HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 148-1978· RESOLUTION NO. 148-78
-
CITY COUNCIL ,' CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE HCDA THREE-YEAR PLAN AND
PROJECT SUMMARY APPLICATION AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE A COOPERATION AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the Housing and Community Development'Act of 1974 and the
Housing and Community Development Act of 1977 both provide for the distribution
of Federal funds through the process of community development block grants; and
WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco may cooperate and partici-
pate with the County of San Mateo which has heretofore qualified as an Urban
County under the Act; and
WHEREAS, the City has prepared a Three Year ~Plan for fiscal years
1980, 1981, and 1982 which includes a community profile, summary of community
'development and housing needs and a comprehensive strategy; and
WHEREAS, a Three Year Project Summary has been prepared proposing
various HCDA funded projects; and
WHEREAS, a Cooperation Agreement has been prepared which sets forth
the formal relationship between the City and County to cooperate and co-partici-
pate in the program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the-City Council of the City of
South San Francisco that the HCDA Three-Year Plan (Exhibit "A"), Three-Year
Project Summary (Exhibit "B") and Cooperation Agreement (Exhibit "C") are here-
by adopted and the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute said Cooperation
Agreement.
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly intro-
duced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco
at a regul ar
by the following vote-
meeting held on the 15th
day of November
· 1978,
AYES:
Councilmen Ro~nald G. Acosta~ Emanuele N. Damonte and Terry J. Mirri
NOES:
ABSTAINED:
Coun_ci Iwoman Roberta Cerri Tegl ia
- .
-
None
- .
Councilman.William A. Borba
ABSENT'
None
U.S. DEPkRTMENT OF HOUSING ~r URBAN DEVELOPMENT
'COMlv~U~IITY~DEVELOPMENT ANIDR~ ./USING PLAN SUMMARY
· COMMUNITY PROFILE
1. NAME OF AI)P4'~ ~IT
City of Sou'tn San Francisco
2. AP~LICATION/G RANT NUMBER
T .... ~ IOD OF' APPLICAltl LITY 4.~[~] Orlgihll (E.~), Thrw YNr~)
,m: JulY, 1979 To: June, 1982.
'
COMMUNITY PROFILE: (~ide ~ brMf MrMt/~ M ~W
Amendment
Population Charac~teristics
The 1970 U.S. Census indicated a total population in South San Francisco of 46,646.
The'December, 1977, population was estimated to be 49,287 persons based on an assumed
· number of 2.92 persons.per, household as opposed to 3.34 in 1970,
Historically, the population increased at'the greatest rate between'1950 and 1970
when an average of 1,359 persons were added each year, During the 1970's the popula-
tion begain leveling off when an average of 396 persons were being included each year
to the total population although an average of 405 new dwelling'units were being
constructed each year. This phenomenon of adding more dwelling units than persons
each year was being caused by the significant decrease in persons per household which
has been very characteristic of the 1970's.
Ethnic Compos i ti on
In 1970 the composition of ethnic groups in South San Francisco included the following-
Ethnic Groups Number Per~enta~qe
American Indian ~"' 233 0.5%
Black 700 1.5%
Orienta 1 1,399 ? 3.0%
Spanish Surname/Mexican American 8,863 19.0%
White 35,451 76.0%
46,646 100.0%
A 1976 Community Profile and Housing Needs Study indicated the following changes since
1970 in ethnic composition in the HCDA Target Area'
DATA SOURCES:
1970 U.S. Census
Consolidated General Plan Update Information; June, 1978
Commu'nity Profile .and Housing Needs; August, 1976
Downtown South San Francisco Economic Analysis; July, 1978
C; lunity Profile and Housing Needs; August, 1976
Exhibit "A"
--u'D ?062
Community 'Profile
Page 2
HCDA Tar_qet Area
Ethnic Composition Chanqes
Group 1970
American Indian
Black 1%
Oriental 2%
Spanish Surname/Mexican American 27%
White 69%
Other -
100%
1976
_
1%
1% O~
4% + 2%
37% +10%
55% -14%
2% + 2%
100%
in conclusion, this survey indicated a 14% increase in ethnic groups in the HCDA
'Target Area between 1970 and 1976.
-Income Characteristics
.
In 1970 the median fmaily income of all househ°lds in South San Francisco was S12,280.
There were a total of 835 households or 2,358 persons having incomes below the poverty
level. This represented 6.2% of all City households and 5.1% of all persons in 1970.
In addition, there were approximately 1,333 families classified as very low income
{50% of median income} and a total of about 3,776 families with lower incomes
of median income)..
In the 1976 survey of the HCDA Target Area, it revealed that 57% of all households
surveyed {about 565 of 991 total) had incomes below the income limits for Section 8
rental assistance {Table 16). The survey also found that approximately 29% of all
households were paying 25% of their income or greater on housing expenses (Table 12}.
Aqes
Age groups in South San Francisco show the following major trends during the 1970's;
-The group showing the largest increase in persons is for the 25-34 age
group.
-The 5-14-year group showed the greatest decrease in persons.
-Senior Citizens {65+) indicate a steady increase in population.
-Teenagers are increasing numerically but are staying relatively the same
percentage.
Community Profile
Page -3
-'-The following age group data is from the 1970 Census and a 1977 estimate:
Estimate Changes in Age Groups
in South San Francisco 1970-1977
1970 Census
1977 Estimates
Aqe Groups Number Percentaqe .Number Percentaqe
Under 5 4,070 8.7% 4,140 8.4%
$- 14 10,.180 21.8% 9,217 18.7%
15- 24 7,933 17,0% 8,428 17.1%
25-34 6,154 13.2% 8,527 17.3%
35-44 6,353 13.6% 6,604 13.
45-54 6,084 13.0% 5,668 11.5%
55-64- · 3,542 7.6% 3,943 8.0%
Economic Conditions
2,330 5.0% 2,'760 5.6%
46,646 100.0% 49 '287 100.0%
. .
In 1970therewere 19,496 persons of 16 years or older of South San Francisco residents
Who were employed in various industries, positions and fields. This is very similar
to the approximately 19,146+. employees who work in South San Francisc° according to
the City Finance Department. Unemployment in the community has averaged approximately
6.7% during the past few years according to the State Employment Development Depart-
ment.
The Target Area Study showed that 72% of the head of households were gainfully
employed and 28% were unemployed (T. his included students and other and is probably
not consistent with the methodology used for State and National unemployment rates).
Nearly a third of these residents were craftsmen (29%), followed next by laborers
(17%), retired (14%), service (13%), professional (12%) and so on.
Housing Conditions
The 1970 Census identified 380 housing units lacking some or all plumbing facilities.
The Target Area Survey indicated the fOllowing housing conditions:
Standard 70%
Rehabilitation Feasible 13%
Rehabilitation Questionable 7%
SubStandard 10%
(Table 19)
Community Profile
'Page 4
During 1977 the City Building Division issued building permits for a net increase of
210 dwelling units. There were permits for 76 single-family units, 159 multiple-
'family units and demolition permits for ll units. Already during the first nine
months of 1978 permits have been issued for 514 new dwelling, units.
.-
'Median sale prices of homes in 1977 was $65,000. Vacancy rates were 1,19%. Median
rental costs were $234 in early 1978 and there were 396 assisted and public housing
Units. (See Technical Supplement)
Land Uses
There are 591 acres of vacant land within the corporate limits of South San Francisco
in June, 1978. Land uses in South San Francisco include the following'
Residential 28,4%
Commerc i al 6.8%
Industrial 22.4%
Public 10,0%
Vacant ll .3%
Streets 16.2%
· ..
Other 4.. 9%
100,0%
U S O~PARTMENT OF HOUSIN hiD URBAN DEVELOPMENT
COMMUNITY' DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING PLAN SUMMARY
· SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
,----- AND HOUSING NEEDS
'£1R'IOD OF ApiaLICABILITY
.rom: July, 1979 To: June, 1982
1'. NAME 0F AI~PLICANT
City of South San Francisco
2. APPLICATION/GI~ANT NUM~EIII
4. ~ Original (£v,~/Thr~
i~ Revision I:~ Amendrnem _
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING NEEDS: (Provide · b~.ief na,'rerive in ecco/,den~e' with in~rructie~J/
A number of various interrelated community development and housing needs now exist
throughout the community which must be addressed before they become any worse..
These generally include: The'need for redeveloping the public improvements neces-
sary to revitalize outdated commercial and industrial areas; housing improvement
and assistance needs; employment needs; traffic remedies; comprehensive planning
solutions; new and improved public utilities and services; parking demands in the
urban center; improvement of publ ic facilities for the senior citizens and other
tel ated needs. .-
,.,. Neiqhborhoo,d Revitalization Needs
The major revitalization needs of the HCDA Target Area neighborhood includes the
fol 1 owing'
1. Revitalization of public improvements, elimination of handicapped
barriers, addition of amenities, improved lighting and utilities and
· new sidewalks and related improvements for Grand Avenue between Spruce
Avenue and Airport Boulevard. These improvements are needed since this
is the heart of the only neighborhood .shopping area which chiefly bene-
fits low and moderate income households and senior citizens. If these
needs are not addressed, the area will continue, to deteriorate, stores
will close, undesirable uses will move into the area and it would
cease to function as a viable neighborhood shopping area and meeting place.
for senior citizens and nearby residents.
The redeVelopment of blighted, vacant, deteriorated and inadequately '~
serviced industri.al and Commercial properties must be addressed. Many
of the older industrial and manufacturing companies (such as Bethlehem
Steel) used to provide a significant amount of employment for the
citizens of South San Francisco and the entire peninsula area. Many
lower income workers were once employed in these plants 'as laborers.
Gradually, as these uses closed down or the operation substantially
modified, the result was an increase in unemployment especially in the
Target Area residential areas. Besides meeting the unemployment needs,
6 DATA SOURCES:
1969 Housing Element
Proposed Updated 1979 Housing Element
Community Profile and Housing Needs; August, 1976
-l~wntown South San Francisco Economic Analysis
~d Town Revitalization Plan Phases I, II, III
·
·
, - x
Forms HUD-70t 5.2 and HUD-70tB.2A..Which ere IbloIttte PI~e I Df 3 Plt~I
HUD.yes3 iS-?sl
Community Development and Housing Needs
Page 2
improvements are needed to replace the existing infrastructure such as
outmoded sewers, drainage-and so on. Also, financial incentives must be
created to assist in making these properties., more financially feasible
to redevelopers.
3, The need for more extens,ive and detailed comprehensive planning.and study
is necessary before any major con~nitments from developers and the City
can be made to support new improvements, Concentrated efforts must be
made to analyze, coordinate and plan for the revitalization of these
blighted areas. Community development planning is. necessary to incorporate
the various viewpoints of the public and help to produce projects which
provide greater benefits to the low, 'moderate income groups. Such planning
will provide necessary conceptual plans, environmental analyses, financial
impact reports and other studies which would meet many of the community's
greatest needs. Without such studies, the community would not have
adequate information to make the many long-term'decisions which will
eventually have some significant impacts.
CPmmunity-Wide Housin~ Needs
As stated in the proposed 1979 Updated Housing Element,. some of the major housing
problems in the community include:
-Many households cannot afford to pay the high cost of housing expenses
unless there are two household incomes,
-There is readily identifiable housing deterioration of many older dwelling
uni ts.
-There is a need for more senior citizen and.affordable housing units for
various groups.
-The low vacancy rates restrict household mobility.
-There will be amarket demand of up to 500-800 dwelling units a year on the
average over the next five years.
-Over 1,500 households are paying more than they can afford for housing.
-Over 1,100 households appear to be in overcrowded conditions.
-Over 500 households live in substandard or deteriorated dwelling units.
Of all of the above needs, affordability seems to be the most widespread; and
the rehabilitation of deteriorated units would have the greatest impact to provide
affordable, standard housing without the need for renl~al or owner income supplements.
Total estimated housing assistance needs in South San Francisco based on the County
lousing Assistance Plan, the U.S. Census and recent studies and surveys by the
~lanning Division indicate the following needs'
Community Development and Housing Needs
Page -3
Total Housing
Assistance Needs
(Having 1 or more
needs)
Owners 307
Renters 2,.649
TOTAL 2,956
Elderly or',
HandicapPed ~'~
·
0 ·° ~
659
709
Large
Family Family
(4 or less) (5 or more)
201 56
1,809 lB1
2,010 237
Com~nunity-Wide Needs for Public Facilities
The Senior Citizens Center (located at 230'Grand Avenue) may eventually need to be
· ·remodeled, enlarged, replaced or otherwise improved to meet the senior citizens
needs of the Target Area. This need should be further analyzed as a part of the
comprehensive planning process for the revitalization of the Grand Avenue neighbor-
hood area.
In addition, there are perceived needs for a neighborhood teen center. However,
there is no readily available information on their space needs, activities, location
of a facility, or many other criteria which would be necessary before such a center
could be established.
Economic-Development Needs
Major economic-related needs include:
-New employment opportunities for the unemployed and underemployed.
-Expanded retail and commercial uses to meet the neighborhood market demand.
-The need for low interest financing for the rehabilitation of dilapidated and
deteriorated structures and interest rate subsidies to aid in creating
assessment districts which are more feasible for recipients.
-Greater emphasis on marketing, advertising and promoting of revitalized areas
to attract new consumers.
-Greater diversity of commercial uses with an emphasis on restaurants and
specialty shops along with neighborhood conVenience stores for senior and
moderate income families.
-The need to assemble land at reasonable costs for the most beneficial uses.
DEPARTMENT O1: HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
COMMOI~IITY DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING PI.AN SUMMARY
COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY
OF APPLICABILITY
July, 1979 To: June, 1982
t. NAME OF APPLICANT
City of South San Francisco
·
;~. APPLICATION/GR&NT NUMBER
4. ~ Original (Ev~ ThrN Yemr~)
[~ Revision ' -
(Dated)
r-i Amendment
(Dared)
.
5 COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY: (Provide a narrative in ~ccordance with insl~uctior~t
During the past.couple of years the City of South San Francisco has been developing
a comprehensive strategy to address the major community development and housing
needs of the area. Since the needs have been identified as multi-faceted, interre-.
lated, complex and constantly changing, an effective strategy has been developed to
meet these varied components. Our approach has been to formulate a long-range,
goal-and-objective-oriented approach which utilizes a flexible yet dynamic system of
implementaion activities. The system has been analyzed to create an effective and
cooperative approach based on recognized performance 'standards. Solutions must be
ongoing and cumulative, recognizing that steady progress will be necessary to keep
the momentum moving. ...
A model of the strategy system has been prepared and is presented on the following
.page. Major compenents of this system 'include: .
-Major Needs
-Citizen Input
-Coordination
-Coordinator
-Plans
-Funding AlternatiVes
-Possi bl e Projects
This model attempts to identify many of the .various "players", projects, funding
sources, etc. It attempts to outline the basic system for the. next three to five
years.
MODEL
OF
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
·
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND NEIGHBORHOOD
STRATEGY
·
AREA SYSTEM
Citizen Input
· Major Needs
Strategy
Coord ina ti on
.Coordingating
Agencies
Plans
Funding
A1 ternati v'e~
Year Projects
Advisory Committee
Busi ness persons
EconOmic Traffic
Ci ti zens Property Owners
Public Grand
Housing Improvements Avenue
·
Others
Other
Neighborhood· Strategy Area
City Council
Redevelopment
Agency
Planning Planning
Division Commission
County
HCDA Division
Housing.. Authority Parking Authority HUD
General Plan -
Redevelopment
Plan
Specific
Plans
o
·
3 Year HCDA Plan
SBA Tax Increment ~Bonds Assessment Districts
UDAG HCDA EDA Revenue-Sharing Gas Tax
General FUnd SP Underground Cal Trans
Other Federal, State and Local Grants Private
Housing Public Comprehensive
Grand Avenue Rehabilitation Housing Planning
. .
Major Off-Site Acquisition of
Capital Improvements Blighted Buildings
Improvements _
,Needs A~sessment for'
New, and Improved Public Facilities/
Parking Seniors and Teens
Comprehensive Strategy
Page 3
As shown., our comprehensive strategy has many complex components. However, the major
coordinating method will be the establishment of a Neighborhood Strategy Area which
.wi'Il tie together these various related, yet sometimes independent, components. The
'--City Council, the Planning Commission and· the proposed Redevelopment Agency and their
staff would become the major boards which will provide the policy guidance, set pri-
orities, prepare plans and implement these projects..
It is important to note that our community strategy shows the relationship that HCDA
will have with the many other sources of funds and projects. HCDA will provide much
of the basic financing for studies, administration and coordination of the rest of the
'program and strategy. In addition, HCDA funds will be used to provide'funds to pro-
vide some substantial physical results in the early stages of the entire effort.
General Objectives
The various objectives of our comprehensive Strategy include the following:
1. To rehabilitate deteriorating dwelling units of low and moderate income
househol ds.
2. To eliminate slums and blight and provide improvements in a lower and
moderate income shopping area.
3. To provide ongoing comprehensive planning services addressing the major
housing and community development needs, problems and solutions.
4. To undertake redevelopment projects in blighted or deteriorating areas
where a comprehensive approach is needed to reverse adverse conditions
and including economic development effOrts to increase employment.
5. To develop an increased local capacity to plan, coordinate and. implement
housing and cOmmunity development programs.
6. To increase citizen input with the objective of creating an expanded ad-
visory committee containing a cross section of members of the residen-
tial, commercial and industrial communities.
7. To create self-funded projects which utilize minimum public resources
and maximize private investment.
Reasons for Target Area Selection
. .
1. Downtown/Grand Avenue Area
- _
This area was selected because of the blighted condition, physical obso-
lescence, economic decline, lack of handicapped facilities, )~roximity
to low income boarding houses, its. use by lower income shoppers, lack of
adequate utilities, its overall need for various improvements and the lo-
cation of the Senior Citizen Center on Grand Avenue.
2. Peck's, Grand and Irish Town Residential Areas
This area conl~ains the largest concentration of deteriorating dwelling units
COmprehens i ve Strategy
Page 4
in the community. It also contains a substantial number of lower and
moderate income households, The area has existing public improvements
including streets, sidewalks, utilities, etc~. Two parks were determined to
be .needed in the Peck's area, and they are being installed during the
fourth HCDA program year. ~.
Bethl,ehem Stee] and Surroundin,q Areas
This area contains a closed steel plant, blighted structUres and is physically
obsolete. There are major opportunities on this site for redevelopment and
employment for low and moderate income households. A redevelopment project
could be formed, around this area and tax increments could be captured to
fund various capital improvements and to-finance long-range rehabilitation
of dwellings and provide expanded housing' opportunities in the older residen-
tial areas.
Priorities
'Major priorities of projects have been established for each major portion of the
'strategy. However, the major categories have not been.prioritized since each of them
are of similar importance, and our long-range comprehensive strategy will emphasis
all .categories equally.
Needs
Assessments
- Major Public Comprehensive For Public
Cateqories Housing Improvements Planning Facilities Economic Redevelopment
Priorities- 1. New 1. Grand 1. Redevelop- 1 Senior 1. Employ- 1. Tax
Construc- Avenue ment Plan Citizens ment Incre-
tion ments
2. Housing 2. Parking 2. Land Use 2. Teens 2. Low 2. Land Use
Rehab Alternatives Interest Controls
Rehab
Loans
3. Housing 3. Major 3. Tax Incre- 3. Others 3. EDA 3. Limited
Assis- Traffic ment Study Acquisi-
tance Cap Imp tion
4. Public .4. Indus- 4. EIR's 4. SBA 4. Other
Housing trial
Off-sites
5. Other 5. Utilities 5. Fiscal
Housing Impact
Projects Reports
5. Other
6, Public
Facilities
Study
Comprehensive Strategy
Page 5
Nei_qhborhood Revitalization Strategy
Short-Term Objectives .'
1. To revitalize the public improvements, provide additional parking, rehabilitate
the facades of deteriorating structures, provide amenities, resolve traffic
problems and generally upgrade the Grand Avenue area from Airport Boulevard
to Spruce Avenue by combining. HCDA, assessment district, bonds and other
available funding sources.
2. To make short-term improvements to the industrial area public rights-of-way,
including street widening, traffic signals, new and modified on-and-off
ramps, and other short-term capital improvements,
3. TO meet the open space needs of the residential neighborhoOds (two neighbor-
hood parks are being constructed during 1978-79).
4. TO prepare all basic planning studies necessary to implement various redevelop-
ment activities.
.. Lon,q-Ran.qe .Objectives'
1. To redevelop all blighting influences and construct parking structures in
the downtown Grand Avenue.
2. To instal!._m_a_jor public improvements including an underpass at East Grand
Avenue and the Southern Pacific Railroad and an overpass at Oyster Point
Boulevard-and Highway lO1.
3. To adopt and implement a Redevelopment Plan for the entire strategy area.
4.. To install new utilities for the oldest portions of the project,
5. To attract major new developments including restaurants, offices, manu-
facturing and other employment intensive uses,
Community-Wide Housin,q Strate.qy
'The major components of'our housing program and the various funding sources include
the following'
l, Public Housing ~'
2. Rehabilitation Program
3. Assisted Programs
· ~4..New Construction
Tax Increment
Fundin.~ Source
HUD HCDA City
X X
Private
X X X X
X X
Comprehensive Strategy
Page 6
The major housing goals over the next three years include'
,Comp.lete an additional 40 units of public housing for a total of 80.
-Complete rehabilitation of up to ten units a year.
-Assist private deVelopers to process, construct and occupy, approximately
5.00-800 new conventionally financed units.
-Work with the Building Division to develop a housing inspection program.
-Obtain commitments for Section 8 (new, existing and rehabilitated) to be
located throughoUt the City in accordance with the Housing Assistance Plan
and Housing .Element. Our goal is to obtain a City percentage of assisted
and public housing, units equal to the average number of such units per popu-
lation as located throughout the County of San Mateo.
Public Facility Strategy
"The basic strategy is to identify the special needs of senior citizens and teens,
develop a plan to provide expanded or new facilities, prepare an implementation
program and obtain various financing alternatives to provide any needed new or
improved facilities. ·
Economic Development Strate~qy
The basic economic approach is to provide public dollars as "seed" money to attract
and be an incentive for a maximum amount of private reinvestment and thereby make
redevelopment more financially feasible,
The City will also work with the various residential, commercial and industriai
property owners to help make revitalization more viable because of "economies of
scale" savings as a result of cooperative effects by private enterprise,
Although an exact number of new employment opportunities is very difficult to
estimate, as a result of HCDA funded projects it is possible to identify those
projects which will have the greatest employment benefits especially for low and
moderate income workers:
1..Construction-related jobs for housing rehabilitation including carpentry,
roofing, electrical, plumbing and other rehabilitation work.
Construction jobs for Grand Avenue improvements including masons, land-
scapers, electricians, general laborers, graders, etc,
3, New positions in expanded commercial uses including restaurant work, office
workers, manufacturing, warehousing, etc.
4, Other opportunities in related projects and businesses.
Comprehensive Strategy
Page 7
5.. Tax revenues from the City-, County, special districts, etc. on all new
constructi on.
6. New sales taxes to the City.
Neighborhood Strategy Area
Implementation Schedule
1979-80
....
1980-81
1981-82
1. Complete Phase II of
Grand Avenue Improvement
1. Complete Phase III
of Grand Avenue
Improvement
1. Complete Phase IV of
Grand Avenue Improve-
ment. -
Rehabilitate approxi-
mately 8-10 housing
uni ts
2. Begin preparing
working drawings
for major capital
improvements
2. Begin first phase of
major capital improve-
ments in industrial area
3. Prepare and adopt EIR,
-fiscal impact report
and preliminary redevelop-
ment plan
3. Begin setting up
i n-house rehabi 1 i-
tation capacity
3. Begin rehabilitation
in-house
4. Begin remodeling deterio-
--- rating building facades
5. Provide new assisted
and public housing units
4. Provide additional
pa rk i ng
..
.
5. Adopt Redevelopment
Plan
4. Complete short-'ter~
parking improvements
5.. Apply.for entitlement
HCDA funding for
South San Francisco
6. Begin providing new public 6. Prepare study on
.parking public facility
needs
6. ImPlement Redevelopment
Plan ~
7..Begin using two new
neighborhood parks
7. Accelerate housing
and commerci al
rehabi 1 i ration
7, Sell bonds to implement
major redevelopment pub-
lic improvements
8. Begin expanding Rehabili-
tation Program into a com-
bined housing and commer-
cial improvement'program
8, Add new and assisted 8, Add new, assisted and
housing units senior citizen housing
9. Obtain commitments for SBA, 9, New Senior Citizen
EDA, UDAG, Housing Programs housing
and other similar programs
for the Neighborhood
Strategy Area.
O. New Senior Citizen housing
· NAME OF APPLICANT
City of South San Francisco
;~. APPLICATION/GRANT NUMBER .
(IMPORTANT: ,See imb~c tion~
complating ~i~ ~ction.]
, .
·
l, Downtown Revitalization Project
2. Housing Improvement Program
3. Comprehensive Planning
U.8. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPME'NT AND HOUSING PLAN SUMMARY
THREE YEAR ~CT SUMMARY
3. PERIOD OF APPLICABILITY
F,~:July 1, 1979 To:June 30, 1982
PROJECT
NUMBER
(b)
T E L R
R F O
A E W
TR tu
G N
,E
(c) (all {el
·
'4.
[~ OriginIJ {Eve~ ~e ym~z,l
~ A~~nt,. dlad
TIMING AND ESTIMATED FUNDING ~/n ~~ of~)
PROGRAM BENEFIT OF E~IMATED CDBG FUNDS
YEAR I YEAR II YEAR III
LOW/MOO OTHER LOW/MOO OTHER LOW/MOD OTHER
BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT
Ii) Ii)
Es'ri.
MATED
OTHER
FUNDS
X X
{k) (I) (m)
X X
200 150 150 350
X X
50 50 75
15 5 15 5 15 5 15
mm!
6. SUBTOTALS $ 265 s
7' TOTAL COSTS TO BE PAIOWITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS
.._8 E S.I'?_MA____.T E O EXP. ENDITURE$ UENEFITTIN~O LOW.A_N_O MODERATE .INCOME WE R$O.N9 /SUni O! C_~.~.uFjn. Z.E, ,, ,nd *1
U, LiNE Il AS A PERCENT OF LINE 7
I . . i ~ . .' _ .,r _ . .,,
Pege 1 of 1 Pages
5 ~$ 215 .s 5 $ 240
_ _
735,000
720,000
198.
HUD.70~
Illllllllil
TOWN OF ¢OLMA
PROPOSED 1979-1982 NEIGHBORHOOD STRATEGY AREA
{Portions of Census Trac_'" ,,--)l, 6022j and' 6.0.23_)..
-
.,F
MAP OF'
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
~ .
SAN MAT£O COUNTY. CALIFORNIA
It' ~ '" '"'". - "' _..~
.
N
i
-'7. -=Low Income-Persons
.,-(.At of below Section
8 Income Limits)
57%
· Minori. ty Group Residents 45%
XSubstandard and Deteriorated
Housing Uni ts 30.0%
,
Source: Community Profile
and Housing Needs,
August, 1976
U.S DEPARTMENT OF Hr, NG AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
ANNUAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
PROJECT SUMMARY
·
3. PERIOD OF APPLICABILITY
FROM TO
July l, 1979 June 30, 1982
B, NAME OF PROJECT
Downtown Revi tal i zation
B. ENTITY WITH RESPONSIBILITY FOR CARRYING OUT THE PROJECT
City of South San Francisco, Planning Division
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
11. CENSUS TR/~CT(S)/ENUMERATION DISTRICT(S)
1. I~,..,dlE OF APPLICANT
City of South San Francisco
2. APPLICATION/GRANT NUMBER
· 6. PROJECT NUMBER
REVIBIONo DATED
AMENDMENT, DATED '
7. ENvIRONMEhlTAL REVIEW ~,"'T'ATU~
'. B.'TELEPHONE NUMBER
873-8000 Extension 246
·
Completion of the public improvements for the Grand Avenue neighborhood shopping area
as shown in the South San Francisco Old Town Revitalization, Phase III - Schematic.
Site Plan· HCDA funds will be combined with pilot project' funds, assessment district
funds, private monies, revenue sharing and all other available resources to complete
this project· Improvements will include the'~econfiguration of Grand Avenue from
Spruce Avenue to Airport Boulevard and installation of street furniture and amenities
for' senior citizens, low and moderate income residents and other neighborhood residents
and shoppers, elimination of street barriers for the handicapped, landscaping, revised
parking; sidewalks,' new utilities, improved lighting to improve security and safety,
engineering administration and other related-costs and improvements· This project is
located in the center of the Neighborhood Strategy Area and it will provide a focal
~ CheCk'if continued on addit/onal pag~($) and attach.
·
6022
12. ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Completion of this four block improvement project in accordance with the recom.~endation
· of the Old Town* Revitalization Plan. .
I--I Check ff conrinued on additional paite($) and attach.
13. COB(:; COMPONENT ACTIVITIES
IList component acrivirie= uJing nmrnes of activitim shown
in Pert A. COST SUMMARY. Form HUD.7067.J
CDBG
LOW/MOD OTHER
BENEFIT BENEFIT
fa) lc)
$ $
PROGRAM YEAR FUNDS (in ~ou&~-~f~ of $)
OTHER
AMOUNT SOURCE
Id)
$
Grand Avenue Improvements
-4th Year Pilot Project
-Sth; 6th and 7th Year
-Revenue Sharing
=Assessment Distri ct
:. '. 154 4th Year HCDA
5OO
150
200+
Property (~,ners
-~4. Tota~ $ 500 $ $ 504
.
15. To~l ~ To Be Paid With Communi~ Dtvelopment Bilk Grant Funds (~m ofCo/um~ b ~dc)
- _
]'T [] ! I
Project Summary
Applicant' City of South San Francisco
From July l, 1979 to June 30, 1982
Name of Project- Downtown Revitalization
Page 2
point for other needed impPovements in this area. A majority of the shoppers'
have been identified as low or moderate income according to the Downtown Eco-
- _
nomic AnQlysis, July, 1978.
If possible, the.City proposes to borrow the next three years of HCDA funds
for this project and pay it off with the subsequent three years of entitlement
f~unds. This would result in a substantial reduction of total project costs be-
cause of inflation of labor, materials and financing. It would also permit the
improvements to be installed all at once rather than in various phases thereby
completing' the project in a more coordinated manner, Funding the remaining phases
.in the first year.rather than spreading it out over three years would also reduce
the assessments which individual property owners will be paying to supplement and
finance the remaining project costs.
FROM
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HC NG AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
ANNUAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
I. I~,.,.~IE OF APPLICANT
.City of South San Francisco
2. APPLICATION/GRANT NUMIEpI'
-.
. B. B. PROJECT NUMBER
PROJECT SUMMARY
3. PERIOD OF APPLICABILITY
TO
July 1, 1979 June 30, 1982
NAME OF PROJECT
Housing Improvement Program
ENTITY WITH RESPONSIBILITY FOR CARRYING OUT THE PROJECT
City of South San Francisco, Planning Division
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
RIEVISION. DATED
AMENDMENT, DATED
7. ENVIRONMENTAL ~EVIE)9 ~'rATI,,~
O.' TK LE P HeNE 'N'Uu I'E ~ -
873-8000, Extension 246
Continuation of the Housing Improvement Program began during the second HCDA year.
This project provides financing for'low and moderate income households and senior
citizens. The county Staff will continue administering the program using County
guidelines with any specific provisions for South.San Francisco. The City will con-
tinue providing liaison services between the-Coun{y and residents. Major provisions
co program will include the provisions for deferring loans and
low and moderate income households. In addition a ~axim~n of
past Housing Improvement Program .funds will be earmarked for
are on very low or fixed incomes and have a very serious
By the. third year it is expected that the City will establish
its own rehabilitation staff as part of' the proposed Redevelopment Agency. During
fiscal year 1980 it is p~ottpsqd.tha.t; the Ci,ty. Sta. ff will use .approximately 10-20..~ of
~ IL~ [.-nectc' ifconzlnueo on eddiUona/pageFs) and attacl~.
'11: CENSUSTRACTISJ/ENUMERATION DISTRICT(S)
602l and -6022
· 12.ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTs
This additional amount of financing will be combined with the previous HCDA Housing
financing and'Redevelopment Tax.Increment Financing. Approximately 8-10 units a
year will be rehabilitated during the next three years and it will increase substan-
tially thereafter.
of the South San Francis
some limited grants for
10% of all. proposed and
City'wide residents who
physical housing need.
El Check if continued on addiUona/ page[s) and artach.
13. CDBG COMPONENT ACTIVITIES PROGRAM YEAR FUNDS (in ~~x orS)
-
IList c~p~ent ~tivitiez uling names of ~tJviti~ sho~ CDBG O~ER
in ~A, ~STSUMMARY, Fo~ HUD.7~7.) LOW/MOD OTHER
AMOUNT' SOURCE
BENEFIT BENEFIT
Ia/ le/ lc/ Id/
$ $
· Housing, Mixed Use and Commercial
Improvement Project
150 25
..
14. Totals $ 150' $ 25 $ ~~-
·
15. Total Cost~ To Be Paid With Community Development Block Grant Fund~ (gum ofCo/urnr~b end'c) $175,000
. .
~Repleo~ 'r-.m'm HUD-7015.1'. which im Or. elate
Page 1 of 2 pages
m ~ · 11 ~!lr
Project Summary
Applicant: City of South San Francisco
From July 1,. 1979 to June 30, 1982
Name of Project: Housing Improvement Program
Page 2
these funds to provide staff assistance for mixed-Ose and 'non-residential pro-
perry owners to apply for Section 312, SBA or other low interest loan pro§r~s.
Eventually, the City may formulate its own rehabilitation financing program..
using tax increments from the proposed redevelopment project.
Rehabilitation of all types of structures would become a major emphasis in the
Neighborhood Strategy Area during the 1980's and beyond.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF H( NG AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
ANNUAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
PROJECT SUMMARY
·
3. PERIOD OF APPLICABILITY .
FROM TO
July 1, 1979 June 30, 1982
B. NAME OF PROJECT
Comprehensive Planning
8.
10.
3,
1. h~.,,dE OF APPLICANT
-CiiLv of South San Francisco
2. APPLICATION/GRANT NUMIER
~l IqEVISlON. DATED
~ AMENDMENTaD~TED
6. PROJECT NUMBER 7. E~VlaONMENTA.L
ENTITY WITH RESPONSIBILITY FOR CARRYING OUT THE PROJECT
City.of South San Francisco, Planning Di-vis~on
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
9.'TELEPHONE NUI.4~ER ' '
873-8000, extension 246
This project includes various comprehensive planning-activities related to the HCDA
program.including special studies for the Neighborhood Strategy Area and the corres-
ponding proposed Redevelopment Project. Comprehensive planning activities will include
financing a portion or all of such studies as .a Tax Increment Financing Study, En-
Vironmental Impact Report(s), Fiscal/Feasibil'ity Study, alternative detailed land use
studies, public facilities study, etc. Administration of these studies and general
planning and administration .of the overall HCDA program would come out of this project
fund. Some consultant services such as redevelopment legal serviCes, fiscal and en-
vironmental specailists may be necessary to carry out some of these planning activities.
It is anticipated that private property owners would combine efforts to pay for the
[][]( Check' if continued on additional page(s) and attach.
11. CENSUS TRACTIS)/ENUMERATION DISTRICT(S) ;
6021, 6022 and 6023
· , .
12. ANTICIPATE~) ACCOMPLISHMENTS
· 1. 0verall planning functions for entire HCDA program;
2. Tax Increment. feasibility study;
E[R for Redevelopment Project;
Adoption of a Redevelopment Plan;
Preparation of a Public Facilities
Other related studies, reports and
needs analysis; and
planning functions.
Check if con tinued on additional parers) and attach.
13. CDBG COMPONENT ACTIVITIES
(List component activities using names of activitie~ shown
in Parr A, COST SUMMARY, Form HUD-7067.)
PROGRAM YEAR FUNDS (in ~o,~m~s of $/
CDBG OTHER
LOW/MOD OTHER
AMOUNT
BENEFIT BENEFIT
(b) (C/ '(ali
SOURCE
S '$ S
Comprehensive Planning
45 15
14. Totals $ 45 S 15 $ ~
1.5. Total Costs To Be Paid With Community Development Block Grant Funds (Su~n of Colurnr~b antic) $ 60,000
__ ~
flepleoes~ HUD-7015.1. which il Obsolete Page 1 of 2 pales 'Uo-~6~
Project Summary
.Applicant: City of South San Francisco
From July l, 1979 to June 30, 1982
Name of Project: Comprehensive Planning
Page 2
major portions of any EIR's, Fiscal Impact Reports, etc. HCDA funds would
provide any additional amount necessary to complete or make these studies
more financially feasible.
I~$. DEI~ARTMEN1~ OF HO~. ,G AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
ANNUAL. COMMUI~tTY DEVELOPMENT PRO(~RAM
Fl: ~
_uly 1, 1979
-.3
1. OF APPLICANT
City of South San Fcancisco
COST:SUMMARY
4.
June 30, 1982
PART ~' SUMMARY OF RR~RAM ACTIVITY
(Impo~r: ~ Jn~c~s ~f~ claiming
~ui~tion of Red Pro~
Disposition
Public Facilities and Improvements -
Senior Centers
Parks, Playgrounds and Other Recreationai Facilities
· Centers for the Handicapped
·
Neighborhood Facilities
Solid Waste Disposal Facilities'
· Fire Protection Facilities and Equipment
Parking Facilities
Public Utilities, Other Than Water and Sewer Facilities
.
Street Improvements '
Water and S~wer Facilities
m.
Foundations and Platforms for Air Rights Sites
Pedestrian Malls and Walkways
Flood and Drainage Facilities
Specially Authorized Public Facilities and Improvements (/./~)
500,000
(1)
.$
12)
(3)
:4
,'
6
Clearance Activities -
Public Services
Interim A~i~tence
"7 --- -CompleTion o/l~revlou~ty'-ApproveO'ClTl~n'Rene~arl~ro]ects ......
FI~ Fm'm HUD-?OZS.6. which i, ObSOlete. . I've l 6f4 p~es.
HUD-7067
.
12
b
15
16
17
Relocation Payments and Ataiitance
AMOUNT
Payments for Lo~s of Rental Income
Removal' of Architectural Barriers
Specially Authorized A~istance to Privately Owned Utilities
!
Rehabilitation and pre~rvation Activiti~
· .
Rehabilitation of Public Residential Structures
Public Housing Modernization
Rehabilitation of Private Properti~
Code Enforcement
Historic Preservation
SPeCially Authorized Economic D~velopmen! Activiti.
-
Acquisition for Economic' Development
· .
Public Facilities and Improvement~ for Economic Development
· .
Commercial and Industrial Facilities
~pecial Activitie~ By Local Development Corporations, Etc. (Li~t)
.
SUBTOTAL
'Planning and Urban Environmental Design (See Parr B of thi# form.)
Development of a C~mprehemive Community Development Plan
Development of a Policy-Planning-Management Capacity
Specially Authorized Comprehensive Planning Activities
General Administration (From Pert C, Line 6)
Contingencies and/or Local Option Activities (Not to exceed lO~ of ~'nount mown in
Parr D, Line I)
.'
TOTAL PROGRAM COSTS (,g~m of Lin~ 15 through 18)
· ·
' l~age 2,of 4 pases
·
·
175,000 ,
60,000
$735,000 t $
HU i~-7~'j~7
PART B. DE alpTION OF: PLANNING AND URBAN EN¥1FIONM NTAL DEl, lON CO~T$
These coSts are explained in the Comprehensive Planning Project Summary. Most of these
costs will be used to finance a portion of the special studies related to the Neighbor-
hood Strategy Area or the proposed Redevelopment Porject. In addition the ovgrall
'-'~lanning and administration for the entire HCDA program would be funded from these
:osts. Specific studies would probably include a tax ~ncrement feasibility study,
'IR's, preparation and adoption of a Redevelopment Plad., preparation and adoption of
.a .Redevelopment Plan, preparation of a public facilities: needs analysis and other re-
.
ports and planning functions.
[~ Check ff continued on eddition~lpaR($}
' PART C. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION COSTS
Line (~ inst~ctions for d~r/prions of ~minis~ti~ ~Uvi~ ~fo~
Ge~r~ Mana~ment, Oversi~t a~ C~rdination ·
Indir~ ~s (Allowable ff ~ar~ puget ~ a ~st all~ti~ plan)
~tizen Pa~icipation
.'2
5
[
Environmental Studies Necessary to Comply With Environmental Regulations
$ $
Other fL/st)
,$
Total General Administratic~n Cc~ts (Sum of Line~ I through 5)
.. , Page3of 4pa~s
$ $
HUD,-~O67 16-78!
'r
3
PART D. BLOCK GRANT RESOURCES FOR PROGRAM COSTS
Entitlement Amount
Le~: Rel~ymen! of Urban Rengw~I/NDP Loans
,
{Iran! Wiffiheld for Repeymen! of HUD-Gu~'~t~ Lo~n $
·
·
Gran! Amount For Program Activities (Line I minuJ sum o! Line,s 2 and3)
. . ·
Program Income
Surplus From Urban Renewal/NDP Settlement
· ~ ·
Loan Proceeds
Reprogrammed Unobligated Funds From Prior Program Year (Attach
TOTAL BLOCK GRANT RESOURCES FOR PROGRAM costs
(Sum of Lines 4 thru 8)
PART E. SUMMARY OF PROGRAM BENEFIT
·
'Costs Subject to Progran~ Benefit Rules '. ~'' '
Exl:~nditur~ Principally Benefitting Lo~- and Moderete-lncome Per~.ons
Line 2 ~ a Percent of Line 1
Other Expenditures
Line 4 as a Percent of Line 1
t .
, $
.$
$
$ '$
AMOUNT
735,000
720,000
98 ~
FOR H~
L,~E ONLY
% %
'Page 4 of 2[ pages
!
COOPERATION AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEI-~NT, entered into this day of , 197'~',
between the C6UMTY OF SiN )t~TEo, apoiitical subdivision of'the Stat~ of
California, hereinafter referred to as "County" and the CITY OF ,
a duly incorporated city within the County of San l-~ateo, hereinafter referred
to as "City",
WITNESS ETH:
WHEREAS., the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, Public La-.-
93-383, enacted. ~ugust 22, 1974, and the Housing and Co--unity Developr?_nt _~.~
..
· . .
of 1977, Public Law 95-128, enacted October 12, 1977, both provide for the
distribution of federal funds through the process of community development
block grants, to eligible public entities; and
WHE~ZAS, those public entities which are eligible to receive said fu.~.~>
are cities with a population in excess of 50,000, 'hold harmless' public
entities, and urban counties; and
~r~RE.~3, public entities that do not othe~,~ise come within the
of an eligible public agency may cooperate and participate with an eli=~ible
public entity such as an urban county; and
~'THEPd~AS, the County of San Mateo has heretofore qualified as am urban
county under the Act, the County again solicits the cooperation and co-partici-
pation of public entities such as City in its application for federal assistance
under the Act for the fifth, sixth and seventh years (FY 1~80, 198! and
Exhibit "C"
~tEREAS, City, having a populatiom of less than 50,000 desires to
cooperate and co-participate with County in this venture; and
WHEREAS, a Cooperation Agreement by and between City and County est~!ishes
the formal relationship to cooperate and co-participate and is specifically
authorized under, the provisions of Government Code Sections 6502 and 26227; and
·
WHERE~AS, County is~in receipt of a communication'from the Umited Sta~s
Department of Housing and Urban Development, hereinafter referred to a~ = ,
.
~with regard to the requisites which must be included in said Cooperation Agre_~-
ment and which further stated that the same must be completed amd submitted by
November 2l, l~78; amd
WHEREAS, on , City did, by an official act or pro-
nouncement,'originally express its intent and desire to cooperate and par~icl-
. ~
pate with -County in its Plan application and to engage in housing and co~anity
development activities within its incorporated limits thereunder; an~
WHEREA~.~, City now desires-to enter into the instant Cooperation Agremmem~
~with the County of San Mateo so that it may qualify,, under applicable pro~sions
~f the Ac~ amd P~ regulations, as co-participant with County in eligible
~activities under the Act:
NOW, T~.RM~=MOP~, IN CONSIDERATION OF T}r~ FOREGOING, the parties h~r~to
agree as fo!low~:
1. Pur?os~. This agreement is for the purpose of enabling the Coumty
and the City ~o cooperate in undertaking, or assisting in undertaking, essential
community development and housing assistance activities, specifically urban
renewal and publicly assisted housing.
. (FY 1980,1981 ~nd t582)
2. Term. The term of this agreement shall be zor programyears
and may be extended upon mutual agreement of the parties for pariods of cn~ or
-2-
more programyears subject to the provisions of the Act as it currently exists
or may subsequently be amended, and further subject to the lawful regulations
of HUD, and subject to the mutual agreement of the parties with regard to the .
content of future Plan applications by County.
3. Applicant's R~sponsibility. County, as applicant, has the ult~:e
responsibility, under the Act, and in the view of HUD, for analysis of needs,
setting of objectives, development of community development and housing
assistance plans, and the one year community development program~ and for prc--
viding assurances or certifications. Therefore, County requires of City, ~_~.d
City agrees to strict adherence to the Plan as approved, and to all assurances
and certifications provided.
4. Affirmative Action. Under County's ultimate supervision and respo~si-
_ o
bility, city.~oyenants and agrees that it will' abide by 'and enforce all
applicable affirmative action requirements including, but no~ limited to,
Executive Order i!246,.the.Equal Employment Opportunities Act, the San Mmteo
.County Affirmative Action Plan and local affirmative action plans.
51. County'S'Responsibility to .City. In addition ~to t~e foregoing obliga-
tions, Co~ty agrees:
A. County shall, in preparing future plans under the Act, solicit
to the extent allowed by the Act and all lawful HL~ regulations, City's p~tici-
·
.pation in the development of such future plans which refer to City's acti-~_:ias
under, the Act.
B. In accordance with instructions from HUD, County agrees to peak--_it
City to carry out the essential community development and housing assist~e
activities provided for in the application and in future plans.
C. County agrees to distribute funding it receives from its cur=emi
Plan application and in future plans, in accordance with the ter~s and
-3-
therein contained, or in accordance with such terms and conditions as require~
by the Act or HUD.
· 6. City's ResPonsibilities to County. In addition to the f0re~0inK
obligations-
.
A. .City agrees to expend any funds received by virtue of any of
County's' plans only in accordance with the terms-and conditions'state~ therein,
or as amended by HUD.
B. City agrees to cooperate with County, as it has heretofore, im the
development of future plan applications for funds under the Act, %~th regard to
housing and community development actiVities to be continued or. undertaken by
City'within its boundaries.
7." Headings'.. The headings in thisl document are merely for the convenience
.
. . .
of the parties,~ and do not"form a mate~iai part of this docUment. HeaLings
shall Jot be 'considered in the const, ruction of this document.
.
.
8. Te_~mination. This agreement may be terminated by the County if ~
'determines that all of City's activities are 'plainly inappropriate' under, the
Act. This agream, ent may also be terminated by either party, upon the lawful
completicn by City of its housing and communitydevelopment activities under
any particular application by County, upon ~JD approval of said completion,
by thirty days' written notice to the other party. However, termination for
any cause or by any method shall take effect only at the end of the pregram
year for which an application has been submitted to HUD.
9. ~.finor Amendments. to the Agreement. Should it become necessary to
change the language of this agreement to meet HUD approval, withoutma~mno'-' ~
ma~or changes and without altering the intent of the agreement, such chamges
may be made administratively by the ~ of .
-4-
Ail remaining provisions of said agreement shall remain in full force
and effect for the term provided herein.
,
Executed on the day and year. first above written in the City of
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
By
CI%~Y OF
By
ATTEST: