUIVJP
PUlVJP
SLUDGE HANDLING/DIGE
SLUDGE HANDLING/DIGE
SLUDGE HANDLING/DIGE
SLUDGE HANDLING/DIGE
CHLORINATION
CHLORINATION
CHLORINATION
CHLORINATION
CHLORINATION
CONTROL
CONT!WL
CONTROL
CONTROL
AND
AND
AND
AND
PROCESS
PROCESS
PROCESS
PROCESS
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
16
CK DATE
PAGE
#
CK
03-12-08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
117947
11 7 94 7
117834
117720
117720
117720
117720
117720
117720
117720
11 7720
117720
117720
117740
117735
117753
11 7904
117904
117781
117890
117841
117907
117788
117832
117866
117909
117920
117866
117909
117765
117883
117779
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
REPORTING FOR VARIOUS
REPORTING FOR VARIOUS
REPORTING FOR VARIOUS
REPORTING FOR VARIOUS
REPORTING FOR VARIOUS
REPORTING FOR VARIOUS
REPORTING FOR VARIOUS
REPORTING FOR VARIOUS
REPORTING FOR VARIOUS
REPORTING FOR VARIOUS
LABORATORY SUPPLIES
LABORATORY SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
UNIFORM SHIRTS
TIMING BELT
MATERIALS
SODIUM BISULFITE, BID 2447
SODIUM BISULFITE, BID 2447
LATERAL REPL GRANT REIMB
LATERAL REPL GRANT REIMB
LATERAL REPL GRANT REIMB
LATERAL REPL GRANT REIMB
LATERAL GRANT REPL REIMB
PRINTING
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
AMOUNT
115.77
239.85
404.50
301.80
301.80
301.80
12.00
301.80
301.80
301.80
301. 80
301.80
301.80
108.79
184.66
1,555.79
3,121.50
3,101.81
1,590.46
2,500.00
1,597.50
2,375.00
2,250.00
147.66
59.51
18.81
11.28
19.47
70.36
270.63
121.39
475.00
INTERNATIONAL
INTERNATIONAL
LAB SAFETY SUPPLY
ACCUTEST NORTHERN
ACCUTEST NORTHERN
ACCUTEST NORTHERN
ACCUTEST NORTHERN
ACCUTEST NORTHERN
ACCUTEST NORTHERN
ACCUTEST NORTHERN
ACCUTEST NORTHERN
ACCUTEST NORTHERN
ACCUTEST NORTHERN
B&B CUSTOM DESIGNS
APPLIED INDUSTRIAL
BUCKLES-SMITH ELECTRIC
SIERRA CHEMICAL CO
SIERRA CHEMICAL CO
DEMARCO, GIOVANNA
ROBINSON, LO"I,n
MACHADO,' MARY
SMITH, MI
DREW, CHR
KSM PRINT
ORCHARD S HARD WAR
SOUTH CIT IER AND
STANDARD :NG SUPP
ORCHARD E HARDWAR
SOUTH CIT lER AND
CENTRAL C ,E SUPPL
R&B COMP]
DELANO Nl
INC
INC
INC
CALI
CALI
CALI
CALI
CALI
CALI
CALI
CALI
CALI
CALI
VENDOR NA1'JIE
VWR
VWR
INC
u 0
uOE &
ACCOUNT NUMBER
71-1-3951-4302
71-13951-4302
71-13951-4365
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13 953 -4201
71-13953 -4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4302
71-13962-4365
71-13962-4365
71-13964-4302
71-13964-4302
71-14320-4207-0760
71-14320-4207-0760
71-14320-4207-0760
71-14320-4207-0760
71-14320-4207-0760
71-14320-4250
71--14321-4302
71-14321-4302
71-14321-4302
71-14321-4302
74-14430-4302
74-14430-4302
74-14430-4302
75-16110-4301
AND
J
J
o
o
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PROGRAM NAME
WASTE
P~
PRO
SEWER MAINTENANCE
SEWER MAINTEN.~CE
SEWER MAINTENANCE
SEWER MAINTENANCE
DRAINAGE
DRAINAGE
DRAINAGE
INFORMATION TECHNOLO
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
17
CK DATE
PAGE
CK #
03-12-08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
117936
117749
117936
117936
117936
117764
117764
117822
117862
117862
11 7862
117936
11 7764
117878
117944
117944
117874
117874
117874
117875
11 7874
117874
117874
117874
117874
117874
117874
117874
117874
117874
117874
117874
TRAINING
TRAINING
T
T
T
IT
IT-HIGHLINE
DATA LINE INSTALLATION
CELL PHONE CHARGES
PHONE CHARGES
TRIC SERVICE
ELECTRIC SERVICE
TRIC SERVICE
TRIC SERVICE
TRIC SERVICE
'TRIC SERVICE
'TRIC SERVICE
'TRIC SERVICE
:TRIC SERVICE
:TRIC SERVICE
:TRIC SERVICE
:TRIC SERVICE
:TRIC SERVICE
'ELECTRIC SERVICE
:TRIC SERVICE
:TRIC SERVICE
ITD
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
FOR
FOR
FOR
PARTS
PARTS
COMP
COMP
CELL
AMOUNT
82
35
80
00
00
31
33
69
99
39
46
97
13
71
67
84
45
56
21
47
76
47
86
61
09
27
23
90
73
76
67
08
28
85
83
895
895
476
109
241
346
125
40
417
004
315
157
210
45
90
51
978
9
251
71
146
44
133
39
43
4
771
110
78
1
1
64
3
VENDOR NAME
BANK
JASON
PG&E COMPANY
PG&E COMPANY
PG&E COMPANY
PG&E COMPANY
PG&E COMPANY
PG&E COMPANY
PG&E COMPANY
PG&E COMPANY
PG&E COMPANY
PG&E COMPANY
PG&E COMPANY
PG&E COMPANY
PG&E COMPANY
PG&E COMPANY
PG&E COMPANY
PG&E COMPANY
I\NK
~ANK
BANK
v
U
ACCOUNT NUMBER
75-16110-4302
75-16110-4310
75-16110-4310
75-16110-4330
75-16110-4330
75-16110-4365
75-16110-4365
75-16110-4365
75-16110-4365
7~-16110-4365
75-16110-4365
75-16110-4365
75-16110-4365
75-16110-4365
75-16110-4410
75-16110-4410
76-06120-4401
76-06120-4401
76-06120-4401
76-06120-4401
76-06120-4401
76-06120-4401
76-06120-4401
76-06120-4401
76-06120-4401
76-06120-4401
76-06120-4401
76-06120-4401
76-06120-4401
76-06120-4401
76-06120-4401
76-06120-4401
PROGRAM NAME
INFORMATION TECHNOLO
INFORMATION TECHNOLO
INFORMATION TECHNOLO
INFORMATION TECHNOLO
INFORMATION TECHNOLO
INFORMATION TECHNOLO
INFORMATION TECHNOLO
INFORMATION TECHNOLO
INFORMATION TECHNOLO
INFORMATION TECHNOLO
INFORMATION TECHNOLO
INFORMATION TECHNOLO
INFORMATION TECHNOLO
INFORMATION TECIlNOLO
INFORMATION TECHNOLO
INFORMATION TECHNOLO
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
PAYMENTS/REV
PAYMENTS/REV
PAYMENTS/REV
PAYMENTS/REV
PAYMENTS/REV
PAYMENTS/REV
PAYMENTS/REV
PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY
UTILITY
UTILITY
UTILITY
UTILITY
UTILITY
UTILITY
UTILITY
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
18
CK DATE
PAGE
#
CK
08
12
03
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
117737
117737
117736
117737
117737
11 7736
117736
117759
117760
117760
117760
117884
117787
117849
117925
11 7744
117832
117863
117869
117901
117863
117901
117863
117863
11 7863
117863
117863
117901
117877
117863
117923
117722
IW10ICE/DESCRIPTION
LABOR
REPAIRS
REPAIR ORDER CARDS
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
CREDIT
SUPPLIES
GARAGE SUPPLIES/PARTS
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
GARAGE SUPPLIES/PARTS
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
SIGNS
SHOP
PHONE
AMOUNT
11
11
80
05
87
73
89
00
72
53
39
00
00
14
00
89
85
23
12
25
41
99
03
39
77
98
93
72
47
46
88
34
77
28
13
236
245
166
80
117
99
81
26
480
30
058
115
302
89
10
77
-16
5
118
14
207
107
141
5
5
80
71
12
101
11
1
SERVI
SERVI
GRO
NAME
VENDOR
AT&T
AT&T
AT&T
AT&T
AT&T
AT&T
AT&T
KSM
OLE
OLE
OLE
OLE
NUMBER
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4430
76-06120-4430
76-06120-4430
76-06120-4430
76-14910-4210
76-14910-4210
76-14910-4210
76 --14910 -4210
76-14910-4210
76-14910-4250
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-1.4910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
ACCOUNT
PROGRAM NAME
PAYMENTS/REV
PAYMENTS/REV
PAYMENTS/REV
PAYMENTS/REV
PAYMENTS/REV
PAYMENTS/REV
PAYMENTS/REV
PAYr~ENTS /REV
PAYMENTS/REV
PAYMENTS/REV
PAYMENTS/REV
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
GARAGE
GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY G.Z\.RAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY
UTILITY
UTILITY
UTILITY
UTILITY
UTILITY
UTILITY
UTILITY
UTILITY
DTILITY
UTILITY
UTILITY
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
19
CK DATE
PAGE
CK #
03-12-08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
117863
117863
117837
117731
117901
117847
117909
11 7863
117901
117869
117869
117901
117863
117863
11 7949
117815
117949
11 7863
117869
117791
117815
117942
117949
117901
117901
117863
117852
117837
117721
11 7 8 52
117949
117909
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
GARAGE SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES/PARTS
ES
ES
ES
SUPPLIES/PARTS
ES
ES
: SUPPLIES/PARTS
ES
ES
:ES
:ES
:ES
lES/VEH PARTS
[ES
, SUPPLIES/REPAIR
, SUPPLIES/PARTS
, SUPPLIES/PARTS
rES
rES
rES
IES
IES
ALIGNMENT FOR BUS
IES
GARAGE
AMOUNT
36
20
123
89
357
83
9
42
77
38
00
46
81
44
41
37
36
75
49
93
25
70
79
00
31
43
82
44
88
63
50
22
80
31
10
93
16
38
88
89
94
1
151
31
16
88
8
713
134
648
10
287
92
150
81
865
22
376
49
94
65
409
119
201
59
NAME
OLE CARBURETOR
OLE CARBURETOR
LEHR AUTO ELECTRIC
AMERICAN CYLINDER HEAD
SERRAMONTE FORD INC
MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY C
SOUTH CITY LUMBER AND
OLE'S CARBURETOR
SERRAMONTE FORD INC
PENINSULA BATTERY INC
PENINSULA BATTERY INC
SERRAMONTE FORD INC
OLE'S CARBURETOR
'S CARBURETOR
GFOOT
TECH EMERGENCY
GFOOT
'S CARBURETOR
INSULA BATTERY INC
:RGENCY VEHICLE GROU
TECH EMERGENCY
TROL/STINGER SPIKE
JGFOOT
VENDOR
S
S
OLE
INC
INC
SERRAMONTE FORD
SERRAMONTE FORD
OLE'S CARBURETOR
MOSS RUBBER
AND
LEHR AUTO ELECTRIC
ADAM-HILL COMPANY,THE
MOSS RUBBER
WING FOOT
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-11910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
NUMBER
ACCOUNT
NAHE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GAR.Z<GE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
PROGRAM
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
20
CK DATE
PAGE
CK #
2-08
1
03-
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/08
03/12/G8
03/12/08
03/12/08
117949
117901
117926
117742
117792
117865
117865
11 7767
117933
117946
117945
117780
117945
117946
117780
11 7 94 5
117780
117946
117764
117868
117857
117857
117857
117802
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
TIRES
GARAGE
GARAGE
FUEL
OIL DISPOSAL
BULK GAS - FLEET
BULK GAS - FLEET
FEB08 COBRA SERVICE CHGS
WORKERS COMP CLAIMS
VISION CLAIMS PAID
CLAIMS ADMIN SVC
DENTAL CLAIMS PAID
CLAIMS ADMIN ~VC
VISION CLAIMS
DENTAL CLAIMS
I CLAIMS ADMIN
I DENTAL CLAIMS
VISION CLAIMS
TER PARTS-WQCP
MATERIALS FOR READ CELEB
:ASE LAB, FLOOR FOOTPRING
.IOR BLDG MODIF ONS
'LOOR LAB BURN
,RY BOOKS 11./" RIALS
SUPPLIES/PARTS
SUPPLIES
~
PAID
PAID
PAID
PAID
FEB08
FEBOE
FEB08
AMOUNT
501.96
224.62
129.90
107.87
65.00
747.62
096.25
180.40
271.54
649.20
109.20
414.13
-2.73
577.34
456.56
977.34
347.43
119.60
353.57
697.80
750.00
500.00
370.00
568.04
13
15
71
5
5
40
-2
7
31
61
VENDOR NAME
WING FOOT
SERRAMONTE FORD INC
TAP PLASTICS INC
BANK OF AMERICA
EVERGREEN OIL INC
TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMEN
VISION SERVICE PLAt~-CA
VISION SERVICE PLAN-CA
DELTA DENTAL PLAN
VISION SERVICE PLAN-CA
VISION SERVICE PLAN-CA
DELTA DENTAL PLAN
VISION SERVICE PLAN-CA
DELTA DENTAL PLAN
VISION SERVICE PLAN-CA
CDW GOVERNMENT INC
ORIENTAL TRADING CO IN
NIELSEN BUILDING ~
NIELSEN BUILDING
NIELSEN BUILDING
MONEY BANK/AMA
SY~TE
OIL CO
OIL CO
OLYMPIAN
OLYMPIAN
CERIDIAN
NUMBER
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4365
76-14910-4366
76-14910-4366
76-14910-4366
77-07410-4351
77-07410-4351
78-00000-2093
78-00000-2093
78-00000-2093
78-00000-2094
78-07310-4131
78-07310-4131
78-07310-4131
78-07310-4132
78-07310-4132
79-07512-4306
81-00000-2888
81-00000-2890
81-00000-2890
81-00000-2890
81-00000-2923
ACCOUNT
AND BENEFITS
AND BENEFITS
AND BENEFITS
AND BENEFITS
AND BENEFITS
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
NAME
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
SELF-INSURANCE
SELF- INSURA."ICE
NON EXPENSE ACCT
NON EXPENSE ACCT
NON EXPENSE ACCT
NON EXPENSE ACCT
HEALTH
HEl'.LTH
HEALTH
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMEN
NON EXPENSE
NON EXPENSE
NON EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
PROGRAM
HEALTH
HEALTH
23
23
168
168
$898
$898
VENDOR TOTAL
&
GE
ACCT
ACCT
NON
NON
GRAND TOTAL
RECORDS
632
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
1
PAGE
08
03-19
CK DATE
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
CK #
117985
118119
118113
118057
118098
118019
118094
118074
118013
118094
118117
117987
117987
118100
118120
118110
118110
118010
118049
118047
118092
118064
118081
118002
117985
118070
118070
118037
118064
118064
118120
118120
11059
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
9/30
ALLvCATION
v ~nB
CA"DS
PETTY
FOOD
2007
FOR 2007 FORD 500
FY ENDING JUNE 30
HIRE
1099 & W2 FORMS/ENVELOPES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
2/1/08-1/31/09 LEASE
PRINTING SVC-NEWSLETTER/MAILING
11059
LIVESCAN BILLING CODE
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
JOB ANNOUNCEMENT
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
PETTY CASH REIMB
PETTY CASH REIMB
CHECK
CHECK
SUPPLIES
LEASE PAYMENT
AUDIT SVCS FOR
W/E 3/9 TEMP
AMOUNT
00
71
50
34
90
00
60
00
34
60
40
00
00
50
95
59
32
53
12
35
24
36
00
89
00
00
00
90
41
76
00
58
4
426
700
658
204
23
859
367
388
300
300
129
27
22
2
8
641
876
622
802
711
20
86
35
34
86
261
395
395
354
48
57
VENDOR NAME
CALIFORNIA, STATE OF
STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZ
SSF CONFERENCE CENTER
NUMBER
4
28
7
MUNISERVICES LLC
SAN MATEO COUNTY CONTR
ADVAN
40
OF
COUNTY
CCAC
CCAC
SAN MATEO
STEELE JIM
FINAL
FINAL
4
&
CREDIT
MAZE & ASSOCIATES
MANPOWER INC
REDWOOD CITY, CITY OF
OFFICE DEPOT INC
PITNEY BOWES
ESSENCE PRINTING, INC
CALIFORNIA, STATE OF
OLSEN, GARY
OLSEN,
KSM PRI G
OFFICE T
OFFICE T
STEELE
STEELE
INC
INC
GARY
JIM
JIM
GREENHILL, RIMA
ROCKY POINT LLC
PACIFICA, CITY OF
GARBARINO, RICHARD
ROCKY POINT LLC
STAPLES BUSINESS
&
SMART
SMART
FORD
10-00000-2132
10-00000-2140
10-00000-2400
10-00000-3113
10-00000-3301
10-00000-3550
10-01110-4250
10-01110-4310
10-01110-4320
10-02110-4250
10-0211 ~-4301
10 02110-4310
10-02110-4310
10-02110..4391
10-05110-4310
10-05110-4310
10-05110-4310
10-05110-4370
10-06210-4201
10-06210-4201
10-06210-4301
10-06210-4301
10-06210-4370
10-07110-4301
10-09110-4201
10-09110-4201
10-09110-4201
10-09110-4250
10-09110-4301
10-09110-4301
10-09110-4330
10-10110-4301
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
CITY COUNCIL
CITY COUNCIL
CITY COUNCIL
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK
CLERK
CLERK
ACCOUNT
ACCT
ACCT
NA."'1E
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
PROGRAJvI
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
CITY
CITY MANAGER
CITY MANAGER
CITY MANAGER
CITY MANAGER
ACCOUNTING
ACCOUNTING
ACCOUNTING
ACCOUNTING
ACCOUNTING
DEPTMNTL-CITYWID
HU~IAN RESOURCES
RESOURCES
RESOURCES
RESOURCES
RESOURCES
RESOURCES
RESOURCES
COMM DEV
HUMfu"l
HUMAN
HUl'1AN
HUMAN
HUMAN
HUMAN
ECONOMIC
&
NON-
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
2
PAGE
U3-19-08
CK DATE
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
CK #
118064
118123
118117
117988
118120
118034
118027
118026
118025
117988
117995
117959
118117
118112
118028
118094
118104
118118
118118
118118
118006
118006
118022
118118
118118
118119
118119
118065
118042
118030
118118
118054
INSTITUTE
INSTITUTE
INSTITUTE
PLANNERS
PLANNERS
PLANNERS
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
SUPPLIES
MEMBERSHIP FEE
OFFICE SUPPLIES
PLANNING PUBLICATIONS
PETTY CASH REIMB
STAFF DEV CD~ EXP REIMB
3/26-27 RO~" RESERV FOR LCC
3/26-27 RESERV FOR LCC
3/26-27 RESERV FOR LCC
PLANNING ,ICATIONS
INSPECTI 'CS-12/07
HP CARTR
OFFICE S ES
SUPPLIES
RENEWAL :RSHIP
ROLLER B CITY LOGO/BLDG DIV
W/E 2/29 ' HIRE
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
DELIVERY
DELIVERY
COMPUTER ,~
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
FEB 08 S U
08
PLIE
ICAL E
E TA :S
PLIE
ULAN :E
SE TAX
USE TAX
6
PYMT
SVC
SVC
PAR1u
~
ROOM
ALES
SALES
FEB
AMOUNT
47
00
05
85
93
91
40
40
40
57
00
99
91
91
00
90
00
00
00
67
09
30
74
26
08
75
04
02
79
50
00
51
11
500
200
727
73
083
361
361
361
149
005
400
12
13
280
562
224
17
17
48
35
66
54
18
1
35
-0
54
846
13
17
992
1
1
5
1
8
ADVAN
CRAMEN
u~CRAMEN
SAC RAMEN
INC
PLAN
PLAN
PLAN
N
PLAN
POINT LLC
SERV-TEMP
STAPLES CREDIT
STAPLES CREDIT
STAPLES CREDIT
VENDOR NAME
FEDEX
FEDEX
STATE
ICC
ROCKY
ACCOUNT NUMBER
10-10110-4301
10-10110-4310
10-10410-4301
10-10410-4303
10-10410-4310
10-10410-4330
10-10411-4320
10-10411-4320
10-10411-4320
10-10413-4303-1305
10-10520-4201-1054
10-10520-4301
10-10520-4302
10-10520-4302
10-10520-4310
10-10520-4380
10-11110-4210
10-11110-4301
10-11210-4301
10-11210-4302
10-11210-4307
10-11210-4307
10-11210-4410
10-11610-4301
10-11610-4302
10-116~0-4302
10-11610-4302
10-11610-4302
10-11610-4302
10-11610-4340
10-11611-4301
10-11611-4801
NAME
COMM DEV
COMM DEV
SERVICES
SERVICES
PLANNING SERVICES
PLANNING SERVICES
PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING COMMISSION
PLfu~NING--DEVELOPER
BUILDING INSPECTION
BUILDING INSPECTION
BUILDING INSPECTION
BUILDING INSPECTION
BUn,DING INSPECTION
BUILDING INSPECTION
FIRE ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
FIRE PREVENTION
FIRE PREVENTION
PREVENTION
PREVENTION
PREVENTION
ALS
ALS
ALS
ALS
ALS
BLS
BLS
ALS
ALS
ECONOMIC
ECONOMIC
PLANNING
PLANNING
&
&
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
PROGRAM
FIRE
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
3
PAGE
C3~1~~08
CK DATE
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
CK #
118054
118112
118030
118038
118112
118054
118054
118118
118041
118010
11 7994
11 7974
118117
118117
118117
118090
118114
118124
118124
118087
118124
118050
118124
118124
117993
117993
118010
118010
118119
118005
118140
117956
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
AMBULANCE
SUPPLIES
NAME TAG/BADGES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
FIRE TRNG VEH LEASE
TRNG VEH LEASE
LIES
-LAW ENF MANUAL UPDATE
FORD FUSION, VIN#3FAHP08137R118927
N/DISINFECT/REMOVE DEBRIS
X GLOVES
CE SUPPLIES
CE SUPPLIES
CE SUPPLIES
& 2/19 DESTRUCTION
REMENT GIFT-MARTINEZ PD
'ESSIONAL SERVICES RELATED TO TELECOMMUNICATION
'ESSIONAL SERVICES RELATED TO TELECOMMUNICATION
CLAS~ REG-KAREN WHITLEY
CTR RELOCATION
:N
PT
RTERS
ACCT#04236
6
6
6
PYMT
PYMT
PYMT
LEASE
-
COMM
FIRE
RADIO
POWER
7/1/2007 THRU
7/1/2007 THRU
ACCT#042360334
ACCT#042360306
2007-2008
2007-2008
#3FAHP08147RI04759
CONTRACT FOR FISCAL YEAR
CONTRACT FOR FISCAL YEAR
2007 FUSION
2007 FUSION 3FAHP07137R186808
FEB 08 SALES & USE TAX
TOLL EVASION VIOLATION
LUNCHEON-CORPORAL TEST
CROSSING GUARD SERVICES
FORD
FORD
AMOUNT
22
3~
72
69
35
09
94
29
00
64
00
35
13
18
23
18
00
00
44
00
05
19
90
98
00
00
95
73
24
00
46
26
1
3
2
13
18
058
58
192
49
58
475
408
9
200
396
220
415
143
436
319
150
50
176
679
98
614
88
129
635
350
299
379
336
1
4
150
1,651
3
VENDOR NAME
MORTON REVOCABLE TRUST
SOUTH CITY LUMBER AND
IRVINE & JACHENS INC
L N CURTIS & SONS
SOUTH CITY LUMBER AND
MORTON REVOCABLE TRUST
MORTON REVOCABLE TRUST
STAPLES CREDIT PLAN
LEXIPOL LLC
FORD CREDIT
~ SCENE CLEANERS I
TREE MEDICAL LLC
ES BUSINESS ADVAN
ES BUSINESS .m""
ES BUSINESS
L SECURE DES
OLICE ASSOCI
OMMUNICATION
OMMUNICATION
C SAFETY TRA
'OMMUNICATION
, MOBILE COMM
.........L.I "Tl-I.~
ADVAN
CRIMw
TELECOMMUNICNrIONS ENG
TELECOMMUNICATIONS ENG
INTERCONNECT
INTERCONNECT
EQUALIZ
SE
CREATIVE
CREATIVE
FORD CREDIT
FORD CREDIT
STATE BOARD OF
FASTRAK
WESTBOROUGH DELI
ALL CITY MANAGEMENT
10 -1161J.-4810
10-11710-4302
10-11710-4302
10-11710-4302
10-11710-4302
10-11720-4801
10-11720-4810
10-11730-4302-1101
10-12110-4364-0780
10-12210-4370
10-12310-4301
10-12310-4301
10-12310-4301
10-12310-4301
10-12310-4301
10-12310-4301
10-12310-4330
10-12410-4201
10-12410-4201
10-12410-4330
10-12410-4365
10-12410-4365
10-12410-4365
10-12410-4365
10-12410-4410
10-12410-4410
10-12620-4370
10-12710-4370
10-12720-4301
10-12720-4301
10-12720-4380
10-12721-4210
NUMBER
ACCOUNT
NAi"1E
BLS
SUPPRESSION
SUPPRESSION
SUPPRESS ION
SUPPRESSION
TRAINING
TRAINING
STATION SUPPLIES
POLICE ADMINISTRATIO
SERVICES ADMINISTRAT
RECORDS
RECORDS
RECORDS
RECORDS
RECORDS
RECORDS
RECORDS
COMMUNICATIONS
COMMUNICATIONS
COMMUNICATIONS
COMMUNICATIONS
COMMUNICATIONS
COMMUNICATIONS
COMMUNICATIONS
COMMUNICATIONS
COMMUNICATIONS
INVESTIGATION
ADMINISTRATIO
PATROL
PATROL
PATROL
TRAFFIC
PROGRAM
PATROL
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
4
PAGE
03-19-08
CK DATE
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
#
118079
118079
118079
118079
118079
118079
118079
118079
118079
118079
118079
118079
118036
118120
118120
118117
118117
117979
118056
118056
118056
118056
118056
118056
117967
118017
118029
118119
118020
118133
118003
118133
CK
DOG
SUPPLIES
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
TREATMENT OF FRITZ(POLICE
PETTY CASH REIMB
PETTY CASH REIMB
HP LASERJET FOR ENG
OFFICE SUPPLIES
FRAMING EXP REIMB
3/20 WORKSHOP
3/20 WORKSHOP
WORKSHOP
WORKSHOP
WORKSHOP
WORKSHOP
PHONE CHARGES
'1' SUPPLIES -STREET
SUPPLIES
8 SALES & USE TAX
IES
IESEL-ST CLEANING
DOUS WASTE REMOVAL
TREET SWEEPING
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
CANINE FOOD
CANINE FOOD
CANINE FOOD
CANINE FOOD
CANINE FOOD
CANINE FOOD
CANINE FOOD
CANINE FOOD
CANINE FOOD
CANINE FOOD
CANINE FOOD
CANINE FOOD
3/20
3/20
CELL
MAIN
MAINT
AMOUNT
66.47
31. 92
58.86
64.92
60.60
34.63
63.29
53.01
69.57
53.55
65.99
55.19
381.34
54.01
55.70
919.04
50.56
52.68
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
238.26
94.62
505.53
0.01
785.89
165.00
130.00
165.00
ADVAN
ADVAN
AT&T MOBILITY
GRANITE ROCK COMPANY
INTERSTATE TRAFFIC
STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZ
HARBOR READY MIX
UNIVAR USA INC
EVERGREEN
UNIVAR USA
INC
VENDOR NAME
STEELE, JIM
STEELE, JIM
STAPLES BUSINESS
STAPLES BUSINESS
BUHAGIAR, DOROTHY
MSA
MSA
MSA
MSA
MSA
MSA
OIL
INC
CLUB
CLUB
CLUB
INC
PET CLUB
PET CLUB
PET CLUB
PET CLUB
PET CLUB
PET CLUB
PET CLUB
PET CLUB
PET CLUB
PET
PET
PET
KKH
ACCOUNT NUMBER
10-127~2-4390
1.0-12722-4390
10-12722-4390
10-12722-4390
10.12722 -43 90
10-12722-4390
10-12722-4390
10-12722-4390
10-12722-4390
10-12722-4390
10-12722-4390
10-12722-4390
10-12722-4390
10-13210-4310
10-13210-4330
10-13210-4550
10-14510-4301
10-14510-4301
10-14510-4310
10-14510-4310
10-14510-4310
10-14510-4310
10-14510-4310
10-14510-4310
10-14510-4410
10-14520-4302
10-14520-4302
10-14520-4302
10-14530-4302
10-14550-4302
10-14550-4302
10-14550-4302
S
S
S
&
STREET MAINTENANCE
STREET MAINTENANCE
STREET MAINTENfu~CE
SIDEWALKS & CURBS
STREET CLEANING
STREET CLEANING
STREET CLEANING
S
S
S
CANINE
CANINE
CANINE
CAN1NE
CANINE
CANINE
CANINE
CANINE
CANINE
CJ:l....NINE
CANINE
CANINE
CANINE
GENERAL ENGINEERING
GENERAL ENGINEERING
GENERAL ENGINEERING
TRAFFIC S
TRAFFIC S
TRAFFIC S
TRAFFIC
TRAFFIC
TRAFFIC
TRAFFIC
TRAFFIC
TRAFFIC
P;'(OGRAM NAME
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
ST MAINT
ST MAINT
ST MAINT
81' MAINT
ST MAINT
ST MAINT
ST MAINT
ST MAINT
ST MAINT
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
5
CK DATE
PAGE
CK #
19-08
03
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
118018
118071
117962
117962
117975
117975
117979
118117
118004
118056
118056
118056
118056
118056
118055
118071
118071
118071
118071
118071
117977
118112
118112
118112
118112
118072
118112
117962
117979
118117
118015
118093
ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES
LIGHTING SUPPLIES
SVC
SVC
PARKS-SAFETY EQUIPMENT
PARKS-SAFETY EQUIPMENT
FRAMING EXP REIMB
OFFICE SUPPLIES
PARKS-IRRIG SUPPLIES
3/20 WORKSHOP
3/20 WORKSHOP
,/,^ WORKSHOP
WORKSHOP
WORKSHOP
l' SUPPLIES
MAINT SUPPLIES
MAINT SUPPLIES
MAINT SUPPLIES
... Tn~ SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
,0 ~ SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
:ANING SVC
, REIMB
'LIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
UNIFORM CLEANING
UNIFORM CLEANING
!'U"'>...L.L." .
MAINT
PARK_-MAIN.
PARK MAINT
.J/~V
3/20
PARI<
PARI<
PARK
PARK
PARK
MAINT
MAINT
MAINT
MAINT
BLDG
BDLG
AMOUNT
458
25
135
07
96
19
49
85
88
68
56
97
00
00
00
00
00
78
78
37
42
71
64
79
71
32
26
14
68
31
39
69
58
52
98
1
68
584
52
50
814
20
20
20
20
20
75
36
127
59
97
21
62
36
43
36
6
205
120
36
52
50
10
88
AND
SER
ADVAN
VENDOR NAME
GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SER
AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SER
BRENTON SAFETY SOLUTIO
BRENTON SAFETY SOLUTIO
BUHAGIAR, DOROTHY
STAPLES BUSINESS
EWING
MSA
MOSS RUBBER
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
BROADMOOR LANDSCAPE SU
SOUTH CITY LUMBER I
CITY LUMBER I
CITY LUMBER
CITY LUMBER
IC NURSERIES
CITY LUMBER
PRIDE UNIFORf'
:IAR, DOROTHY
,ES BUSINESS
IGER
:STER MIDLAND
ADVAN
MSA
MSA
MSA
MSA
NUMBER
'lND
'lND
AND
AND
SOUTH
10-14560-4302
10-14570-4302
10-14610-4210
10-14610-4210
10-14610-4210
10-14610-4210
10-14610-4301
10-14610-4301
10-14611)-4302
10-14610-4310
10-14610-4310
10-14610-4310
10-14610-4310
10-14610-4310
10-14610-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620-4360
10-14620--4360
10--14640-4360
10-14710-4210
10-14'710-4301
10-14710-4301
10-14721-4360
10-14721-4360
ACCOUNT
PROGRAM NAME
SIGNALS
LIGHTING
ADMINISTRATION
PARK ADMINISTRATION
PARK ADMINISTRATION
PARK ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
1'.DMINISTRATION
ADMINISTKATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK
PARK
PARK
PARK
PARK
PARK
PARK
PARK MAINTENANCE
PARK MAINTENlU~CE
PARK MAINTENANCE
STREET TREE MAINTENA
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
CITY HALL MAINTENANC
CITY HALL MAINTENANC
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
6
PAGE
19-08
03
CK DATE
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
CK #
118015
118093
118015
118015
118016
118015
118093
118112
118071
118109
118112
118016
118112
118112
118112
118112
117953
118109
118073
118071
118071
118112
118016
118146
118112
118109
118112
118112
118112
118112
118112
118108
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
BDLG MAINT
MAINT SUPPLIES
MAINT SUPPLIES
MAINT-ROOF SURVEYS
MAINT SUPPLIES
MAINT SUPPLIES
MAINT SUPPLIES
MAINT SUPPLIES
MAINT SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
BLDG MAINT
BDLG MAINT
BLDG MAINT
BLDG MAINT
MAL NT
MAINT
BLDG
BLDG
BLDG
BLDG
BDLG
BLDG
BLDG
BLDG
BLDG
BLDG
BLDG MAINT SUPPLIES
BLDG MAINT-ELEVATOR SERVICE
MAINT-ROOF SURVEYS
TING MAINTENANCE
MAINT SUPPLIES
IT
MAINT SUPPLIES
MAINT SUPPLIES
MAINT SUPPLIES
MAINT SUPPLIES
MAINT-ROOF SURVEYS
MAINT SUPPLIES
MAINT SUPPLIES
MAINT SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
MAINT
MAINT
MAINT
BDLG
BLDG
BLDG
BLDG
AMOUNT
43
88
131
46
7
243
88
62
7
92
98
99
60
03
91
98
73
57
00
06
52
96
78
42
93
10
00
50
11
58
55
01
00
33
00
16
52
32
07
44
86
44
900
5
5
4
1
8
342
1
900
17
34
o
11
2
1
271
900
310
262
-28
16
27
285
1
1
1
VENDOR NAME
GRAINGER
ROCHESTER MIDLAND
GRAINGER
GRAINGER
GRAND AVE HARDWARE
GRAINGER
ROCHESTER MIDLAND
SOUTH CITY LUMBER AND
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
SKYLINE ENGINEERING
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
GRAND AVE HARDWARE
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
AND
AND
AND
AND
ACME HOME ELEVATOR INC
SKYLINE ENGINEERING IN
PACIFIC POWER SERVICE
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWAR
SOUTH CITY LUMBER AND
GRAND AVE HARDWARE
WM MlNUCCIANI PLUMBING
SOUTH CITY LUMBER AND
SKYLINE ENGINEERING IN
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
SIGILLO SUPPLY
IN
AND
ACCOUNT NUMBER
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
10-14722-4360
10-14722-4360
10-14723-4302
10-14723-4302
10-14723-4302
10-14723-4360
10-14723-4360
10-14731-4360
10-14731-4360
10-14731-4360
10-14731-4360
10-14732-4302
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14732-4360
10-14733-4302
10-14733-4302
10-14733-4360
10-14741-4302
10-14741-4360
10-14741-4360
10-14741-4360
10-14741-4360
10-14741-4360
10-14741-4360
10-14741-4360
10-14741-4360
10-14743-4360
PROGRAM NAME
CITY HALL ANNEX MAIN
CITY HALL ili'lNEX MA.1N
MSB MAINTENANCE
MSB MAINTENANCE
MSB MAINTENANCE
MSB MAINTENANCE
MSB MAINTENANCE
FIRE STATION MAINTEN
FIRE STATION MAIN'fEN
FIRE STATION MAINTEN
FIRE STATION MAINTEN
LIBRARY MAINTENANCE
LIBRARY MAINTENANCE
LIBRARY MAINTENANCE
LIBRARY MAINTENANCE
LIBRARY MAINTENANCE
LIBRARY MAINTENANCE
LIBRARY MAINTENANCE
LIBRARY MAINTENANCE
CORPORATION YARD ~~I
CORPORATION YARD MAL
CORPORATION YARD MAL
RECREATION BUILDING
RECREATION BUILDING
RECREATION BUILDING
RECREATION BUILDING
RECREATION BUILDING
RECREA.fION BUILDING
RECREATION BUILDING
RECREATION BUILDING
RECREATION BUILDING
WESTBOROUGH BUILDING
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
7
PAGE
13-08
03
CK DATE
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
#
118035
118035
118035
118035
118062
118035
118037
118117
118053
117997
118053
118077
118076
117983
118053
118053
117969
117969
117969
118119
117969
118119
118011
118011
117969
118061
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
CK
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
LABELING
LABELLING
LABELLING
LABELLING
CATALOGING & METADATA
LABELING SVC-LIB LENDING MATERIALS
CUTTIMG BOOKMARKS
OFFICE SUPPLIES
PETTY CASH REIMB
OPERATING SUPPLIES
PETTY CASH REIMB
C.HANSEN/LIT LEARN
4/3 REGISTRATION
LIB ASSOC SUBSC.
PETTY CASH REIMB
PETTY CASH REIMB
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
FEB 08
BOOKS
FEB 08
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
MATERIAL
CLASS
SALES & USE TAX
SALES & USE TAX
SVC-LENDING
SVC
SVC
SVC
LIVING TOGETHER
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
AMOUNT
80
80
55
60
56
05
57
24
33
75
87
00
00
00
75
84
39
39
03
08
12
50
24
31
92
62
66
53
25
87
91
92
177
155
63
58
412
284
41
172
7
298
17
30
30
165
24
37
17
17
576
1
132
o
52
26
18
27
79
15
38
28
14
47
NAME
KD GRAPHICS
KD GRAPHICS
KD GRAPHICS
KD GRAPHICS
OCLC INC
KD GRAPHICS
KSM PRINTING
STAPLES BUSINESS
MIYAKO, LISA
DEMCO SUPPLY INC
MIYAKO, LISA
PENINSULA LIBRARY SYST
PENINSULA LIBRARY SYST
CALIFORNIA LIBRARY ASS
MIYAKO, LISA
MIYAKO,
BAKER & OR INC
BAKER & OR T"~
BAKE & OR
STAT BO OF ALIZ
& OR
BO OF ALIZ
GRO
GRO
NOLO
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
ADVAN
....""-'
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
LISA
THE
THE
& TAYLOR
PRESS INC
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
&
&
&
&
&
&
VENDOR
R
E:
BAKER
STATE
GALE
BAKER
1,CCOUNT NUMBER
10-15110-4210
]0-15110-4210
10-15110-4210
10-15110-4210
10 -15110 -4210
10-15110-4210
10-15110-4250
10-15110-4301
10-15110-4301
10-15110-4302
10 -15110-4307
10-15110-4310
10-15110-4310
10-15110-4310
10 -15110 -4310
10-15110-4380
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10 15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
NA."1E
LIBRARY AD~jIN/TECHNl
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
LIBRARY ADMIN/TECHNI
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
LIBRARY CIRCULA
LIBRARY CIRCULA
LIBRARY CIRCULA
LIBRARY CIRCULA
LIBRARY CIRCULA
LIBRARY CIRCULA
LIBRARY CIRCULA
LIBRARY CIRCUT"A
LIBRARY CIRCULA
LIBRARY CIRCULA
LIBRARY CIRCULA
LIBRARY CIRCULA
LIBRARY CIRCULA
LIBRARY CIRCULA
LIBRARY CIRCULA
PROGRAM
MAIN
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
8
CK DATE
PAGE
03-19-08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
CK #
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
118088
118119
118088
118051
118051
118051
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
USE TAX
&
LIBRARY BOOKS
AUDIO/VIDEO
FEB 08 SALES
AUDIO/VIDEO
A/V SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
A/V
A/V
AMOUNT
73
61
36
10
79
88
64
03
36
01
60
52
45
59
79
03
30
14
67
68
64
62
72
25
16
72
94
32
50
17
10
79
92
10
51
31
44
65
414
46
14
68
23
244
46
38
16
81
30
15
49
31
18
57
27
69
21
330
77
17
6
490
133
36
VENDOR NAME
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
RANDOM HOUSE INC
STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZ
RANDOM HOUSE INC
MIDWEST TAPE
MIDWEST TAPE
MIDWEST TAPE
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
B~~..KER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
ACCOUNT NUMBER
10-15210-4303
10-15210.4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
.. ^ ., c.,., ^ II"') f"l-:>
.1.U-..L:...J~.LV-""'')V.J
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4303
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
PROGRAM NAME
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
CIRCULA
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
LIBRARY
MAUl
MAIN
MAIN
MAIli
MAIN
MAIN
MAIN
MAIN
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
9
PAGE
03-19-08
CK DATE
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
CK #
118051
118051
118051
118051
118051
118051
118091
118091
117976
118088
118051
118053
118117
118119
117973
117973
117973
117973
117973
117973
118119
118142
117969
118131
118061
117969
118061
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
AUDIO/VIDEO
AUDIO/VIDEO
AUDIO/VIDEO
AUDIO/VIDEO
RECORDED BOOKS
RECORDED BOOKS
AUDIO/VIDEO
AUDIO VIDEO
AUDIO/VIDEO
PETTY CASH REIMB
OFFICE SUPPLIES
FEB 08 SALES
A/V
A/V
TAX
MATERIALS
USE TAX
USE
VIDEO
FEB 08 SALES &
2 PERFORMANCES
BOOKS
PRE-PAY BOOKS
LIVING TOGETHER
BOOKS
LIVING TOGETHER
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
&
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
AUDIO
AMOUNT
383.02
147.18
667.82
321.36
43.28
194.79
120.56
29.02
245.61
77.94
749.86
125.08
11.47
-0.04
170.58
46.54
46.54
912.55
12.27
12.27
158.85
500.00
352.13
71.00
27.63
33.23
27.63
31. 68
16.79
49.07
8.18
16.40
VENDOR NAME
MIDWEST TAPE
MIDWEST TAPE
MIDWEST TAPE
MIDWEST TAPE
MIDWEST TAPE
MIDWEST TAPE
RECORDED BOOKS
RECORDED BOOKS
BRILLIANCE AUDIO INC
Rl',NDOM HOUSE INC
MIDWEST TAPE
MIYAKO, LISA
STAPLES BUSINESS ADVAN
BOARD OF EQUALIZ
INC
INC
WHOLESALERS
E BOARD OF EQUALIZ
WILD THINGS INC
& TAYLOR
GOVERNMENT
PRESS INC
& TAYLOR
PRESS INC
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
TAYLOR
INC
INC
INC
INC
PRINTI
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
WHOLESALERS
WHOLESALERS
WHOJJESALERS
WHOLESALERS
WHOLESALERS
&
&
&
&
&
BAKER
U.S.
NOLO
BAKER
NOLO
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
ACCOUNT NUMBER
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-15210-4304
10-15220-4301
10-15220-4301
10-15220-4303
10-15220-4303
10-15220-4303
10-15220-4303
10-15220-4303
10-15220-4303
10-15220-4304
10-15225-4302-1522
10-15225-4380-1528
10-15230-4303
10-15230-4303
10-15230-4303
10-15230-4303
10-15310-4303
10-15310-4303
10-15310-4303
10-15310-4303
10-15310-4303
10-15310-4303
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CIRCULA
MAIN LIBRARY CHILDRE
MAIN LIBRARY CHILDRE
LIBRARY CHILDRE
LIBRARY CHILDRE
LIBRARY CHILDRE
LIBRARY CHILDRE
LIBRARY CHILDRE
CHILDRE
CHILDRE
PROGRAM NAME
MAIN
MAIN
MAIN
MAIN LIBRARY
MAIN LIBRARY
WEST ORANGE CHILDREN
WEST ORANGE CHILDREN
MAIN LIBRARY REFEREN
MAIN LIBRARY REFEREN
MAIN LIBRARY REFEREN
MAIN LIBRARY REFEREN
GRAND AVE OPERATIONS
GRAND AVE OPERATIONS
GRAND AVE OPERATIONS
GRAND AVE OPERATIONS
GRAND AVE OPERATIONS
GRAND AVE OPERATIONS
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
10
CK DATE
PAGE
08
0]-19
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
CK
117969
118051
118051
118060
118053
118119
117973
117973
117973
117973
118053
118053
118053
118117
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
117969
118117
118063
118053
11 7991
118136
117998
118119
118053
118110
118053
118110
#
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
AUDIO/VIDEO
AUDIO VISUAL
PETTY CASH REIMB
FEB 08 SALES & USE TAX
BOOKS
BOOKS
BOOKS
AUDIO VIDEO MATERIALS
PETTY CASH REIMB
PETTY CASH REIMB
PETTY CASH REIMB
OFFICE SUPPLIES
BOOKS
A/V SUPPLIES
BOOKS-PROJ READ
BOOKS-PROJ READ
BOOKS-PROJ READ
BOOKS-PROJ READ
BOOKS-PROJ READ
BOOKS
BOOKS-PROJ READ
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
PETTY CASH REIMB
REPAIR
PARENT MEETING
SUPPLIES
FEB 08 SALES & USE TAX
PETTY CASH REIMB
HOMEWORK ASST SNACKS
PETTY CASH REIMB
SNACKS-REAL PROG
AMOUNT
28
103
124
119
46
o
12
307
54
12
21
16
10
20
19
189
58
72
70
88
43
26
16
04
26
24
26
26
00
30
78
55
40
79
94
58
49
28
55
11
85
08
53
50
37
08
34
05
43
16
84
44
38
159
57
13
411
130
34
5
18
91
53
24
INC
INC
INC
ADVAN
NC
NC
NC
INC
INC
INC
NAME
BAKER & TAYLOR
MIDWEST TAPE
MIDWEST TAPE
NODA AUDIO VISUAL
MIYAKO, LISA
STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZ
BOOK WHOLESALERS INC
BOOK WHOLESALERS INC
nnMT WHOLESALERS
WHOLESALERS
KO,
KO,
KO,
LES
LISA
LISA
LISA
VENDOR
J..JV'-JJ.\.
BOOK
FINAL
LISA
FINAL
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
BAKER
ACCOUNT NUMBER
10-15310-4303
10-15310-4304
10-15310-4304
10-15310-4304
10-15315-4380-1532
10-15320-4303
10-15320-4303
10-15320-4303
10-15320-4303
10-15320-4304
10-15410-4310
10-15410-4380
10-15415-4302-1563
10-15415-4302-1563
10-15415-4303-1563
10-15415-4303-1563
10-15415-4303-1563
10-15415-4303-1563
10-15415-4303-1563
10-15415-4303-1563
10-15415-4303-1563
10-15430-4301
10-15430-4301
10-15430-4302
10-15';'30-4302
10-15440-4240-1509
10-15440-4302-1507
10-15440-4302-1510
10-15440-4302-1537
10-15440-4380-1551
10-15440-4380-1551
10-15440-4380-1551
PROGRAM NAME
OPERATIONS
OPERATIONS
OPERATIONS
OPERATIONS
GRAND AVE GRANTS
GRAND AVENUE CHILDRE
GRAND AVENUE CHILDRE
GRAND AVENUE CHILDRE
GRAND AVENUE CHILDRE
GRAl~D AVEr~uE CHILDRE
PROJECT READ
PROJECT READ
PROJECT READ GRANTS
PROJECT READ GRANTS
PROJECT READ GRANTS
PROJECT READ GRANTS
PROJECT GRANTS
GRAND AVE
GRAND AVE
GRAND AVE
GRAND AVE
READ
PROJECT READ GRANTS
PROJECT READ GRANTS
PROJECT READ GRANTS
PROJECT READ GRANTS
LEARNING CENTER
LEARNING CENTER
LEARNING CENTER
LEARNING CENTER
LEARNING CENTER GRAN
LEARNING CENTER GRAN
LEARNING CENTER GRAN
LEARNING CENTER GRAN
LEARNING CENTER GRAN
LEARNING CENTER GRAN
LEARNING CENTER GRAN
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
11
PAGE
03-19-08
CK DATE
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
CK #
118110
118094
118037
117955
118117
118117
118126
118126
118083
118126
118111
118058
118116
117996
117996
117996
118045
118037
117964
117964
118048
118095
118059
118037
117968
117963
118122
118110
118118
118118
118118
118110
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
SNACK-HOMEWK ASST PROG
BUS CARDS
PRINTING SVC
WATER/COOLER RENTAL
COLOR PRINTER INK CARTRIDGES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
AIRFARE ONSITE UPGRADE/TRAINING
ONSITE UPGRADE/TRAINING-SOFTWARE
RENEWAL PERMIT#138
ONSITE UPGRADE/TRAINING-SOFTWARE
2008 LEISURE GUIDE BROCHURE
08 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL
FEE-SUMMER SWIMMING PROG
BUSINESS DIRECTORY CD FOR OMP
BUSINESS DIRECTORY CD FOR OMP
BUSINESS DIRECTORY CD FOR OMP
LOCK REPAIR-TERRABAY
PRINT/BIND SUMMER CAMP BOOKLETS
KEYS & LOCKS FOR PARK MAINT STAFF
KEYS & LOCKS FOR STAFF
MILEAGE EXP n ~
MEXICAN FOLK
2008 GOLF IN S N
PRINT/BIND S P LETS
VESTS-EVENT N
EASTER EGG H R
REPAIRS-REF
SNACKS-REAL
MISC OFFICE
MISC OFFICE
MISC OFFICE
SNACKS-PRESC
MAl NT
PARK
"EIM~
AMOUNT
244.46
47.09
203.24
48.00
715.75
406.46
651.00
000.00
175.00
500.00
369.00
135.00
000.00
198.00
221.90
100.00
39.50
845.00
53.85
137.75
52.52
295.75
700.00
845.00
276.04
319.34
150.00
46.93
14.05
34.58
15.22
470.11
2
2
4
11
VENDOR NAME
FINAL
POINT LLC
PRINTING
ALHAMBRA
STAPLES BUSINESS
STAPLES BUSINESS
THE ACTIVE NETWORK
ACTIVE NETWORK
TMASTER
ACTIVE NETWORK, IN
OMA VALLEY PUBLISHI
IONAL RECREATION &
UNIFIED SCHOOL DIS
A EXPRESS
. EXPRESS
EXPRESS
BORG LOCKSMITHS
PRINTING
S PENINSULA LOCKSM
S PENINSULA LOCKSM
NGO, EDWARD
N, MARIANNA
S III, MANUEL
PRINTING
CUSTOM DESIGNS
STRATAKIS
RIOR VENDING
T & FINAL
LES CREDIT
LES CREDIT
LES CREDIT
.T FINAL
ADVAN
ADVAN
IN
IN
F
PLAN
PLAN
PLAN
&
&
SMART
ROCKY
KSM
DAT
DAT~
DATA
KSM
ART
ART
THE
ACCOUNT NUMBER
10-15440-4380-1551
10-17110-4250
10-17110-4250
10-17110-4301
10-17110-4301
10 17110-4301
10-17110-4302
10-1,110-4302
10-17110-4302
10-1'7210-4210
10-17210-4250
10-17210-4310
10-17230-4240
10-17230-4340
10-17230-4365
10-17230-4390
10-17240-4302
10-17240-4302
10-17250-4302
10-17250-4302
10-17250-4310
10-17260-4210
10-17260-4210
10-17260-4302
10-17260-4302
10-17260-4302
10-17260-4302
10-17270-4302
10-17280-4301
10-17280-4301
10-17280-4301
10-17280-4302
PROGRAM NAME
LEARNING CENTER GRAN
RECREATION & COMM SE
RECREATION & COMM SE
RECREATION & COMM SE
RECREATION & M..... SE
RECREATION & SE
RECREATION & SE
RECREATION & SE
RECREATION & SE
RECREATION AD STR
RECREATION AD STR
RECREATION AD STR
AQUATIC RAM
AQUATIC
AQUATIC
AQUATIC
SPORTS & AT
SPORTS & AT
RENTALS/
RENTALS/
RENTALS/
CLASSES
CLASSES
CLASSES
CLASSES
CLASSES
CLASSES
REAL
Cli
Cli
CI'
Cli
'-'-"'-'1"
COMM
PROG
PROGRAM
PROGRAM
PROGRAM
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
12
CK DATE
PAGE
01-19-08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
CK #
118037
118118
118118
118118
118118
118039
118037
118039
118127
118143
118102
118080
118097
118046
117980
118118
117955
118129
118116
117978
118132
118106
118033
118103
117961
118094
117967
118018
117986
118086
117982
117982
CAMP
BOOKLETS
PROG
INVOICE/DESCR!PTION
PRINTING-FLYERS SUMMER
MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES
MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES
MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES
MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES
SEATS-PRESCHL PROG
PRINT/BIND SUMMER CAMP
ARTS/CRAFTS/GAMES-FRESH
DEP SUMMER CAMP
PROGRAM
PROJECT-
RESERVATION-TRADITIONAL CAMP
RESERVATION-TRADITIONAL CAMP
TRAD SUMMER CAMP
DEP-TRADITIONAL CAMP
RESERVATION- SUMMER CAMP
2008 SUMMER CAMP
MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES
WATER/COOLER RENTAL
TONER-TERRAYBAY
FEE-SUMMER SWIMMING PROG
SOUN~ SYSTEM/ACCESORIES
MAINT CUST SUPPLIES
LL PERIOD 3/13
HEALTH FOR EMP & RETIREES
HOOL BOOK FAIR
PORTS
ESS CARDS
PHONE CHARGES
T-DUPL PYMT CK#113293
,R PARK - DESIGN SERVICES FOR DONATION
:E MEMORIAL PARK RECREATION BUILDING
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
MAINT
MAINT
~
BLDG
BLDG
BLDG
AMOUNT
31
73
20
06
33
74
38
56
00
00
50
00
00
00
00
13
08
58
81
73
19
95
82
44
50
00
30
73
17
10
53
21
074
724
560
20
682
033
66
40
37
-283
767
110
282
73
301
206
129
188
4
88
845
201
100
395
237
300
690
200
20
68
29
7
VENDOR NAME
KSM PRINTING
STAPLES CREDIT
STAPLES CREDIT
STAPLES CREDIT
STAPLES CREDIT
LAKESHORE
KSM PRINTING
LAKESHORE
THE MYSTERY SPOT
WILDLIFE ASSOCIATES
CRUZ ~~ BOARD
PEOP
PLAN
PLAN
PLAN
PLAN
5
8
2
136
1
33
SANTA
PICNIC
SAN FRANCISCO ZOOLOGIC
MALIBU REDWOOD CITY
CA STATE
STAPLES
ALHAMBRA
TOSHIBA BUSINESS SOLUT
SSF UNIFIED SCHOOL DIS
BRONSTEIN MUSIC
UNITED TEXTILE
SHI. JOHNNY
KAISER FOUNDATION HEAL
SCHOLASTIC BOOK FAIRS
AMERINATIONAL COMMUNIT
ROCKY POINT LLC
AT&T MOBILITY
GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO
CALLANDER ASSOCIATES
PRIBUSS ENGINEERING IN
SUPPLY
SUPPLY
~~ACH
THE
HISTORICAL LA
CREDIT PLAN
CAL-STEAM
CAL-STEAM
10-17280-4302
10-17280-4302
10-17280-4302
10-17280-4302
10-17280-4302
10-17280-4302
10-17280-4302
10-17280-4302-1720
10-17280-4390
10-17280-4390
10-17280-4390
10-17280-4390
10-17280-4390
10-17280-4390
10-17280-4390
10-17290-4301
10-17290-4302
10-17290-4365
10-17290-4390
10-17290-4390
11-00000-1302
12-00000-2003
12-00000-2011
27-00000-2878
29-10321-4240
29-10341-4301
33-14830-4410
51-13231-4302-0801
51-13232-4210-0523
51-13232-4210-0526
51-13232-4302-0826
51-13232-4302-0826
CHlLDCARE
CHlLDCARE
CHILDCARE
CHILDCARE
CHILDCARE
CHILDCARE
CHnDCARE
CHILDCARE
CHILDCARE
CHILDC1\.RE
CHILDCARE
CHILD CARE
CHILDCARE
CHILDCARE
CHILDCARE
SENIOR CENTERS
SENIOR CENTERS
SENIOR CENTERS
SENIOR CENTERS
SENIOR CENTERS
NON EXPENSE ACCT
NON EXPENSE ACCT
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
CDBG USING REH
CDBG WNTOWN RE
WEST RK 3 MAIN
GENE INFRASTR
FACI IES CAPII
FACI IES CAPlI
FACI 'lES CAPI'I
FACI 'IES CAPlI
NUMBER
ACCOUNT
PROGRAM NAME
ACCT
P
NON
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
13
CK DATE
PAGE
CK #
03-19-08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
11 7957
118109
118067
118119
118031
118052
118066
117970
118078
118139
118075
118015
118009
117992
118032
118078
118014
118012
117957
117957
117957
118082
118009
118015
118023
118119
118069
118069
118021
118021
118001
117999
ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES
BDLG MAINT-ROOF SURVEYS
ERGONOMIC ITEMS
FEB 08 SALES & USE TAX
PIPELINE REHAB CIP
ALUMINUN WARNING SIGNS
CONTINUED LEASE FOR M24
RENEWAL-P#A5876
PETTY CASH REIMB
MEETING SUPPLIES
FIRE ALARM SYSTEM
LAMPS
CONDUIT FOR ADMIN BLDG
INSPECTION-VARIOUS LOC
PANEL REMOVAL, SHOP PARTS
PETTY CASH REIMB
SHOP TOOLS
HELMETS
FANS FOR PUMP STATION
BACK UP ~^~~ SUPPLY FOR
ZIP TIES SAFETY SUPPLY
CLARIFLO OPERATIONS
CONDUIT IGESTER #5
THERMAL FOR ROOF BLOWER
RENTAL F GESTER STRUCTURAL
FEB 08 S & USE TAX
SODIUM H .LORITE
SODIUM H :LORITE
GASKETS
GASKETS
TOTAL RE .L CHLORINE
MONTHLY ,ING FOR FY
COPIERS
C2424
&
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
INSP
PLC
<~..~R
FOR
FOR LAB
07-08
AMOUNT
82
00
75
19
74
32
49
00
33
78
28
77
80
00
64
31
42
15
40
21
60
04
06
59
83
67
07
24
16
73
86
00
10
1
8
432
950
350
76
206
024
369
645
53
75
348
129
827
594
181
38
342
242
265
457
519
536
019
40
1
15
1
974
o
725
716
15
89
132
350
3
& SUP
VENDOR NAME
ALL INDUSTRIAL ELECTRI
SKYLINE ENGINEERING IN
OFFICE RELIEF
STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZ
J. FLORES CONSTRUCTION
MILT'S SIGN SERVICE IN
OFFICE EQUIPMENT FINAN
BAY AREA AIR QUALITY M
PEREZ, OLGA
WEST COAST CONCESSIONS
PENINSULA BATTERY INC
GRAINGER
FLOWERS ELECTRIC & SER
CRANE AMERICA SERVICES
K-119 OF CALIFORNIA
PEREZ, OLGA
GOLDEN GATE
BOLT
GALLS INC
ALL INDUSTRIAL ELECTRI
ALL INDUSTRIAL ELECTRI
ALL INDUSTRIAL ELECTRI
POLYDYNE INC
FLOWERS ELECTRIC & SER
GRAINGER
HERTZ EQUIPMENT RENTAL
STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZ
ALKALI PROD
ALKALI PROD
1
CHLOR
CHLOR
HARRINGTON
HARRINGTON
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL I
OLIN
OLIN
ACCOUNT NUMBER
51-13232-4360-0526
51-13232-4360-0823
51-16110-4301-0240
71-00000-2140
71-13235-4210-0750
71-13910-4201
71-13910-4210
71-13910-4220
71-13910-4302
71-13910-4330
71-13910-4365
71-13910-4365
71-13910-4365
71-13922-4360
71-13 941- 4 3 6 5
71-13941-4365
71-13941-4365
71-13941-4365
71-13942-4360
71-13942-4360
71-13942-4360
71-13943-4302
71-13943-4365
71-13943-4365
71-13943-4365
71-13943-4365
71-13944-4302
71-13944-4302
71-13944-4365
71-13944-4365
71-13951-4201
71-1395]-4201
FACILITIES CAPITAL P
FACILITIES CAPITAL P
INFORMATION TECHNOLO
NON EXPENSE ACCT
SANITARY SEWER CAPIT
WQCP ADMINISTRATION
WQCP ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADlvlINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADS AND GROUNDS
IMARY TREATMENT
IMARY TREATMENT
IMARY TREATMENT
IMARY TREATMENT
'NDARY TREATMENT
INDARY TREATMENT
INDARY TREATMENT
SLUDGE HANDLING/DIGE
SLUDGE HANDLING/DIGE
SLUDGE HANDLING/DIGE
SLUDGE HANDLING!DIGE
SLUDGE HANDLING/DIGE
NAME
P!WGRAM
WQCP
WQCP
WQCP
WQCP
WQCP
CHLORINATION
CHLORINATION
CHLORINATION
CHLORINATION
CONTROL
CONTROL
AND
AND
PROCESS
PROCESS
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
14
PAGE
03-19-08
CK DATE
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
CK #
118119
117999
117999
118105
118137
118137
118137
118078
118119
118008
118137
118137
118078
118119
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
& USE TAX
AND TUBE CULT
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
PETTY CASH REIMB
FEB 08 SALES USE TAX
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
MONTHLY FOR VARIOUS
FOR LAB
FOR LAB
07-08
07-08
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
SALES & USE TAX
SAMPLING FOR FY
SAMPLING FY
LABORATORY
FEB
LAB
FEB 08
MONTHLY
MONTHLY FOR
ACETATE BUFFER SOL
LABORATORY SUPPLIES
LABORATORY SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
REIMB
ES
S
LABORATORY
LABORATORY
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
&
SAMPLING
SAMPLING
SAMPLING
SAMPLING
SAMPLING
SAMPLING
SAMPLING
SAMPLING
SAMPLING
SAMPLING
SAMPLING
SAMPLING
SAMPLING
SAMPLING
SAMPLING
SAMPLING
SAMPLING
SAMPLING
AMOUNT
12.38
350.00
350.00
460.42
37.02
22.91
192.81
54.23
9.29
1,945.45
69.43
53.86
146.00
9.74
75.00
150.00
150.00
75.00
300.00
150.00
75.00
150.00
250.00
250.00
150.00
150.00
250.00
150.00
150.00
75.00
75.00
150.00
I
PRODUCTS
INTERNATIONAL
INTERNATIONAL
INTERNATIONAL
PEREZ, OLGA
STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZ
FISHER SCIENTIFIC
VWR INTERNATIONAL
INTERNATIONAL
EZ, OLGA
TE BOARD OF
VENDOR NAME
STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZ
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
SHAPE
VWR
I
INC
INC
INC
INC
INC
VWR
VWR
VWR
ACCOUNT NUMBER
EQUALIZ
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
71-13951-4201
71-13951-4201
71-13951-4201
71-13951-4302
71-13951-4302
71-13951-4302
71-13951-4302
71-13951-4302
71-13951-4302
71-13951-4302
71-13951-4302
71-13951-4302
71-13951-4330
71-13951-4365
71-13953 -4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953 -4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953 -4201
71-13953 -4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953 -4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
fu'lD
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
AND
l\~D
AND
AND
AND
AND
PRO
PRO
PRO
WASTE
WASTE
WASTE
PROGRAM NAME
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
15
PAGE
03-19-08
CK DATE
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
CK #
117999
117999
11 7999
117999
117999
117999
11 7999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
117999
11 7999
117999
117999
11 7999
117999
117999
11 7999
117999
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIES
AMOUNT
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
150
75
75
150
150
75
200
250
150
150
75
150
150
75
150
500
250
450
450
250
200
150
75
250
150
150
450
150
150
150
250
250
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NAME
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
VENDOR
ACCOUNT NUMBER
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953 -4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PROGRAM NAME
INDUSTRIAL WASTE
INDUSTRIAL WASTE
INDUSTRIAL WASTE
INDUSTRIAL WASTE
INDUSTRIAL WASTE
INDUSTRIAL WASTE
INDUSTRIAL WASTE
INDUSTRIAL WASTE
INDUSTRIAL WASTE
INDUSTRIAL WI'.STE
INDUSTRIAL WASTE
INDUSTRIAL WASTE
INDUSTRIAL WASTE
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIl'.L
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
WASTE
WASTE
WASTE
WASTE
WASTE
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
16
CK DATE
PAGE
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
CK #
117999
117999
117999
117999
118078
118044
117971
118115
118107
117962
118012
118120
118120
118084
118138
118084
118120
117966
117966
117965
117966
117965
117965
117965
117966
117990
117965
117965
117965
117965
117984
117984
03-19-08
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INDUSTRIES
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
MONTHLY
MONTHLY
MONTHLY
MONTHLY
PETTY CASH REIMB
MISC EXP REIMB
JAN 08 DUMP CHARGES
08-DEBRIS BOX COLLECTION
IUM BISULFITE, BID 2447
FORM
PLIES
'TY CASH REIMB
'TY CASH REIMB
SYSTEM-l "R RENEWH
NT RENEWAL A
SYSTEM-l
'TY CASH RE
INE CHARGES
INE CHARGES
>NE CHARGES
>NE CHARGES
>NE CHARGES
lNE CHARGES
)NE CHARGEE
)NE CHARGEE
,LE INTERNE
)NE CHARGEE
)NE CHARGEE
)NE CHARGEE
)NE CHARGEE
SERVICI
SERVICI
SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS
SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS
SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS
SAMPLING FOR VARIOUS
SVC/MODEM
FEB
WATER
WATER
AMOUNT
00
00
00
00
41
97
25
70
37
01
39
65
96
00
00
00
81
71
41
47
07
60
94
30
71
20
26
21
78
72
34
32
150
150
250
200
18
65
52,261
17,478
3,087
2
68
8
71
550
300
550
12
78
25
140
85
228
120
48
78
46
256
5
84
106
245
32
I
I
I
SER
CORP
CORP
CALIFORNIA WATER SERVI
CALIFORNIA WATER SERVI
I
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
PEREZ, OLGA
LUSTENBERGER, CRAIG
BLUE LINE TRANSFER INC
SSF SCAVENGER CO INC
SIERRA CHEMICAL CO
&~ERIPRIDE UNIFORM
GALLS T"C
STEELE TU
STEELE
POWER ENANCE
WEBTRE
POWER ENANCE
STEELE
AT&T
AT&T
AT&T
AT&T
VENDOR NAME
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
DYSERT ENVIRONMENTAL
AT&T
AT&T
AT&T
AT&T
AT&T
AT&T
AT&T
AT&T
COMCAST
ACCOUNT NUMBER
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4201
71-13953-4302
71-13953-4302
71-13962-4240
71-13962-4420
71-13964-4302
71-14320-4210
74-14430-4302
75-16110-4301
75-16110-4302
75-16110-4365
75-16110-4365
75-16110-4365
75-16110-4365
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4410
76-06120-4430
76-06120-4430
PROGRAM NAME
INDUSTRIAL WASTE
INDUSTRIAL WASTE
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
SLUDGE DEWA G /
SLUDGE DEWA G /
DECHl .TION
SEWER ADMI~ .TION
NAGE
INFORMATIO~ [NOLO
INFORMATIm; [NOLO
INFORMATIO~ [NOLO
INFORMATIO~ [NOLO
INFORMATIO~ [NOLO
INFORMATIm !NOLO
UTILITY PAi ;/REV
UTILITY PAi ;/REV
UTILITY PA~ ;/REV
UTILITY PA' ;/REV
UTILITY PA' ;/REV
UTILITY PA' ,/REV
UTILITY PA' ,/REV
UTILITY PA' ,/REV
UTILITY PA' 3/REV
UTILITY PA' 3/REV
UTILITY PA 3/REV
UTILITY PA S/REV
UTILITY PA S/REV
UTILITY PA S/REV
UTILITY PA S/REV
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
PRO
WASTE
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
17
PAGE
03-19-08
CK DATE
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
CK #
117984
117984
117984
117984
117984
117984
117984
11 7984
117984
118141
117984
117984
117972
117972
118134
117962
118096
118117
118007
118068
118119
11 7958
118068
118068
118089
11 7958
118055
118144
118043
118125
118068
118075
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
TOWING SVC-GARAGE
TOWING SVC-GARAGE
RECYCLING SVC-GARAGE
UNIFORM
CONTRACT SVCS-GARAGE
OFFICE SUPPLIES
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
GARAGE SUPPLIES
GARAGE SUPPLIES
FEB 08 SALES & USE TAX
BAGS-GARAGE
GARAGE SUPPLIES
GARAGE SUPPLIES
GARAGE SUPPLIES
BAGS-GARAGE
GARAGE SUPPLIES
GARAGE SUPPLIES
GARAGE SUPPLIES
GARAGE SUPPLIES
GARAGE SUPPLIES
AUTO SUPPLIES-GARAGE
AMOUNT
9
92
115
26
17
9
9
18
21
957
76
81
59
39
05
76
76
79
06
38
76
30
00
00
00
14
27
57
48
63
59
81
32
98
64
43
93
00
78
53
50
93
244
37
242
133
251
25
713
58
308
105
31
9
9
23
65
65
137
33
362
50
974
231
38
VENDOR NAME
CALIFORNIA WATER
CALIFORNIA WATER
CALIFORNIA WATER
CALIFORNIA WATER
CALIFORNIA WATER
CALIFORNIA WATER
CALIFORNIA WATER
CALIFORNIA WATER SERVI
CALIFORNIA WATER SERVI
WESTBOROUGH WATER DIST
CALIFORNIA WATER
VAN'S ANTI-FREEZE RECY
AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SER
SERVI
SERVI
SERVI
SERVI
SERVI
SERVI
SERVI
SERVI
SERVI
INC
INC
CALIFORNIA WATER
BOB JR'S TOWING
BOB JR'S TOWING
ACCOUNT NUMBER
ADVAN
DISTR
ROSS AUTO CLINIC
STAPLES BUSINESS
FIRST AUTOMOTIVE
OLE'S CARBURETOR
STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZ
INC
" ~.,E..
OLE'S
INC
ALLIANZ MADVAC
OLE'S CARBURETOR
OLE'S CARBURETOR
RDO EQUIPMENT CO
ALLIANZ MADVAC INC
MOSS RUBBER
WING FOOT
LIGHT HOUSE, THE
~~n ~ UTILITIES WEST
CARBURETOR
SULA BATTERY
76-06120-4430
76-06120-4430
76-06120-4430
76-06120-4430
76-06120-4430
76-06120-4430
76-06120-4430
76-06120-4430
76-06120-4430
76-06120-4430
76-06120-4430
76-06120-4430
76-14910-4210
76-14910-4210
76-14910-4210
76-14910-4210
76-14910-4210
76-14910-4301
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
UTILITY PAYMENTS/REV
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
PROGRAM NAME
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
18
CK DATE
PAGE
#
03-19-08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
CK
118085
118068
118121
11 7954
118121
118068
118068
118068
118043
118075
118112
118068
118068
118068
118068
118112
118068
118068
118024
118121
118075
118068
118068
118145
118068
118130
118068
11 7954
118119
118068
11 7954
118075
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
AUTO
GARAG
GARAG
GARAG
GARAG
GARAGE
GARAGE
GARAGE
GARAGE
:E
GARAGE
GARAGE
GARAGE
GARAGE
GARAGE
GARAGE
USE TAX
CREDIT
GARAGE
FEB 08
CREDIT
GARAGE SUPPLIES
AUTO SUPPLIES-GARAGE
SUPPLIES
SALES
&
AMOUNT
739
64
52
68
65
157
111
4
86
299
52
17
34
61
97
29
02
16
62
55
20
38
28
76
21
70
23
88
01
89
12
40
78
73
23
08
84
16
73
73
54
03
INC
GRO
VENDOR NAME
POWER PLAN
OLE'S CARBURETOR
STEWART AUTOMOTIVE GRO
AIRPORT AUTO PARTS
STEWART AUTOMOTIVE
OLE'S CARBURETOR
OLE'S CARBURETOR
OLE'S CARBURETOR
LIGHT HOUSE, THE
PENINSULA BATTERY
ACCOUNT NUMBER
4
13
48
113
49
10
39
166
277
137
77
40
159
300
11
54
-16
22
57
-74
41
42
INC
AND
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
OLE'S CARBURETOR
OLE'S CARBURETOR
OLE'S CARBURETOR
OLE'S CARBURETOR
SALE
INC
INC
SOUTH CITY LUMBER
OLE'S CARBURETOR
OLE'S CARBURETOR
HI-TECH EMERGENCY
STEWART AUTOMOTIVE
PENINSULA BATTERY
OLE'S CARBURETOR
'S CARBURETOR
ZER CORPORATION
'S CARBURETOR
':T~n EQUIPMENT
ARBURETOR
AUTO PARTS INC
OARD OF EQUALIZ
ARBURETOR
AUTO PARTS
LA BATTERY
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
7b'-14910-4302
76--14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
AND
GRO
INC
TH
OLE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GAR.l\GE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
PROGRAM NAME
CITY SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT
OF
19
PAGE
9-08
03-
CK DATE
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
03/19/08
/I
118068
118112
118068
118068
118089
118068
118040
118068
118068
118068
118068
117952
118033
118033
118033
118128
118119
118099
117989
117981
118135
117968
117960
118135
118135
118000
118053
118147
CK
RETIREES
RETIREES
RETIREES
VOLUNTEER
INVOICE/DESCRIPTION
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SALES TAX SiB 8/25%
GARAGE SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
GARAGE SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
AB CLAIM-PROPERTY
HEALTH FOR EMP &
HEALTH FOR EMP &
HEALTH FOR EMP &
.TICIPANT
SALES & USE TAX
II WHEELS-2/1-2/29
DONATE A TREE SERVICE
: VENDING MACHINE SUPPLIES
:M/ACCESSORIES
:TFOLIO / CHEER
: / CHEER
:M/ ACCESSORIES
:M/ACCESSORIES
~LL BOUQUET FOR LIB
CASH REIMB
, MAINT-EMS
GARAGE
GARAGE
GARAGE
GARAGE
GARAGE
AMOUNT
61
61
86
48
62
99
34
16
70
81
78
66
07
20
18
00
91
52
50
85
78
48
81
02
43
39
35
40
127
12
41
14
-0
108
255
2
31
409
126
029
961
417
072
245
139
432
23
131
282
580
385
665
383
44
69
947
12
32
66
1
AND
ABAG PLAN CORPORATION
KAISER FOUNDATION HEAL
KAISER FOUNDATION HEAL
KAISER FOUNDATION HEAL
TLC ADMINISTRATORS
STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZ
SAN MATEO COUNTY TRANS
CLEARLITE TROPHIES
CAFFE A-ROMA
VARSITY SPIRIT FASHION
B&B CUSTOM DESIGNS
ALPINE AWARDS INC
VARSITY SPIRIT FASHION
VARSITY SPIRIT FASHION
EL CAMINO FLORIST
MIYAKO, LISA
ZOLL DATA SYSTEMS
VENDOR NAME
CARBURETOR
CITY LUMBER
CARBURETOR
OLE'S CARBURETOR
RDO EQUIPMENT CO
S CARBURETOR
LEHR AUTO ELECTRIC
OLE'S CARBURETOR
OLE'S CARBURETOR
OLE'S CARBURETOR
OLE'S CARBURETOR
OLE'S
SOUTH
OLE'S
OLE
ACCOUNT NUMBER
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
76-14910-4302
'76-14910-4302
77-07410-4352
78-00000-2091
78-00000-2094
78-07310-4132
78-07310-4135
81-00000-2140
81-00000-2876
81-00000-2879
81-00000-2880
81-00000-2880
81-00000-2880
81-00000-2880
81-00000-2880
81-00000-2880
81-00000-2887
81-00000-2887
81-00000-2932
NA1'1E
CITY GARAGE
CITY GF.RAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
ACCT
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
CITY GARAGE
SELF-INSURANCE
NON EXPENSE
NON EXPENSE
HEALTH AND BEN!
HEALTH
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
,FITS
AND BENEFITS
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
PROGRAM
$701. 741. 28
VENDOR TOTAL
SFTWR
8
CITY OF SO SAN FRANCISCO
WARRANT DISBURSEMENT REPORT PAGE 20
AMOUNT INVOICE/DESCRIPTION CK # CK DATE
GRAND TOTAL $701, 741.28
VENDOR NAME
NUMBER
ACCOUNT
03-19-08
PROGRAM NAME
-----------
604 RECORDS
-
G
~ . ~~\
(0 n
>- -
~ ~
V 0
~l~ S taff R~ort
AGENDA ITEM # 3
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
March 26, 2008
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Terry White, Director of Public Works
ACCEPTANCE OF 130/148 BEACON STREET TRENCH REPAIR
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council, by motion, accept the 130/148 Beacon Street Trench
Repair Project as complete in accordance with the plans and specifications.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The Wet Weather Program was initiated to remediate a Cease and Desist Order (CDO) issued by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) on July 16, 1997. In response to this order, the
City completed capacity improvements at the Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP), an infiltration
and inflow (I&I) study and master plan of recommended infrastructure improvements, subsequently
referred to as the Wet Weather Program. The CDO required the infrastructure sewer improvements
to be constructed by November 1,2007.
The Wet Weather Program consists of four phases. Phase I consisted of the replacement of two
pump stations (San Mateo and Shaw Road) and several miles of new gravity/force main sewer lines,
connecting the pump stations to the VfQCP. This project was designed by Carrollo Engineers and
constructed by Mitchell Engineering/Obayahsi, A Joint Venture (Mitchell). These pump stations and
gravity/force sewer lines have been completed and are currently in operation.
As part of the construction of the sewer main from the Shaw Road pump station to the WQCP, the
design called for tunneling a sewer lim:l under US Route 101, and continuing in a 16- foot deep trench
within a City sewer easement in between 130 and 148 Beacon Street properties. The contractor
initiated this portion of the work in the: summer of2004. On February 14, 2005, a portion of the open
trench adjacent to 130/148 Beacon Street failed due to inadequate shoring. Following restoration of
the trench, it was later discovered that Mitchell had used sand as trench backfill instead oflightweight
aggregate, as specified by the geotechnical and design engineers.
The geotechnical engineer retained by the City evaluated the trench. He determined that due to the
underlying soil, which consists of bay mud and high ground water, the sand backfill used by Mitchell
might "liquefy" during a significant earthquake and pose a threat to the stability of the building
structures at 130 and 148 Beacon Street. The completed einergencyrepair by JMB Construction, Inc.
corrected the problem by excavating the trench to the top ofthe pipe and replacing the sand backfill
with lightweight aggregate.
Staff Report
Subject:
Page 2 of2
ACCEPTANCE OF 130/148 BEACON STREET TRENCH REPAIR
FUNDING
The project was funded by the sewer fund in the FY 07-08 Capital Improvement Program (CIP).
Total cost ofthe emergency repair is $445,455.62.
CONCLUSION
Theproj~ct rl?pl(iced_the ex.istingt~l?n_~l11JllckfilJ_'Yitl1Jight\\'~igl1t aggregat~, (;olUI><l(;tedJQth~n ___
geotechnical engineering's recommendation and replaced the existing fiber optical cable.
The project was inspected by City staff and the geotechnical engineer. The work was completed in
accordance with the plans and specifications. The project has a one year warranty period, which takes
effect upon acceptance by the City Council. Acceptance of the emergency repairs will allow staff to
file a Notice of Completion and release the payment performance bond and retention funds at the end
of the thirty day lien period.
B~
Terry White
Director of u lic Works
Approved by:L .,i:--_
B - ' . Nagel
City Manager
at/kjlrr/tw
-
(~.
v . (;)
~ Staff Report
AGENDA ITEM # 4
DATE:
March 26, 2008
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Mark Raffaelli, Chief of Police
SUBJECT:
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING $120,401 FROM THE STATE UNDER THE
SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FUND (SLESF)
PROGRAM AND AMENDING THE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S 200712008
OPERATING BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution accepting $120,401
from the State under the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) Program
and amending the Police Department's operating budget for fiscal year 2007/2008.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
During 1996, Assembly Bill No. 3229 passed, which required that $100 million of the State's
1996/97 Budget be appropriated to create a new subvention to augment local law enforcement
efforts. As a result, the City initially received $132,438.20. Although it was reported to be one-
time supplemental funding for front line police activities, we have continued to receive the
funding yearly.
Once more, the Department has been made aware the State will continue the SLESF program for
the 200712008 fiscal year and our allotment is $120,401.
These funds will be used to supplement our current personnel costs.
To track expenditures, Fund 39 has been established for the Supplemental Law Enforcement
Services Fund.
FUNDING
There are no general fund obligations. The entire amount is provided by the State.
Staff Report
Subject: SLESF Program
Page 2
CONCLUSION
Adoption of this resolution will allow the City to accept $120,401 in additional funding from the
California Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) Program and amend the Police
Department's operating budget for FY 2007/2008.
BY:~~
Mark aelli
Chief of Police
ApproV~ .cp
M.N
City Manager
Attachment: Resolution
1070185.1
RESOLUTION NO.
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING $120,401 FROM THE
STATE UNDER THE SUPPLEMENTAL LAW
ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FUND (SLESF) PROGRAM
AND AMENDING THE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S
2007 /2008 OPERATING BUDGET
WHEREAS, staff recommends the acceptance of $120,401 from the State under
the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund ("SLESF") Program and the
amendment of the Police Department's operating budget for fiscal year 2007/2008; and
WHEREAS, in 1996, Assembly Bill No. 3229 passed, requiring $100 million of
the State's 1996-97 Budget be appropriated to create a new subvention to augment local
law enforcement efforts;
WHEREAS, the City re:ceived $132,438.20 as one-time supplemental funding for
front line police activities; and
WHEREAS, the City has continued to receive funding on a yearly basis;
and
WHEREAS, staff is aware that the State will continue the SLESF program
for the 200712008 fiscal year, and that the City's $120,401 allotment will be used
to supplement current personnel costs; and
WHEREAS, to track expenditures for the SLESF, Fund 39 has been
established; and
WHEREAS, the entire amount is provided by the State and there are no general
funding obligations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
South San Francisco that the City Council hereby accepts $120,401 from the State under
the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund and amends the Police Department's
FY 200712008 operating budge:t.
*
*
*
*
*
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and
adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a meeting
held on the day of 2008 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
1070594.1
ATTEST:
City Clerk
-
~'tl\ S:'W
S
'!!. - ~v..\
o "
>< I U;
~ f]
C'4.lIFOp..~\.'?>:
S taff R~ort
AGENDA ITEM # 5
DATE:
March 26, 2008
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Steven T. Mattas, City Attorney
SUBJECT:
RESOLUTION UPDATING DESIGNATION OF POSITIONS AND
APPLICABLE DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES FOR THE CITY OF SOUTH
SAN FRANCISCO
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution amending the designation of positions
and applicable disclosure categories for the City of South San Francisco.
BACKGROUND:
In September 2006, the City Council approved Resolution 71-2006 amending the designation of
positions and applicable disclosure categories. Staff recently noted that the existing Resolution did not
include the following classifications in its designation of positions subject to disclosure categories:
Planning Technician, System Administrator, and Building Inspector. The attached Resolution amends
the designation to include said positions. It also excludes the position ofInformation Technology
Manager, which has now been replaced by the System Administrator position.
FUNDING:
There is no financial impact.
CONCLUSION:
Approval of this Resolution will amend the City's conflict of interest code to remove positions no longer
in existence subject the positions of Planning Technician, Building Inspector and System Administrator
to ap~ble disclosure categories.
By: lwA~T. %
Steven T. Mattas ~t
City Attorney
APProv~S1"V ~lt~')
'__ M. Nagj -----
City Manager
Attachment: Resolution, Exhibit 1072118.1A
RESOLUTION NO.
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION UPDKrING DESIGNATION OF
POSITIONS AND APPLICABLE DISCLOSURE
CATEGORIES FOR THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN
FRANCISCO
WHEREAS, staff desires an update to designation of positions and applicable disclosure
categories for the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South San
Francisco hereby approves an update to the designation of positions and the applicable disclosure
categories for the positions shown in the attached Exhibit A.
*
*
*
*
*
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the
City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a meeting held on the _ day
of , 2008 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
1070418.1
Resolution No.
Exhibit A
DESIGl"l'A nON OF POSITIONS AND
APPLICABLE DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
FOR THE CHY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
Designated Positions Disclosure
Category
Members of the following
Boards and Commissions
1.1 City Council Form 700
1.2 Design Review Board 1,2,3,4
1.3 Historic Preservation Commission I
1.4 Housing Authority I
1.5 Library Board 6
1.6 Parking Place Commission 3,4,6
1.7 Planning Commission Form 700
1.8 Parks & Recreation Commission 1,2,4,6
1.9 Conference Center Board 6
1.10 Cultural Arts Commission 1,2
1.11 Public Facilities Corporation 1,2,4
1.12 Board of Appeals 1,2,4
1.13 San Mateo County Mosquito Abatement District - SSF 1,2,3,4,5,6
Representative
2. City Mana2er
2.1 City Manager Form 700
2.2 Assistant City Manager 1,2,4
2.3 Assistant to the City Manager 1,2,4
3. City Clerk
3.1 City Clerk 5
3.2 Deputy City Clerk 6
4. City Attorney
4.1 City Attorney Form 700
4.2 Assistant City Attorney 1,2,3,4,5,6
5. City Treasurer
5.1 City Treasurer Form 700
5.2 Deputy City Treasurer 1,2,3,4,5,6
6. Department of Economic &
Community Development
6.1 Director of Economic & Community Dev. 1,2,4
6.2 City Planner 1,2,4
6.3 Principal Planner 1,2,4
6.4 Senior Planner 1,2,4
6.5 Associate Planner 1,2,4
6.6 Assistant Planner 1,2,4
6.7 Housing Development Coordinator 1,2,4
6.9 Manager of Housing and Redevelopment 1,2,4,6
6.10 City Building Official 1,2,4
6.11 Assistant Building Official 1,2,4
6.12 Senior Building Inspector 1,2,4
6.13 Building Inspector 1,2,4
6.15 Planning Technician 1,2,4
6.16 Permit Technician 1,2,4
7. Human Resources Department
7.1 Director of Human Resources 6
7.2 Human Resources Analyst II 6
8. Department of Public Worb
8.1 Director of Public Works 1,2,4,6
8.3 Superintendent of Water Quality Control Plant 1,2,4,6
8.4 Assistant Plant Superintendent 1,2,4,6
8.5 City Engineer 1,2,4,6
8.6 Senior Engineer 1,2,4,6
8.7 Public Works Inspector 1,2,4,6
8.8 Public Works Supervisor 1,2,4,6
8.9 Technical Services Supervisor 1,2,4,6
8.10 Senior Technical Services Supervisor 1, 2, 4, 6
9. Finance Department
9.1 Director of Finance 1,3,4,5
9.2 Assistant Finance Director 1,3,4,5
10. Fire Department
10.1 Fire Chief 6
10.2 Deputy Fire Chief 6
10.3 Battalion Chief 6
lOA Fire Marshall 1,2,4,6
10.5 Assistant Fire Marshall 6
10.9 Fire Inspector 5
10.11 Safety Inspector I, II and III 1,2,4
11. Library Department
11.1 Library Director 6
11.2 Assistant Library Director 6
11.3 Literary Program Manager 6
11.4 Library Program Manager 6
12. Recreation & Community Services Dept
12.1 Director of Recreation & Community Services 1,2,4,6
12.2 Recreation & Community Services Manager 2,4,5,6
13. Police Department
13.1 Chief of Police 6
13.2 Police Captain 6
13.3 Police Lieutenant 6
14. Consultants Form 700
15. Housing Authority
15.1 Executive Director 1,2,4
16. Conference Center
16.1 Executive Director 1
17. Information Technology Department
17.1 Director ofInformation Teclmology 1,2,4,6
17.2 System Administrator 6
1070387.1
~'t\l s~
(~g
>- r;;
~ <")
v c
~ll!# Staff R~ort
AGENDA ITEM # 6
DATE:
March 26, 2008
TO:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Barry M. Nagel, City Manager
SUBJECT:
Resolution Opposing State Legislation to Permit the Towing of Triple Tractor
Trailers on State Highways in California
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution Opposing State Legislation to
Permit the Towing of Triple Tractor Trailers on State Highways in California.
BACKGROUNDfDISCUSSION:
Legislation is being proposed to allow triple tractor trailer vehicles to travel along California's
state highways via truck-only lanes:, which are likely to have increased accident involvement
rates at least 11 % higher than today's single tractor trailers according to the United States
Department of Transportation (USDOT). While previous State legislation was narrowly
defeated, new legislation is being re-introduced to authorize the California Department of
Transportation (CalTrans), as well as other regional transportation entities, to enter into public-
private partnership agreements to construct truck-only lanes which will allow triple tractor
trailers to travel on our State roads.
Current California law prohibits operations of triple-trailer trucks and other longer combination
vehicles (LCV s) and limits the weight and length of all trucks allowed on state highways. The
proposal under consideration in Sa(~ramento would overturn some of these important highway
safety provisions and allow LCV s in our state. The League of California Cities (LCC) opposes
all efforts that allow vehicles that ",rill jeopardize the integrity of the public infrastructure or the
health and safety of the motoring public on the road. Truck safety is important because these
vehicles share county roads and city streets with road users such as motorists, pedestrians,
cyclists, motorcyclists and bus riders throughout California. The League of California Cities has
requested that California cities adopt a resolution that would allow triple tractor trailers to travel
on our State roads via truck-only lcmes.
Staff Report March 26,2008
Subject: Resolution Opposing State Legislation to Permit the Towing of Triple Tractor Trailers on State Highways
in California
Page Two
FUNDING
Adoption of this resolution will have no direct impact on the General Fund.
CONCLUSION:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution Opposing State Legislation to Permit
the Towing of Triple Tractor Trailers on State Highways in California.
By:
Attachment: Resolution
RESOLUTION NO.
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION OPPOSING STATE LEGISLATION TO PERMIT THE
TOWING OF TRIPLE TRACTOR TRAILERS ON STATE HIGHWAYS IN
CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco is concerned for the health, welfare and safety
of the City and its residents; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is aware that state legislation is being proposed to increase
the size, weight, and number of trailers which may be towed by commercial trucks on state
highways in California; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that bigger and heavier trucks pose a serious threat to
highway safety because of their added weight and inherent instability, increasing the likelihood of
more accidents and more fatalities in such accidents; and
WHEREAS, the City recognizt:s and supports the League of California Cities' position
opposing all efforts to legislatively increase the permitted weight and size of commercial vehicles
including the number of towed tractor trailers, specifically "triple tractor trailers," as such increased
size and weight of vehicles, including towed tractor trailers, on the state highways will jeopardize
the integrity of the public infrastructurl~ and safety of the motoring public on the road.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco
opposes state legislation permitting the towing of tripe tractor trailers on state highways in
California.
*
*
*
*
*
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the
City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting held on the 26th day of March
2008 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
-
~'t\l s~
~.
(c ("l
>- ....
~ ~
v C
C'4.lIFO?-~\~
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Staff Report
AGENDA ITEM #7
March 26, 2008
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Marty VanDuyn, Assistant City Manager
MODIFICATION OF A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT AND DESIGN REVIEW ALLOWING THE REPLACEMENT OF THE
EXTERIOR SIDING "WITH DIFFERENT MATERIAL THAN ORIGINALLY
APPROVED FOR 45 DWELLINGS SITUATED ON SUNRISE AND MOONLIGHT
COURTS IN THE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-2-H-P) ZONE
DISTRICT, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SSFMC CHAPTERS 20.84 AND 20.85.
Applicants: Westborough Highlands Homeowners Association
Env. Doc.: Categorical Exemption: Section 15301, Class l(d) Existing Facilities
Case Nos: P08-0007 IPUD08-0001 & DR08-0004]
[Original Case Nos.: PUD 88-9, SA 88-98 & ND 623]
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council follow the recommendation of the Planning Commission and adopt the
attached resolution to approve a modification of the subject permits.
BACKGROUNDIDISCUSSION
The 45 unit residential development was approved by the City Council on June 8, 1988 and constructed
in 1991 to 1995. The exterior siding has failed on many, ifnot all, of the dwellings on Sunrise and
Moonlight Courts. While the proposed changes are relatively minor in nature, the cumulative effect of
all the proposed changes will be noticeable, and are therefore, subject to review by the Planning
Commission and City Council as a Modification of the Residential Planned Unit Development [SSFMC
Chapters 20.84 and 20.91]. The City Council's review is required because the final approval of the
original project was made by the Council.
The Westborough Highlands Homeowners Association is requesting that the City Council approve a
new "clap board" style exterior siding for all of the dwellings. The proposed exterior siding is a better
performing man-made material (HardiP'lank - fiber cement siding that simulates the appearance of wood
siding manufactured by James Hardie) that is visually different than the original wood plank siding. The
proposed modifications to the dwellings also include re-roofing, repair of water damage including decks
and substrate, new flashing (to prevent water infiltration) and the installation of new replacement
windows and doors of the same design and finish as the existing. The finished buildings will be trimmed
and painted to match the existing earth tone color palate.
To date, the replacement of the siding has been complete on two dwellings, at 27 and 33 Moonlight
Staff Report
Subject: P08-0007
Page 2
Court and the owners of 17, 21, 25 and 26 Moonlight Court and 1 Sunrise Court are in contract to
replace the exterior siding on their residl~nces by the end of this year. Further information regarding the
proposed project is contained in the attached Planning Commission Staff Report.
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed modification at its meeting of March 6,2008. At the
meeting the Planning Commission expressed concern about the maintenance of the dwellings. City staff
has reviewed the matter with the Westborough Highlands Homeowners Association attorney and has
reviewed the recorded Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions (CC&Rs). The CC&Rs contain provisions
requiring that each owner is responsible for the maintenance of their respective dwelling - similar to a
traditional residential subdivision, each dwelling is constructed on a separate lot. The Association is
responsible for maintenance of the common areas including the private roadways and perimeter
landscaping. The Commissioners adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council approve the
new siding and other changes.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The proposed development was determined by City staff to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301(d) Class 1 Existing
Facilities. Pursuant to these provisions the project was judged not to have the potential for causing a
significant effect on the environment. Because the project is exempt, in accordance with the CEQA, the
City Council need take no further action.
CONCLUSION
The proposed changes comply with the City's Design Review Guidelines and will be compatible with
the original architecture. Both the City's Design Review Board and the Planning Commission have
reviewed the proposed exterior siding n~placement and recommend approval. Therefore, City staff
recommends that the City Council follow the recommendation of the Planning Commission and adopt a
resolution approving a Modification to the Residential Planned Unit Development Permit and Design
Review allowing the replacement of the: exterior siding with different material than originally approved
for 45 dwellings situated on Sunrise and Moonlight Courts, subject to making the required findings and
adopting the conditions of approval.
By:
Marty VanDuyn
Assistant City Manager
.....~"'-
A IlWoved:
Attachments:
Draft City Council Resolution
Planning Commission Resolution
Planning Commission
March 6,2008 Staff Report
Plans
MVD:SK/SC/BLA
RESOLUTION NO.
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITYCOUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO APPROVING A MODIFICATION
OF A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
FOR THE PROPERTIES SITUATED ON SUNRISE AND
MOONLIGHT COURTS AND AS SUBMITTED BY THE
WESTBOROUGH HIGHLANDS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION,
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
WHEREAS, on June 8, 1988, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco held a
properly noticed public hearing and approved a Residential Planned Unit Development Permit
allowing 45 residential dwellings and ]landscaped common area, a Tentative Subdivision Map
allowing the subdivision of the site into 45 lots and common area, Design Review of 45
dwellings, a Negative Declaration ass(;:ssing the environmental impacts associated with the
development, and adopted conditions of approval;
WHEREAS, in January of2008, the Westborough Highlands Homeowners Association
hereafter referred to as the "Applicant", applied to the City to proceed with exterior revisions to
several of the dwellings;
WHEREAS, on March 6, 2008, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public
hearing to consider the Modification of the Residential Planned Unit Development Permit and
the associated land use entitlements including the revisions to the approved design of all of the
dwellings that are a part of the Project; and
WHEREAS, the South San Fnmcisco City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on
March 26, 2008 to consider the Modification for the Project, as both are defined below;
WHEREAS, as required by SSFMC Title 20 (Zoning Regulations), the City Council
makes the following findings in support of the Modification of the Residential Planned Unit
Development Permit and Design Review for the properties situated on Sunrise and Moonlight
Courts, based on public testimony and the materials submitted to the City of South San francsico
city Council wich include but are not ]limited to the Applicant's written narrative for the dwelling
exterior modifications; the Negative Declaration previously adopted by the City Council of the
City of South San Francisco on June 8, 1988; the South San Francisco Design Guidelines; the
Draft Planned Unit Development Findings; the Planning Commission Staff Report dated March
6,2008; the Planning Commission mt:eting on March 6, 2008; the City Council Staff Report,
dated March 26, 2008; and the March 26,2008 City Council meeting.
1. CEQA. The City Council adopted a Negative Declaration on June 8, 1988 for the
PUD. The Negative Declaration detennined that the proposed development would not have any
adverse impacts. The Planning Commission has determined that the proposed changes to the
project are exempt from CEQA as a Class 1 project, repair, maintenance, and minor alteration of
existing structures. The proposed changes qualify as a Class 1 project because they involve
negligible or no expansion of the existing use. The proposed changes would not create any
adverse individual or cumulative impaets. There is no substantial evidence in the light of the
whole record before the City that the changes to the project will have a significant effect on the
environment. The Modification of the Residential Planned Unit Development Permit and the
associated land use entitlements therefl:>re complies with the California Environmental Quality
Act.
2. Residential Planned Unit Development Permit. As required by the Planned Unit
Development Procedures [SSFMC Chapter 20.84] and Revocation and Modification of Permits
[SSFMC Chapter 20.91], the following findings are made in approval of a Modification of
Residential Planned Unit Development Permit PUD08-0008, to approve replacement of the
exterior siding of all of the dwellings.
A. The site is physically suitable for the 45 unit residential development with
common area. The changes to the dwellings are in keeping with the
architectural design of the new dwellings and because the changes are limited
to exterior siding the buildings and will still be in conformity with the
surrounding residential developments. The City's Design Review Board
recommended approval of the proposed changes.
B. The changes to the dwellings has been reviewed and recommended for
approval by the City's Design Review board to be in accordance with the City
of South San Francisco Design Guidelines and to provide a high quality of fit
with the neighborhood. The changes will improve the habitability and lifespan
of the affected dwellings and will contribute to a residential environment of
sustained desirability and stability.
C. The changes to the dwellings are in keeping with the General Plan Land Use
designation of Medium Density Residential and the Zoning of Medium
Density Residential Zone District [R-2-H] in that the changes will not result in
any dwelling unit density increases.
D. The changes to the dwellings are consistent with the General Plan Land Use
designation of Medium Density Residential and the Housing Element in that
the changes will not result in the reduction of either the market rate dwellings
associated with the development.
E. The changes will not be adverse to the public health, safety or general welfare
ofthe community, or unreasonably detrimental to surrounding properties or
improvements. The: changes are designed to comply with the City Design
Guidelines and the architectural theme of the development and the
surrounding residential enclave and will result in the improved lifespan of the
dwellings.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
A. Approve the Modification of a Residential Planned Unit Development Permit and
Design Review allowing exterior revisions to the dwellings consisting of the
replacement of the exterior siding, subject to the Conditions of Approval
contained in Exhibit B.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the resolution shall become effective immediately
upon its passage and adoption.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of
South San Francisco at the regular me1eting held on the day of 2008 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
Attest:
City Clerk
WHEREAS, the South San Fnmcisco City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on
March 26, 2008;
EXHffiIT #A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
WESTUOROUGH HIGHLANDS
ALL OF THE PROPERTIES ALONG SUNRISE & MOONLIGHT COURTS
P08-0007
(As Recommended by tht! Planning Commission on March 26, 2008)
A. PLANNING DIVISION:
1. Each owner shall comply with the City's Standard Conditions and with all
the requirements of all affected City Divisions and Departments as
contained in the attached conditions, except as amended by the conditions
of approval.
2. The construction drawings for each dwelling shall substantially comply
with the Plarming Commission approved clapboard fInish, as amended by
the conditions of approval including the plans submitted by Richard
Avelar & Associates Architects, dated January 17,2008, submitted in
association with P08-0007.
3. Landscaping damaged during construction shall be replanted in
accordance with the landscape plans approved as part ofPUD 88-9.
4. Prior to the issuanc1e of any Building Permit, the Westborough Highlands
Homeowners Assoeiation shall record a document in a manner satisfactory
to the City Attorney that restricts the replacement of exterior siding of all
buildings to a clapboard style approved as part ofP08-0007, that requires
that the replacement doors and windows to match the design and finish of
the existing doors and windows at the time of the approval ofP08-0007,
and that requires the Homeowners Association to review all plans
involving fe-siding and/or replacement of doors and windows of the
dwellings comprising the Westborough Highlands Homeowners
association. The document shall be subject to the review and approval by
the City's Chief Planner and City Attorney.
5. Prior to the fInal inspection, re-sided buildings shall be finished using the
earth tone color paliette approved as part ofPUD 88-9.
6. All other conditions of approval associated with PUD 88-9, SA 88-98
shall remain in full force and effect.
(planning Contact Person: Steve Carlson, Senior Planner, 650/877-8353, Fax
650/829-6639)
RESOLUTION NO. 2668-2008
PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION RECOMMIGNDING APPROVAL OF A MODIFICATION OF
A RESIDENTIAL PLANNIi:n UNIT DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR THE
PROPERTIES SITUATED ON SUNRISE AND MOONLIGHT COURTS AND AS
SUBMITTED BY THE WESTBOROUGH HIGHLANDS HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION, SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
WHEREAS, on June 8, 1988, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco
held a properly noticed public hearing and approved a Residential Plarmed Unit
Development Permit allowing 45 residential dwellings and landscaped common area, a
Tentative Subdivision Map allowing the subdivision of the site into 45 lots and common
area, Design Review of 45 dwellings, a Negative Declaration assessing the environmental
impacts associated with the development, and adopted conditions of approval;
WHEREAS, in January of2008, the Westborough Highlands Homeowners
Association hereafter referred to as the "Applicant", applied to the City to proceed with
exterior revisions to several of the: dwellings;
WHEREAS, on March 6, 2008, the Plarming Commission held a properly noticed
public hearing to consider the Modification of the Residential Planned Unit Development
Permit and the associated land us(~ entitlements including the revisions to the approved
design of all ofthe dwellings that are a part of the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that the exterior
modifications of the dwellings art: consistent with the City's General Plan and all
applicable requirements of the City's Zoning Ordinances; and
WHEREAS, the Plarming Commission has determined that the proposed
improvements will require adherence to several conditions of approval attached as
Exhibit #A; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Plarming Commission of the
City of South San Francisco hereby adopts the following findings based on the entire
record of the Applicant's design revisions, including the Applicant's plans submitted in
association with the Modification of the Residential Plarmed Unit Development Permit
and the associated land use entitlt:ments, the Applicant's written narrative for the
dwelling exterior modifications, the South San Francisco General Plan, the proposed
Modification of the Plarmed Unit Development Permit, the Design Review ofthe
proposed dwelling changes, the Negative Declaration previously adopted by the City
Council of the City of South San Francisco on June 8, 1988, the South San Francisco
Design Guidelines, the Draft Planned Unit Development Findings, the Planning
Commission Staff Report dated March 6, 2008, and the testimony and materials
submitted at the Planning Commission meeting on March 6, 2008;
1. CEQA. The City Council adopted aN egative Declaration on June 8, 1988 for
the PUD. The Negative Declaration determined that the proposed development would not
have any adverse impacts. The Planning Commission has determined that the proposed
changes to the project are exempt from CEQA as a Class 1 project, repair, maintenance,
and minor alteration of existing structures. The proposed changes qualify as a Class 1
project because they involve negligible or no expansion ofthe existing use. The proposed
changes would not create any advl;:rse individual or cumulative impacts. There is no
substantial evidence in the light of the whole record before the City that the changes to
the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Modification of the
Residential Planned Unit Development Permit and the associated land use entitlements
therefore complies with the California Environmental Quality Act.
2. Residential Planned Unit Development Permit. As required by the Planned
Unit Development Procedures [SSFMC Chapter 20.84] and Revocation and Modification
of Permits [SSFMC Chapter 20.91], the following findings are made in approval of a
Modification of Residential Planned Unit Development Permit PUD08-0008, to approve
replacement of the exterior siding of all of the dwellings.
A. The site is physically suitable for the 45 unit residential development
with common area. The changes to the dwellings are in keeping with
the architectural design of the new dwellings and because the changes
are limited to exterior siding the buildings and will still be in
conformity with the surrounding residential developments. The City's
Design Review Board recommended approval of the proposed
changes.
B. The changes to the dwellings has been reviewed and recommended for
approval by tht: City's Design Review board to be in accordance with
the City of South San Francisco Design Guidelines and to provide a
high quality of fit with the neighborhood. The changes will improve
the habitability and lifespan of the affected dwellings and will
contribute to a residential environment of sustained desirability and
stability.
C. The changes to the dwellings are in keeping with the General Plan
Land Use designation of Medium Density Residential and the Zoning
of Medium Density Residential Zone District [R-2-H] in that the
changes will not result in any dwelling unit density increases.
D. The changes to the dwellings are consistent with the General Plan
Land Use designation of Medium Density Residential and the Housing
Element in that the changes will not result in the reduction of either the
market rate dwellings associated with the development.
E. The changes willI not be adverse to the public health, safety or general
welfare of the community, or unreasonably detrimental to surrounding
properties or improvements. The changes are designed to comply with
the City Design Guidelines and the architectural theme of the
development and the surrounding residential enclave and will result in
the improved lifespan of the dwellings.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Planning
Commission of the City of South San Francisco does hereby:
A. Recommends approval of the Modification of Residential Planned Unit
Development Permit allowing exterior revisions to the dwellings
consisting of the replacement of the exterior siding.
B. Recommends approval of the Design Review of the exterior revisions to
the dwellings consisting of replacement of the exterior siding.
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission of
the City of South San Francisco at the regular meeting held on the 6th day of March 2008,
by the following vote:
AYES:
Commissioner Honan. Commissioner Moore. Commissioner Prouty. Commissioner
Sim. Commissioner Zemke. Vice Chairperson Teglia and Chairperson Giusti
NOES:
None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Attest: /s/ Susv Kalkin
Susy Kalkin
Secretary to the Planning Commission
Plannin~g Commission
Staff RE~port
DATE:
March 6, 2008
TO:
Planning Commission
SUBJECT:
MODIFICATION OF:
Residential Planned Unit Development Permit and Design Review
allowing the replacement of the exterior siding with different material than
originally approved for 45 dwellings situated on Sunrise and Moonlight
Courts in the Medium Density Residential (R-2-H-P) Zone District, in
accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.84 and 20.85.
Applicants: Westborough Highlands Homeowners Association
Env. Doc.: Categorical Exemption: Section 15301, Class led) Existing
Facilities
Case Nos: P08-0007 [PUD08-0001 & DR08-0004]
[Original Case Nos..: PUD 88-9, SA 88-98 & ND 623]
RECOMMENDA TION:
That the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council
approve a Modification to a Residential Planned Unit Development Permit and Design
Review allowing the replacement of the exterior siding with different material than
originally approved for 45 dwellings situated on Sunrise and Moonlight Courts, subject to
making the required findings and adopting the conditions of approval.
BACKGROUNDIDISCUSSION:
The 45 unit residential development was approved by the City Council on June 8, 1988 and
constructed in 1991 to 1995. Weathering and apparently improper flashing and/or installation has
resulted in paint degradation, the failure ofthe exterior siding and water damage of the substrate
to many, if not all, of the dwellings on Sunrise and Moonlight Courts. A lawsuit by 21 of the 45
dwelling owners has provided funds to replace the exterior siding on their dwellings. A couple of
these dwellings have already had the exterior siding replaced with a better performing man made
material (HardiPlank - fiber cement siding that simulates the appearance of wood siding
manufactured by James Hardie) that is visually different than the original siding. The proposed
modifications to the dwellings include changing the exterior siding from a grooved flat profile to
a "clap board" style, reroofing, repair of water damage including decks and substrate, flashing [to
prevent water infiltration] and the installation of new replacement windows and doors of the
same design and finish as the existing. The finished buildings will be trimmed and painted to
match the existing earth tone color palate.
March 6, 2008
P08-0007 Sunrise and Moonlight Courts
Page 2 of 3
The Westborough Highlands Homeowners Association is requesting that the Plalming
Commission approve the new "clap board" style exterior siding for all of the dwellings, including
the 24 owners that did not participate in or benefit by the lawsuit.
To date the replacement of the siding has been complete on 2 dwellings at 27 and 33 Moonlight
Court. The current owners of 5 more dwellings at 17, 21, 25 and 26 Moonlight Court and 1
Sunrise Court are in contract to replace the exterior siding on their residences by the end of this
year. While it is not known when the other 38 dwelling owners will replace the siding, from field
observation it is apparent to City staff that the siding will not last many more years without
requiring major repairs. To assist the review, the applicant has submitted a written nalTative, site
plan, photos of the existing buildings and the recently completed re-sided dwellings.
The Commission should determine whether the proposed changes are sympathetic to the
approved building architecture.
While the proposed changes are relatively minor in nature, the cumulative effect of all the
proposed changes will be noticeable, and are therefore, subject to review by the Plmming
Commission and City Council as a Modification of the Residential Plmmed Unit Development
[SSFMC Chapters 20.84 and 20.91]. The City Council's review is required because the final
approval of the original project was made by the Council.
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
The plans were reviewed by the Design Review Board at their meeting of February 19,2008. The
Board was supportive of replacement of the exterior siding with clap board and recommended
approval. The Board noted that while the board profiles were distinctive, it would be difficult for
the casual observer to tell the difference between the profiles, except when observed in close
proximity to the buildings, and that the two board patterns could visually coexist together
without being ovelily disruptive to the architectural integrity of the development.
To improve the visual appearance and ensure that further exterior changes are consistent with the
development, a condition of approval has been added requiring that the replacement of exterior
siding on the remaining dwellings use "clap board" that matches the proposed HardiPlank board
profile and that the Westborough Highlands Home Owners Association be required to fonnally
review any proposed exterior change before a building permit is issued by the City.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The proposed development was determined by City staffto be Categorically Exempt from the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act [CEQA] pursuant to Section 15301(d)
Class 1 Existing Facilities. Pursuant to these provisions the project was judged not to have the
potential for causing a significant effect on the enviromnent. Because the project is exempt, in
March 6, 2008
P08-0007 Sunrise and Moonlight Courts
Page 3 of 3
accordance with the CEQA, the Planning Commission need take no further action.
CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION:
The proposed changes comply with the City's Design Review Guidelines and will be compatible
with the original architecture. The City's Design Review Board has reviewed the proposed
exterior siding replacement and recommends approval. Therefore, City staff recommends that the
Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve a
Modification to the Residential Plalmed Unit Development Permit and Design Review allowing
the replacement of the exterior siding with different material than originally approved for 45
dwellings situated on Sunrise and Moonlight Courts, subject to making the required findings and
adopting the conditions of approval.
Attachments:
Draft Resolution
Exhibit #A Draft Conditions of Approval
Applicant's Nan-ative
Plans
Westborough Highlands Homeowners Association
February 8. 2008
Mr. Steve Carlson
City of South San. Francisco
315 Maple Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
(Via Email &; Regular Mail)
RE: PUD Modification Application
Dear Mr. Carlson:
As requested, we are submitting this letter to confirm that the PUD modification application submitted
to the City of South San Francisco by the Westborough Highlands Homeowners Association, is
applicable to all homes located within the Community at both Moonlight Court & Sunrise Court in
South San Francisco.
Sincerely, .
Z:GH
Gordon Loo
President
co: Joe Garcia, Richard Avelar & Associates
Miguel Ordenana, The Manor Association
~
'The Manor Association. Ioc. · 353 Main Street. Redwood City, California 94063-1729
Telephone (650) 637.1616 . Facsimile (650) 637-1670
RICH}~RD AVELAR & ASSOCIATES
ARCHITECTS
318 HARRISON STREET, SUITE 103 OAKLAND CA 94607 (510) 893.5501 FAX (510) 893.5874
January 17, 2008
City of South San Francisco
Planning Division
135 Maple Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
Re: Westborough Highlands
1 Sunrise Court, 11 Sunrise Court, 22 Sunrise Court, 17 Moonlight Court, 21 Moonlight Court, 25
Moonlight Court and 26 Moonlight Court
Westborough Highlands are wood-framed, two and three-story duplexes situated on the up-slope and the
down slope of this hillside development. ll1is residence was originally constructed in the 1994 to 1 Q95 time
frame and is part of a 40-unit development overlooking the 280 freeway to the East. A pier and grade beam
foundation supports the entire conventionally framed structure. Fenestration consists of double-glaZed,
aluminum-framed windows and sliding glass doors manufactured by Milgard. Roofing material are
composition shingles on a 5 and 12 slope.
A typical feature of the up-slope residence is a wooden deck, with entrances off of the Kitchen and Living
Room, which is cantilevered out over the g:arage entrance. The decking is 2x6 tressure treated floor planks
with a wooden railing and cap. The deck is separated from the adjacent unit by a one hour rated exterior
dividing wall.
A typical feature of the down-slope residence is a wooden deck which projects out from the building and is
supported by 6x6 pressure treated posts anchored to the ground with concrete piers. The decking is 2x6
pressure treated floor planks with a wooden railing and cap. The joists supporting the deck are cantilevered.
There are two wooden decks, one at the upper living room and the second at the lower master bedroom.
The exterior car parking area is wood framed, supported on 8x8 posts and topped with a 4" concrete slab
over a waterproofing membrane.
This project is a repair of construction defects contracted on an Owner by Owner basis. The primary
purpose of the work is to make the building watertight due to deficiencies in the existing hardboard
siding. The proposed Scope of Repair includes removal of the existing "Louisiana Pacific Inner-Seal"
lapped hardboard siding and replacement with new James Hardie Company fiber cement lap siding. Other
repairs include the installation of a new drainage system, re-flashing of the existing windows, inspection and
repair of the existing wood decks and guardrails, new composition shingle roofing and painting to match the
existing colors.
Principals.................................................. ...
Architects & General Contractors................. Microbiologist................
Richard Avelar, AlA, G.C. & Founder
Daniel Chekene, AIA Michael Gilmore, G,C.
Joel Agnello, AIA Gary M. Garcia, AlA
Timothy Stokes, G.c. Steven T. Penland, G.C.
Joseph G. Garcia, AIA Ken Kosloff, G.C.
Ralph McDaniel, AIA
David M. Field, AlA
Eric Archuletta, G.c.
Lonnie Haughton, G.C.
Ed Vazquez, G.C. Lewis (Chip) Lambert, M.S.
Greg Cole, G.C.
Gregg de Haan, G.C.
Jack Canada, G.C.
\!'l
\
\
SUNRISE
--
--
GEL L
~
------
8 0 U L
cVAAD
(2) EXISTING SCHEMATIC SITE PLAN
NOT TO SCALE
~E
PROJECT:
RICHARD AVELAR & ASSOCIATES
ARC HIT E C T S
WESTBOROUGH HIGHLANDS
EXTERIOR CLADDING REPAIRS
21 MOONLIGHT COURT
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA
318 HARRlSON STREET, SUITE \03 OAKLAND CA 94607 (5\0) 893-5501 FAX (5\0) 893-5874
LEGEND
PH.1
UNIT ADDRESS
UNIT ELEVATION TYPE
UNIT TYPE
EXTERIOR CLADDING
REPAIRS NOT FINALIZED,
BUILDING PERMIT NO.
B071739
WORK WILL NOT BE COMPLETED
DUE TO TERMINATION OF
CONTRACT BY OWNER.
LOCATION OF WORK TO BE
PERFORMED UNDER THIS SCOPE
OF REPAIR (1,17,21,25,26)
RESIDENCES NOT IN CONTRACT
PHOTOGRAPH
TITLE:
EXISTING SCHEMATIC
SITE PLAN
SHEET NO:
FILE: DATE:
70130 01-17-08
Westborough Highlands HOA
RA&A Project No. 70130
January 17. 2008
Page 2 of20
Photograph 1
22 Sunrise Court at left
Siding replacement completed but not yet painted. Building wrapped for weather protection
Westborough Highlands HOA
RAM Project No. 70130
January 17. 2008
Page 3 of 20
Photograph 2
22 Sunrise Court at right
Siding replacement completed but not yet painted. Building wrapped for weather protection
Westborough Highlands HOA
RA&A Project No. 70130
January 17.2008
Page 4 of 20
Photograph 3
11 Sunrise Court
Building permi1l approved, contract terminated by Owner
Westborough Highlands HOA
RA&A Project No. 70130
January 17. 2008
PageS of 20
Photograph 4
11 Sunrise Court
Detail at existing damaged hardboard siding
Westborough Highlands HOA
RA&A Project No. 70130
January 17.2008
Page 6 of 20
Photograph 5
11 Sunrise Court
Detail at existing damaged hardboard siding
Photograph 6
11 Sunrise Court
Westborough Highlands HOA
RA&A Project No. 70130
January 17, 2008
Page 7 of 20
Detail at existing damaged hardboard trim
Photograph 7
1 Sunrise Court
Damaged hardboard siding and trim to be replaced
Westborough Highlands HOA
RA&A Project No. 70130
January 17.2008
Page 8 of 20
Photograph 8
1 Sunrise Court
Damaged hardboard siding and trim to be replaced
Westborough Highlands HOA
RA&A Project No. 70130
January 17.2008
Page 9 of 20
Photograph 9
1 Sunrise Court
Damaged halrdboard siding and trim to be replaced
Westborough Highlands HOA
RA&A Project No. 70130
January 17.2008
Page 10 of 20
Photograph 10
17 Moonlight Court
Damaged hardboard siding and trim to be replaced
Westborough Highlands HOA
RAM Project No. 70130
January 17. 2008
Page 11 of 20
Photograph 11
17 Moonlight Court
Damaged hardboard siding and trim to be replaced
Photograph 12
17 Moonlight Court
Damaged hardboard siding and trim to be replaced
Westborough Highlands HOA
RA&A Project No. 70130
January 17. 2008
Page 12 of 20
Photograph 13
21 Moonlight Court
Damaged halrdboard siding and trim to be replaced
Westborough Highlands HOA
RA&A Project No. 70130
January 17.2008
Page 13 of 20
Photograph 14
21 Moonlight Court
Damaged hardboard siding and trim to be replaced
Westborough Highlands HOA
RA&A Project No. 70130
January 17. 2008
Page 14 of 20
Photograph 15
21 Moonlight Court
Damaged hardboard siding and trim to be replaced
Westborough Highlands HOA
RA&A Project No. 70130
January 17. 2008
Page 150120
Photograph 16
25 Moonlight Court
Damaged hardboard siding and trim to be replaced
Westborough Highlands HOA
RA&A Project No. 70130
January 17.2008
Page 16 of 20
Photograph 17
25 Moonlight Court
Damaged hardboard siding and trim to be replaced
Photograph 18
25 Moonlight Court
Damaged hardboard siding and trim to be replaced
Westborough Highlands HOA
RA&A Project No. 70130
January 17.2008
Page 170120
Photograph 19
26 Moonlight Court
Damaged halrdboard siding and trim to be replaced
Westborough Highlands HOA
RA&A Project No. 70130
January 17.2008
Page 18 of20
Photograph 20
26 Moonlight Court
Damaged hardboard siding and trim to be replaced
Westborough Highlands HOA
RA&A Project No. 70130
January 17.2008
Page 19 of 20
Photograph 21
33 Moonlight Court
Recently painted residence is not under contract with Richard A velar & Associates
Westborough Highlands HOA
RA&A Project No. 70130
January 17, 2008
Page 20 of 20
Photograph 22
27 Moonlight Court
Residence is not undler contract with Richard Avelar & Associates
-
~
~ . ~~\
C ("l
:>- ....\
~ ~I
v C
~llFO"~~ S taff R~ort
AGENDA ITEM #8
DATE:
March 26, 2008
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Marty VanDuyn, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT:
A RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS AND ADOPTING A MITIGA TED
NEGATIVE DECLARA nON FOR THE MILLER A VENUE PARKING
STRUCTURE PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution, making findings and
adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for the Miller Avenue
Parking Structure.
BACKGROUNDfDISCUSSION
On December 12,2007 the City Council reviewed and provided comment on the schematic design plans
for the Miller Avenue parking structure. At that meeting, the Council was also presented with an Initial
StudylMitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for the project. Due to a database
error, an owner of adjacent property did not receive the required notice for the project. Since that
meeting, staff has repaired the database error and recirculated the environmental document. In
accordance with direction from the City Attorney, the document was revised to address comments
received on January 8, 2008 from the adjacent property owner and circulated a third time.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Initial Study, prepared by staff, identified and discussed the impacts of the parking structure
resulting in a Mitigated Negative Declaration being prepared for adoption. The Mitigated Negative
Declaration, attached to the resolution as Exhibit A, concluded that while the project may have
potentially significant impacts in the areas of Air Quality, Cultural Resources, and Noise, after
implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the project would not result in any significant
environmental impacts. Proposed mitigation has been incorporated into a Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program, attached to the resolution as Exhibit B.
The 20 day comment period commenced February 5, 2008 and ended February 25, 2008. Comments
were received from the owner of 308 Miller Avenue expressing general opposition to the project, but did
not raise any environmental issues. \Vritten comments were received on February 25, 2008 from
Staff Report
Subject: (Miller Avenue Parking Structure)
March 26, 2008
Page 2 of 4
representatives of the owners of 321 Miller Avenue and relate to the aesthetic impacts of the project and
traffic circulation concerns. Staff has prepared a written response to these comments, and both the
comments and staff s response are attached to this staff report as well as summarized below.
Aesthetics
The comment letter objects to the parking structure's aesthetic implications, including views from the
west-facing \\ri.ndows of some of the apartments at 321 Miller Avenue and the shading effects of the
structure on those windows.
In response, staff notes that courts have generally found the obstruction of a few private views to be a
less than significant impact. Additionally, the views that would be obstructed by the project are
principally of a vacant parking lot and surrounding urban development. Any potential views of scenic
resources such as San Bruno Mountain or Sign Hill are largely obstructed by existing structures and
trees across Miller Avenue and would not be affected by the project.
With regard to the shading effects of the project, the parking structure would not substantially affect
shadows of the first floor windows, since those windows are already shaded by the existing duplex at
323 Miller and an existing 6' tall solid wood fence located on the property line. The west-facing second
floor windows would be subject to increased shading during the afternoon hours due to the height of the
proposed parking structure. The project was reviewed by the members of the Design Review Board
during a Design Values Workshop and the structure's height was considered by Board members. The
Board recommended the 412 story structure now proposed. As proposed, the project complies with the
General Plan's policies for Downtown, including the 60' height limit and encouragement of lot line to
lot line commercial development, consistent with the traditional neighborhood form.
In a previous hearing for the project and in the comment letter, it was suggested that the structure should
be placed partially underground and set back from the east property line, respectively, in order to
alleviate their concerns. Staff notes that as proposed, the parking structure is configured \\ri.th a number
of "green" energy-saving features. Among these features, the geothermal climate control, natural
ventilation and lighting would either be completely lost or substantially compromised by placing the
parking structure underground.
Undergrounding any of the parking would also necessitate an additional vehicular access point due to
circulation requirements of a partially underground structure. This driveway could only be placed at
either Miller Avenue, which would eliminate the ground floor commercial space; or Fourth Lane, which
would create a dangerous pedestrian environment at the Maple AvenueIFourth Lane intersection.
Finally, increasing the parking structure's setback from the east property line has serious implications
for the cost efficiencies of the project due to the impacts of modifying the ramping system. To place a
parking structure in a smaller building envelope, the ramping system would require more complicated
forming and structural supports, resulting in a loss of parking spaces within the entire structure. For
example, if a "speed ramping" system is required, the ability to park on inclining surfaces is lost due to
the required slope of the ramps. According to the project designer, a setback of a size necessary to
Staff Report
Subject: (Miller Avenue Parking Stmcture)
March 26, 2008
Page 3 of 4
substantially reduce or eliminate the prc~ect's shading effects may render the entire project technically
infeasible, cost impacts notwithstanding.
Traffic
The comment letter also challenges the traffic analysis prepared for the project, focusing on the
vehicular circulation characteristics of Fourth Lane and how these characteristics may be affected by the
parking structure.
The existing condition along Fourth Lane at the project site includes four separate access driveways to
the Lane. Due to the configuration of the existing surface parking lots, each parking instance
accommodated by the 60 spaces in these three lots requires a trip to a segment of Fourth Lane. This is
because the parking lots afford one-way travel only, with two parking lots exiting to the Lane and one
entering from the Lane. Moreover, the existing duplex at 323 Miller includes parking spaces accessible
only from Fourth Lane.
The proposed parking structure would eliminate all of these existing access points, possibly replacing
them with a loading area. The loading area would be intended to allow small commercial trucks to
service the proposed ground floor commercial space without blocking the lane while providing an area
for trash enclosures and other utility fum~tions. The structure therefore would reduce the vehicle trips on
Fourth Lane. Further, as demonstrated in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the project would not
significantly impact service levels at loeal intersections. Thus, the project as proposed improves many
characteristics of the current circulation conditions in the Lane, without significantly impacting City
traffic.
CONCLUSION
As proposed, the project provides sevleral benefits to the City, including elimination of a currently
underutilized lot, increased parking n~venue, increased tax revenue and increased activity in the
Downtown area, and is consistent with the General Plan and Redevelopment Plan polices applicable to
Downtown that seek to strengthen the Downtown's presence as the City's traditional commercial core.
The analysis contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration demonstrates that as mitigated, the project
will not have any significant environmental impacts. Comments received on the project did not identify
any new significant impacts. Accordingly, staff does not believe that there exists any substantial
evidence on the whole of the record supporting a fair argument that the proposed project may have
significant environmental effects.
Staff therefore recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution, making findings and
adopting the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project.
Staff Report
Subject: (Miller Avenue Parking StlUcture)
March 26, 2008
Page 4 of 4
~B~ ,(~
\-----~arry N gel '" : ----'
City Manager
By: ~~
Marty VanDuyn
Assistant City Manag
MVD:SK:cs:bla
Attachments:
Resolution with Exhibits
Exhibit A - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Exhibit B - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Exhibit C - Response to Comments dated 3/7/08
Hannig Law Firm - Written Comments received 1/8/08
Adela Hernandez - Written Comments received 2/14/08
Hannig Law Firm - Written Comments received 2/25/08
l065368.l
RESOLUTION NO.
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
A RESOLUTION lVlAKING FINDINGS AND ADOPTING A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE
MILLER AVENUE PARKING STRUCTURE PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco proposes to develop a public parking
structure consisting of a 4lf2 story buill ding containing 256 parking stalls and up to 13,700 square
feet of ground floor commercial space and related improvements, on 24,500 square feet of land
area located on the south side of the 300 block of Miller Avenue in the City of South San
Francisco ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
Public Resources Code, SS 21000, et seq., a mitigated negative declaration (MND), incorporated
by reference and attached hereto as Exhibit A, was prepared analyzing the potential
environmental impacts of the project; and
WHEREAS, a previous MND for the Project, dated December 20, 2007, was circulated
for public review from December 20, 2007 to January 8, 2008, during which time comments
were received on the Project concerning the MND's analysis of aesthetic and traffic impacts; and
WHEREAS, comments received on the original MND prompted staff to obtain additional
expert analysis regarding shadow impacts of the Project, and re-evaluate the Project's traffic
impacts; and
WHEREAS, the revised analyses confirmed that the Project would not have significant
aesthetic or traffic impacts; and
WHEREAS, the revised MND was recirculated for another public review period from
February 5,2008 to February 25, 2008; and
WHEREAS, additional comments regarding the project's aesthetic and traffic impacts
were received during the comment period for the recirculated MND, to which staff prepared a
response letter, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit C; and
WHEREAS, the Project will have potentially significant impacts to air quality, cultural
resources, and noise, for which mitigation measures have been proposed and incorporated into a
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, attached hereto as Exhibit B, which mitigation
measures will reduce these impacts to less than significant; and
WHEREAS, revisions to the Project and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
ensure that the Project's environmental impacts will be reduced to a level of less- than-
significant; and
a. Air Quality - The physical removal of the existing parking lot and structures
is a construction activity with a high potential for creating air pollutants. In
addition to the dust created during removal activities, substantial dust and
construction exhaust emissions could be created during grading for the
project. Mitigation Measure 1A will require BAAQMD dust suppression
measures be included in construction contracts for the Project. These
measures will reduce the Project's particulate matter emissions to a less than
significant level. Mitigation Measure 1 B imposes construction equipment
3. There is no substantial evidence on the record that the proposed Project, as mitigated,
will have a significant effect on the environment. Potentially significant impacts, of
which there are only three, will be mitigated to a less-than-significant level, as
follows:
2. The MND has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the implementing
Guidelines, and adequately described the impacts of the Project.
1. The MND, dated February 1,2008, represents the City Council's independent
judgment and analysis.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that based on the entirety of the record before it, which
includes without limitation, design plans prepared and dated December 7, 2007 for the Miller
Avenue Parking Structure, the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared and dated February 1,
2008 for the Miller Avenue Parking Structure, comments received on the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and the response to comments prepared by staff, agenda, minutes, and reports
prepared for the November 14,2007 City Council study session, agenda, minutes and reports
prepared for the December 12, 2007 City Council meeting, agc~nda, minutes and reports prepared
for the January 23,2008 City Council meeting, agenda, minutes and reports prepared for the
March 26, 2008 City Council meeting, the City Council hereby finds as follows:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and
correct and made a part of this resolution.
WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the MND, including comments and responses
and other documents that constitute the record of proceedings for the Project is the Chief
Planner, Planning Division of the City of South San Francisco, 315 Maple Avenue, South San
Francisco, CA.
WHEREAS, the Project as proposed is consistent with the policies of the 1999 General
Plan applicable to the Downtown planning sub-area, the Downtown/Central Redevelopment
Plan, and South San Francisco Municipal Code Title 20 (Zoning Ordinances); and
WHEREAS, the MND, including comments and responses, reflects the City Council's
independent judgment and analysis on the potential for environmental impacts from the Miller
A venue Parking Structure Project; and
measures that \\rilll operate to reduce impacts from construction exhaust to a
less-than-signific::mt level. Accordingly, the Project, as mitigated will not have
any significant ail' quality impacts.
b. Cultural Resources - Development of the parking structure as proposed
would necessitate the removal of an existing residential duplex locally listed
as a "potentially historic resource". Removal of this structure could constitute
a "substantial adverse change" in the significance of the resource. Mitigation
Measure 2 require:s preparation and implementation of a Preservation Plan that
\\rill require relocation or salvage and re-use of the historical materials in the
structure. This Mitigation Measure ensures that the historical character of the
structure will not be lost. Therefore, the Project, as mitigated, \\rill not have
any significant impacts on cultural or historical resources.
c. Noise - Construction of the project would result in temporary noise increases
due to operation of heavy equipment. Mitigation Measure 3 requires that the
restrictions on construction activities promulgated by the City of South San
Francisco's Noise Ordinance be incorporated into bid documents for the
Project, thereby limiting the hours of operation and noise generation of
individual pieces of equipment to acceptable levels. Therefore, the Project, as
mitigated, \\rill not have any significant noise impacts.
4. The Project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of fish or \\rildlife species, cause a fish or \\rildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels, or threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community. It dOt~s not reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal. It does not eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or pre-history because there is no identified area at the
Project site which is habitat for rare or endangered species, or which represents
unique examples of Cali~Drnia history or prehistory. In addition, the Project is within
the scope of use contemplated in the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance; and the
Project does not have any significant, unavoidable adverse impacts. Implementation
of specified mitigation measures will avoid or reduce the effects of the Project on the
environment and thereby avoid any significant impacts.
5. The Project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to
the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals.
6. The Project does not involve impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable, because the described Project will incorporate mitigation measures to
avoid significant impacts of the Project in the context of continued growth and
development in the City of South San Francisco.
10650l2.l
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the City
Council of the City of South San Francisco at a Public Hearing held on the 26th day of March,
2008 by the following vote:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South San
Francisco hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration consisting of attached Exhibit A and
the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program consisting of attached Exhibit B for the Miller
Avenue Parking Structure Project.
7. The Project does not have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, because the proposed
development will enhance and complement the existing traditional commercial core
of the City and improve the appearance of the area, all adverse effects of the Project
will be mitigated to an insignificant level.
Miller Avenue Parking Structure - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan - December 20, 2007
Verified
& Date
Monitored
By
City of
South San
Francisco
Engineering
Division
When
Implemented
In bid
documents for
the project,
note on
Implemented
By
Project
Sponsor
Mitigation
MITIGA TION MEASURE 1 A: Dust Suppression Procedures.
The following measures are recommended for inclusion in
construction contracts to control fugitive dust emissions.
Impact
Air Quality - Violation of Air Quality
Standards or Substantial Contribution to
an Existing or Projected Violation.
1)
construction
drawings for
the building
and
During Demolition
o Watering shall be used to control dust generation
during demolition of structures and break-up of
pavement.
The proposed Project would require site grading
and removal of an existing residential structure.
The physical removal of the existing parking lot
and structures is a construction activity with a high
permit,
during
construction.
trucks hauling demolition debris from the
trucks
Use dust-proof chutes to load debris into
whenever feasible.
Cover al
site.
o
o
potential for creating air pollutants.
created during removal
and construction exhaust
addition to the dust
substantial dust
could be created during grading for the
In
activities,
emissions
During Construction
o Water all active construction areas at least twice
daily.
project.
Water or cover stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or
other materials that can be blown by the wind.
o
Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose
materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two
feet of freeboard.
o
Sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) all
paved access road, parking areas and staging areas at
construction sites.
o
Sweep streets daily (preferably with water sweepers)
if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public
streets.
o
Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds
{instantaneous _gusts) exceed 25 mph.
o
EXHIBIT B
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION
With the implementation of these construction control
measures, impacts related to construction dust and exhaust
would be reduced to a less than significant level
Properly tune
emissions.
o
and maintain equipment for low
Diesel equipment standing idle for more than two
minutes shall be turned off. This includes trucks
waiting to deliver or receive soils or other bulk
materials. Rotating drum concrete trucks may keep
their engines running continuously as long as they
are on site.
o
The contractor(s) shall install temporary electrical
services whenever possible to avoid the necessity of
independently powered equipment (e.g., generators).
o
Ensure that emissions from all diesel powered
construction equipment used on the project site do
not exceed 40% opacity for more than three minutes
in anyone hour. (Opacity is an indicator of exhaust
particulate emissions from diesel powered
equipment.) Any equipment found to exceed 40%
opacity (or Ringelmallll 2.0) shall be prohibited from
use on the site until repaired.
o
Use add-on control devices such as diesel oxidation
catalysts or particulate filters
o
At least 50 percent of the heavy-duty, off-road
equipment used for construction shall be powered by
CARB-certified off-road engines or equivalent, or
use alternative fuels (such as biodiesel or water
emulsion fuel) that result in lower emissions.
o
MITIGATION MEASURE IS: Exhaust Emissions Reduction
Procedures. The following measures are recommended to
reduce diesel particulate matter and NOx emissions from on-
site construction equipment.
City of
South San
Francisco
Planning
Division
Prior to site
preparation
activities on
323 Miller
A venue
property
Project
Sponsor
MITIGA TION MEASURE 2: Cultural Resources
The project sponsor shall construct the Project in a manner
that preserves the historical significance of the residential
duplex at 323 Miller A venue, by developing and
implementing a Preservation Plan that shall be incorporated
into the bid documents for the project where applicable. The
plan shall incorporate one of the following alternatives to
demolition of the structure:
Resources - Substantial Adverse
in the Significance of a Historic
Resource.
Development of the parking structure as proposed
would necessitate the removal of an existing
residential duplex locally listed as a "potentially
historic resource". Removal of this structure could
constitute a "substantial adverse in the
Cultural
Change
2)
(a) Relocation: Under this option, impacts to the structure
would be mitigated to a less than significant level by
relocating the structure intact to another site in the Downtown
area that is owned by the City or Redevelopment Agency, or
is privately owned. The City's Historical Preservation
Commission has expressed support for further evaluation of
this option.
change'
significance of the resource.
City of
South San
Francisco
Engineering
Division
In bid
documents for
the project,
and during
Project
sponsor
(b) Salvage & Reuse of Historical Materials: Under this
option, impacts to the structure would be mitigated to a less
than significant level by preserving the well-maintained
historical material-for which the structure is historically
significant-to be used in future construction. The City's
Historical Preservation Commission has expressed support for
further evaluation of this option.
MITIGATION MEASURE 3: Noise
The restrictions on construction activities promulgated by the
City of South San Francisco's Noise Ordinance shall be
J into bid documents for the project. These
m hours
Temporary or
Ambient Noise
Substantial
Increase in
Levels in the Project Vicinity Above
Levels Existing Without the Project.
Noise -
Periodic
3)
project
construction
of operation and noise generation of
individual pieces of equipment will ensure construction-
related noise impacts remain at a less than significant level
incorporate a
limitations
the project would result in
increases due to operation of
temporary
heavy equipment.
Construction of
noise
CITY COUNCIL 2008
PEDRO GONZALEZ, MAYOR
KARYLMATSUMOTO,MAYORPROTEM
MARK N. ADDIEGO, COUNCILMEMBER
RICHARD A. GARBARINO, COUNCILMEMBER
KEVIN MULLIN, COUNCILMEMBER
BARRY M. NAGEL, CITY MANAGER
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
(650) 877-8535
FAX (650) 829-6639
March 7,2008
Peter W. Daniel
Hannig Law Firm LLP
2991 EI Camino Real
Redwood City, CA 94061-4003
Re: Response to Comments on R:evised Miller Avenue Parking Structure Mitigated
Negative Declaration of Environmenta! Impacts
Dear Mr. Daniel:
Thank you for your comments on the recirculated Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)
for the proposed Miller Avenue Parking Structure. The Planning Division is in receipt of
your office's comments and has prepared the following response to the substantive
environmental concerns raised in your letter. As noted in your letter, your comments
focus on two areas of concern: ('1) light and view impacts, and (2) traffic impacts. Both
issues are discussed below.
Light and View Impacts
As detailed in the MND, staff has carefully analyzed the view impacts, as well as the
shade and shadow impacts of the proposed project on surrounding properties. Both
impacts are analyzed as components of the project's broader aesthetic effects. The
issues have not been "parsed"; rather, the reason that they appear under separate sub-
headings in the MND is for clarity and organizational purposes, and is consistent with
how courts have traditionally separated the two issues when evaluating a project's
aesthetic impacts. (See, e.g., Banker's Hill v. City of San Diego (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th
249, 279-280; Bowman v. City of' Berkeley (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 572, 586.) The case
law cited in your letter addresses CEQA "piecemealing" principles, which do not apply
EXHIBIT C
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION
315 MAPLE AVENUE . P.O. BOX 711 . SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94083
Pursuant to your office's comments on the original MND, the traffic analysis has
undergone substantial revisions in this recirculated MND. These revisions have been
helpful to confirm the original conclusion that the project will not have any significant
impacts to traffic and circulation. The revised analysis incorporates data based on the
current project design. Impacts to circulation are evaluated based on intersection data.
As noted in the traffic expert's report, U[i]ntersections, rather than roadway segments
Traffic Impacts
Further, as noted in the MND, the project and your clients' property are sited in the
Downtown Commercial zoning district, where lot line-to-Iot line development is permitted
without height restrictions, and use permits are required for structures that include
residential uses. Additionally, the General Plan prohibits first floor residential uses in
the Downtown Commercial land use designation. Therefore the apartment buildings
configured for first-floor residential use located in the vicinity of the project are
nonconforming uses. As the proposed project is consistent with the City's planning
documents and zoning code, and a legally adequate emvironmental review has been
prepared, staff's position is that such impacts on nonconforming uses should not
constrain lawful development on adjacent parcels. Courts have recognized that a
primary objective of zoning is the gradual elimination of nonconforming uses. (See, e.g.,
County of San Diego v. McClurken (1951) 37 Cal.2d 683, 687.) Allowing existing
nonconforming uses to impede fulfillment of the City's planning and zoning
determinations would be inconsistent with this objective. Therefore, staff does not
recommend that any additional setbacks be imposed for this project.
Finally, with respect to view and shadow impacts, you have requested that a setback be
required for the project. Staff has discussed with the project designer the possibility of
redesigning the structure to provide an adequate setback, however, technical and
economic concerns make such a setback infeasible. This is principally due to
modifications to the ramping system in order to accommodate a parking structure within
a smaller building envelope. Such modifications will at a minimum require more
complicated forming and structural supports, resulting in a loss of parking spaces.
Economic implications notwithstanding, a setback of substantial size could render the
project technically infeasible.
Your comments state that your clients' objection to the project is not that construction
will eliminate any views of scenic vistas, but rather that it will eliminate their views
altogether. Staff is mindful of the view impacts of the project, but we reiterate that CEQA
does not protect private views of unremarkable urban landscape, regardless of the
degree to which those views are affected. Your commemts do not appear to raise any
legal inadequacy with this conclusion. As such, the comments on view and shadow
impacts may represent a difference of opinion, but do present any environmental
concern that requires further analysis.
Miller Avenue Parking Structure - Response to Comments
317/2008
Page 2
here where the issues are evaluated as part of a single analysis in a single CEQA
document.
Miller Avenue Parking Structure - Response to Comments
317/2008
Page 3
between intersections, are almost always the capacity controlling locations for any
circulation system." (MND, appen.D.)
Contrary to your assertion, the traffic impacts of the loading and delivery area have
been adequately discussed in the MND. The document shows how trucks will access
the project site, and where they will be parked while making deliveries. Wh ile a final
determination regarding loading activities on Fourth Lane has not yet been made, the
analysis of the impacts of such activity complies with CEQA's requirement that all
reasonably foreseeable consequences of approval be analyzed. (See Laurel Heights
Improvement Assn. v. Regents of Univ. of Cal. (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376.) Since staff has
reviewed the reasonably forese~eable consequences of project approval, including
potential loading activities on Fourth Lane, and determined that project approval will not
result in significant environmental impacts, the lack of a final use determination for
loading on Fourth Lane does not prohibit the City from approving the MND at this time.
With regards to the MND's analysis, Figure 3 demonstrates that there is adequate room
for a loading truck to maneuver in Fourth Lane. Further, the project has been designed
such that when a truck is parked at the loading station, it will not block circulation in
Fourth Lane. (See MND, fig. 3.) Vehicles will still be able to travel the length of the Lane
and tenants of 321 Miller Avenue will be able to access the Lane.
Conclusion
Your concerns throughout this process have been evaluated by staff and contributed to
the decision to revise and recirculate the MND. Your February 25, 2008, comments,
while appreciated, do not present a fair argument based on substantial evidence that
the project may have significant environmental effects for CEQA purposes. Accordingly,
the MND is a legally adequate CEQA document. As no other substantial evidence of
significant impacts exists on the record, it is appropriate for the City Council to approve
the project based on the Revised MND.
Sincerely,
Cc: Joseph P. & Janice M. Caron
P.O. Box 389
South San Francisco, CA 94083
1065017.1
DIRBCf DIAL:
(650) 482-3084
HANNIC; " ~ ,
, ,0 , > ;;,
. < < I.a\\. hirm i"I' .
< ,
PARTNERS:
TED J. HANNIG
JOHN H. BLAKE
Eu.EN B. HAAs
WILLIAM R. WAItHtJRST4'
John H. Blake
Partner
~
jhb@hamliglaw.com
CORNER OF SELBY LANE/ATHERTON
AND EL CAMINO REAL/REDWOOD CITY
www.hanniglaw.com
2991 EL CAMINO REAL
REDWOOD CITY, CA 94061-4003
TELEPHONE (650) 482-3040
FACSIMILE (650) 482-2820
ASSOClAT1lS:
PETER W. DANIEL
LoRI A. ItISH
DAVID M. SHBSGREEN
DAVID M. WOOLPB
*AJ)MI'ITEI) IN NEVADA '"
CUJJloItN1A
Via u.s. Mail, Fax and E-Mail
January 8, 2008
Chadrick Smalley
Associate Planner
City of South San Francisco
315 Maple Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94083
Re: Comments by Owners of321 Miller Avenue to Mitigated Negative Declaration for Proposed
Miller Avenue Parking Structure, under California Enviromnental Quality Act (CEQA),
Public Resources Code ~~21000-21177
1. Introduction
This firm represents the owners of the ten-unit apartment building located at 321 Miller
Avenue in South San Francisco (the "321 Miller Owners"), which is adjacent to the proposed
project on the south east side. This is the right side of the project as viewed in figure 2
"Preliminary Site Plan" in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The 321 Miller Owners, who
were not properly notified of the status of the project, still voiced objection to the proposed
project at the December 12, 2007 meeting.!
On December 12, 2007 the City COWlcil began to consider a Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the project. The Mitigated Negative Declaration has not been approved and this
matter is on the COWlcil's January 23 agenda.
This letter focuses on (1) the need for a consideration of a set-back on the east side of the
proposed parking structure because of the devastating aesthetic impact of a four and a half story
structure situated mere feet from the windows of a residential structure, and (2) the traffic impact
of the project and the shortcomings in the traffic element of the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
I There are no meeting minutes available for the December 12 hearing as of the date of this letter. The 321 Owners
have obtained and reviewed a DVD recording of the meeting, and references in this letter are to the time stamp on
that DVD.
{9009:TEMP:PWD:H0064068.DOC.! }
(9009:TEMP:PWD:H0064068.DOC.l }
2 The wall is one story high and there is a sloping roof on this structure.
Those decisions and the authorities cited therein state, rather, that private views should be
considered in the CEQA process, with a consideration of the number of views affected and the
proximity of the obstruction bearing on the determination of the significance of the impact. Each
Staff cites two appellate court decisions, neither of which make such a statement. Staff
cites Banker's Hill Hillcrest, Park West Community Preservation Group v. City of San Diego
(2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 249 and Bowman v. City of Berkeley (2004) 122 Ca1.App.4th 572.
Staff's statement at page 14 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration that "to the extent that
any private views are impacted by the proj ect CEQA does not protect such views, particularly
when situated in an urban setting" is an incorrect statement of the law.
Views from the inside of 321 Miller Avenue are part of the aesthetic issues that CEQA
was created to protect. The CEQA Guidelines give content to the concept of aesthetics by
including the following questions in the checklist of a project's potential environmental effects:
"Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?" and "Would the project
substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?"
(Guidelines, Appendix G, questions lea) and I(c).)
The City is incorrect to dismiss the impact of the project on the view from 321 Miller
Avenue. This impact should be evaluated in any environmental review, and if deemed
significant, should be the basis of an EIR.
Photo 1 shows the proximity of the apartment building at 321 Miller Avenue (on the left)
to the existing building one-story building2 at 323 Miller Ave., which will be replaced by the
parking lot wall, four and a half stories high. The parking structure, ifbuilt as proposed, would
be taller than the top of the frame of the photo.
2. The Miti!:ated Ne!:ative Declaration Is Deficient Because It Contains No Consideration
Or Analvsis Of The Total Elimination of the Views From The_Windows 10311 Miller
Ayenue Directlv Facine: The Parkin!: Structure.
The Mitigated Negative Declaration is deficient because it does not contain the requisite
level of accuracy and analysis. If the City relies upon this flawed document it risks a successful
legal challenge under CEQA.
Chadrick Smalley
January 8, 2008
Page Two
II :\ ~ ~ I (;
--
1.:1\\ ri r Tll
II\Y\(C
--
, I :1\\ I illll ,',
Chadrick Smalley
January 8,2008
Page Three
of these cases indicates that factual analysis is necessary and that each situation should be
considered on a case-by-case basis.
Decisions cited by the Court of Appeal in the Bowman opinion further demonstrate this
requirement. In Ocean View Estates Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. v. Montecito Water Dist. (2d Dist.
2004), 116 Cal.App.4th 396, 402, the court wrote: "The District cites nothing in CEQA that
relieves it from considering the impact of the project on private views. To say there is no
common law right to a private view, is not to say that the District is relieved from considering
the impact of its project on such views.... That a project affects only a few private views may be
a factor in determining whether the impact is significant." In Mira Mar Mobile Community v.
City of Oceanside (4th Dist,. 2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 477,492, the court wrote: "aesthetic issues,
such as public and private views, are properly studied in an EIR to assess the impacts of a
project"
Further, the cases cited by Staff are factually distinguishable and the projects in those
cases had nowhere near the impact of this project. In the Banker's Hill case, the project
proponent voluntarily implemented significant setbacks to its project to minimize the impact on
neighbors. Banker's Hill, supra at 272. In Bowman, the nearest residential property was 50 feet
away from the project, and the project proponent took steps to minimize shading impacts.
Bowman, supra at 585. In Ocean View Estates, the private residences surrounded a reservoir but
did not abut a tall structure the way that 321 Miller does. Ocean View Estates, supra at 399. In
contrast, the residents of321 Miller Avenue will likely not even be able to see the sky through
those windows if the project is built as proposed.
Accordingly, the severely obstructed views of the residents of321 Miller Avenue from
the windows facing the wall of the parking structure should be considered and mitigated under
CEQA. The City should analyze the impact of the placing of a four and a half story structure
mere feet away from residential windows. Appropriate mitigation measures may include but are
not limited to an appropriate set-back.
3 . The Miti2ated Ne2ative Declaration Is Deficient Because It Contains No Consideration
Of Shadows And Shadin2 Issues Resultin2 From Locatin2 A Four and Half StOry
Structure Only Five Feet Awav From An Existin2 Residential Structure.
Shadows and shading are potential significant environmental effects under CEQA. The
City has failed to even consider the impact of the large parking structure on the neighboring
properties. The Court of Appeal for the First District has written: "We presume that many if not
{9009:TEMP:PWD:H0064068.DOC.l}
{9009:TEMP:PWD:H0064068.DOC.l}
With regard to traffic impacts, the Mitigated Negative Declaration is inadequate in the
following ways: First, the Mitigated Negative Declaration relies on a February 7, 2007 traffic
The California Code of Regulations identifies transportation and traffic as environmental
factors that should be considered in the CEQA process. The Mitigated Negative Declaration
fails to even identify traffic issues as a potentially significant impact of the project requiring
mitigation. This conclusion is unsupported by the requisite level of analysis, and the Mitigated
Negative Declaration cannot legally be approved.
4. The Mitie:ated Nee:ative Declaration Does Not Contain a Sufficient Analysis of Traffic
Im)!acts.
The City should consider reasonable mitigation measures including but not limited to set-
backs to reduce the effect of this significant impact. The current Mitigated Negative Declaration
ignores this issue and is, therefore, deficient.
Other CEQA decisions support the position that shadows and shading should be taken
into consideration. In Mira Mar Mobile Community v. City of Oceanside (4 Dist. 2004) 119
Cal.app.4th 477, 494, the Court of Appeal upheld the findings of a city that approved a project
that was "sensitive to the adjacent use and was designed to preserve adjacent "private views,
where feasible." That city took the neighbors into consideration by undertaking a shading study,
which concluded that no on-site mitigation was required because the project would have no sun
shadow effects. Other cases in which shadows and shading were considered as potential
significant environmental impacts include Mani Brothers Real Estate Group v. City of Los
Angeles, (2d Dist., 2007) 153 Cal.App.4th 1385, 1389; and A Local & Regional Monitor v. City
of Los Angeles (2d Dist.,1993) 16 Cal.App.4th 630, 642.
The shading and shadowing caused by a sheer 60 foot high wall just 5 feet from the
windows of the 321 Miller Avenue apartments will be nearly absolute. It will look like a prison,
and little if any sunlight will enter the apartment windows. See again Photo 1, which shows the
proximity of the apartment building at 321 Miller Avenue to the existing building at 323 Miller
Ave., which will be replaced by the parking lot wall, four and a half stories high. The proposed
project's shading will be substantial and should be mitigated.
most urban developments will have some shading effects on nearby properties, and that those
effects, if sufficiently substantial, could represent a significant environmental impact." Bowman
v. City of Berkeley (2004) 122 Cal.App.4t1i 572,586.
Chadrick Smalley
January 8, 2008
Page Four
IJc\~\I(; .
--
I :1\\ linll
1I,\Y\lC
~
1..1\\ I inn ,,'
Chadrick Smalley
January 8, 2008
Page Five
study by the Crane Transportation Group that completely ignores the traffic impact on Fourth
Lane, the narrow one-way alley that borders the project on the south side. Second, the Traffic
Study is based on an estimate of the office space square footage that has since been significantly
revised upward. The traffic study must be revised to address these issues before it can form the
basis of any traffic conclusions in the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
In addition, City staff stated on the record that several traffic-related issues raised by the
public and the Council members would be addressed at a later date. As explained below, this
violates CEQA.
4.a. Descriotion Of Fourth Lane Corridor and Traffic Impacts.
Fourth Lane is an important corridor to the 321 Miller owners and their tenants.3 It is a
narrow one-way alley (see Photos 2 and 3) spotted with vehicles, some parked legally, some not.
The back side of321 Miller appears in Photo 4 on the right side, with a red truck parked
alongside. The ten-space parking area for 321 Miller Avenue is accessible only from Fourth
Lane. Residents leaving the parking area at 321 Miller must turn right and travel west (away
from the photographer) because Fourth Lane is a one-way alley.
Photos 4 and 6 show a common occurrence; a person stopping their car behind the St.
Vincent DePaul Society (street address 344 Grand Ave) in order to donate items. The 321 Miller
Owners and their tenants attest that it is not uncommon to see more than one car in this area as
people queue to drop off donations.
Directly across the alley from this point, Photo 5 shows a shed at the location of the south
east comer of the project area. According to the Preliminary Site Plan, this is where the Loading
Area will be.
At the December 12 hearing the architect suggested that delivery or trash trucks might
back into this loading area, if it is used for loading at al1.4 Such a driving maneuver would be
challenging under the best of conditions because of the narrow alleyway, and Photos 4 and 6
show that it would be impossible if there was a car (or two) parked behind St. Vincent De Paul.
It is not hard to imagine what would happen on that alley if more than one delivery truck arrived
at the same time. Businesses on Grand Avenue which back onto Fourth Lane on this block also
include a grocery store, a bakery, and a hardware store.
3 The photographs of Fourth Lane were taken at about 3:00 pm on January 5, 2008.
4 12/12/07 Meeting, minute 2:33-2:35.
{9009:TEMP:PWD:HOO64068.DOC.1}
{9009:TEMP:PWD:H0064068.DOC.l}
The February 2007 traffic study cited in the Mitigated Negative Declaration stated that
there would be 9200 feet of office space, and since that time the project has been changed so that
there is now 13,700 feet of office space (a nearly 50% increase).
4.c.1. The Project Now Has 50% More Office Space Square Footage than
Qriginallv Estimated in the Traffic Report.
Two significant changes have occurred since the production of the traffic study by Crane
in February 2007 which render the study inaccurate. The City risks a violation of CEQA if it
tries to rely on an inaccurate traffic study. The traffic study must be revised.
4.c. The Traffic Studv Relied Upon Bv The Prolect ProoonentsJs NQt Accurate Because
It Relies On Outdated Facts And Assumptions.
In spite of Crane's conclusion that only intersections should be studied, an adequate study
can consider both intersections and road segments. Citizen Action to Serve All Students v.
Thomley (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 748, 755-6. Thus it is entirely appropriate and necessary to
evaluate traffic patterns in Fourth Lane.
The City's failure to adequately describe existing traffic conditions renders it impossible
to properly analyze project impacts. See Galante Vineyard v. Monterey Peninsula Water
Management Dist. (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 1109, 1122 (in which the description of traffic and
other impacts was found to be inadequate).
4.b. The Mitigated Negative Declaration Should Have Considered These Traffic Impacts
and the Failure To Do So Violates CEOA.
Photos 6, 7 and 8 also show a man on a ladder and several trash dtunpsters in the
alleyway, further illustrating the uses and activities on Fourth Lane. The photos also show a
ntunber of utility poles in the alley, which should be removed (and the utilities placed
underground) as part of any approved project as mitigation for traffic impacts in Fourth Lane.
1bis potential bottleneck is right where the exiting residents of321 Miller Avenue are
forced to go because of the one-way alley. This impossible (and impassible) situation is likely to
happen on a regular basis.
Chadrick Smalley
January 8,2008
Page Six
I 10\ \ "I (;
~
1;1\\ Ii 1"111 ""
11.\,\,\1(; .
--
, " ;1\\ I i 1'111 ,." .
Chadrick Smalley
January 8, 2008
Page Seven
Without any facts in supoort. the Mitigated Negative Declaration states: "Though the
project contains 4,500 more square feet of commercial space than originally analyzed by the
traffic study, this difference would not represent a material change in project impacts." This
conclusion is not supported by any data or explanation.
On the other hand, professional transportation engineers and major city governments
understand that an increase in square footage leads to an increase in trip generation (See: Trip
Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Journal 7th Edition; see also, San Diego
Municipal Code, Land Development Code, Trip Generation Manual 2003).
The First District Court of Appeal would likely disagree with Crane's conclusion. In
American Canyon Community Unitedfor Responsible Growth v. City of American Canyon (1 st
Dist.2006), 145 Cal.AppAth 1062, the Court of Appeal held that a city's reliance on a low
square footage estimate, rather than a higher and more accurate estimate, in order to make traffic
projections, was not supported by substantial evidence and violated CEQA. The court wrote:
"The City's low calculation of the (project's) square footage fatally undermines its conclusion
that the (project) would have no significant effects on traffic requiring supplemental
environmental review."
4.c. 2. The Traffic Study Presumed that Traffic Would Exit Onto Fourth
Lane. Which is No Longer the Case.
The February 2007 traffic study cited in the Mitigated Negative Declaration presumed
that cars would be exiting onto Fourth Lane, which is no longer the case.
Figure 8 of the Crane Traffic Report contemplates that a number of cars will be exiting
the parking structure onto Fourth Lane. Since the report, the City has changed the plan so that all
exiting vehicles will exit on Miller Avenue This impact is amplified because of the increased
square footage as described above.
Because of this new information the Crane Traffic Study does not support a "no
significant impact" finding on the traffic issue. The errors and omissions in the Crane Study
discussed above result in an incomplete, distorted-and hence inaccurate-picture of the
project's traffic impact.
{9009:TEMP:PWD:H0064068.DOC.l}
{9009:TEMP:PWD:HOO64068.DOC.l}
5 12/12/07 Meeting, minute 2:33-2:35.
There is "a low threshold requirement for preparation of an EIR" (No Oil, Inc. v. City of
Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal.3d 68.84) and a "preference for resolving doubts in favor of
environmental review" (Sierra Club v. County of Sonoma (1992) 6 Cal.AppAth 1307. 1316-
1317). An EIR must be prepared ''whenever it can be fairly argued on the basis of substantial
evidence that the project may have significant environmental impact" (No Oil, Inc. supra at 75)
even if there is substantial evidence to the contrary (Arviv. Enterprises, Inc. v. South Valley Area
Planning Comm. (2002) 10ICal.App. 4th 1333. 1346.
An EIR provides detailed information about the likely effect a proposed project may have
on the environment, lists ways in which significant effects might be minimized and indicates
alternatives to the project. Public Resources Code ~ 21061. An EIR is required whenever there
is a " 'fair argument' .. that significant impacts may occur. Quail Botanical Gardens
Foundation, Inc. v. City of Ene in it as (1994) 29 Cal.AppAth 1597. 1602.
For the reasons discussed above. the 321 Miller Owners urge the Council to withhold
approval of the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration to fully consider the impacts caused
by building a 60 foot wall just five feet away from the windows of an existing residential
apartment building. and the traffic impacts of the project. Adequate mitigation is required for
significant impacts. and if this is impossible an EIR should be considered pursuant to 14 CCR ~
15162.
5. Conclusion
It would be wrong and illegal to make a decision now and wait until after the Mitigated
Negative Declaration has been approved to determine how the loading area would be used.
Reliance on future analysis to determine whether impacts are significant violates CEQA. [See.
e.g., Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296.]
At the December 12 hearing the architect suggested that the area designated as the
'Loading Area' has not been specifically programmed.s and it is not clear to what use that area
will be put. This is significant because loading activities are likely to spill onto Fourth Lane. and
impact the residents of321 Miller Avenue and others.
4.c. 3. There Should be No Approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration Until
the City Decides whether the Loading Space Will Actually be Used for LoadinlZ
Or Not. As this Decision Will Have Traffic Impacts.
Chadrick Smalley
January 8, 2008
Page Eight
IIA\\I(;
~
1;1\\ li!'lll
11-\'\'\1(; '.
'. . I..,,; 111'11-1 ., ."
. .
Chadrick Smalley
January 8, 2008
Page Nine
The time is right for further review, as the Council has made no decision on the project,
and no notice of detennination has issued. Traffic issues in this area are a high priority for the
City and its citizens, and traffic impacts should be thoroughly analyzed in compliance with the
law.
Encl.: Photos 1-8
cc: Client
{9009:TEMP:PWD:H0064068.DOC.l}
PHOTO 1
PHOTO 2
~,
~~
t
J
\1-
\
PHOTO 4
~:o,;..,:r:t~!<;""'~<'.''''''
PHOTO 5
~
PHOTO 7
\
\
\
, .I
J/
\
PHOTO 8
b]b
./Z1a~, q(1~k;--'
~- Ii.:!.; /!j ~,-
'" -"" ~" il:j1b'"
~CE ~E A}TAJLA)lILI~ :; Fl!>, . PES! + 2~ ~'J
PUBLIC RE~;~,;',-<U~Ql'l~'l\~;Fl.~JiJ3{.~l TO AD~~if.z~ _~
RECIRCULAT" J~ "I(j.:.l'E:Q'~NE!i:~T .' ECLARATION1J~~ l)iii'ffJ"'"
FORMIL VENUEPA RUCTURE ~'-.'<i'if'
,~, ,/,,"if,i,L ~'. 'i.:," .!~~_" .,-,::,;:;;"':":':';::2- >:::' ':l,:_.. .
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that e' ~". f,,$Pl1tlf:~,' !-ancisco has completed the Negative
--'~-~_' _, "":.:~~, ~'__"" ,. "~:, .~\-::""'t~'F..
Declaration for the Miller A venue Parking structure, and it is available for public review and
comment for 20 days. Copies are available at the Orange Avenue Library - 804 W. Orange
Avenue, the Grand Avenue Library - 306 W alnut Avenue, Planning Division - 315 Maple
Avenue and in the offices of the City Clerk - 400 Grand Avenue.
PROJECT
-~'--~-'-""'-'-''''-''-'''''''~'''~~~''--''~'''-''-'~'''-''''~'-''--'''''''''-'-"''''-'--'._~'''''''''-''''''''''._---'''---''''''-''_''''''''''''''''''''-''"'-"'''--''__'_'''-__'''''",'_~'''''''._""'''._~''''''''''''''''''''-'''-'''''rT_'_-'''~=-'''''''''_""""""""_,-,="",,,''''''''''''"
Miller Avenue Parking Structure
City of SSF Redevelopment Agency/applicant-owner
Miller Avenue (APNs 012-312-040 through 012-312-070)
The Miller Avenue Parking Structure is proposed to be a 4~ story public parking structure with
up to 13,700 square feet of ground floor commercial space, to be located on the three existing
surface parking lots on the south side of the 300 Block of Miller Avenue (APNs 012-312-040,
050 and 060) and the existing residential properties at 323 Miller Avenue (APN 012-312-070) in
the Downtown Commercial (D-C) Zoning District.
The comment period for this document commences on Tuesday. February 5. 2008 and will
close on Monday Februarv 25.2008. Written comments regarding the Negative Declaration
must be received by the Planning Division, 315 Maple Avenue, South San Francisco, by no later
than 5:00 PM on February 25th, 2008. Please send all comments to: Chadrick Smalley,
Associate Planner, Planning Division, City of South San Francisco, P.O. Box 711, South San
Francisco, CA 94083.
If you have any questions, please call Chadrick Smalley, Associate Planner, at (650) 877-8535
and FAX 650/829-6639.
/s/ Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner
Planning Division, City of South San Francisco
~6Y(
~~L
~l~t(<y ~'
~
~
~
~~
~/L {j~
~
rY~
ADELA HERNANDEZ
WRlnEN COMMENTS
02/14/08
/s/ Su~y Kalkin, Chief Planner
Planmng Division, City of South San F .
ranClSCO
~ d~ Cf;jAftL- uJA ~ fM' M 1
/~ @.vV"'L 4- ~ 6( /-t:Ue,/ ~ \
S-~<).F.
~~
If you have any questions, please call Chadrick Smalley, Associate Planner, at (650) 877-8535
and FAX 650/829-6639.
The comment period for this document commences on Mondav. Februarv 4. 2008 and will
close on Mondav February 25.2008. Written comments regarding the Negative Declaration
must be received by the Planning Division, 315 Maple Avenue, South San Francisco, by no later
than 5:00 PM on January 25th, 2008. Please send all comments to: Chadrick Smalley, Associate
Planner, Planning Division, City of South San Francisco, P.O. Box 711, South San Francisco,
CA 94083.
The Miller Avenue Parking Structure is proposed to be a 4Y1 story public parking structure with
up to 13,700 square feet of ground floor commercial space, to be located on the three existing
surface parking lots on the south side of the 300 Block of Miller Avenue (APNs 012-312-040,
050 and 060) and the existing residential properties at 323 Miller Avenue (APN 012-312-070) in
the Downtown Commercial (D-C) Zoning District.
Miller Avenue Parking Structure
City of SSF Redevelopment Agency/appli.~ant-owner
Miller Avenue (APNs 012-312-040 through 012-312-070)
PROJECT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that~e"":<~ittfiQt;,~~JJ;1l1r~'~~r~Cisco has completed the Negative
Declaration for the Miller Avenue p{j;k~l,~~iijQt~~~;iin(rlt is available for public review and
comment for 20 days. Copies are available ~tlli~<:o;nge Avenue: Library - 804 W. Orange
Avenue, the Grand Avenue Library - 306 W alnut Avenue, Planning Division - 315 Maple
Avenue and in the offices of the City Clerk - 400 Orand Avenue.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that ili ,;;.,~,.../_",<rancisco has completed the Negative
Declaration for the Miller A venue Parkiltfsf;:il~ti:;e, and it is available for public review and
comment for 20 days. Copies are available at the Orange Avenue Library - 804 W. Orange
Avenue, the Grand Avenue Library - 306 W alnut Avenue, Planning Division - 315 Maple
Avenue and in the offices of the City Clerk - 400 Grand Avenue.
PROJECT
--..,.,.........,.,,......_._.....~----.~............-_--_.---'....._~_...-...,..-~...""'.~.~,..,-..,____v_.........._............_~..,.........."....,.,.."......____,....___.______""............._...,~...,.....""""...."..,...~'.~'~...T.,.,.-......~..
Miller Avenue Parking Structure
City of SSF Redevelopment Agency/applicant-owner
Miller Avenue (APNs 012-312-040 through 012-312-070)
The Miller Avenue Parking Structure is proposed to be a 4~ story public parking structure with
up to 13,700 square feet of ground floor commercial space, to be located on the three existing
surface parking lots on the south side of the 300 Block of Miller Avenue (APNs 012-312-040,
050 and 060) and the existing residential properties at 323 Miller Avenue (APN 012-312-070) in
the Downtown Commercial (D-C) Zoning District.
The comment period for this document commences on Tuesdav. Februarv 5. 2008 and will
close on Mondav February 25.2008. Written comments regarding the Negative Declaration
must be received by the Planning Division, 315 Maple Avenue, South San Francisco, by no later
than 5:00 PM on February 25th, 2008. Please send all comments to: Chadrick Smalley,
Associate Planner, Planning Division, City of South San Francisco, P.O. Box 711, South San
Francisco, CA 94083.
If you have any questions, please call Chadrick Smalley, Associate Planner, at (650) 877-8535
and FAX 650/829-6639.
/s/ Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner
Planning Division, City of South San Francisco
~~~l
(
1-1~lley ~. r
L ~ wr~
~ ~t1-
9 J ~, ~~
~
();~ A
~irup~
~ .
"
V0~~
M~\ ~ €-I
t~~
b\o-~ ~ c1- ~ tJ 1S
S. 5~ \= .
~~.
Isl Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner
Planning Division, City of South San Francisco
If you have any questions, please call Chadrick Smalley, Associate Planner, at (650) 877-8535
and FAX 650/829-6639.
The comment period for this document commences on Monday. February 4. 2008 and will
close on Monday February 25. 2008. Written comments regarding the Negative Declaration
must be received by the Planning Division, 315 Maple Avenue, South San Francisco, by no later
than 5:00 PM on January 25th, 2008. Please send all comments to: Chadrick Smalley, Associate
Planner, Planning Division, City of South San Francisco, P.O. Box 711, South San Francisco,
CA 94083.
The Miller Avenue Parking Structure is proposed to be a 4V2 story' public parking structure with
up to 13,700 square feet of ground floor commercial space, to be located on the three existing
surface parking lots on the south side of the 300 Block of Miller Avenue (APNs 012-312-040,
050 and 060) and the existing residential properties at 323 Miller Avenue (APN 012-312-070) in
the Downtown Commercial (D-C) Zoning District.
Miller Avenue Parking Structure
City of SSF Redevelopment Agency/applil:ant-owner
Miller Avenue (APNs 012-312-040 through 012-312-070)
PROJECT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN th~"(e'~Qlf.J"i:~~:~~{[~Cisco has completed the Negative
Declaration for the Miller .Avenue P~r.k!;ft~~~~9!:t~;;,Md it is av~ilable for public review and
comment for 20 days. CopIes are aVallable at me~ange Avenue: LIbrary- 804 W. Orange
Avenue, the Grand Avenue Library- 306 Walnut Avenue, Planning Division - 315 Maple
Avenue and in the offices of the City Clerk - 400 Grand Avenue.
PUBLIC RE
p-'
RECIRCULATI
'&'
FOR MITT
Peter W. Dauiel
.A88odate Attorn~y
II A N ;\Jl (;" "
, '
" 1,;1\\ Firm 'I' ,
, >
PARTNBIL~'
TEDJ. HANNIG
JOHN H. BLAEB
BI.l.EN B. HAAs
WIJ..I..lAM R. W~
DIRECT DIAL:
650/482-3039
CORNER OF SELBY LANE/ATHERTON
AND EL CAMINO REAL/REDWOOD CITY
www.hannieJaw.com
2991 EL CAMINO REAL
RB.DWOOD CITY, CA 94061.4003
Tm..BPHONE (650) 482-3040
FACSIMILE (650) 482-2820
ASSOCIATa~'
I'BTBJl W. DANIEL
Lou A.lDSH
DAVID M. SHIlSGlUmN
DAVID M. WOOLPB
E:Mw.
pwd@Iwmiglaw.com
'"ADMIrIIlD Dol NIlVAm '" CU.DoaNIA
By Facsimile, U.S. Mail and Elect.ronic MaD.
February 25, 2008
Chadrick Smalley
Ass'Ociate Planner
City 'Of S'Outh San Francisc'O
315 Maple Avenue
S'Outh San Francisco, CA 94083
Re: Comments by Owners 'Of 321 Miller Avenue to Revised Mitigated Negative Declarati'On
Dated February 1,2008 far Prop'Osed Miller Avenue Parking Structure, Under Calif'Ornia
Envir'Onmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resaurces Cade ~~21000-21177
1. Introduction.
This firm represents the 'Owners of the ten-unit apartment building located at 321 Miller
Avenue in S'Outh San Francisco (the "321 Miller Owners"), which is adjacent t'O the praposed
praject 'On the south east side. This is the right side 'Of the pr'Oject as viewed in figure 2
"Preliminary Site Plan" in the Mitigated Negative Declaratian.
In 'Order t'O camply with CEQA, City Planning Department Staff has prepared a revised
Mitigated Negative Declaratian which will sh'Ortly be under c'Onsiderati'On. The mast recent
versian 'Of this d'Ocument is dated February 1,2008. The previ'Ous versian 'Of the Mitigated
Negative Declarati'On was dated De:cember 20,2007. N'O Mitigated Negative Declarati'On has
been approved.
This c'Omment is directed at the February 1,2008 revised Mitigated Negative Declaratian.
On January 8, 2008, the 321 Miller Owners submitted comments ta the priar versian 'Of the
{ZAMM:20S4:PWD:H006628S.DOC.l}
HANNIG LAW FIRM
WRITTEN COMMENTS
02/25/08
{ZAMM:20S4:PWD:H006628SDOC.l}
Put simply, the proposed Project will be a very tall fow~ and a half story building, located
just a few feet away from a neighboring residential building which is only half as tall. Several
tenants of the 321 building will now have a flat wall just a few feet away, directly across from
their windows, and looming more than two stories directly above. This will block out nearly all
direct and indirect exterior light from these windows.
2. The Revised Miti2ated Net:ative Declaration Is Inadeauate In That It FaDs To
Adeouatelv Discuss The Imnacts Of Puttine: A TaU Buildine: So Close To A Nei2hborine:
Residential Buildine:. Eliminatin2 All Li2ht and View.
Because these matters have not been adequately addressed in the current Mitigated
Negative Declaration, this letter focuses on (1) the need for a c,onsideration of a set-back on the
east side of the proposed parking structure because of the devastating aesthetic impact of a four
and a half story structure situated mere feet from the windows of a residential structure, and (2)
the traffic impact of the project and the shortcomings in the traffic element of the Mitigated
Negative Declaration.
(1) Infonn governmental decisionmakers and the publilc about the potential,
significant environmental effects of proposed activities;
(2) Identify the ways that environmental damage can b~ avoided or significantly
reduced;
(3) Prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment by requiring
changes in projects through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures when
the governmental agency finds the changes to be feasible; and
(4) disclose to the public the reasons why a governmental agency approved the
project in the manner the agency chose if significant eIllvironmental effects are
involved. (CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal.Code Regs. 15002)
As an infonnational document, the revised Mitigated Negative Declaration is a slight
improvement. For example, the new document does illustrate more clearly the significant
shadow impacts on 321 Miller. Overall, however, the document still falls short ofwhat the public
should expect from their government pursuant to the "General Concepts" of CEQA, which are
to:
City's Mitigated Negative Declaration. The 321 Miller Owners incorporate and reserve all
comments made regarding the prior version of the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Chad rick Smalley
February 25, 2008
Page Two
11\ Y\ J( ;
~
I :1 \I. I i t'l1I
11\'\'\1<,
--
I :1\\ I 11"111
Chadl'ick Smalley
February 25, 2008
Page Three
Staff attempts to parse the ":shading" issue from the "vista" issue, but the two issues are
intertwined and should be considerc~ together to accord with CEQA principles. Orinda Assn. v.
Board of Supervisors (1986) 182 Cal.App.3d 1145, 1171-2.
Now that the Mitigated Negative Declaration includes some graphics on shading it is
clear that these windows directly facing the project on both sides will lose most or all of the
direct sunlight they now receive. ~laking matters worse, the windows will lose indirect, ambient
light because of the sheer size ofthl~ project wall and the close proximity to the windows.
The problem is not that these people will lose a view of a mountain, or of a body of
water, or a valley, examples of the vistas in dispute in reported CEQA court opinions. Here, the
project will stamp out any view of Emy kind from these windows. The only view these people
will have is the bare wall of the parloog structure just a few feet away.
At the very least, the Council should require adequate mitigation measures for this project
such as a reasonable setback from the neighboring property line to allow some minimally
acceptable amount of light to remain.
3. The Revised Mitieated Neeative Declaration Is Inadeauate In That It Fails To
Adeouatelv Discuss The Proiect's Traffic ImDacts on Fourth Lane.
As was discussed in the 321 Miller Owners January 8 comment letter, the tenants of321
Miller are forced to turn right (north) on Fourth. Lane in order to exit the apartment building.
The tenants will not be able to exit if there is a delivery truck in the way.
Modifications to the auto exit plan from the structure (Mitigated Negative Declaration,
page 51) and the new requirement for underground utilities in the alley (Mitigated Negative
Declaration, page 52) are improvements over previous iterations of the plan.
However, the current Mitigated Negative Declaration is still flawed in that it fails to
adequately discuss the impact ofthl~ loading / delivery area on the Fourth. Lane alleyway. The
traffic study discusses cars coming into and out of the parking lot, but does not adequately
discuss the delivery trucks that will be coming into the ally, leaving the alley, and parking in the
alley itself while making deliveries.. This is all the more critical since the office space square
footage has been increased so dramatically to over 13,700 square feet.
Traffic impacts of delivery 1lUCks are appropriate items for analysis under CEQA See:
National Resources Defense Council v. City of Los Angeles (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 268, 279
{ZAMM:20S4:PWD:HOO6628S.DOC.l}
{ZAMM:2OS4::PWD:H006628S.DOC.l}
1 There are no meeting minutes available for the December 12 hearing as of the date of this letter. The 321 Owners
have obtained from the City a DVD recording of the meeting, and referencf's in this letter are to the time stamp on
that DVD. The cited comments by Staft'were made at the December 12 m~~ting and can be viewed at the time
stamp 2:26 and 2:35: 17.
The Council should withhold approval of this Mitigated Negative Declaration until
adequate information about the traffic impacts in Fourth Lane i.s produced by City staff. At a
minimum, such information should include a discussion of how delivery traffic is proposed to be
managed and traffic impacts minimized in Fourth Lane.
The 321 Miller Owners are not aware of any requirement or proposed requirement that
the future tenants of the office space in the proposed project make best efforts to minimize traffic
impacts in Fourth Lane. At the very least, such requirements should limit the size of delivery
trucks, and require tenants to coordinate the schedules of their deliveries so that two delivery
trucks will not be on site at the same time. There should also be a 'no stopping' zone in Fourth
Lane next to the Project site.
This traffic impact to Fourth Lane remains hidden so long as only intersections are
studied, and so long as no data regarding Fourth Lane traffic is provided for analysis. As the 321
Miller Owners pointed out on January 8, it is appropriate undelr CEQA to evaluate both
intersection and road sections in making a CEQA traffic study. Citizen Action to Serve All
Students v. Thornley (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 748, 755-6.
(project proponent acknowledged that traffic impacts from tru(:k deliveries should be addressed
and that best efforts should be used to minimize impacts). SeE1 also: Laurel Heights
Improvement Association v. Regents of the University of California (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1112, 1139
(project proponent appropriately and adequately discussed the impacts of truck delivery traffic).
The loading area is discussed only briefly at page 51 of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration, which states that the project would have space for just one small delivery truck at a
time so long as it is not being used for other purposes. The problem is that Staff has not
determined exactly how this loading area is to be utilized. At the Council meeting on December
12,2007, planning Staff stated that the actual use for the loading area had not been determined,
that it could be used for deliveries or for trash, and that the detl:mllnation of the actual design for
the loading area will be left to the potential future tenants of the Project office space as part of
the tenant improvements. 1
Chad rick Smalley
February 25, 2008
Page Four
11.\'\\1(;
~
I ;I\V 1'.ir'lI
II \,\,\J(,
~
I :111 I II III ,
Chadl'ick Smalley
February 25, 2008
Page Five
4. Conclusion.
For the reasons discussed above, the 321 Miller Owners urge the Council to withhold
approval o/the proposed Mitigate,' Negative Declaration to fully consider the impacts caused
by building a 60 foot wall just five feet away from the windows of an existing residential
apartment building, and the traffic impacts of the project. Adequate mitigation is required for
significant impacts, and if this is impossible an EIR should be considered pursuant to 14 Cal.
Code Regs. ~ 15162.
An EIR provides detailed information about the likely effect a proposed project may have
on the environment, lists ways in which significant effects might be minimi7.ed and indicates
alternatives to the project. Public Resources Code ~ 21061. An EIR is required whenever there
is a "fair argumenf' that significant impacts may occur. Quail Botanical Gardens Foundation,
Inc. v. City ofEnclnitas (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1597, 1602.
There is "a low threshold requirement for preparation of an EIR" (No Oil, Inc. v. City of
Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal.3d 68,84) and a "preference for resolving doubts in favor of
environmental review" (Sierra Club v. County of Sonoma (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1307, 1316-
1317). An EIR must be prepared '''whenever it can be fairly argued on the basis of substantial
evidence that the project may have a significant environmental impacf' (No Oil, Inc. supra at 75)
even if there is substantial evidence to the contrary (Arviv. Enterprises, Inc. v. South Valley Area
Planning Comm. (2002) 10ICal.App.4th 1333, 1346.
Very truly yours,
llANNIG LAw FIRM UP /:fI
/'
~~~/'
/~
Peter W. Daniel
cc: Clients
{ZAMM:20S4:PWD:H006628S ,DOC. 1 }
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
MILLER AVENUE PARKING STRUCTURE
South San Francisco, California
for
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
P.O. Box 711
South San Francisco, California 94083
by
Cotton, Shires and Associates, Inc.
330 Village Lane
Los Gatos, California 95030
March 2007
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
MILLER A VENUE PARKING STRUCTURE
South San Francisco, California
Table of Contents
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Conclusions........ ........... ....... ........ ................... ............................................ ........... 1
Recommendations........ .............. ................................................. ......................... 2
TECHNICAL REPORT
1.0 INTRODUCTION...... ................ .................... ........ ..... ..... ........... .................. ....... 3
1.1 Purpose and Scope of Work ................................................................... 3
2.0 PHYSICAL AND GEOLOGIC SETTING ...................................................... 4
2.1 Terrain ........ ...... .................. ........ ........ ........... .................. ..... .......... ........... 4
2.2 Geologic Setting ....................................................................................... 4
2.3 Seismic Setting ............................... ..................................... ..................... 4
2.3.1 Deterministic Analysis ............................................................... 5
2.3.2 Probabilistic Analysis ................................................................. 5
3.0 SITE CONDITIONS ............................................................. ..... .......................... 6
3.1 Surface Conditions......................................................... .......................... 6
3.2 Subsurface Conditions ............................................................................ 7
3.3 Groundwater Conditions ............. ........ ........... ..... .............. ..................... 7
4.0 POTENTIAL GEOTECHNICAL HAZARDS ................................................. 8
4.1 Seismic Hazards ....................... ......... ........................... ............................ 8
4.2 Settlement Behavior ................................................................................. 8
4.3 Cut and Fill Slope Static Stability .......................................................... 9
4.4 Sulfate Attack on Concrete ..................................................................... 9
4.5 Surficial Erosion ....................................................................................... 10
-.
Table or Contents (cont.)
5.0
Page
RECOMMENDA TIONS............................................................ ......................... 10
5.1 Foundation Design Consideration ........................................................ 10
5.2 Foundation Design Criteria .................................................................... 10
5.2.1 Cast-in-Place Piers ...................................................................... 10
5.2.2 Shallow Foundations.................................................................. 11
5.3 Site Grading .............................................................................................. 12
5.3.1 Site Preparation ........................................................................... 12
5.3.2 Compacted Fill............................................................................ 12
5.3.3 Cut Slope Design......................................................................... 13
5.3.4 Utility Trench Backfill................................................................ 13
5.3.5 Pavement/Garage Slab Subgrade Preparation........................ 13
5.4 Slab-on-grade and Concrete Flatwork .................................................. 13
5.5 Retaining Wall Design............................................................................. 14
5.5.1 Pier Supported Retaining Walls................................................ 14
5.5.2 Footing Supported Retaining Walls ......................................... 15
5.5.3 Backdrain ........................................................... .... ...................... 15
5.6 Drainage ............ ..... ...... ................ ...... ............. ..... .................... ................. 16
5.7 Seismic Design..... ........... ....... ......................... ........................ ..... ............. 16
5.8 Pavement Design ..................................................................................... 16
5.9 Erosion Control........................................................................................ 17
5.10 Technical Review ..................................................................................... 18
5.11 Earthwork Construction Inspection and Testing ................................ 18
6.0 INVESTIGATION LIMITATIONS.................................................................. 18
7.0 REFERENCES. .......... ........ .................... ..................... ........................................... 20
7.1 Documents/Maps ..................................................................................... 20
APPENDICES
A Field Investigation. ................. ........... ............. ............................. ............ ....... A-I
B Laboratory Testing ......................................................................................... B-1
ii
Table of Contents (cont.)
FIGURES Follows Page
1 Site Location Map ........................................................................................... 3
2 Engineering Geologic And Boring Location Map ..................................... 6
3 Engineering Geologic Cross Section A-A' ................................................... 6
APPENDIX FIGURES
A-I Logs of Exploratory Borings .................................................................... A-Ho A-8
B-1 Summary of Triaxial Shear Testing.............................................................. B-1
APPENDIX TABLE
B-1 Summary of Laboratory Test Results...................................................... .... B-2
iii
Mr. Sam Bautista
Senior Civil Engineer, Engineering Division
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
P.o. Box 711
South San Francisco, California 94083
March 28, 2007
E0017
SUBJECT:
RE:
Geotechnical Investigation
Miller A venue Parking Structure
South San Francisco, California
Dear Mr. Bautista:
We are pleased to submit the following report describing the findings,
conclusions, and recommendations of our geotechnical investigation for the proposed
new three-and-half story parking structure on Miller Avenue in South San Francisco,
California. Our investigation was performed in accordance with our proposal for
Geotechnical Services dated January 4, 2006.
In this report, we characterize the geotechnical conditions underlying the
proposed new parking structure, and provide conclusions and recommendations
regarding geotechnical hazards, foundation types and design criteria, site grading,
support of slab-on-grade floors, retaining wall design criteria, trench backfill, pavement
design and erosion control. For clarity, we have provided an Executive Summary at the
front of the report which presents an overview of our pertinent conclusions and
recommendations. This summary is followed by our Technical Report.
We appreciate the opportunity to have been of service to you on this project. If
you have any questions regarding this report, please feel free to call us.
Very truly yours,
COTTON, SHIRES AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Ted Sayre
Supervising Engineering Geologist
CEG 1795
David T. Schrier
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
GE 2334
DTS:TS:POS::st
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In this Executive Summary, we provide a summary of the pertinent conclusions and
recommendations resulting from our Geotechnical Investigation for the proposed new
three-and-half story parking structure on the Miller A venue in South San Francisco,
California. A more detailed discussion of our findings, conclusions and
recommendations is presented in the main body of this technical report.
Conclusions
· The site is feasible for construction of the proposed new three-and-half story
parking structure, from a geotechnical standpoint, provided that the
recommendations of this report are incorporated into the design and
construction of the project.
. The primary potential geotechnical hazards identified at the site include
seismically induced ground shaking, differential settlement of the building
foundation, and surficial erosion of graded areas. These potential hazards were
determined to present varying degrees of potential risk to the proposed building,
and should be considered in the design.
. The site should be subjected to very strong seismic shaking within the life of the
project. A peak ground acceleration of O.6g should be anticipated.
. The proposed parking structure building site is generally underlain by alluvial
fan deposits, and at depth, by Franciscan Complex greenstone bedrock.
. We estimate that there is a low potential for liquefaction at the site.
. We anticipate that the very stiff, dense near-surface materials could settle up to 1
inch total under assumed shallow foundation loading, and an isolated 4-foot
medium dense sand layer encountered in Boring No.5 could settle up to 1 inch
under dynamic (seismic) densification/shaking.
1
Recommendations
.
The proposed parking structure building can either be supported on a
continuous shallow footing foundation system bearing on in-place near-surface
material, or on a cast-in-place drilled pier foundation extending at least 20 feet
into the underlying alluvium.
.
Site grading for the structure should be within the capabilities of moderate
conventional construction equipment (Le., excavators, dozers and drill rigs). The
sandy material encountered in the borings could require casing to prevent caving
and sloughing during pier drilling.
.
All permanent cut and fill slopes should have a maximum inclination of 2-1/2
horizontal to 1 vertical (2.5:1). All fill prisms should be keyed and benched into
firm, in-place material.
.
Civil drawings and specifications should be reviewed by our office to confirm
that the recommendations of this report are incorporated into the design of the
project.
.
Earthwork construction activities should be inspected and tested by a
representative of our office to confirm that the recommendations of this report
are incorporated into the construction of the project.
2
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGA nON
MILLER AVENUE PARKING STRUCTURE
South San Francisco, California
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation for the proposed new
three-and-half story parking structure on Miller Avenue in South San Francisco,
California. The proposed parking structure site is located on the southern side of Miller
Avenue, between Maple Avenue and Linden Avenue (Figure 1). We performed our
investigation between January 25, 2007, and March 28, 2007, for the City of South San
Francisco in accordance with our proposal dated January 4, 2007.
We understand that at this point planned improvements consist of constructing a new,
3-1/2-story structure. It is likely that during the design process, the project team will
have modifications that may include additional structures.
While we have not been provided with maximum dead-pIus-live wall loads for the
proposed new buildings, we anticipate that they will be relatively heavy, as is typical for
concrete framed structures. We understand that site grading may include excavating up
to 5 to 8 feet of soil to set the lower floor of the parking structure below grade.
1.1 Pmpose and Scope of Work
The purpose of our investigation was to develop geotechnical recommendations for
project design. Our objectives were to: (1) evaluate surface and subsurface conditions;
and (2) develop conclusions and recommendations regarding geotechnical hazards, site
grading, foundation and retaining wall type and design criteria, and recommendations
for pavement sections.
The specific scope of work performed for our investigation included the following tasks:
1) Review in-house geologic data and the topographic survey provided to us:
2) Subsurface exploration;
3) Laboratory testing of representative earth materials;
4) Geologic and geotechnical engineering analyses; and
3
5) Preparation of this report.
2.0 PHYSICAL AND GEOLOGIC SETTING
2.1 Terrain
The proposed Miller Avenue site parking structure is situated on the southern flanking
slope of Sign Hill, adjacent to the valley floor formed by Colma Creek. Current site
topography is characterized by gently inclined east sloping terrain. Topographic relief
across the site is roughly 9-1/2 feet with elevations varying from 52.8 feet at the
northwestern comer of the site to 42.2 feet at the southeastern corner. A small concrete
wall retains roughly 1/2-foot of material and separates the western two-thirds of the site
from the eastern third.
2.2 Geologic Setting
The Miller Avenue property is located on an alluvial fan situated between the Bay
margin and the flanks of Sign Hill. The site is situated approximately 2.5 miles northeast
of the San Andres fault which forms a boundary between the Pacific and North
American tectonic plates. According to geologic maps of the area, the site is underlain
by slope debris and ravine fills (Bonilla, 1971 and 1965). However, we encountered
roughly 35 to 45 feet of alluvial materials overlying Franciscan Complex Greenstone
bedrock. Alluvial materials have likely been transported downslope by the local creeks
and streams and deposited on the fans during periods of high flows.
2.3 Seismic Setting
The site is situated in a very seismically active area. Historically, this area has been
subjected to very strong shaking from major earthquakes and the site will continue to
experience very strong ground shaking in the future. The significant active faults
located closest to the site are the San Andreas fault (2.5 miles/4 km toward the
southwest), the San Gregorio fault (7.9 miles/12.6 km toward the southwest), and the
Hayward fault (12.7 miles/20.3 km toward the northeast) (Figure 2).
4
2.2.1 Deterministic Analysis - The site could be affected by seismic shaking
stemming from earthquakes on anyone of several major active earthquake faults in the
region. The following table provides the results of our deterministic analysis and lists
the major earthquake sources, the distances from the sources to the site, the maximum
Moment Magnitudes and the peak horizontal ground accelerations that are anticipated
at the site.
Fault
Source
Distance (mi!km)
Moment
Magnitude1
Peak Horizontal
Acceleration (g)2
San Andreas
(1906 Segment)
2.5/4.0
7.9
0.50
San Gregorio
7.9/12.6
7.3
0.34
Hayward
(Total Length)
12.7/20.3
7.1
0.18
1Based on "Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment For The State of California" by
CDMG, DMG Open-File Report 96-08.
2Based on attenuation relationships developed by Bozorgnia, Campbell & Niazi 1999,
(horizontal component - Pleistocene soil, corrected); as determined using the
computer program EQFAULT by Blake, 1989, and updated 2004.
2.2.2 Probabilistic Analysis - We also performed a probabilistic analysis
employing the computer program FRISKSP (By T.F. Blake, 1988 and updated 2004) and
incorporated moment magnitudes from the California Division of Mines and Geology
(CDMG) publication "Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment For The State of
California" (DMG Open-File Report 96-08), and attenuation relationships by Bozorgnia,
Campbell & Niazi 2000 (horizontal component - Pleistocene soil, corrected). The results
of our probabilistic analysis indicate that an acceleration for a Design Basis Earthquake
(10 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years, or a 475-year return period, which is
generally used for residential and commercial buildings) is O.60g.
5
Taking into account the above Moment Magnitude earthquakes, the 1997 Uniform
Building Code (UBC) coefficients presented in Section 5.7, and the results of the
deterministic and probabilistic approaches, it is our opinion that the site could
experience a peak horizontal ground acceleration (PGA) between O.50g (equal to the
deterministic acceleration calculated for an earthquake on the San Andreas fault for the
site) and 0.60g (equal to the probabilistic analysis for a Design Basis Earthquake). It
should also be noted that findings of strong motion research from the Lorna Prieta
earthquake indicate that: 1) recorded ground motions generally exceeded predicted
ground motions based on many of the available attenuation curves; and 2) topographic
site effects resulted in local amplification of bedrock motion.
3.0 SITE CONDITIONS
The following statements summarize the site-specific conditions which, to varying
degrees, influence the geotechnical suitability for the proposed parking structure on
Miller A venue.
3.1 Surface Conditions
The site has dimensions of approximately 140 feet by 150 feet, and is presently being
used for at grade public parking. The site is bordered to the north by Miller Avenue, to
the east by a 25-foot wide by 140-foot long single family residence lot (which we
understand may be demolished and the site included in the project), to the south by
Fourth Lane, and by a multi-family residential building to the west (Figure 3). The site
is covered with asphaltic concrete pavement with concrete curbs, and a landscaped
parking island. Vegetation in the parking island consists of several mature trees and
bushes.
3.2 Subsurface Conditions
We explored the subsurface conditions at the site by means of 5 exploratory borings. We
logged the cuttings and samples from the borings to assist us in determining the site
stratigraphy. Representative soil materials obtained from the borings were selected for
laboratory testing.
6
Exploratory borings were located in the vicinity of the proposed new structure. In the
borings, we generally encountered alluvial soil materials consisting of sandy silt, silty
sand, sandy clay, sand, clayey sand, and silty clay, overlying Franciscan Complex
Greenstone bedrock which extended to the depths explored. Generally, we classified
the material as either very stiff (cohesive materials) or dense (cohesionless materials)
with a few layers of medium dense (cohesionless materials); Boring CSA/SD-5 we
encountered medium dense material between a depth of roughly 14 and 18.5 feet.
Detailed logs of our exploratory borings, and the results of the laboratory tests
performed on representative samples are presented in Appendies A and B, respectively.
The results of our laboratory testing (Appendix B) indicate that the near-surface clayey
soil material at the site has a low expansion potential and has relatively moderate to
high shear strength.
The subsurface distribution of earth materials beneath the existing site and proposed
building is depicted on the Engineering Geologic Cross Section 1-1' (Figure 3).
3.3 Groundwater Conditions
During drilling, we encountered groundwater in Borings CSA/SD-l at depths of 36.0
feet. It should be understood that groundwater levels fluctuate seasonally, and that
higher levels may occur at other times and/or locations.
4.0 POTENTIAL GEOTECHNICAL HAZARDS
In the following section, we list identified potential geotechnical hazards at the proposed
site, along with the corresponding degrees of determined potential risk, and
recommendations for possible mitigation measures.
4.1 Seismic Hazards
Seismic ground shaking associated with a large earthquake on either the San Andreas,
San Gregorio or Hayward fault is considered to be a moderate to high potential hazard
7
in the project area. Peak ground accelerations up to O.60g should be anticipated at the
site (see report Section 2.2).
No active faults have been recognized on, or mapped through, the subject property.
Thus, the potential for surface faulting and ground rupture on the property is
considered to be low.
Seismically-induced ground failure mechanisms include: lateral spreading, landsliding,
liquefaction, lurching, and differential compaction. Due to the relatively very stiff and
dense subsurface materials combined with the significant depth to groundwater, the
potentials for lateral spreading, landsliding, liquefaction, and lurching is considered to
be low. However, the potential for differential densification of one or two medium
dense sandy layers underlying the site is considered to be moderate due to the medium
dense sands encountered in Boring CSA/SD-5.
We calculated that the conservative total or differential settlement of the ground surface
due to dynamic densification of the sandy material could be up to 1 inch (using a
conservative, simplified version of the procedure outlined by Tokimatsu and Seed,
1987). Due to the low potential for dynamic densification to occur combined with the
apparent isolated layer of medium dense sands, we conclude that specific mitigation for
dynamic densification is not required.
4.2 Settlement Behavior
Based on our analysis, there is a moderate potential that the alluvial soil materials
encountered in the borings will compress under the allowable bearing capacity static
building loads. Compression of the alluvium could result in relatively minor amounts
of differential foundation movement.
Although a shallow footing could provide satisfactory support; in the event that the
estimated settlements are too large, we have provided alternative recommendations for
supporting the new parking structure on cast-in-place drilled piers (deep foundations).
For our static settlement calculations, we assumed that a shallow foundation supported
structure would have a dead-plus-long-term-live-load of approximately 2,750 pounds
per square foot (psf) (equal to the allowable bearing capacity). Based on this
8
assumption, we estimate that total static settlement for a shallow foundation supported
structure should be roughly 1 inch, and differential settlements should be less than 1/2
inch across the bottom of the building.
A cast-in-place deep pier foundation system should experience total and differential
settlements between piers of less than 1/2 inch due to static loading. Assuming that the
piers will extend at least to a depth of 26 feet (7-1/2 feet below the identified zone of
sandy soil susceptible to dynamic densification), a cast-in-place deep pier foundation
system should eliminate the potential for significant settlement due to dynamic
densification.
4.3 Cut and Fill Slope Stability
Likely site grading includes an excavation for the planned subsurface parking. Based on
the results of our field reconnaissance of the area, and the apparent shear strength of the
material encountered in the borings, there is moderate potential that temporarily un-
braced cut slopes could creep, slough and/or erode. We are not aware of any planned
fill slopes for the project. We assume that a retaining wall will support the outer edge of
the planned subsurface section of the parking structure. Suitable shoring should be
constructed to brace temporary cuts and reduce the potential for off-site distress to
adjacent structures and utilities. As an alternative, temporary cuts should be setback a
suitable distance from the property line.
4.4 Sulfate Attack on Concrete
The soils encountered in the borings appear to be have moderate to low cohesion, low
gypsum content, and consequently should have a low to moderate potential for concrete
sulfate attack. However, we recommend that corrosivity testing be completed on the
near surface site soils prior to completing the concrete mix design in order to confirm the
estimated low potential for corrosivity to metallic and concrete structures.
9
4.5 Surficial Erosion
Based on our experience, the alluvial material has a moderate to high susceptibility to
surficial erosion. To mitigate this potential, we have provided recommendations for
erosion control and surface drainage collection.
5.0 RECOMMENDA nONS
5.1 Foundation Design Considerations
The principal factors affecting foundation type selection include the following:
acceptable magnitudes of differential settlement from static loading; and the isolated
zone of medium dense sand encountered in Boring CSAjSD-5, associated potential for
dynamic densification and minor differential settlement. The advantages of deep
foundations include: 1) deep foundations extending below the zone of dynamic
densification will not be susceptible to minor differential settlement; and 2) under static
loading, deep foundations will tend to settle less than shallow foundations. If these
advantages of a deep foundation are not deemed significant enough to the Oty to justify
potential cost increases associated with the deep foundations, then the proposed parking
structure could be supported on shallow foundations. However, if these advantages are
deemed important by the City, then we recommend that the parking structure be
supported on a deep (pier and grade beam) foundation.
Recommendations for deep foundations, and shallow foundations are presented in the
following section of this report.
5.2 Foundation Type and Design Criteria
5.2.1 Cast-in-Place Piers - The planned parking structure can be supported by
a reinforced concrete pier and grade beam foundation systems. The drilled, cast-in-
place piers should derive vertical support from skin friction in firm natural alluvial
material as determined in the field by the project geotechnical engineer at the time of
construction. Piers should be sized according to the following criteria:
10
Vertical Capacity - minimum three (3) pier diameter spacing
Minimum pier diameter......................................................... 18 inches
Minimum pier penetration.................................................... Elevation 32
(At least 7-1/2 feet below medium dense sand layer)
Allowable adhesion (skin friction), for reinforced concrete dead plus live loads:
o to 2 feet into soil material.................................................... 0 psf
Below 2 feet in soil material................................................... 600 psf
Lateral Passive Resistance - piers [equivalent fluid pressure applied over an
effective width of two (2) pier diameters]
o to 2 feet in soil material....................................................... 0 pef
Below 2 feet in soil material................................................... 450 pef
The above adhesion value (skin friction) can be increased by 1/3 for seismic loading and
should be decreased by 1/2 for uplift. The upper portion of the piers should be formed
to create vertical surfaces, and IImushroomingll of pier tops and overpours around grade
beams should be prevented. Drilled pier holes should be machine cleaned of all loose
material prior to the placement of steel and concrete. Piers should be steel reinforced
with a cage including a minimum of 4, No.5 bars vertical (with greater reinforcement as
required by the project Structural Engineer). Casing could be necessary to prevent the
cohesionless materials encountered in our borings from caving.
If water is present in the pier holes, prior to placing concrete, the water should be
pumped out until the pier holes are dry, or the concrete should be poured by tremie
methods to displace the water.
All piers should be connected at their tops by continuous grade beams. The grade
beams should be embedded at least 9 inches below pad grade.
5.2.2 Shallow Foundation - If a shallow foundation system is selected, the
footings should be at least 24 inches wide, and founded at least 24 inches below the
lowest adjacent final grade. The footings should be designed for an allowable bearing
capacity of 2,750 pounds per square foot (psf) for dead-plus-live loads, and 4,125 psf
11
under total loads, including wind or seismic forces. Resistance to lateral loads should be
computed using a concrete/soil base friction coefficient of 0.35 and 400 pef equivalent
fluid passive resistance beginning below an embedment depth of 1 foot.
5.2 Site Grading
Based on our field investigation, grading excavations should be within the capabilities of
moderate conventional excavation equipment (Le., excavators, dozers and drill rigs) and
should not require significant dewatering to the anticipated depths of excavation,
provided that construction takes place during the dry season. The sandy material
encountered in the borings could require casing to prevent caving and sloughing during
pier drilling.
It should be noted that we encountered refusal in one of the small-diameter borings
(CSA/SD-4) at depth in greenstone bedrock, consequently heavy drilling equipment will
be necessary for piers extending into the bedrock.
5.3.1 Site Preparation - All loose material, vegetation, asphaltic concrete,
abandoned foundations, debris, and other deleterious material should be stripped and
removed from the areas to be developed. This material should be disposed of in a
suitable location off site or stored on site for later use in landscaping.
Excavation should proceed as necessary for planned grades. Soft and/or yielding
materials in the location of the planned structures should be over-excavated and
replaced with compacted fill. Areas to be filled should be scarified to at least an 8-inch
depth, moisture conditioned to at least optimum moisture content and compacted to at
least 90 percent relative compaction based on ASTM D-1557-00.
Following site preparation, it maybe necessary to place fill in order to achieve the
necessary sub grade elevation. The total amount of material removed during site
preparation could range between 4 and 12 inches or more, but the actual amount can
only be determined during construction.
5.3.2 Compacted Fill - The excavated on-site materials can be re-used as
compacted fill provided they are free of organic matter and material larger than 4 inches
in diameter. Imported fill should be free of organic material; it should contain no
12
material larger than 4 inches and should have a plasticity index of less than 16. The fill
should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness, moisture
conditioned to at least optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95 percent
relative compaction beneath structures and 18 inches below the aggregate base rock for
pavements, and 90 percent relative compaction elsewhere.
5.3.3 Cut Slope Design - Any new permanent cut slopes should not exceed an
inclination of 2 horizontal to 1 vertical (2:1) in alluvium, without detailed geotechnical
studies to evaluate their stability.
During the dry season, temporary cut slopes of 1.75 horizontal to 1 vertical (1:1) in
alluvium, should be satisfactory for construction purposes, provided that they are
inspected and approved by our field representative at the time of construction.
5.3.4 Utility Trench Backfill - Utility trenches should be backfilled with soil
that meets the requirements for compacted fill, provided that bedding materials for
pipes are in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations. The backfill should
be compacted to a minimum of 90% of maximum dry density in non-structural areas
and a minimum of 95% of maximum dry density beneath structures and in the upper 18
inches of pavement subgrades. Equipment and methods should be used that are suitable
for work in confined areas without damaging the conduits or the walls.
Special care should be taken to ensure that utility trenches which extend under the
perimeter footing are backfilled with clayey (low permeability) soils for a distance of 3
feet in both directions.
5.3.5 Pavement/Garage Slab Sub grade Preparation - After general compaction
and compaction of the utility trench backfills, the pavement sub grade surface should be
checked for yielding areas by proof-rolling with a loaded water truck or equivalent.
Any yielding areas should be excavated and replaced with compacted fill. Then the
upper 18 inches should be moisture conditioned to at least optimum moisture content,
and the soil should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction.
13
5.4 Slabs-on-Grade and Concrete Flatwork
Slabs-on-grade and concrete flatwork sub grades should be prepared as recommended in
Site Grading, above. The concrete flatwork (sidewalks and patios) should be supported
on at least 6 inches of non-expansive, moist, compacted fill. Slabs and flatwork should
be steel reinforced with at least No.4 bars at 24-inch centers each way, and provided
with crack control joints at maximum 10 feet on centers. Slab-on-grade driveways
should be at least 6 inches thick.
5.5 Retaining Wall Design
The following section provides our recommendations for both the structure retaining
walls and the site retaining walls.
Retaining walls should be designed to resist an equivalent active fluid pressure of 40 pcf
for horizontal backfill (only type of backfill assumed). The active lateral fluid pressure
should be increased by 50% for walls that are restrained from rotation (building walls).
For seismic loading apply a dynamic resultant force acting at 0.6H from the bottom of
the wall and equal to an equivalent fluid pressure of 15H2 pcf. The lateral loads on the
retaining wall can be resisted by passive pressures of 400 pcf equivalent fluid pressure
for wall foundations bearing at least 1 foot below adjacent ground surface (neglect the
upper foot for passive resistance) and a coefficient of friction equal to 0.35.
5.5.1 Pier Supported Retaining Walls - Pier foundations should be designed
according to the Foundation Design Criteria provided above. The retaining walls that
are free to rotate should be designed to resist an active lateral fluid pressure of 40
pounds per cubic foot (pcf) for horizontal backfill. The above active lateral fluid
pressures should be increased by 50% for walls that are restrained from rotation
(building walls). The lateral loads on the retaining wall can be resisted by passive
pressure against the side of the piers using the lateral passive resistance provided in
Cast-in-Place Piers foundation design criteria, above. For seismic loading apply a
dynamic resultant force acting at 0.6H from the bottom of the wall and equal to an
equivalent fluid pressure of 15H2 pcf (where H is the height of the wall).
14
If walls are planned adjacent to ground level parking or used to support the driveway
entrance, a traffic surcharge of 100 psf should be included and applied against the top 10
feet of the retaining wall.
5.5.2 Footing Supported Retaining Walls - Footings should be designed
according to the Foundation Design Criteria provided above. Site retaining walls free to
rotate should be designed to resist an active lateral fluid pressure of 40 pounds per cubic
foot (pcf). The above active lateral fluid pressures should be increased by 50% for walls
that are restrained from rotation (building walls). The resistance to lateral loads should
be computed using the lateral passive resistance provided in Shallow Foundation design
criteria, above. If additional lateral resistance is required, and as an alternative to
excavating a deep, continuous foundation key, shallow piers can be used to support the
wall, using the same passive resistance criteria acting over two pier diameters.
For seismic loading apply a dynamic resultant force acting at 0.6H from the bottom of
the wall and equal to an equivalent fluid pressure of 15H2 pd (where H is the height of
the wall).
If walls are planned adjacent to ground level parking or used to support the driveway
entrance, a traffic surcharge of 100 psf should be included and applied against the top 10
feet of the retaining wall.
Lower terraced walls should to be designed to resist the combined heights of all walls
that are bearing within an imaginary l(H):l(V) line extended up from their base.
5.5.3 Backdrain - Backdrains should be constructed behind all retaining walls.
The backdrain should be a minimum 12-inch wide continuous blanket of either Caltrans
Class 2 Permeable Material or 3/4-inch x 1/2-inch clean crush drainrock enclosed in
Mirafi 140N (or approved equivalent) filter fabric, and extended to within 1 to 1-1/2 feet
of the ground surface where an impervious fill and/or asphaltic concrete cap should be
placed. A minimum 4-inch diameter PVC Schedule 40 perforated drain pipe should be
placed near the bottom of the drainrock (perforations down), surrounded by a minimum
of 4 inches of drainrock with at least 2 inches of drainrock underlying the pipe. All
backdraL.'1 pipes should be sloped to drain at a minimum of 1/2 percent and collected in
4-inch diameter non-perforated Schedule 40 PVC pipes which are sloped a minimum of
15
16
While no R-value tests were performed, based on a conservatively assumed (for the site
soil conditions) R-value of 10, and an assumed Traffic Index (TI) of S (corresponding to
relatively light loading and service vehicle use), we recommend that the pavement
section should consist of a minimum of 3 inches thickness of asphaltic concrete
5.8 Pavement Design
A peak ground acceleration of O.SOg to 0.60g should be anticipated for design purposes.
With respect to the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) seismic design criteria, the San
Andreas fault should be assumed as the controlling fault, and the following values
should be used for design: Seismic Coefficients Ca and Cv of 0.54 (based on a Na of 1.2)
and 1.04 (based on a Nv of 1.6), respectively.
5.7 Seismic Design
Where concrete curbs are used to isolate landscaping in or adjacent to the pavement
areas, we recommend that the curb extend a minimum of 8 inches into the low
permeable material below the base rock to provide a barrier against the migration of
landscape water into the pavement section.
Because of the detrimental influence of water as it interacts with soil, foundations,
pavements, and cut and fill slopes, it is important that surface water be controlled in the
project area. Grades should be sloped to drain at a minimum of 2% for a distance of at
least 10 feet out from structures with runoff directed into an appropriate catch
basin/storm drain system. Unless draining onto well-drained (away from the structure)
impervious surfaces, all roof runoff should be collected in gutters with downspouts tied
into buried tightline pipes (PVC Schedule 40) that also discharge into a catch
basin/storm drain. The catch basin/storm drain should discharge into the City storm
drainage system or the paved access road, well downslope of the structures.
5.6 Drainage
2 percent and discharged into the site or City storm drainage system. The exterior
retaining wall backdrains should also discharge to a suitable location away from
structures, or onto an impermeable surface.
underlain by a minimum of 6 inches thickness of virgin (non-recycled) aggregate base
rock compacted to a minimum of 9S% of maximum dry density (ASTM D1S57-00). The
pavement subgrade should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, moisture conditioned to
greater than optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90 percent relative
compaction (ASTM DIS57-00) to form an unyielding surface. At the City's request an R-
value could be performed to confirm the assumption.
Asphaltic concrete should be placed and compacted in accordance with the
requirements of Section 39 of the Caltrans Standard Specifications; aggregate base rock
should conform to the provisions of Section 26 (Caltrans) for 3/4-inch maximum Class 2
Aggregate Base.
5.9 Erosion Control
All graded slopes higher than eight (8) feet, and steeper than 20 percent (5:1) should be
covered with a securely staked erosion control blanket consisting of straw and coconut
fiber and treated with hydroseed prior to exposure to rain. All other grounds disturbed
by construction activities should be treated with hydroseed prior to exposure to rain.
An approved Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) should be implemented
in accordance with Caltrans Standard Specifications. If freshly graded slopes are
exposed to rain, this plan should include properly keyed and staked straw bale barriers
at the base of the slopes higher than eight feet and steeper than 20 percent.
5.10 Technical Review
Supplemental geotechnical design recommendations should be provided by our firm
based on specific design needs developed by the other project design professionals. This
report, and any supplemental recommendations, should be reviewed by the contractor
as part of the bid process. It is strongly recommended that no construction be started
nor grading undertaken until the final drawings, specifications, and calculations have
been reviewed and approved in writing by a representative of our firm.
17
18
This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or
of his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained
herein are called the attention of the project engineer and incorporated into the plans.
Furthermore, it is also the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative, to ensure
that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field.
Any recommendations and/or design criteria presented in this report are contingent
upon our firm being retained to review the final drawings and specifications, to be
consulted when any questions arise with regard to the recommendations contained
herein, and to provide testing and inspection services for earthwork and construction
operations. Unanticipated soil and geologic conditions are commonly encountered
during construction which cannot be fully determined from existing exposures or by
limited subsurface investigation. Such conditions may require additional expenditures
during construction to obtain a properly constructed project. Some contingency fund is
recommended to accommodate these possible extra costs.
Our services consist of professional opinions and recommendations made in accordance
with generally accepted engineering geology and geotechnical engineering principles
and practices. No warranty, expressed or implied, or merchantability of fitness, is made
or intended in connection with our work, by the proposal for consulting or other
services, or by the furnishing of oral or written reports or findings. The investigation
was performed and this report prepared for the exclusive use of the client, and for
specific application to proposed site development as outlined in the body of the report.
6.0 INVESTIGA nON LIMITATIONS
All excavations including foundations and pier drilling should be inspected by a
representative of our firm prior to placing rebar, backfilling, and/or pouring concrete
foundations. Any grading should also be inspected and tested as appropriate to confirm
adequate stripping, sub grade preparation, and compaction. Our office should be
contacted with a minimum of 48 hours advance notice of construction activities
requiring inspection and/or testing services.
5.11 Earthwork Construction Inspection and Testing
7.0 REFERENCES
7.1 Documents/Maps
Blake, T. F., 1989, EQFAULT, FRISK, UBCSEIS, LIQUEFY2: A Computer Program for
the Deterministic Prediction of Peak Horizontal Acceleration from Digitized
California Faults; A Computer Program for the Probabilistic Prediction of Peak
Horizontal Acceleration from Digitized California Faults; Computation of 1997
UBC Seismic Design Parameters; A computer program for the determination of
liquefiable soils. Windows Versions, Users Manual, July, 1989, updated 2004.
Bonilla, M.G., 1971, Preliminary Geologic Map of the San Francisco south quadrangle
and part of the Hunter's Point quadrangle, California: United States Geological
Survey (USGS) Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-311, 2 sheets, scale 1:24000.
Bonilla, M,G., 1965, Geologic Map of the San Francisco South Quadrangle, California:
United States Geological Survey (USGS) 1 sheet, scale 1:20000.
Bowles, J.E., Foundation Analysis and Design, Third Edition, 1982, McGraw-Hill
Book Company.
Bozorgnia, Y., Campbell, K. W. and Niazi, M. 1999, Vertical Ground Motion:
Characteristics, Relationships with Horizontal Component, and Building Code
Implications, Proceedings of the SMIP99 Seminar of Strong Motion Data, Oakland,
California.
California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1997, Guidelines for Evaluating and
Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California: Special Publication 117.
California Division of Mines and Geology, 1996, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard
Assessment For The State Of California: CDMG Open-File Report 96-08.
Lawson, A.c. (chairman), 1908, The California earthquake of April 1906-report of the
state earthquake investigation commission: Carnegie Institution of Washington
publication no. 87, vol. 1, part 1.
Schrnertmann, J.H., Static Cone To Compute Static Settlement over Sand Bases, Journal
of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, ASCE, Vol. 96, No. SM3, 1976.
19
20
u. S. Department of the Navy, 1982, Design Manual Soil Mechanics, Foundations, and
Earth Structures, NA VFAC DM-7.2.
Tokimatsu, K. and Seed, H. B., 1987, Evaluation of settlements in sands due to
earthquake shaking: Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, v. 113, p. 861-878.
Tomlinson, M.J., Pile Design and Construction Practice, Third Edition, A Viewpoint
Publication, 1987.
Seed, H. B. and Idriss, 1. M., 1982, Ground motions and soil liquefaction during
earthquakes: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Monograph No, S, 134
p.
Southern California Earthquake Center University of Southern California,
Recommended Procedures For Implementation of DMG Special Publication
117 Guidelines For Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction in California.
APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATION
We explored subsurface conditions at the site of the planned parking structure in South
San Francisco, California on January 2S and 26, by means of five borings drilled to
depths of 26-1/2 to Sl-l/2 feet using truck-mounted, hollow stern auger equipment. The
location of the borings is shown on Figure 3. The engineering geologist who logged the
borings visually classified the soils in accordance with ASTM D-2487. We obtained
relatively undisturbed samples of the materials encountered at selected depths. These
samples were obtained in brass liners that were 2.5 inches in outside diameter and 6
inches long; the liners were inside a 3-inch diameter modified split-barrel California
Sampler. The sampler was driven with a 140-pound hammer that was raised by an
automatic hammer and allowed to freely fall about 30 inches. We also performed
Standard Penetration Tests at selected depths. The depths of the sampling (and
penetration testing) are shown on the boring logs. The bold number at the conclusion of
the sampling interval represents the corrected blow count from a modified California
sampler to Standard Penetration Test value accomplished by multiplying the blow count
by 0.68.
Descriptive logs of the borings are presented in this appendix. These logs depict our
interpretation of the subsurface conditions at the dates and locations indicated, based on
representative samples collected at roughly a five-foot sampling intervals. It is. not
warranted that they are representative of subsurface conditions at other times and
locations. The contacts on the logs represent the approximate boundaries between earth
materials, and the transitions between these materials may be gradual.
A-1
B-1
1. Detailed soil description ASTM D 2487;
2. Natural moisture content of the soil ASTM D 2216;
3. In-situ density of the soil (wet and dry);
4. Triaxial shear strength testing ASTM D 2850;
S. Atterberg limits determination, ASTM D 4318; and
6. Percent minus the No. 200 sieve, ASTM D 1140.
The following laboratory tests were performed as part of this investigation:
The laboratory analysis performed for the site consisted of limited testing of the
principal soil types sampled during the field investigation to evaluate index properties
and strength parameters of subsurface materials. The soil descriptions and the field and
laboratory test results were used to assign parameters to the various materials at the site.
The results of the laboratory testing program are presented on the boring logs and in
this appendix (Table B-1, and Figure B-1).
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
PROPOSED
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
DOWNTOWN PARKING GARAGE
January 30,2008
Prepared for: City of South San Francisco
Prepared by: Mark D. Crane, P.E.
California Registered Traffic Engineer (#1381)
CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
2621 E. Wind rim Court
Elk Grove, CA 95758
(916) 647-3406
]/30/08 South San Francisco Downtown Parking Garage Page]
MARK D, CRANE, P,E. . CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
3. Large, easy-to-read signs should be employed on the streets in downtown South San
Francisco providing directions to the new garage.
2. All six analyzed intersections along either Grand Avenue or Miller Avenue in downtown
South San Francisco are now operating at acceptable levels of service during both the
lunchtime and PM commute peak traffic hours. The new as well as redistributed existing
traffic in the downtown area accessing the proposed garage would not be expected to
produce any significant operational changes to any intersection.
1. The proposed garage, if successful, would be expected to generate about 145 new
inbound and l45 new outbound vehicles to/from the project site during the lunchtime
peak traffic hour, with about 105 new inbound and 105 new outbound vehicles to/from
the project site during the evening commute peak traffic hour. These vehicles are in
addition to the existing 30 inbound/outbound midday peak hour and 20
inbound/outbound PM peak hour vehicles now accessing the surface lot on the project
site, that would transfer to the new garage.
III. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The City of South San Francisco is proposing to build a multi-story parking garage in the
downtown section of the City that would contain up to 256 parking stalls. The garage would be
built on the site of an existing 60-space surface parking lot owned by the City, providing a net
increase of 196 parking spaces downtown. The garage would be located on the south side of
Miller Avenue about midway between Linden Avenue and Maple Avenue and would extend to
the 4th Lane Alley (see Figure 1). Inbound and outbound access to the garage would only be
provided from Miller Avenue: no access would be provided to the 4th Lane Alley. In addition
to the new parking spaces, the garage would also have up to 13,700 square feet of net new retail
commercial use along the project's first floor Miller Avenue frontage.
II. PROPOSED PROJECT
This study has been prepared at the request of the City of South San Francisco to determine
circulation impacts in downtown South San Francisco resulting from operation of a proposed
256-space multi-story parking garage along Miller A venue (between Linden A venue and Maple
Avenue). Midday (lunchtime) and evening commute period traffic counts have been conducted
at three major intersections along Miller Avenue and at three major intersections along Grand
Avenue in the vicinity of the proposed garage, Existing operating conditions have then been
determined at each location. The change in downtown circulation patterns have been projected
with the opening of the garage and resultant operating conditions determined at the six analysis
intersections for midday and evening commute conditions. Finally, assessment has been made of
any improvement needs along Miller A venue at the garage access location.
I. INTRODUCTION
4. Incentives should be provided to encourage shoppers/restaurant patrons/business people
to park in the new garage.
5. Bright lighting and security should be top priority items to maintain continued use of the
new garage.
6, A short (50- to 75-foot-long) left turn lane should be provided on the westbound Miller
A venue approach to the garage entrance. This will result in the loss of some on-street
parking spaces in the immediate vicinity of the turn lane.
7. On-street parking should be prohibited on either side of the project's Miller Avenue
driveway in order to provide acceptable sight lines assuming prevailing vehicle speeds on
Miller A venue remain at least 35 miles per hour.
IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS
City Planning and Engineering staff selected six major intersections in the downtown area to
determine impacts from the revised circulation patterns due to the new garage. Locations were:
Grand Avenue/Airport Boulevard (signal)
Grand Avenue/Linden Avenue (signal)
Grand Avenue/Maple Avenue (signal)
Miller Avenue/Airport Boulevard-U.S.lOI Southbound Off-Ramp (signal)
Miller Avenue/Linden Avenue (signal
Miller Avenue/Maple Avenue (all-way-stop)
A. VOLUMES
Weekday midday (noon to 2:00 PM) and evening commute (4:00 to 6:00 PM) traffic counts were
conducted by Crane Transportation Group at each of the six analysis intersections in January
2007 (with two exceptions). Evening commute counts at the Grand Avenue/Airport Boulevard
and Miller Avenue/Airport Boulevard intersections were conducted in December 2005 for initial
use in the Genentech Master EIR. The overall peak traffic hours for the system of six
intersections were determined to be 12: 15 to I: 15 PM and 5:00 to 6:00 PM. Volumes for these
time periods are presented in Figures 2 and 3, respectively. In addition to vehicular traffic,
pedestrian crossings were also tabulated at most intersections and are presented in Figures 4 and
5 for the 12:15 to 1:15 PM and 5:00 to 6:00 PM periods. Currently, Miller Avenue in the
vicinity of the proposed garage entrance has a two-way volume of about 480 vehicles per hour
(vph) between 12:15 and 1:15 PM and a two-way volume of595 vehicles per hour between 5:00
and 6:00 PM.
]/30/08 South San Francisco Downtown Parking Garage Page 2
MARK D. CRANE, P.E. . CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
1/30108 South San Francisco Downtown Parking Garage Page 3
MARK D, CRANE, P,E, . CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
Table 1 shows that all analyzed intersections are currently operating at acceptable levels of
service (LOS B or C) during both the midday and evening commute peak traffic hours. Figure 6
provides a schematic presentation of approach lanes and control at each of the six analysis
intersections.
3. Existing Operation
The City of South San Francisco considers Level of Service D (LOS D) to be the poorest
acceptable operation for signalized and all-way-stop intersections, with LOS E the poorest
acceptable operation for unsignalized city street intersection turn movements. The City has no
standards for turn movements from private driveways.
2. Minimum Acceptable Standards
Unsignalized Intersections. Unsignalized intersection operation is also typically graded using
the Level of Service A through F scale. LOS ratings for all-way stop intersections are
determined using a methodology outlined in the year 2000 TRB Highway Capacity Manual.
Under this methodology, all-way stop intersections receive one LOS designation reflecting
operation of the entire intersection. Average control delay values are also calculated.
lntersections with side streets only stop sign controlled (two-way stop control) are also evaluated
using the LOS and average control delay scales using a methodology outlined in the year 2000
TRB Highway Capacity Manual. However, unlike signalized or all-way stop analysis where the
LOS and control delay designations only pertain to the entire intersection, in side street stop sign
control analysis LOS and delay designations are computed for only the stop sign controlled
approaches or individual turn and through movements. The Appendix provides greater detail
about unsignalized analysis methodologies.
Signalized Intersections. Intersections, rather than roadway segments between intersections, are
almost always the capacity controlling locations for any circulation system. Signalized
intersection operation is graded based upon two different scales. The fIrst scale employs a
grading system called Level of Service (LOS) which ranges from Level A, indicating
uncongested flow and minimum delay to drivers, down to Level F, indicating signifIcant
congestion and delay on most or all intersection approaches. The Level of Service scale is also
associated with a control delay tabulation (year 2000 Transportation Research Board [TRB]
Highway Capacity Manual [HCM] operations method) at each intersection. The control delay
designation allows a more detailed examination of the impacts of a particular project. Greater
detail regarding the LOS/control delay relationship is provided in the Appendix.
1. Methodology
B. INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
V. CHANGE IN DOWNTOWN TRAFFIC VOLUMES DUE TO
PROPOSED GARAGE
The proposed downtown garage will slightly increase volumes as well as change traffic flow
patterns on downtown streets. Projections regarding expected changes in traffic flow have been
worked out in consultation with City Planning and Engineering staff and are presented below in
summary format.
A. ANAL YSIS INPUT TO DETERMINE TRAFFIC FLOW IMP ACTS DUE
TO THE NEW DOWNTOWN GARAGE
.
Traffic due to the 13,700 square feet of retail commercial activity on the ground floor of the
garage will all be newly added to downtown streets.
.
Percent parking occupancy of the new garage (excluding traffic from the new
retail/commercial uses) will be the same as that in the existing surface lot on the project site.
Based upon surveys by City staff of parking activity in the existing 60-space lot (see
Table 2), up to 85 percent of the spaces are occupied during lunchtime and up to 60 percent
are occupied at 5 :00 PM.
.
There will not be a 100 percent turnover of occupied spaces at the garage during any given
hour. A 65 to 70 percent turnover rate of occupied spaces has been utilized for analysis
purposes,
.
Traffic activity associated with the existing 60-space lot on the project site is already
occurring and part of the traffic count program recently conducted. Thus, the proposed
garage will produce a net new circulation impact from an increase of 196 spaces on the
project site (256 spaces in the proposed garage minus 60 existing spaces).
.
There will be a charge for parking in the garage, as there is today for parking in the surface
lot on the project site. The exact charge is being developed by City staff.
.
Ten percent of the new parking demand at the garage (in addition to the new demand from
the 13,700 square feet ofretail/commercial activity) will be due to drivers newly attracted to
the downtown area due to greater ease of finding parking. The remaining 90 percent of the
new parking demand at the garage will come from drivers already on the downtown roadway
system that are now parking on-street or in other City parking lots. The new lot, when used,
will eliminate some congestion by reducing the amount of driving around the block looking
for parking along or as close as possible to Grand A venue.
.
The vast majority of demand to park in the new garage will come from existing drivers
parking along Grand Avenue and Miller Avenue as well as Maple and Linden avenues north
of Grand Avenue.
.
Signing will be provided in the downtown area directing drivers to the new garage.
1/30/08 South San Francisco Downtown Parking Garage Page 4
MARK D. CRANE, P,E. . CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
1/30/08 South San Francisco Downtown Parking Garage Page 5
MARK D. CRANE, P,E. . CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
Source: Crane Transportation Group
MIDDAY EVENING COMMUTE
PEAK HOUR TRIPS PEAK HOUR TRIPS
ACTIVITY IN OUT IN OUT
Net New Spaces Turning 117 117 77 77
Over Each Hour
New Retail/Commercial 25 25 25 25
Uses
Total New Trips To/From l42 142 102 102
Proiect Site
Existing Surface Lot Trips 30 30 20 20
Transferring to New Garage
Total Trips Entering & In In 122 122
Leaving New Garage
SUMMARY OF GARAGE TOTAL TRIP GENERATION
MIDDAY EVENING COMMUTE
PEAK HOUR PEAK HOUR
Maximum Net New Spaces 85% x 196 = 167 60% x 196 = 118
Occupied (excluding new
retail)
Net New Occupied Spaces 70% x 117 = 117 65% x 118 = 77
Turning Over Each Hour
(Excluding New Retail)
Source: Crane Transportation Group
SUMMARY OF GARAGE TRIP GENERATION
DUE ONLY TO USE OF NET NEW PARKING SPACES WITHIN GARAGE
256
~
196
=
Proposed Garage Total Spaces
Existing Surface Lot Spaces on Garage Site
Net New Spaces Due to Parking Garage
C. SUMMARY OF PARKING GARAGE TRIP GENERATION
Table 3 shows that the proposed 13,700 square feet of retail/commercial activity on the fIrst
floor of the garage would be likely to generate about 25 inbound and 25 outbound trips during
the lunchtime peak traffIc hour with a similar number of in and outbound trips expected during
the PM commute peak hour. Trip rates have been taken from the traffIc engineering profession's
standard source of trip rate data, Trip Generation, 7th Edition, by the Institute of Transportation
Engineers, 2003.
B. TRAFFIC GENERATION DUE TO 13,700 SQUARE FEET OF
RETAIL/COMMERCIAL USES IN THE NEW GARAGE
D. RESUL TANT TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITH NEW DOWNTOWN
GARAGE
Figures 7 and 8 present the projected incremental change in traffic at the six analysis
intersections due to the proposed downtown garage during the midday and PM commute peak
traffic hours. Negative numbers for some movements reflect some drivers being diverted
directly to the new garage and away from the pattern of circling the garage block attempting to
find a parking stall along Grand Avenue and then, secondarily, along Maple Avenue, Linden
A venue and Miller A venue, Projections also reflect vehicles leaving the garage by the one exit
(to Miller A venue) and getting back on the local circulation system at one concentrated location
rather than from a wide variety of on-street parking spaces and other City owned public parking
lots. It should be noted that the incremental change in traffic shown does not include the
vehicles currently entering and leaving the surface lot on the site of the garage, Traffic flow
patterns for these vehicles would be expected to change slightly due to the removal of access
to/from the existing parking lot to the 4th Lane Alley. Provision of the new garage would lower
volumes now using 4th Lane Alley.
E. CHANGES TO INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE WITH THE
PROPOSED GARAGE IN OPERATION
Table 1 shows that with the proposed garage in operation there should be only one change in
level of service and only insignificant changes in vehicle delay (of three seconds or less)
compared to existing conditions at all analyzed intersections. Operation would remain an
acceptable LOS B, C or D at all intersections. Delay would tend to decrease slightly at the
Grand Avenue intersections and increase slightly at the Miller Avenue intersections.
F. NEED FOR IMPROVEMENTS AT THE PROJECT ACCESS
INTERSECTION WITH MILLER AVENUE
1. Need for Left Turn Lane on Westbound Miller Avenue Approach to
the Garage Entrance
During the midday peak hour there would be about 90 vehicles making a left turn from Miller
Avenue into the new garage (or about 30 percent of the westbound traffic flow), while during the
PM commute peak hour there would be about 65 vehicles making a left turn into the new garage
(or about 15 percent of the westbound traffic flow).
Left turn lane warrant criteria! for two-lane streets and roads have been developed for situations
where vehicle speeds are greater than those along Miller Avenue (for speeds of 40 miles per hour
or greater, not the 25 to 30 mile per hour speeds along Miller Avenue). If these higher speed
criteria are used, the combination of through and turn volumes at the garage entrance would just
meet the left turn lane warrant criteria during both the midday and PM commute peak traffic
hours. Based upon the likelihood that if the garage is successful, there could be, on average,
more than one vehicle per minute making a left turn into the garage during the midday peak hour
and about one vehicle every minute making a left turn into the garage during the PM peak hour,
I Intersection Channelization Design Guide, TRB Report 279, November 1985.
1/30/08 South San Francisco Downtown Parking Garage Page 6
MARK D. CRANE, P.E. . CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
a short left turn deceleration lane would be highly desirable in order to reduce the potential for
rear-end accidents (see Recommendations in Section VI).
The exact location of the garage driveway connection to Miller Avenue has not yet been
selected. However, if on-street parking along the south side of Miller A venue is allowed too
close to the driveway, on-street vehicles could limit sight lines for drivers leaving the garage to
less than acceptable lengths.
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS
1, Large, easy-to-read signs should be employed on the streets in downtown South San
Francisco providing directions to the new garage.
2. Incentives should be provided to encourage shoppers/restaurant patrons/business people
to park in the new garage.
3. Bright lighting and security should be top priority items to maintain continued use of the
new garage,
4. A short (50- to 75-foot-Iong) left turn lane should be provided on the westbound Miller
A venue approach to the garage entrance. This will result in the loss of some on-street
parking spaces in the immediate vicinity of the turn lane.
5. On-street parking should be prohibited on either side of the project's Miller Avenue
driveway in order to provide acceptable sight lines assuming prevailing vehicle speeds on
Miller A venue remain at least 35 miles per hour.
This Report is intended for presentation and use in its entirety, together with an of its supporting exhibits, schedules, and
appendices. Crane Transportation Group will have no liability for any use of the Report other than in its entirety, such as
providing an excerpt to a third party or quoting a portion of the Report. If you provide a portion of the Report to a third party,
you agree to hold CTG harmless against any liability to such third parties based upon their use of or reliance upon a less than
complete version of the Report.
1/30/08 South San Francisco Downtown Parking Garage Page 7
MARK D, CRANE, P .E. . CRANE TRANSPORT A nON GROUP
Figures
'$.
\ A ~
If)o'' ~
y
"6
't-
I-
Uw
WI-
-,-
00
a:::
A.
/IV Mli/eM
Q)
..
'l"" en
Q) ..
.. u
= Q)
m ....
u: f
a.
>-
."
:l
1i5
u
Ii:
!!!
I-
"
Ol
m
m
Cl
Ol
c:
:i2
m
ll.
c:
~
1::
~
o
o
8
III
.u
c:
m
U:
c:
m
en
.c:
:;
o
en
c..
::J
o
0:::
C)
Z
o
i=
<C
I-
0:::
o
c..
en
z
<C
0:::
I-
W
z
<C
0:::
()
~
<ll ~s
1, 'do
l/'l,o
?- """",,,,
-0
't-
~~
M
~.
~
~I"-
..--
I"-
~~
N
~O
..--
en
~
E
.:!
o
>
..
.!
::s
,~-
J:U)
N m~,,",
~ ,5 > .;.:
~ ~ ~ an
m ';c 0 '!:
u: W::I: N
~~
~
~
A.
~
~
"
~
:E
r~
0')
1"-00
..--Nco
..-- M
~~~
r ~
~t~
O')..--N
~MLO
..--"--
Pll18 J.l0 '.J!tt
~
~J
N
co ~
MCO
~.
11 It sSeJd-f::;
~~ ~~
N ..-- I"-
coco ..-- M COCO N ~~
M ..-- ..-- ~ LO I"-NLO
..--
~~~ Fe;; ~~~ F~
~J ~t~ ~J ~t~ /IV uepun
LO "--N co ~
0') ~ 0 co ~ ..-- 0') N
..-- LOCO ..-- ..-- co NO
~. ~. N"--
Do
:J
0
0::
~ C)
~ <( Z
<( l:: '"0
.... -J l:: 0
(]) .s ~ i=
::::
~ "t C!) c:(
I-
0::
0
~8 ~~ c: Do
:i2 UJ
..-- CO iii Z
I"- ~LO ~~ D- c:(
LOLOLO ~~ ONCO c:
M"--CO ..-- N ~ 0::
0 I-
~~~ ~~~ F~ "E
F~ ~ w
0 Z
/lvaldew 8 c:(
..--J ~t~ Ul 0::
~J ~t~ '0
c: U
t1l
~ u:
0') LO ~ 0 N c: ~
~ coMco I"- M ..- 0 t1l
CO NO')N CO Ul
N T"" .c:
~. '5
~. 0
en
M
CO
..-
(l) JS
~ ~
Ul,O
?- ............,.
"0
-z.
~~
M
~.
co
~..-
N
-l.~
oq-
~ co
M
II)
Q)
E
:s
'0
>
.
fa
--
M = g g
"' C._ n
W .- .c CD
; '1i) Q) O'
=.- >
._ >< 0
U.W.n
:sin
0-
::c
Jl:
fa
Q)
D.
:E
D.
r~
o
!':::oq-oq-
.., N M
..- (0
~+~
rro
~t~
NLO(O
~oq-~
Pll18 J.lod.J/V
~
o
o
..-
~J
o
~~
..-
~.
IIV ssa.Jd,fO
~~ ~~
oq- ..- oq-
oq- 0 oq- M ..- 10 0')
10 M 0') +- N (ONoq- .- ..-
N N
~~~ F~ ~~L. r~
(OJ ~t~ ~j ~t~ "V uapun
"- V
0 -... "-oq-O') CO -... (0 0 oq-
N (010"- ..- CO 0') CO
~. ~. ..-
c..
:J
0
0:::
:::. :::. C>
'<:( c: '<:( Z
.... -J "0 0
~ c::
:S ~ >- i=
""C
~ "t" <.!l ::l <(
Vi
0 I-
~ 0:::
f- 0
-t..ffi Q) c..
~"- 0>
!! VJ
0') m Z
"- 10 CO t!l
coo <0 +-~ O')NCO .-~ 0> <(
c:
NM<O (0 N :52 0:::
~~L. ..- ~~L. lii I-
F~ r~ c..
c: W
3: Z
0
"va/dew "E <(
~t~ ~j ~t~ 3: 0:::
~j 0
Cl (.)
0
0
0') 10 0 -... 0 "- In
-... No 0 "- Ou ~
"- M oq- (0 c:
N..- ..- 10 m
..- ~. N u:
~. c:
m
(/)
.r:;
:;
0
(/)
'$0
~ J ~
~ ""
UlO'~
.,....
"'0
"t-
Q.l
c::C
call!
'C 'iij
- >
l3 ca
"0 III
Q.l-
Q,c
::J
o 0
Z u
~
CI)
..
:s
m
u:
en
CI)
E
:s
'0
>
c
~
.--
ban
-en~
WI CI) ..
c_~
.- v .
"CI)an
.!! a. ~
>< ..
W"N
:s~
o_
X
Jl:
~
CI)
a.
)\
~
"
"
i
Pilla /-10 'JIV
II It sSeJd-f;)
..... I\Ii uapufl
0> 0>
C\I I""-
CD
co
..r
I""- a..
I""-
:J
0 0
N ~
C)
Z
:::. Q
<:( I-
"t:l <(
:::. t:: t:: I-
<:( -J ~ ~
'- :S (!) 0
~ ~ a..
~ c: (/)
~ Z
1Il <(
0-
c: ~
~ I-
0
'E W
~
0 z
0 <(
8
I\Ii a/dew Ul ~
'0 0
c:
1Il
l""- ll: ~
co c:
1Il
III
.r;
S
0
III
'So
\ A ~
~o,~
......
"0
't-
a.>
cD
lUll!
'i:: 'ffi
- :>
:3 lU
"'0 (/l
a.>_
Q.c
o ::J
Z 8
In
Gl
~
::s
m
i:i:
en
Gl
E
::s
-
o
>
C
l'\S
.--
-b 0
..., en 0
c '" ..
.- w CD
~"I
.!! Gl 0
)(a.~
w~1n
::s-
o
::c
~
l'\S
Gl
a.
:E
a.
Pille po 'J!'rI
1111 SS9.1d,{O
v
0
.....
Q')
N
C")
co 1\\1' uapufl
CD .....
CD
I'- .....
.....
I'-
V
0 c..
N =>
0
D::
C)
::. Z
q: 0
::. c: "t:l t-
q: -J c: <(
.... .s ~
Q) t-
:.:: "'I" (!) D::
:a: 0
c..
c: CJ)
32 Z
lii
v D- <(
0 c: D::
;;
C") ..... 0 t-
C") ;:
;; W
N 0 Z
Cl
C") 8 <(
..... 1\\1' aldew (/) D::
co Q') "u ()
..... c:
C") 11l
V ..... U:
..... c: ~
11l
IJ)
..... J::
I'- S
0
co IJ)
.....
0) J ~
'% 'd.
Ul?- " <t
""6
"t-
)~~~ r
-. t ....J ~t PAIS lJO '.1ft!
~ -4
-.
f
At! SS09Jd;(Q
)~ + ~ +
"\7' uepuq
-t ~t -t +
c:
....
::J
a. I-
0 -
- ..c:
(j) Ol
>- ro a:
~ Q)
:> c: Q)
<;( ...!.. Ol ....
:> "0 U5 u..
<;( t: <(
-J t: II
.... ~ II II
(]) .s
::::: "'" C!) (De ~
~
"\7' 09/dew
e
..
C
o
CJ
"
c
C'a
en
(,)
.-
..
..
CD mQ)
Q) .5 E
.. .. 0
:s .!!! Q)
.~ >C C)
U. W Q)
C
C'a
...I
C
o
;
(,)
Q)
l!!
Q)
..
C
a..
::J
o
e:::
C)
z
o
I-
<C
l-
e:::
o
a..
en
z
<C
e:::
I-
w
z
<C
e:::
(J
c
:i!
i;;
a.
c
~
o
"
~
o
D
~
.0
C
III
u:
C
III
rn
.J:
"5
o
rn
~
0)0
OlD
roOl
c.c:
UJ:;:;
o .!Q
CD X
0lQ)
c: Q)
t3:5
.x :5
Q) ,-
0) =:
~ "'C
- Q)
~-
_ ttl
.~ .g
-crn
0) rn
-rottlQ)
,- rn Ol
g ~ ~
rn .~ ro
rn ~ Ol
ro Q) =:
"~ :> Q)
1ijcDC:
L.... ~ Q)
-rn~
0)--
-COO
:JQ)-
u"ea:;
,~ c. 't5
o~fij
c:_...
oc:~
-COrn
lG=:-ro
Eg;::
:J_::=
'O..Qo
> Ol-
Q) c: Q)
lG :g 16
~ttlc.
I- c. rn
*
s
\ A~
\Il~,~
"'0
'7-
1..0
'V CD
00..-
o ..- ("')
.J~~
~-.
("')
e~-y
@~~
OOlD..-
("') ..- ..-
~~~
OOJ
..-
~ ~ ---+
IQ..-
@!;t-y
~~
C;~
~ t:
C/,lO
:::>
@~ r--
t. 00
"It ..-
+- r-- r--oo +- ~e
..- ..-Noo
f~@ ..- ("')
.J~~ f r--
1..0
~ @~J ~t~ PAle /.JO '.J!'r/
("')
00 e~ -.
..- 00 ..- N
@ ("')00 r--("')LO
~. ..- ..- ..-
6>8
/lit sse./dlfQ
~~G)
~ ~@)
y~@
~t~
"-N~
1..000..-
@@~
~@)
*rcm
y*'@)
~
@
*
@C@@ ~~@
1..0 1..0 1..0 -"'-- '" t:;;:\
("') ..- CD .....--- 1..0 \..!)
~ ~ ~ y~@
~t~
*@ '>
~~
~
~
@~J
r6\ '" ---+
IQlD
~-y
lD("')CD
N",N
@~
*
M\@
'Or--
CDCDN
r--NI..O
~~~
@~J
tN\ ~ ---+
\.i)..-
@~-y
t:
....J
J::
~
@\@
Woo@
"'It 1..0
ONOO
..- N
~~~
@~J
8 ~ ---+
8~-y
~~@
~~8
CD
"'It
y
~t~
..-",N
OONO
N"-
@@@
'>
<:(
"0
t:
~
C!>
~~@
~ to@
y~@
~t~
o N
("')ro~
tM\N
\d@
/I'r/ uepun
/I'r/ a/dew
Q)
Ol
ttl
...
ttl
C)
Ol
c:
:;;:
...
ttl
0..
-c
0)
rn
o
c.
o
...
0..
Q)
Ol
ttl
...
ttl
c.9
Ol
c:
:;;:
...
ttl
0..
o
-
0)
:J
"'C
Q)
Ol
rn c:
Q) ro
E ~
:J 0
~~
Ol Q)
c: E
:P Q)
rn ...
.x 0
w c:
>-
"tl
::J
ii5
"
liij
t=
Gl
Cl
I ..
~ CD@) ~
:;2
m
Cl.
c
3:
o
1:
3:
o
D
8
III
"0
c
!!!
u.
c
..
(J)
.r=
'S
o
(J)
en
CI)
E
... ~
u-
CI) 0
.->-
O~J.n
""'-- ~ "t""
,- D. ~ ..
CI)..JIO"t""
~"V:::tab
~ m~ "t""
.~ C ~ ..
u..;CI)N
en D. !:..
';( ~
W ~
"CI
~
:E
a..
~
o
a:::
C)
z
o
I-
et
I-
a:::
o
a..
f/)
z
et
a:::
I-
w
z
et
a:::
u
~
(])c
u<O
co Ol
c..c:
CJ'J+=
c.!!?
<0 x
Ol(])
c: (])
~-E
.- .J::
~~
(]) 3
.J:: "0
-(])
=(6
.~ 'g
"OlIl
(]) III
-roco(])
.- III Ol
g ~ ~
III U co
III E Ol
co (]) :>
U> ;>
IE . ~
co (])
5.... :!::: Q)
-lIl.J::
(])--
"Ouo
:J(])-
13'e Q)
.!: c.. (;j
(5~~
c:_.....
oc:~
"'Colll
:g3rn
Eg::;:
:J _ 3
0.2(5
> Ol-
(]) c: (])
:g ~ ~
.J::coc..
I- c.. III
*
(I) So
~ A~
(/)~,~
1>
't-
v
Vv
LOLO
o NM
~~~
~---.
M
8~-Y
@)~@
vOv
!!)MO)
.J~l.
<oj
fcQ\~ -+
\:I.JN
@~l
*@ :>
~~
Q)
~
0@@
I"-
roo <0
NM<O
.J~~
@~j
fcD\ 0> -+
'2:)1"-
~l
COo..
<: E
c; ~
.,... c::
Cl)O
:J
ro
-+-N
f~@
~
o
o
...-
(0
@f)
I"-vv
!!)NM
...- <0
~~~
8~J
o ~ ---.
...-
~-y
~~@
~ ~tN\
N'0:J
l~@
e~
...-LOO)
<oNv
.J~~
@gj
8~ -+
@~l
~t~
I"-vO>
<O!!)!'--
@@0
~~
l*@
~
@
~[Oe
~~@
l~@
c::
....J
.s
"t
@@rc;)I
"'-O>\.i)
ro
0> N ro
<0 N
.J~~
~t~
No!!)
N...-M
w@@
@~j
Q~ -+
e~,
~~
-+- ~e
f [0
~t~
N!!)<O
~...,.~
@)e
~~
~~e
l~
Pilla /-10 '.J!V
IIV SSeVdA"o
(])
Ol
~
co
~
Ol
c:
:.s2
.....
co
0..
"0
(])
III
o
C-
o
.....
0..
(])
Ol
co
.....
co
<.9
Ol
c:
~
.....
co
0..
o
-
(])
:J
"'C
(])
Ol
III c:
(]) co
E .J::
:J U
om
>1:
Ol (])
.!: E
ii5 ~
'x g
UJ_
/I'if uapun
~t~
(Oov
OO(j)ro
@@@
:>
<:(
"0
c::
~
~
~ffiW
~~@
l~@
~t~
Or--'"
vm<O
@@
/I'if a/dew
>-
"t:l
::l
Ui
lJ
IE
~
l-
I 1:,
~ to@ ~
c
:ii!
i;;
(L
c
~
o
1:
~
o
Cl
8
en
'0
c
C1l
u:
c
C1l
en
or.
:;
o
en
III
Gl
... E
u ~
Gl_
.... 0 -
ClOe>g
Gl D. .. ..
....JI~CQ
~"UO.
z:n ...0
._ z:n... 0
LL. C ..
.- ~ an
"'ca-
.~ Gl
>CD.
W:e
D.
Il.
::)
o
0:::
C>
Z
o
t-
<(
t-
o:::
o
Il.
U)
Z
<(
0:::
t-
W
Z
<(
0:::
o
~
Tables
1/30108 SSF Downtown Parking Garage
Table 1
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
MIDDAY EVENING COMMUTE
PEAK HOUR (12:15-1:15 PM) PEAK HOUR (5:00-6:00 PM)
EXISTING + EXISTING +
INTERSECTION EXISTING CnD GARAGE EXISTING CBD GARAGE
Grand Ave.lAirport Blvd. D-35.3(I) D-35.3 C-34,6 C-34,5
(Signal)
Grand Ave.lLinden Ave. B-15,9(1) 8-15.4 B-15,1 B-14.9
(Signal)
Grand Ave.lMaple Ave. B-IO,8(1) 8-10.6 B-1 1.8 B-1 1.8
(Signal)
Miller Ave.lAirport C-28,Oll) C-28,5 C-24.5 C-24.8
Blvd./U.S,IOI SB Off-Ramp
(Signal)
Miller Ave.lLinden Ave, C-31.3(I) C-32.6 C-32.3 C-33.5
(Signal)
Miller Ave.lMaple Ave, B-IO,2(2) B-IO.6 B-13,8 C-15,6
(All Way Stop)
(I) Signalized level of service-vehicle control delay in seconds.
(2) All way stop level of service-vehicle control delay in seconds,
Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual Analysis Methodology
Compiled by: Crane Transportation Group
1/30/08 SSF Downtown Parking Garage
Table 2
EXISTING PARKING DEMAND
60-SPACE SURFACE LOT TO BE
REPLACED BY PARKING GARAGE
(WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2006)
SPACES PERCENT
TIME UTILIZED UTILIZED
11 :00 AM 35 58%
11 :30 AM 35 58%
12:00 Noon 48 80%
12:30 PM 51 85%
1:00PM 47 78%
1:30PM 38 63%
2:00 PM 41 68%
2:30 PM 38 63%
3:00 PM 34 57%
3:30 PM 32 53%
4:00 PM 31 52%
4:30 PM 34 57%
5:00 PM 33 55%
5:30 PM 32 53%
6:00 PM 31 52%
6:30 PM 30 50%
7:00 PM 31 52%
Source: City of South San Francisco Public Works Department
1/30108 SSF Downtown Parking Garage
Table 3
TRIP GENERATION
USES ON GROUND FLOOR OF PROPOSED
DOWNTOWN PARKING GARAGE
MIDDA Y PEAK HOUR TRIPS PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS
IN OUT IN OUT
USE SIZE RATE VOL RATE VOL RATE VOL RATE VOL
Specialty Retail 13,700 1.8 25 1.8 25 1.8 25 1.8 25
SQ.FT,
Trip rate source: Trip Generation, San Diego Association of Governments, 2002,
Compiled by: Crane Transportation Group
J/30/08 SSF Downtown Parking Garage
Appendix
1/30/08 SSF Downtown Parking Garage
Appendix
LEVEL OF SERVICE
CONTROL DELAY RELATIONSHIP FOR
ALL-WAY STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS
Level of Service
Average Control Delay Per Vehicle (in seconds)
A
0- 10
B
> 10 - 15
C
> 15 - 25
D
> 25 - 35
E
> 35 - 50
F
> 50
Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move up time to first in line at the intersection,
stopped delay as first car in queue, and final acceleration delay.
Source: Highway Capacity Manual 2000, Transportation Research Board
1/30/08 SSF Downtown Parking Garage
Appendix
LEVEL OF SERVICE
CONTROL DELAY RELATIONSHIP FOR
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
Level of Service
Control Delay Per Vehicle (in seconds)
A
10
B
> 10 - 20
C
> 20 - 35
D
> 35 - 55
E
> 55 - 80
F
> 80
Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move up time to first in line at the intersection,
stopped delay as first car in queue, and final acceleration delay.
Source: Highway Capacity Manual 2000, Transportation Research Board
1/30/08 SSF Downtown Parking Garage
-
g
~ . ~~\
(~ 0
t:; ~
v <:>
~IIFO""'" Staff Reoort
AGENDA ITEM # 9
......
DATE: March 26, 2008
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Steven T. Mattas, City Attorney
SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 6.76 OF THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
MUNICIPAL CODE TO IMPLEMENT THE DIGITAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND VIDEO
COMPETITION ACT OF 2006
RECOMMENDATION:
Waive first reading and introduce an ordinance amending Chapter 6.78 of the South San Francisco
Municipal Code to implement the Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act of2006 (DIVCA).
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Local entities within the state of California have traditionally had the authority to regulate, in accordance
with federal, state and local law, certain aspects ofthe provision of video service, including the authority
to award franchises. In 2006, the State Le:gislature adopted the Digital Infrastructure and Video
Competition Act of2006 ("DIVCA"), which became effective January 1,2007. The purpose ofDIVCA
was to streamline the franchising process for video service providers and to provide for the convergence
of technologies. For instance, telephone companies-such as AT&T-have developed integrated
products that use existing telephone networks to provide cable-like services, and cable companies-like
Comcast-are using their networks to provide telephone services. This technology allows telephone,
cellular phone, audio, Internet, and video services to be provided by one company. To facilitate the
rollout of such integrated services, the Legislature enacted DIVCA.
DIVCA substantially changed California !law by establishing a statewide franchising procedure for video
service providers to be administered by the California Public Utilities Commission ("CPUC"). DIVCA
establishes that the CPUC is the sole authority to award franchises for the provision of video services, and
preempts local franchising authority. Further, DIVCA establishes limited authority oflocal entities to
exercise control over state franchise holders. Consequently, the City is now prohibited by DIVCA from
awarding new local franchises or regulating state franchise holders, except to the extent permitted by
DIVCA, which heretofore the City could have done pursuant to the terms of the Chapter 6.76 of the
Municipal Code ("Cable Television Franchises").
While DIVCA constitutes a sea change relative to the local involvement in the regulation of video
programming, it does contain a number of provisions designed to make franchising agencies, like the City
Staff Report
DIVCA Implementation Ordinance
Page 2
of South San Francisco, more or less whok Thus, the City will receive the equivalent amount of
franchise fees from state franchise holders" and state franchise holders will be required to provide public,
educational and governmental channel access and support. In addition, AB 2987 contains provisions
designed to ensure that neighborhoods are not discriminated against on the basis of household income.
Presently, there are only two state franchisees in the City: AT&T and Comcast. Both are offering video
service pursuant to that state franchise and would be subject to the attached proposed ordinance upon
adoption. Staff anticipates that the trend will continue and other open video service operators will over
time opt into the state franchise system.
The following outlines the regulations included in the ordinance:
1. Public, Educational and Government Channel Facilities. The proposed ordinance establishes a
public, educational, and government ("PEG") channel facilities fee of one percent of any state
franchise holder's gross revenues to support PEG channel facilities. This fee will replace the
existing $0.30 per subscriber fee that is in the Comcast local franchise. Further, to ensure that the
City has adequate information to determine whether the appropriate calculation of the 1 % fee has
been performed, the proposed ordinance requires that a statement be provided with the payment
setting forth the manner in which the calculation was made. Additionally, it allows the City
Manager to issue directives requiring additional reporting to ensure that the basis for the
calculation is adequately explained and documented. Finally, under DIVCA, the ordinance
enacting the 1 % fee "automatically expires" upon the expiration of a state franchise, the terms of
which are 10 years. This creates the potential for a number of issues, since there are multiple state
franchises with differing expiration dates and since the formalities for enactment of ordinances-a
first reading, subsequent adoption, and 30-day waiting period thereafter-necessarily require
substantial lead time. To avoid these issues, the proposed ordinance provides that,
notwithstanding the provision in DIVCA, the section shall be deemed automatically reauthorized
unless the state franchise holder provides the City with 60 days' written notice that the 1 % fee will
expire upon the termination of the state franchise. This will provide the City with an opportunity
to adopt an ordinance reauthorizing the fee.
2. Franchise Fee for State Franchise Holders. All state franchise holders will be required to remit
to the City a franchise fee of five percent of its gross revenues.
Customer Service Penalties. Notwithstanding the fact the local agencies have no real role in the
regulatory process, DIVCA provides that the City "shall enforce" certain statutory customer
service and protection standards to which state franchise holders are subject, when complaints are
received from residents within the City's jurisdiction. It also states that the City shall adopt, either
by resolution or ordinance, a schedule of penalties for violations of such standards. The proposed
ordinance includes a proposed schedule of penalties at the maximum permitted by law for all
violations, If the Council introduc:es the proposed ordinance, staff will recommend that the
Council adopt the resolution at tht:: meeting at which the ordinance is adopted.
3. Authority to Examine and Audit Business Records. The proposed ordinance authorizes the
City Manager to exercise the City's right under DIVCA to examine and audit the business records
of any state franchise holder. Under DIVCA, whether the City or franchise holder pays for the
"reasonable and actual costs" of the audit the depends on the amount of the underpayment, as
Staff Report
DIVCA Implementation Ordinance
Page 3
follows:
More than 5% underpayment
Zero underpayment
Between 5% and zero
Franchise holder
City
Each bears own costs
FUNDING:
Adoption of the proposed ordinance would result in the City collecting the maximum amount of revenue
permitted by law.
CONCLUSION:
The attached proposed ordinance would allow the City to exercise the limited authority granted to it by
DIVCA.
~(h.~
Barry M. N el, City Manager
Enclosure: Ordinance
1064916
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 6.78 OF THE SOUTH SAN
FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL CODE TO IMPLEMENT THE DIGITAL
INFRASTRUCTURE AND VIDEO COMPETITION ACT OF 2006
WHEREAS, cities and counties within the State of California have traditionally
had the authority to issue franchisl~s to, and thereby regulate, providers of cable services
within their respective jurisdictions, in accordance with federal, state, and local law; and
WHEREAS, the Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act of 2006
(Public Utilities Code sections 5800 et seq. ("DIVCA")) became effective January 1,
2007; and
WHEREAS, DIVCA changed California law by establishing a statewide
franchising procedure for video service providers to be administered by the Calif()rnia
Public Utilities Commission ("CPUC"); and
WHEREAS, under certain circumstances described therein, DIVCA preempts the
City's authority to issue franchises and provides, in those circumstances, that the CPUC
is the sole authority to award state franchises for the provision of video services; and
WHEREAS, DIVCA authorizes the City to exercise certain authority over state
franchise holders; and
WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco desires to exercise that authority and
to facilitate the implementation of DIVCA by setting forth regulations for the provision
of video service by state franchise holders within the City.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco does
ORDAIN as follows:
1. Section 1. Chapter 6.78 is hereby added to the South San Francisco Municipal Code
to read as follows:
Chapter 6.78
VIDEO SERVICE PROVIDED BY ST ATE FRANCHISE HOLDERS
6.78.010
Purpose and Applicability.
The purpose of this chapter is to set forth regulations for the provision of video service by
state franchise holders, in accordance with the Digital Infrastructure and Video
Competition Act, California Public Utilities Code sections 5800-5970 ("DIVCA"). This
1064918
chapter shall apply to video service providers operating within the city pursuant to a valid
state franchise.
6.78.020
Definitions.
For the purposes of this chapter, thle words set out in this section shall have the following
meanmgs:
(a) "City" means the City of South San Francisco.
(b) "City manager" means the city manager of the City of South San Francisco, or his
or her designee.
(c) "Franchise fee" shall have the meaning given that term by subdivision (g) of
Public Utilities Code section 5830 or its successor.
(d) "Gross revenues" shall havle the meaning given that term by the California Public
Utilities Code section 5860 or its successor.
(e) "Holder" shall have the meaning given that term by subdivision G) of Public
Utilities Code section 5830 or its successor.
(f) "Material breach" shall have the meaning given that term by subdivision (j) of
Public Utilities Code section 5900 or its successor.
(g) "Network" shall have the meaning given that term by subdivision (1) of Public
Utilities Code section 5830 or its successor.
(h) "State franchise" shall have the meaning given that term by subdivision (P) of
Public Utilities Code section 5830.
(i) "Video servi ce" shall have the meaning given that term by the California Public
Utilities Code section 5830(s) or its successor.
6.78.030
Franchise Fee for State Franchise Holders.
Any state franchise holder shall remit to the City a franchise fee in the amount of five
percent of the gross revenues of the state franchise holder in compliance with California
Public Utilities Code section 5840(q).
6.78.040
Public, Educational, and Government Channels
(a) Each state franchise holder shall remit to the City a fee to support PEG chamlel
facilities in the amount of one percent of the gross revenues of the state franchise holder.
All revenue collected pursuant to this fee shall be deposited in a separate fund and shall
only be expended for the purpose of supporting PEG channel facilities.
1064918
(b) Each payment of the fee established in subsection (a) of this section delivered to
the city shall be accompanied by a summary report explaining the basis for the
calculation of the payment, reflecting the total amount of gross revenues for the
remittance period and all payments, deductions and computations used to determine the
amount of the quarterly remittance, The city manager may establish, and from time to
time revise, such additional reporting requirements as are necessary to ensure that the
basis for the calculation of the amount of remittance is adequately explained and
documented, and each state franchise holder shall comply with such additional reporting
requirements provided that each state franchise holder shall have first been provided
written notice at least fifteen (15) clays prior to the beginning of the remittance period.
(c) All obligations existing on December 31,2006 to provide and support PEG
channel facilities and institutional networks and to provide cable services to community
buildings contained in a local franchise shall continue until October 31, 2014 pursuant to
California Public Utilities Code section 5870.
(d) Each state franchise holder shall designate a sufficient amount of capacity on its
network to allow the provision of PEG channels in accordance with California Public
Utilities Code section 5870. Each state franchise holder shall have three (3) months from
the date the City requests the PEG channels to designate the capacity. The three (3)
month period shall be tolled by any period during which the designation or provision of
PEG channel capacity is technically infeasible.
(e) Notwithstanding California Public Utilities Code section 5879(n), upon the
expiration of any state franchise, without any action of the city council, this section shall
be deemed to have been automatically reauthorized, unless the state franchise holder has
given the city manager and the city council written notice sixty (60) days prior to the
expiration of its state franchise that the section will expire pursuant to the terms of
California Public Utilities Code st~ction 5879(n).
(f) This section shall be enforced, and disputes regarding this section shall be
resolved, pursuant to California Public Utilities Code section 5870.
6.78.050
Customer Service Penalties by State Franchise Holders.
(a) Any state franchise holder shall comply with the customer service provisions set
forth in Public Utilities Code section 5900.
(b) The city shall impose the following penalties against a state franchise holder for
any material breach of the customer service provisions set forth in section 6.78.040(A):
(l) For the first occun-ence of a material breach, a fine of $500.00 shall be
imposed for each day of each material breach, not to exceed $1,500.00 for
each occurrence of the material breach.
1064918
(2) For a second occummce of a material breach of the same nature as the first
material breach that occurs within 12 months, a fine of$l,OOO.OO shall be
imposed for each day of each material breach, not to exceed $3,000.00 for
each occurrence of the material breach.
(3) For a third or further occurrence of a material breach of the same nature as
the previous material breaches that occurs within 12 months, a fine of
$2,500.00 shall be imposed for each day of each material breach, not to
exceed $7,500.00 for each occurrence of the material breach.
(c) The city manager shall have the authority to assess penalties for any material
breach by a holder of a state franchise. Prior to assessing penalties for a material breach,
the city manager shall first have provided the state franchise holder with written notice of
any alleged material breach of the customer service provisions set forth in California
Public Utilities Code section 5900 and shall allow the state franchise holder at least thirty
(30) days from receipt of the noticle to remedy the specified material breach.
(d) A material breach for the purposes of assessing penalties shall be deemed to have
occurred for each day within the jurisdiction of the city, following the expiration of the
period specified in this section that any material breach has not been remedied by the
video provider, irrespective of the number of customers affected. No monetary penalties
shall be assessed for a material breach if it is out ofthe reasonable control ofthe stat~~
franchise holder.
(e) The city shall submit one half of any penalty amounts it receives to the Digital
Divide Account established by California Public Utilities Code section 280.5.
(f) No monetary penalties shall be assessed for a material breach if it is out ofthe
reasonable control of the state franchise holder.
6.78.060
Authority to Examine and Audit Business Records.
The city shall ensure that it receives all franchise fee revenue to which it is entitled to at
the times and in the amounts specified by Public Utilities Code section 5860, and, to that
end, the city manager is hereby authorized, either with or without the assistance of duly
authorized representative, to examine the business records ofthe holder of the state
franchise in accordance with subdivision (i) of Public Utilities Code section 5860.
2. Section 2. Publication and Effective Date
Pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 36933, a summary of this
Ordinance shall be prepared by the City Attorney. At least five (5) days prior to the
Council meeting at which this Ordinance is scheduled to be adopted, the City Clerk shall
(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 along with the names of those City Council members
1064918
voting for and against this Ordinanc:e or otherwise voting. This ordinance shall become
effective thirty days from and after its adoption.
3. Section 3. Severability
In the event any section or portion of this ordinance shall be determined invalid or
unconstitutional, such section or portion shall be deemed severable and all other sections
or portions hereof shall remain in full force and effect.
Introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
South San Francisco, held the __ day of , 2008.
Adopted as an Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting
of the City Council held the _ day of , 2008 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
As Mayor of the City of South San Francisco, I do hereby approve the foregoing
ordinance this day of , 2008.
Pedro Gonzalez, Mayor
1064918
SPE(~:IAL MEETING
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, California 94083
Meeting to be held at:
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING
CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY ROOM
33 ARROYO DRIVE
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 26, 2008
8:00 P.M.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 54956 of the Government Code of the
State of California, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco will hold a
Special Meeting on Wednesday, the 26th day of March, 2008, at 8:00 p.m., in the Municipal Services
Building, Community Room, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, California.
Purpose of the meeting:
1. Call to Order.
2. Roll Call.
3. Public Comments - comments are limited to items on the Special Meeting
Agenda.
4. Resolution awarding the Lindenville Storm Drainage Construction
Improvement Project No. SS-07-04, Bid No. 2475 Phase V-C to Precision
Engineering, Inc. of San Francisco, CA in the amount of $2,446,780.00.
5. Resolution authorizing the execution of a contract with Watry Design, Inc.
for construction design of the Miller A venue Parking Structure.
6. Adjournment.
-
~'t\\ s:w
g
~ . ~~\
(0 0
:-. ....
~ ~
v 0
GtlIFO?-~\.~
-
Redevelopment Agency
Staff Report
RDA AGENDA ITEM # 4
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
March 26, 2008
Redevelopment Agency Board
Terry White, Director of Public Works
A RESOLUTION A'W ARDING THE LINDENVILLE STORM DRAINAGE
CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. SS-07-04
BID NO. 2475
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Redevelopment Agency adopt a resolution awarding the
construction contract for the Lindenville Storm Drainage Construction Improvement
Project, Project No. SS-07-04, Bid No. 2475 to Precision Engineering, Inc. of San Francisco,
California, in the amount of $2,446,780 (Base Bid and Bid Alternate B) and rejecting Bid
Alternate A.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
This project is the second phase of storm drain improvements in the area. The first phase is a
storm drain pump station located at 27 South Linden Avenue which is currently under-
construction. The second phase includes the installation of approximately 4,000 feet of 42", 36",
30" and 28" storm drain pipe along South Canal Street between Starlite Street and South Linden
Avenue, South Linden Avenue betwee:n Victory Avenue and South Canal Street, Maple Avenue
and Victory Avenue. The new storm drain pipes will be connected to the new pump station via a
48" line that was installed under the Colma Creek Channel by the City in cooperation with the San
Mateo County Flood Control District in 2005. The completion of the pump station and the pipe
line project will significantly reduce the chance of flooding in the Lindenville area.
On February 2, 2008 and February 13, 2008, staff advertised the notice inviting sealed bids for
this project. Staff opened bids on March 19, 2008 and six bids were received. The lowest
responsible bidder is Precision Engineering, Inc. Below is the summary of the base bids:
Engineer's Estimate:
Not Available
Bids: Precision Engineering, Inc.
Mountain Cascade, Inc.
JMB Construction, Inc.
J & M, Inc.
K.J . Woods Construction, Inc.
McGuin: Hester
$2,426,780.00
$2,575,257.50
$2,752,200.00
$3,002,257.00
$3,1l8,000.00
$3,l63,941.00
Staff Report
Subject: LINDENVILLE STORM: DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT
Page 2 of2
Staff verified the lowest responsible bidder's current contractor's license with the California State
Licensing Board to be of good standing, and confirmed their references for past construction
projects similar to the subject project.
FUNDING
Shown below is the cost breakdown for the project budget:
Precision Engineering, ][nc.
Construction Management & Inspection
Soils Testing
Carollo Engineers (Design Engineers) Const. Support Fee
Contingency (20%)
Construction Administration by Staff
Total Project Budget Cost
$2,446,780
$ 275,000
$ 80,000
$ 100,000
$ 490,000
$ l70,000
$3,561,780
Sufficient Redevelopment Bond funds were budgeted to cover the project costs. The project is
included in the City of South San Frandsco's 2006-2007 CIP in the amount of $9,000,000. The
completion of the pump station and this associated piping will be completed within the program
budget.
CONCLUSION
Approval of this project will allow the continued construction of a storm drainage improvement
project that will reduce the potential for flooding in the Lindenville area.
.;'.,.,.)~
B~'
Terry Whi I
Director 0 ublic Works
p.t-
~ ---.
APProv~M GJ-
~_I . Nagel
Executive Director
at/kj/rr/tw
Attachment: Resolution
Bid Summary
RESOLUTION NO.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION AWARDING THE LINDENVILLE
STORM DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TO PRECISION
ENGINEERING, INC. OF SAN FRANCISCO, CA FOR
THE AMOUNT OF $2,446,780.00
WHEREAS, on February 2, 2008 and February 13, 2008, staff advertised the notice to
invite sealed bids for the project; and
WHEREAS, on March 19, 2008, staff opened bids and six bids were received, and the
lowest responsible bidder was Precision Engineering, Inc. for the amount of $2,426,780.00 for
Base Bid and $20,000 for Bid Alternate B; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends that the Redevelopment Agency award the construction
contract to Precision Engineering, Ine., in an amount not to exceed $2,446,780.00; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends rejecting Bid Alternate A; and
WHEREAS, project is the second phase of storm drain improvements in the area; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of
South San Francisco that the Agency hereby awards the construction contract for the Lindenville
Storm Drainage Construction Improvement to Precision Engineering, Inc. in the amount of
$2,446,780.00.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Executive Director is hereby authorized to
execute the Agreement on behalf of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San
Francisco, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney.
*
*
*
*
*
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by
the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco at a
meeting held on the day of , 2008 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
McGUire Hester
TOiiiE'Stimated
Price
Wood Construction Inc
~ed
Price
K.J.
J&M Inl
Total Estimated
Price
Phase V-C
JMB Construction I
TQt8iEstlmated
Price
City of South San Francisco
Lindenville Storm Drainage Construction Improvemen
Bid No. 2475
Bid Opened by: Andy Tan
Witnessed by: Rosalie Calvo
105,000.00
65,500.00
341,250.00
$
$
Unit Price
105,000.00
65,500.00
525.00
50,000.00
216,320.00
227,500.00
Unit Price
150,000.00
216,320,00
90,000.00
43,500.00
301,600.00
4M.00 ~
Unit Price
90,000.00
43,500.00
120,000.00
125,000.00
Unit Price
120,000.00
125,000.00
Cascade lnc
~ated
Price
00,000.50
20,000.00
234,000.00
$
$
$
Mounlai
Unit Price
100,000.50
20,000.00
360.00
Engineering loe
~ted
Price
100,000.00
75,000.00
175,500.00
$
$
$
Precisio
Unit Price
$ 100,000.00
-
$ 75,000.00
$
Unl
LS
LS
Estimated
Quantity
Item
No.
1 Moblllzatlon
2 Sheeting, Shoring & Bracing
3 Installation of 18" diameter stonn drain laterals by open-cu1
construction method
Installation of the upper S. Canal Street storm drain main from MH
4 S3 to the point of connection to the existing storm drain by open-
Bidders Name
Bid Item Description
350.00
266,500.00
410.00
270.00
LF
6SO
282,720.00
290,325.00
456.00
525.00
223.200.00
364,980.00
360.00
660.00
396,800.00
363,229.00
640.00
693.00
207,700.00
268,205.00
335.00
201,500.00
325.00
235,600.00
360.001 $
LF
620
485.00
254,380.00
460.00
331,800.00
600.00
LF
553
Installation of the lower S. Canal Street stonn drain main from
existing MH S5 to MH S3 by open~ut construction methods
362.365.00
302,120.00
999.00
253,150.00
610.00
300,875.00
725.00
249,000.00 I $
600.00
Installation of the lower S. Linden Ave storm drain main from
existing MH S5 to MH L2 by open-cut construction methods
fromMH
599,165.00
109,921.00
92,000.001
-
39,200.00
18,200.00
148,915.00
12,210.00
143,000.00
81,000.00
7,900.00
158.00
2,500.00
50.001 $
5,000.00
100.001 $
2,750.00
55.00
7,500.001 $
40,000.00
150.00
685.00
728.00
665.00
383.00 $
11,500.00 $
9,800.00 $
9,100.00 $
5,135.00 $
2,035.00 $
143,000.00 $
5,000.00
100.00
LS
CY
306,820.00
373,500.00
675,750.00
11,930.00 $
56,000.00 $
20,000.00 $
24,000.00 $
261,000.00 $
9,000.00 $
20,000.00 $
so
Traffic Control
Over-excavatlon
580.00
900.00
750.00
390.00 $
7,000.00 $
5,000.00 $
12,000.00 $
9,000.00 $
1,500.00 $
20,000.00 $
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
204,194.00 I $
414,585.00
386.00
203,665.00
385.00
238,050.00
450.00 I $
275,080.00 I $
520.00
LF
529
Installation of the Maple Avenue storm drain main by open-cu
construction methods
654,126.00
122,549.00 $
55,496.00 $
16,668.00 $
19,332.00 $
88,508.00 $
5,100.00 $
81,000.00 $
726.00
6,937.00
4,167.00
9,666.00
3,052.00
850.00
427.00
$
$
$
$
$
468.520.00
109,060.00
160,000.00
~
17,000.00
133,400.00
6,000.00
100,000.00
520.00
100,450.00 $ 380.00 $
-I--
116,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $
36,000.00 $ 12,000.00 $
13,000.00 $ 8,SOO.00 $
116,000.00 $ 4,600.00 $
2,400.00 $ 1,000.00 $
40,000.00 $ 100,000.00 $
540,600.00
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
600.00
14,500.00
9,000.00
6,SOO.00
4,000.00
400.00
350.00
427,975.00
136,325.00 $
48,000.00 $
18,OO!tOO "
12,000.00 $
145,000.00 $
3,000.00 $
30,000.00 $
475.001 $
475.00 $
6,000.00 $
4,50Q.00 $
6,000.00 $
5,000.00 $
SOO.OO $
30,000.00 $
$
$
$
$
$
$
LF
LF
LF
EA
EA
EA
EA
415
287
8
.
2
29
6
90
nstall.Uon of the upper S. Linden Ave storm drain main
U to MH L5 by open-cut construction methods
Installation of the Victory Ave storm drain main by open-cu
construction methods
Installation of 60" diameter stann drain manholes
nstall_tion of 48" diameter storm drain manholes
Installation of Type "GTO" catch basins
Installation of Type "GO-SSFT"" catch basins
Reconnection of existing stann drain catch basins
40,000.00
40.00 I $
20,000.001 $
20.00
30,000.001 $
30.00
13,000.00
13.001 $
40,000.001 $
40.00 I $
5,000.00
Excavation, handling, storage, removal, and testing of potentially
contaminated soil
23,700.00
11,950.00
28,000.00
75,000.00
5,500.00
3,163,941.00
60,000.00
79.00
400.00
239.00 $
14.00 $
75,000.00 $
5,500.00 $
S
9,000.00
9,000.001 $
$
$
$
$
$
2,500.00
20,000.00
5,000.00
10,000.00
3,118.000.00
30.001 $
60.00 I $
50.00
10.00
5,000.00
10,000.00
8,300.001 $
9,150.001 $
0,000.00 $
12,120,00 $
35,000.00 $
6,000.00 S
3,001,257.00 $
61.00
200,00
6.06
35,000.00
6,000.00
61.00
$
$
$
$
$
21,000.00
8,000.00
24,000.00
120,000.00
30,000.00
2,752.200.1
47,250.00
70.00 I $
8,500.00 $ 160.00 $
24,000.00 $ 12.00 $
100,000.00 $ 120,000.00 $
10,002.00 $ 30,000.00 $
1.575,157.50 $ S
315.001 $
18,000.001 $
54,000.00
60.00
360.00
$ 170.00 $
$ 12.00 $
$ 100,000.00 $
$ 10,002.00 $
$ $
12,000.001 $
30,000.001 $
5,500.001
22,000.00
75,000.00
10,000.00
2.0416,780.00
5.001 $
10.00 $
11.00 $
75,000.00 $
10,000,00 $
s
40.00 I $
200.00
$
$
$
$
$
CY
CY
CY
SF
LS
LS
CY
000
300
1SO
so
2,000
1
1
Disposal of soils meeting the definition of a Class II non-
hazardous soil, at an acceptable landfill (COMP-1)
Disposal of salls meeting the definition of an RCRA Hazardous
Waste requiring solidification/stabilization, at an acceptable
landfill (COMP-2)
Dlsponl of soils meeting the definition of a California Hazardous
Waste at an acceptable landfill (COMP-3)
Asphalt pavement patching (outside of the trench zone'
Abandonment of existing storm drain facilities
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
7,500.00
15,000.00
35,000.00
10,000.00
35,000.00
LS
BID ALTERNATE A UNIT PRICE SCHEDULE
IC
30,000.00
6,000.00
I YES I
i YES I
I YES I
I YES I
5,000.00
I YES I
I YES I
I YES I
I YES I
I YES I
I YES I
I YES I
I YES I
4,000.00
3,000.00
I YES I
\YESI
I YES I
I YES I
I YES I
I YES I
I YES I
I YES I
20,000.00
I YES I
I YES I
I YES I
I YES I
CY
20
BID ALTERNATE B UNIT PRICE SCHEDULE
Removal of concrete slab
ADDENDUM NO.2
ADDENDUM NO.
ADDENDUM NO.
BID BOND
Ie
~'t'k\ S:!!.N
g
~ . =.~
o ~
>< C;;I
';. (')
'-' 0
C'4.lIFO'il..~\~
--"-""
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
RedeveZopment Agency
Staff RE~port
RDA AGENDA ITEM # 5
March 26, 2008
Redevelopment Agency Board
Marty VanDuyn, Assistant Director
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT WITH
WATRY DESIGN, INC. FOR CONSTRUCTION DESIGN OF THE MILLER
AVENUE PARKING STRUCTURE
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Redevelopment Agency Board adopt a Resolution authorizing the
City Manager to execute a contrad with Watry Design, Inc. to design the Miller Avenue
Parking Structure.
BACKGROUNDIDISCUSSION
On February 14, 2007, the Redevelopment Agency Board approved a concept financing plan for a
new Downtown parking structure and authorized staff to begin utilizing a $150,000 allocation in the
2006-2007 Capital Improvements Budget for initial planning, engineering and special studies for the
proj ect.
On June 4, 2007 the City Council conducted a study session to review parking structure design
concepts and authorized staff to proceed with planning and design of a 4Y2 to 5Y2 story parking
structure with ground floor commercial space. The City Council then approved the 2007-2008
Capital Improvement Budget on Jum~ 13, 2007, which includes a $10,000,000 appropriation for
design and construction of the Miller Avenue Parking Structure.
Staff initially approached the architectural firm that had developed the structure's conceptual designs
to request a proposal for design services and contract administration. As described in staffs
memorandum to Council dated August 3l, 2007, delays in receiving a draft proposal from this firm
led staff to make contact with two additional design firms specializing in parking structure projects
(Watry Design, Inc. and International Parking Design) to solicit additional proposals, consistent with
the Council's direction to complete this project with expediency as well as attention to quality of
design. Watry Design, Inc., responded to staffs inquiry with a full scope of services and a schedule
indicating a seven month time savings over the competing firm. On October 5, 2007, statTreported
to Council via memorandum that Watry Design, Inc. was retained to begin schematic design of the
parking structure.
Staff Report
To: Redevelopment Agency Board
RE: Miller Avenue Parking Structure: Design
Date: March 12, 2008
Page 2 of3
As of December 27, 2007, the concept design and the schematic phases of the prqject were
substantially complete. The project has now progressed into the construction drawings phase per
Council's action on December 12, 2007, which approved the schematic design with comments and
directed staff to proceed with thl;~ construction and bidding documents phases, pending
environmental review.
Watry Design, Inc. has provided staff with the attached proposal to prepare construction drawings,
bid packages and construction administration services, including the development of design criteria
to allow bid alternates for a roof mounted solar array, enhanced video surveillance and geothermal
heating and cooling. Watry Design, lnc.'s budget to complete this work totals $1,101,232. The
project schedule anticipates commencement of construction activities on or around October 30,
2008. .
FUNDING
The 2007-2008 Capital Improvement Budget includes an appropriation of$10,000,000 for design
and construction of the Miller A venue Parking Structure, funded from Redevelopment Agency
Funds.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the Redevelopment Agency Board adopt the attached resolution authorizing
the City Manager to execute a contract with Watry Design, Inc. to complete the construction
documents and competitive bid packages for the Miller Avenue Parking Structure.
BY:~~
Assistant Director
~
.~ F
./'-~ .' t.
-Approved:. "'t: v ,( ~
I '
- --' Barry M. Na 1
Executive Director
../
A TT ACHMENTS Redevelopment Agency Resolution
Watry Design, Inc. Scope of Services
Time Schedule:
RESOLUTION NO.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION
OF A CONTRACT WITH WATRY DESIGN, INC.
FOR CONSTRUCTION DESIGN OF THE MILLER
AVENUE PARKING STRUCTURE
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco
("Agency") is a redevelopment agency existing pursuant to the Community
Redevelopment Law, California Health and Safety Code Section 33000, et seq. (the
"CRL"), and pursuant to the authority granted thereunder, has the responsibility to carry
out the Redevelopment Plan ("Redevelopment Plan") for the Downtown/Central
Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area "); and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco has appropriated
$10,000,000 in the 2007-2008 Capital Improvement Budget for the design and
construction of the Miller Avenue: Parking Structure; and
WHEREAS, Watry Design, Inc. and Group 4 Architecture/Walker Parking
Consultants submitted proposals for the design and construction administration of the
Miller Avenue Parking Structure, though Watry Design, Inc. was able to provide a full
scope of services and complete delivery of the project seven months earlier than Group 4
Architecture/Walker Parking Consultants; and
WHEREAS, Watry Design, Inc. has completed schematic designs of the Miller
A venue Parking Structure, and is prepared to proceed with construction drawings, bid
packages, and construction administration services for an amount not to exceed
$1,101,232, as detailed in their proposal, attached to this Resolution and incorporat~~d
herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been completed in accordance
with the California Environmental Quality Act, analyzing the proposed project's effects
on the environment and concluding that after mitigation, the project will not have any
significant environmental impacts.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Redevelopment Agency of
the City of South San Francisco does hereby authorize the Executive Director or his
designee, to execute a contract with Watry Design, Inc., not to exceed $1,101,232, to
complete the construction design and documents and competitive bid packages for the
Miller Avenue Parking Structure,
*
*
*
*
*
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by
the Redevelopment Agency of the: City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting held
the day of , 2008, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Clerk
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
February 29,2008
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project consists of a new multistory parking garage with street-level commercial space, to be located
on Miller Avenue in South San Francisco. The requirements and general geometry of the proposed garage
will be based on Garage Concept 2A oftJhe Miller Avenue Parking Garage Feasibility Study presented to
the South San Francisco City Council on June 4th, 2007 and consistent with the Schematic Design
reviewed by the City Council on December 12, 2007, The Project will not include improvements to 4th
Lane or other off site improvements. Thl~ parking structure project consists of a 4 Y2 level parking
structure containing approximately 256 stalls and approximately 13,700 square feet of ground floor
commercial space. The structural frame is considered to be cast-in-place concrete, shear wall, long span
system with a shallow foundation system per the soils report.
Assumptions:
1. Geotechnical Report and Site Survey are provided by the City.
2. The Public Works Agency will supply City standard bidding requirements; including bid proposal,
contract forms and agreement, and General Conditions pertaining to the Owner and General
Contractor Agreement. WDI and its consultants will provide the remaining necessary technical
specifications in CSI format, including Divisions I through 16.
Exclusions/rom Basic Fee:
I. This agreement does not include services related to Project Peer Review or Special Inspections.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Basic Services to be provided are as follows.
Section 1 - Basic Services
1.1 Construction Documelllts Phase
l.l.l Watry Design, Inc. shall attend design coordination meetings with the City, not
to exceed 4.
1.1.2 Based on the City approved Design Documents and any further adjustments in
the scope of the Project or in the construction budget authorized by the City,
Watry Design, Inc. shall prepare, for approval by the City, Construction
Documents consisting of Drawings and Specifications setting forth in detail the
requirements for the construction of the Project covered by this agreement. The
Contract Documents are to include the following:
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of South San Francisco and Watry Design, Inc, - Exhibit A
February 29, 2008
Page 1 of 11
" Parking Level Plans
" Structural Foundation Plans
" Structural Framing Plans
" Structural Calculations
" Parking Level Drainage Plan
" Exterior Elevations
. Building Cross Sections
. Enlarged Floor Plans (of specific areas as needed)
. Typical Wall Sections
. Architectural and Structural engineering Details
. Mechanical Plans and Details
. Electrical Plans and Details
. Security Plans and Details
. Civil Plans and Details
. Landscape Plans and Details
. Signage Plans and Details
. Project Specifications
1,1.3 Watry Design, Inc. shall prepare Structural Calculations for the Primary
Structural System for submittal to Governing Building Officials.
1,lA Watry Design, Inc. shall designate elements to be designed by Special~y
Engineers. The Contract Documents shall specify Structural Design Criteria,
type of element, position within structure and connection to Primary Structural
System, and required Submittals.
1.I.S Watry Design, Inc. shall review the effect of Secondary and Non-Structural
elements on the Primary Structural System and design the Primary Structural
System to accept and support such items. The Contract Documents shall provide
information regarding the supporting capability and physical attachment
limitations of the Primary Structural System.
l.l.6 Watry Design, Inc. shall designate on the Contract Documents all required
Special Inspection and Testing.
1.1.7 Civil Engineer shall provide final site demolition plans, on-site grading and
drainage plans, on-site storm, sanitary and water plans including relocations as
needed, horizontal layout of site electrical, gas, and telecommunication systems,
off-site plans for site frontage improvements consisting of utility services,
sidewalks, driv~lways, and curb replacement, fire design plan with pipe: sizing,
flow analysis, and fire system layout including fire hydrants, FDC's and PIV's
for bidding purposes for site work only.
1.1.8 Security Consultant shall design the conduit for a future security system and
develop and provide all required drawings, details, and installation for the
conduit system..
1.1.9 Mechanical Engineer shall provide construction documents for the mechanical
and plumbing systems. They shall also provide envelope Title 24 documentation
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of South San Francisco and Watry Design, Inc, - Exhibit A
February 29, 2008
Page 2 of 11
for the retail shell. They shall also provide performance plans and specifications
for a fire protection design / build contract.
1.1.10 Electrical Engin(~er shall provide construction documents and specifications for
the electrical systems including lighting systems.
1.1.II Landscape Archiitect shall provide specifications and construction documents for
landscape plants, materials, drainage, irrigation, and any special landscape
features.
1.1.12 Signage Consultant shall provide specifications and construction documents for
the signs that in dude interior and exterior signage and code required signage.
1,1.13 Cost Estimator shall finalize Opinion of Probable Construction Cost with input
from Watry Design, Inc.
1.1.14 Watry Design, Inc. and all subconsultants shall respond in writing to Governing
Building Official's comments on Contract Documents. Watry Design, Inc, will
coordinate responses from all subconsultants.
1.2 Plan Check Phase
1.2.1 Watry Design, Inc. shall submit drawings to the Building Official for Plan
Check.
1.2.2 Watry Design, Inc. and sub consultants shall respond to questions of Building
Official and issue the final set for Bidding.
1.3 Bidding Phase
1.3 ,1 Watry Design, Inc. shall attend the prebid meeting at the site.
1.3.2 Watry Design, Inc. shall respond to questions from the General Contractors as it
pertains to the bidding process by issuing addenda and assist the City in
evaluating bids as requested.
1.4 Construction Administration Phase
IA,I Watry Design, Inc.'s responsibility to provide Basic Services for the Construction
Administration Phase under this Agreement commences with the issuance of a
contract between the City and a Contractor and terminates at the issuance to the
Owner of the Certificate of Occupancy. The anticipated length of construction is
estimated to be 60 weeks.
1.4.2 Duties, responsibilities, and limitations of authority of Watry Design, Inc. shall
not be restricted, modified or extended without written agreement between the
City and Watry Design, Inc.
1.4.3 Contractor shall send all required submittals directly to Watry Design, Inc, for
review and copy the City, The Contractor shall maintain an updated log of all
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of South San Francisco and Watry Design, Inc, - Exhibit A
February 29,2008
Page 3 of 11
submittals and RFI's. Watry Design, Inc. shall review Contractor submittals
pertaining to items designed by Watry Design, Inc. such as shop drawings,
product data, samples and other data as required by Watry Design, Inc., but only
for the limited purpose of checking for general conformance with the de:sign
concept and the iinformation expressed in the Contract Documents prepared by
Watry Design, luc, This review shall not include review of the accuracy or
completeness of details, such as quantities, dimensions, weights or gauges,
fabrication proce:sses, construction means or methods, coordination of the work
with other trades or construction safety precautions, all of which are the sole
responsibility of the Contractor. Watry Design, Inc.'s review shall be conducted
with reasonable promptness while allowing sufficient time in Watry Design,
Inc.'s judgment to permit adequate review. Review of a specific item shall not
indicate that Watry Design, Inc. has reviewed the entire assembly of which the
item is a component. The General Contractor shall review all submittals prior to
Watry Design, Inc.'s review. Each submittal shall be stamped that the General
Contractor has reviewed the submittal. Watry Design, Inc. shall not be
responsible for any deviations from the contract documents not brought to the
attention of Watry Design, Inc. in writing by the Contractor. Watry Design, Inc.
shall not be required to review partial submissions or those for which
submissions of correlated items have not been received. Watry Design, Inc. shall
maintain the dis(;retion to return partial or incomplete submittals to the
Contractor. Watry Design, Inc, shall mark up one reproducible copy, n~turn it to
the Contractor and copy the City. Number of submittals is assumed to be 200.
lAA Watry Design, Inc. shall also review submittals pertaining to Structural Elements
specified by Watry Design, Inc. and designed by Specialty Engineers, Watry
Design Inc shall:
. Determine whether Submittals have received prior approvals as required by
the Contract Documents.
. Determine whether Submittals bear the signature and professional seal of the
Specialty Engineer responsible for the design as required by the Contract
Documents.
. Include review of any Pre-Engineered Structural Elements and shall be for
the type, position, and connection to other elements within the Primary
Structural System, and for criteria and loads used for their design.
. Include determination that structural elements are necessary for a stable
structure will be provided.
IA.S Watry Design, Inc, shall visit the project at appropriate intervals during
construction to become generally familiar with the progress and quality of the
contracts' work and to determine if the work is preceding in general accordance
with the Contra(;t Documents prepared by Watry Design, Inc. The City has not
retained Watry Design, Inc. to make detailed inspections or to provide exhaustive
or continuous project review and observation services. Watry Design, Inc. does
not guarantee the performance of, and shall have no responsibility for, the acts or
omissions of any contractor, subcontractor, supplier or any other entity furnishing
materials or performing any work on the project. Watry will attend construction
meetings/site visits on the average of a bi-weekly basis, assumed to be a
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of South San Francisco and Watry Design, Inc, - Exhibit A
February 29, 2008
Page 4 of 11
maximum of30. The number of structural visits prior to slab pours is not to
exceed 15.
1.4.6 Neither the profe:ssional activities of Watry Design, Inc., nor the presence of
Watry Design, Inc. or his or her employees and sub-consultants at a construction
site, shall relieve the General Contractor and any other entity of their obligations,
duties and responsibilities including, but not limited to, construction mt~ans,
methods, sequence, techniques or procedures necessary for performing,
superintending or coordinating all portions of the Work of construction in
accordance with the contract documents and any health or safety precautions
required by any regulatory agencies. Watry Design, Inc. and his or her personnel
have no authority to exercise any control over any construction contractor or
other entity or their employees in connection with their work or any health or
safety precautions. The City agrees that the General Contractor is solely
responsible for jobsite safety, and warrants that this intent shall be made evident
in the City's agre:ement with the General Contractor. The City also agrees that
Watry Design, Inc. shall be indemnified and shall be made additional insureds
under the General Contractor's general liability policy,
1.4.7 Watry Design, Inc. shall have the authority to reject any work of the Contractor
that is not, in the professional judgment of Watry Design, lnc., in accordance
with the plans, specifications and other construction documents. Neither this
authority nor the good faith judgment to reject or not to reject any such work
shall subject Watry Design, Inc. to any liability or cause of action on behalf of
the contractor, subcontractors or any other suppliers or persons performing
portions of the work on this project.
1.4.8 Interpretations and decisions of Watry Design, Inc. shall be consistent with the
intent of and reasonably inferable from the Contract Documents and shall be in
writing or in the form of drawings. When making such interpretations and initial
decisions, Watry Design, Inc. shall endeavor to secure faithful performance by
the City or the Contractor, shall not show partiality to either, and shall not be
liable for results of interpretations or decisions so rendered in good faith.
1.4 ,9 Watry Design, Inc. shall be a representative of and shall advise and consult with
the City during (;onstruction until final payment to the Contractor is due. Watry
Design, Inc. shall have authority to act on behalf of the City only to the extent
provided in this Agreement unless otherwise modified by written instrument.
1.4,l0 Watry Design, Inc.'s decisions on matters relating to aesthetic effect shall be final
if consistent with the intent expressed in the Contract Documents.
1.4,11 Watry Design, Inc. shall interpret and decide matters concerning perfOlmance of
the Contractor under the requirements of the Contract Documents, on written
request by the City. Watry Design, Inc.'s response to such request shall be made
with reasonable promptness and within any time limits agreed upon.
1.4,12 Watry Design, Inc, shall conduct periodic reviews to determine the date of
Substantial Completion and the date of final completion, and shall receive and
forward to the City for the City's review and records written warranties and
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of South San Francisco and Watry Design, Inc. - Exhibit A
February 29, 2008
Page 5 of 11
related documents required by the Contract Documents and assembled by the
Contractor. Watry Design, Inc, shall recommend issuance of a final Certificate
for Payment by the City upon compliance with the requirements of the Contract
Documents.
1.4.13 Watry Design, Inc. shall render written decisions within a reasonable time on all
claims, disputes or other matters in question between the City and Contractor
relating to the execution or progress of the Work as provided in the Contract
Documents if asked to do so,
1.4.14 The City warrants he or she will cause the Contractor to review any request for
information (RFI's) submitted by subcontractors prior to submission to Watry
Design, Inc, to ensure such RFI's are not already clearly and unambiguously
answered in the Contract Documents. Watry Design, Inc. shall be paid by the
City form Contractor retention for time spent reviewing RFI's which are already
clearly answered on the Contract Documents, in accordance with Watry Design,
Inc.'s standard rates. In the event of disagreement over such compensation, the
judgment of the City's representative shall prevail.
1.5 Consultants
1.5 ,1 Watry Design, Inc. shall hire the following proposed consultants to prepare
documents for the project based on their expertise:
. Civil Engineering and Surveying: Wilsey & Ham
. Security Consulting: Tomasi Dubois & Associates, Inc.
. Mechanical, Plumbing Engineering and FP criteria: List
Engineering
. Electrical Engineering: Engineering Enterprise
. Landscape Architecture: Merrill Morris Partners
. Signage Design: Donnelly Design
. Cost Estimating: O'Connor Construction Management, Inc.
. Photovoltaic: Kenwood Energy
Section 2 - Additional Services
2.1 General
2.1.1 Services beyond those outlined under Basic Services may be requested. They are
categorized as Additional, Special or Extra Services. These services may be
provided by Watry Design, Inc. under terms mutually agreed upon by the City
and Watry Design, Inc.
2.2 Special Services
2.2.1 Special Services are services that mayor may not be foreseen at the beginning of
design stages, and are not normally included as Basic Services, Examples
include, but are not limited to:
2.2.I,1 Services related to the analysis of the City's future needs and
programming the future requirements. Watry Design, Inc, will
work with the retail consultant to program the retail space.
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of South San Francisco and Watry Design, Inc. - Exhibit A
February 29, 2008
Page 6 of 11
2.2.1.2
2.2.1.3
2,2.1.4
2.2.1.5
2.2.1.6
2.2.1.7
2.2.1.8
2.2.1.9
2.2.1.1 0
2.2.1.11
2.2,1.12
2.2.1.13
2.2.1.14
2.3 Extra Services
Services related to financial feasibility or other special tiscal
studies.
Services related to off-site planning surveys, off-site site
I~valuations or comparative studies of prospective sites.
Services related to the structural design of Non-Structural
Elements and their attachments, such as:
. Window washing systems and tie downs,
. Antennas and flagpoles.
Services related to special dynamic analysis such as sp~~ctrum or
time-history response to seismic forces, or floor-response
analysis for footfall or vibratory equipment.
Services related to special wind analyses, such as wind-.tunnel
test, etc.
Services related to "seismic risk" analysis.
Field Investigation of existing Buildings and structures" except
for the investigation of potential soil nails ofthe adjacent
building that are on the site underground.
Services connected with the preparation of documents for
segregated Contracts for phased or fast track construction.
Continuous and/or detailed inspections of construction.
Design or review related to contractor's construction related
equipment, e.g., cranes hoist, etc.
Design for future expansion, facilities, systems and equipment.
Preparation of shop or fabrication Drawings, for example
reinforcing and structural steel detailing, etc.
Services provided after the issuance to the City of the final
Certificate of Retention Payment, or in the absence of a final
Certificate for Retention Payment, more than 60 days after the
date the Notice of Completion is filed at the County Re:corder.
2.3.l Extra Services are services that arise as a result of unforeseen circumstlillces
during the design or construction process. Examples include, but are not limited
to:
2.3.1.1 Services resulting from changes in scope or magnitude ofthe project as
describl~d and agreed to under the Basic .Services Agreement.
2.3 .1.2 Services resulting from revisions due to the enactment or revision of
codes, laws, or regulations subsequent to the preparation of documents.
2.3 .1.3 Services resulting from revisions due to changes required as a result of
the City's failure to render decisions in a timely manor.
2.3 ,IA Services resulting from corrections or revisions required because of
errors or omissions in construction by the Contractor.
2.3 .1.5 Services resulting from damage, as the result of fires, man made
disasters, or acts of God.
2.3 ,1.6 Review and design of alternate or substitute systems during construction,
2.3 .1.7 Review of additional shop drawing Submittals when occasioned by
improper handling or coordination by the Contractor.
2.3 .l.8 Overtime work required by the City.
February 29,2008
Page 7 of 11
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of South San Francisco and Watry Design, Inc. - Exhibit A
2.4 Accepted Additional Services
2.4,1 Pre-schematic / Schematic Phase added scope":
2.4.1.1 Added City Council meeting
2.4.l.2 Downto\Vl1 merchants meeting
2.4.1.3 Council member design review meeting
2.4.2 Expanded security system:
2.4.2,1 Provision of added security system components requested by the Owner.
2.4.3 Geothermal HVAC system:
2.4.3,1 Mechanical: Boring layout, mechanical design ofHV AC system for each
zone of anticipated individual tenant space.
2.4.3 ,2 Electrical design of support systems, controls for each zone of
anticipated individual tenant space HV AC equipment.
2.4.3.3 Architectural and Structural coordination of above components
2.4.4 Mixed use, Office area:
2.4.4.1 HV AC system design, plumbing and fire protection design,
specificClltions.
2.4.4.2 Electrical systems design, lighting plan, electrical conduit! outlets
planes), specifications
2.4.4.3 Architectural design of office and associated rooms, floor plans, reflected
ceiling plans, interior elevations, fixture layout, sections, finish schedule,
door-window schedule, details, specifications.
2.4.4.4 Structural design of slab on grade conditions, footings, floor plans,
sections details.
2.4.4.5 Signage design, room ill, etc..
2.4.5 Mixed use, Food service:
2.4.5.1 Design c:riteria for mechanical, plumbing, fire protection systems to
design fiJr built in capabilities to accommodate integration of future
systems of food service use.
2.4.5.2 Design criteria for electrical systems to design for built in capabilities to
accommodate integration of future systems of food service use,
2.4.5.3 Structural design of slab penetrations for future exhaust ducting system.
Architec:tural, structural coordination between disciplines
2.4.6 Photovoltaic (PV) System Assessment: The City of South San Francisco is in the
initial stages of ,;:valuating solar photovoltaic (PY) energy opportunities at its
Miller Street parking structure. The City's objectives are to:
. Gain a preliminary understanding ofPY technologies and applications,
. Understand the economics of solar energy.
. Understand the impact of solar energy on greenhouse gas emissions.
. Obtain competitive proposals for the installation ofPY,
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of South San Francisco and Watry Design, Inc. - Exhibit A
February 29, 2008
Page 8 of 11
2.4.6,1 Evaluation ofPV Potential
. Kick-off Meeting: Successful projects begin with development of a
detailed work plan and schedule. A kick-off meeting will help to ensure
that all expectations are clearly understood at the outset. The kick-off
meeting is an effective way to finalize the scope of each of the following
tasks, develop an implementation schedule, review expectations, and to
obtain drawings and other materials that will be required to complete the
project.
. Site Assl~ssment: Kenwood Energy will utilize plan documents to
generate an estimate of the facility's future energy use, and will evaluate
the area suited for PV installation.
. Life Cyde Cost Analysis: Kenwood Energy will utilize its proprietary
Photovoltaic Energy Production tool to assess the value of the energy
produced by each system. The tool takes into account such factors as
local solar radiation, system inclination and orientation angles, panel
efficienc:y, inverter efficiency, the utility's electric rate, the facility
energy use, and the effects of heat and dirt on PV system perfOlmance,
We will then complete a life cycle analysis that accounts for installation
costs, ongoing maintenance costs, energy cost inflation, PV panel output
degradation, rebates, and discount rates.
. Report: Kenwood Energy will complete a report that summarizes the
findings. Following is the anticipated outline for the Report.
Executive Summary
Description of the PV options, and the advantages and disadvantages
of each.
Overview of Incentive Programs.
Financial Analysis results summary.
Summary and recommendations,
2.4.6.2 Bid Specification Development: Kenwood Energy will support Watry in
the devdopment of a comprehensive bid specification that can be used as
part of the bid documents. The specification will:
. Define the objectives of the City
. Describe the Scope of Work to be provided
. Specify the PV System energy output criteria
. Detail warranty and performance standards
. Establish quality standards
. Detail bid submittal, pre-construction submittal, and post construction
submittal requirements
. Specify material requirements
. Detail installation standards
. Define the requirements of the Data Acquisition System
. Outline commissioning and start-up requirements
2.4.6.3 PV Architectural:
. Meetings; programming; preparation of Design Criteria Document (DB).
. Specifications
. Development and documentation of details, added information to
elevations, sections, enlarged elevations/ sections and floor plans
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of South San Francisco and Watry Design, Inc, - Exhibit A
February 29,2008
Page 9 of 11
. Coordination between disciplines and regulatory agencies.
. Bid support
. CA support
. Project management
2.4.6.4 PV Struc:tural:
. Calculatiions, structural design of upgrade of building components to
support the added gravity and lateral loads. Design of steel framing to
support the PV arrays and its connection to building is provided by the
Design Builder contractor,
. Development and documentation of details, including embeds, (~tc, to
accept connection of steel frame
. Bid support
. CA support
PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE
Phase 10l
Phase 102
Phase 103
Phase 104
Phase 105
Phase 106
Phase 300
Phase 301
Phase 302
Phase 400
Phase 500
Phase 501
Phase 600
Phase 60 I
Phase 999
Schematic Add Services
Security Add Services
Geothermal Loop
Office Tenant Improvements
Food Service
Management for Add service
Construction Documents finish
PV Design
PV Management
Plan Check
Bidding
PV Bidding
Construction Administration
PV Const. Administration
Reim bursab les
TOTAL
PROPOSED SCHEDULE
$5,200
$4,000
$16,000
$30,000
$13,500
$4,650
$592,705
$28,120
$l ,372
$28,000
$34,000
$3,200
$289,000
$3,200
$48,285
$1,101,232
February 29, 2008
Page 10 of 11
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of South San Francisco and Watry Design, Inc. - Exhibit A
Durati
..........ib .....TTaskName...
'--0
1
---2- .
-3
4
-5
6
'-7
......8--
9
m..~f6.... ....
if
--i2
i3'
-f4-'
....'i5
40
41""
42
--43
44
45
4
48
20753U
'city of South San' Francis co PS
Program Confirmation/Kickoff Phase
Prepare Schedule and work plan
PMT Meeting
Design Values Workshop Phase
In house design and analy sis of Options
Prepare massing renderings of two options
Maximum of 4 perspective archttectural mnderings
. besign Vallles V\forkShop
Prepare Cost Model
PMT Meeting
Design Phase I Downtown SubcommltteelC:ommunlty Input
Prepare presentation materials 2 preferred options
Downtown Subcommtttee.Communtty InplJt Meeting
Update Cost Model
PMT Meeting
Addttional Communtty Input
Design Phase II - City Council Approval
Prepare presentation materials
Ctty Council Meeting
PMT Meeting
Schematic Design Documents
Subconsuttants prepare documents
Documents submttted to Ctty
City Review of documents
Environmental Clearance
112wks
0,6 wks
2 daYl
1 day
2,8 wks
5 daYl
1 day
2 daYl
5 daYl
1 day
1 day
10,2 wks ,
40 day i
1 day
10 day l
16 wks
30 wks
5wks
12 wks
---Finish' ..
9/10/07 10/30/09
9/10/07 9/12/07
9/10/07 9/11/07
9/12/07 9/12/07
9/13/07 10/2/07
9/13/07 9/19/07
9/20/07 9/24/07
9/20/07 9/26/07
9/27/07 9/27/07
9/28/07 10/1/07
10/3/07 12/4/07
10/3/07 10/9/07
10/10/07 10/10/07
10/11/07 10/12/07
10/15/07 10/15/07
10/16/07 12/4/07
12/5/07 12/13/07
12/5/07 12/11/07
12/12/07 12/12/07
12/13/07 12/13/07
10/3/07 12/12/07
10/3/07 11/27i07
11/28/07 11/28/07
11/29/07 '12/1:2107
12/13/07 4/2/081
12/14/07 7/10/08'
12/14/07 1/171081
4/3/08 6/25/08
6/26/08 7/2/08
7/3/08 7/9/08
7/10/08 711 0/08
7/11/08 8/22/08
7/11/08 7/31/08
8/1/08 8/7/08
8/8/08 8/14/08
8/22/08 8/22/08
8/25/08 10/29/08
8/25/08 8/25/08
9/2/08 9/2/08
9/10/08 '9116/oa
9/24/08 9/30/08
10/8/08 10/8/08
10/9/08 10/29/08
10/30/08 10/30/09
10/30/08 10/30/08
10/31/08 10/29/0S
10/30/0S 10/30/0S
Construction Documents Phase
Prepare 15% Construction Documents
Prepare 90% Construction Documents
Ctty Review
Prepare Final Plan Check Submtttal
Submtt f or Pian Check
City Plan Check
First Review
Respond to comments
Second Rev iew
Respond to comments
Issue Permtt
Bidding Phase
Contractors pick up drav.ings
Pre Bid meeting
Addendum 1
Addendum 2
Bids Due
Award process
Construction
Notice to Proceed
C onst ruct ion
Construction Complete
1wk
1 day
6,2 wks
3wks
1wk
1wk
1 day
3 wks
52.4 wks
1 day
52 wks
1 day
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of South San Francisco and Watry Design, Inc, - Exhibit A
February 29, 2008
Page 11 of 11