HomeMy WebLinkAbout07.27.22@500 SP CCWednesday, July 27, 2022
5:00 PM
City of South San Francisco
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
TELECONFERENCE MEETING
https://ssf-net.zoom.us/j/82441379671
Special City Council
Special Meeting Agenda
1
July 27, 2022Special City Council Special Meeting Agenda
TELECONFERENCE MEETING NOTICE
The purpose of conducting the meeting as described in this notice is to provide the safest environment for staff
and the public while allowing for public participation.
Councilmembers Coleman, Flores and Addiego, Vice Mayor Nicolas and Mayor Nagales and essential City
staff will participate via Teleconference.
Pursuant to Ralph M. Brown Act, Government Code Section 54953, all votes shall be by roll call due to
council members participating by teleconference.
The City Council will meet by teleconference, consistent with the Brown Act as amended by AB 361 (2021).
Under the amended rules, the City will not provide a physical location for members of the public to participate
in the teleconference meeting.
American Disability Act:
The City Clerk will provide materials in appropriate alternative formats to comply with the Americans with
Disabilities Act. Please send a written request to City Clerk Rosa Govea Acosta at 400 Grand Avenue, South
San Francisco, CA 94080, or email at [email protected]. Include your name, address, phone number, a brief
description of the requested materials, and preferred alternative format service at least 24-hours before the
meeting.
Accommodations: Individuals who require special assistance of a disability -related modification or
accommodation to participate in the meeting, including Interpretation Services, should contact the Office of the
City Clerk by email at [email protected], 24-hours before the meeting.
Notification in advance of the meeting will enable the City of South San Francisco to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting.
Page 2 City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/29/2022
2
July 27, 2022Special City Council Special Meeting Agenda
ZOOM LINK BELOW -NO REGISTRATION REQUIRED
Join Zoom meeting
https://ssf-net.zoom.us/j/82441379671
(Enter your email and name)
Join by One Tap Mobile :
US: +16699006833,,82441379671# or +16694449171,,82441379671#
Join by Telephone:
Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):
US: +1 346 248 7799 or +1 669 900 6833 or 833 548 0276 (Toll Free)
Webinar ID: 824 4137 9671
How to observe the Meeting (no public comment):
1) https://www.ssf.net/government/city-council/video-streaming-city-and-council-meetings/city-council
How to submit written Public Comment before the City Council Meeting:
Members of the public are encouraged to submit public comments in writing in advance of the meeting via the
eComment tab by 1:00 p.m. on the meeting date. Use the eComment portal by clicking on the following link :
https://ci-ssf-ca.granicusideas.com/meetings or by visiting the City Council meeting's agenda page. eComments
are also directly sent to the iLegislate application used by City Council and staff.
How to provide Public Comment during the City Council Meeting:
1) By Phone: (669) 900-6833. Webinar ID is 824 4137 9671. Click *9 to raise a hand to speak. Click *6 to
unmute when called.
By One tap mobile: US: +16699006833,,85185367700# or +12532158782,,85185367700#
2) Online at: https://ssf-net.zoom.us/j/82441379671
a. Enter an email address and name. The name will be visible online and will be used to notify you that it is your
turn to speak.
b. When the Clerk calls for the item on which you wish to speak, click on "raise hand." Speakers will be notified
shortly before they are called to speak.
c. When called, please limit your remarks to the time limit allotted.
Page 3 City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/29/2022
3
July 27, 2022Special City Council Special Meeting Agenda
Call to Order.
Roll Call.
Agenda Review.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Comments are limited to items on the Special Meeting Agenda.
ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS
Report regarding a resolution authorizing the appropriation of $524,100 to fund the
new after school club program, facility improvements, and architectural and
programming studies at the Paradise Valley Recreation Center, and $152,648 for the
expansion of licensed before and after school programs at Buri Buri Elementary
School and amending the Parks and Recreation Department’s Fiscal Year 2022-23
Operating Budget pursuant to budget amendment #23.010. (Greg Mediati, Director of
Parks and Recreation)
1.
Resolution authorizing the appropriation of $524,100 to fund the new after school club
program, facility improvements, and architectural and programming studies at the
Paradise Valley Recreation Center, and $152,648 for the expansion of licensed before
and after school programs at Buri Buri Elementary School and amending the Parks
and Recreation Department’s Fiscal Year 2022-23 Operating Budget pursuant to
budget amendment #23.010.
1a.
Report regarding a resolution making draft findings and declaring an intent to consider
overruling the San Mateo City / County Association of Governments (C/CAG) Airport
Land Use Commission’s (ALUC) determination of inconsistency with respect to noise
policies for the proposed residential portion of the redevelopment project located at
180 El Camino Real and to provide notice pursuant to the Public Utilities Code to the
Airport Land Use Commission and the State of California Department of
Transportation’s Division of Aeronautics regarding such findings and intent to consider
overruling (Billy Gross, Principal Planner)
2.
Page 4 City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/29/2022
4
July 27, 2022Special City Council Special Meeting Agenda
Resolution making draft findings that approval of a proposed residential portion of a
redevelopment project located at 180 El Camino Real is consistent with Public Utilities
Code Section 21670 and declaring an intent to consider overruling the San Mateo City
/ County Association of Governments (C/CAG) Airport Land Use Commission’s
(ALUC) determination of inconsistency with respect to noise policies for the proposed
residential portion of a redevelopment project located at 180 El Camino Real and to
provide notice in accordance with Sections 21676(b) and 21676.5(a) of the State
Public Utilities Code to the Airport Land Use Commission and the State of California
Department of Transportation’s Division of Aeronautics at least 45 days prior to the
scheduled public hearing date for consideration of the proposed project and proposed
overruling action by the City Council.
2a.
Report regarding a ballot measure to adopt an ordinance authorizing the City of South
San Francisco to develop, construct, or acquire affordable, low-rent housing units
pursuant to Article XXXIV of the California Constitution, subject to the approval of
the voters, and adopting a resolution establishing November 8, 2022 as the date for a
municipal election on the proposed ballot measure. (Sky Woodruff, City Attorney and
Mike Futrell, City Manager)
3.
Resolution establishing November 8, 2022 as the date for a municipal election on a
proposed ballot measure seeking voter authorization for the City of South San
Francisco (“City”) to develop, construct, or acquire affordable, low-rent housing units
pursuant to Article XXXIV of the California Constitution; approving a proposed
ordinance authorizing the City to develop, construct, or acquire affordable, low-rent
housing units pursuant to Article XXXIV; establishing policies and procedures in
connection with such an election; requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County
of San Mateo consolidate said election with the statewide primary election pursuant to
section 10403 of the Elections Code; and providing for submittal of ballot arguments
and rebuttals and authorizing the filing of an impartial analysis.
3a.
An ordinance authorizing the City of South San Francisco to develop, construct, or
acquire affordable, low-rent housing units pursuant to Article XXXIV of the California
Constitution.
3b.
Adjournment.
Page 5 City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/29/2022
5
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:22-603 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:1.
Report regarding a resolution authorizing the appropriation of $524,100 to fund the new after school club
program,facility improvements,and architectural and programming studies at the Paradise Valley Recreation
Center,and $152,648 for the expansion of licensed before and after school programs at Buri Buri Elementary
School and amending the Parks and Recreation Department’s Fiscal Year 2022-23 Operating Budget pursuant
to budget amendment #23.010.(Greg Mediati, Director of Parks and Recreation)
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve a resolution authorizing the appropriation of $524,100
to fund the new after school club program services,facility improvements and architectural and
programming studies at the Paradise Valley Recreation Center and $152,648 for the expansion of
licensed before and after school programs at Buri Buri Elementary School and amending the Parks and
Recreation Department’s Fiscal Year 2022-23 Operating Budget pursuant to budget amendment #23.010.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
Buri Buri Elementary School After School Program Expansion
The Youth Enrichment Services (YES)Child Care Program is one of eight program areas within the Recreation
Division of the Parks and Recreation Department.The YES Program currently serves approximately 1,000
children and young adults at four licensed After School Recreation Programs,two ASES grant-funded REAL
(Recreation,Enrichment and Learning)Programs,and seasonal camps.The Preschool and Early Learning
Program,formerly part of the larger Child Care Program area,was made its own discrete program area in 2022
and serves another 134 preschool-aged children at three licensed preschool centers.
The four After School Recreation Programs (ASRPs)are licensed by the Department of Social Services
Community Care Licensing Program.These programs take place at Buri Buri,Monte Verde,Ponderosa,and
Spruce Elementary Schools.These ASRPs serve children from kindergarten through fifth grade and operate in
accordance with the South San Francisco Unified School District (SSFUSD)calendar.Families may register
for before and after school care (7:30 a.m.to morning bell time,and afternoon bell time to 6:00 p.m.),before
school care only (7:30 a.m.to bell time),or after school care only (bell time to 6:00 p.m.),and can also opt for
five, three, or two days of care on a regular schedule.
The existing Buri Buri Elementary School After School Program operated by the City of South San Francisco
has a capacity of 130 children.Due to a great deal of growing need,SSFUSD has requested the expansion of
the Buri Buri ASRP to accommodate 50 additional children.
Any consideration for expansion must be able to meet the licensing requirements for space allocation,which is
a formula that dictates the square footage of space made available to each child in a licensed program.SSFUSD
and staff have identified the appropriate spaces on the Buri Buri campus that meet these requirements.Given
that SSFUSD is able to meet this threshold,staff has developed a proposal that considers staffing needs,one-
time startup costs, annual licensing fees, staff fingerprinting fees, and a snack and supply budget.
The total budget request for the Buri Buri ASRP expansion is $152,648 for the first year of the expandedCity of South San Francisco Printed on 7/22/2022Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™6
File #:22-603 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:1.
The total budget request for the Buri Buri ASRP expansion is $152,648 for the first year of the expanded
program (Fiscal Year 2022-2023),and $142,648 for each subsequent year,not including additional labor-
negotiated wage increases.This includes funds for hourly Recreation Leaders serving as childcare aides,
custodial support,classroom and cleaning supplies,fingerprinting,and licensing fees.This does not include
indirect costs associated with the existing full-time Coordinator,Supervisor,or other administrative overhead,
which can be absorbed by the Department’s operating budget.Costs for the first year of the program include a
budget for $10,000 in one-time startup costs.Full costs associated with this program are detailed in Attachment
1.
The revenue earned from user fees from the additional 50 children is projected to be $130,000,depending on
enrollment.
Paradise Valley Recreation Center Kids Club After School Program
In March 2022,staff learned of the merger of the Boys and Girls Clubs of the Peninsula,Mid-Peninsula Boys
and Girls Club and Boys and Girls Clubs of North San Mateo County,into one overarching organization -the
Boys and Girls Clubs of the Peninsula.
In May 2022,staff met with the Boys and Girls Club leadership.At this time,the Club noted that the Paradise
Valley Park clubhouse would be closed,and all services offered at this location would be moved to their
clubhouse at 201 West Orange Avenue.The Paradise Recreation Center,which is City property and was leased
to the club at no cost, would be relinquished back to the City.
Staff worked with the Boys and Girls Club to enroll students displaced by the program in two ways:
participants were offered placement in the City’s ASES funded REAL After School Program at Martin School,
or could be transported to the Orange Avenue Clubhouse by the Boys and Girls Club.
Since then,Parks and Recreation Department and City Manager’s Office staff have met and drafted plans to
offer near-term services at the Paradise Valley Recreation Center.At least for this coming year,as a pilot
program,staff is planning to offer an after-school class-based program in a drop-in format.As currently
envisioned,the program would operate five days per week,from bell time to 5:00 p.m.Each day would have a
different theme -for example:Mondays could focus on sports and wellness,Tuesdays may focus on outdoor
education, and so forth. Children can be enrolled in one to five days per week.
Since the program would be drop-in in nature,kindergarteners may not enroll,however they can be
accommodated at the REAL Program,also operated by the Department at Martin Elementary School.Staff
hope to serve up to 40 children at this site when at full capacity.Additionally,staff may try to host other classes
and activities during the day prior to after school activities, such as preschool-age or adult classes.
Staffing for this program includes one limited-term Recreation Coordinator which may be full-time after a
longer-term program is established,Recreation Leaders to serve as program aides,and an hourly Custodian,
totaling $246,100 per year.One-time monies in the amount of $95,700 will fund new vinyl and epoxy flooring,
classroom furnishings,interior and exterior painting,and other minor facility updates.An additional $150,000
in one-time funds is requested to fund a feasibility study to determine the existing deferred maintenance of the
facility and conduct outreach with the community to vision the future programming of the site.In total
$524,100 is being requested for this fiscal year.Additional appropriations for future years,once a program is
solidified,will be requested next fiscal year.Full costs associated with this program are detailed in Attachment
1.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/22/2022Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™7
File #:22-603 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:1.
Fees for the class are assessed at $5.70 per hour,the same fee as other City-operated after school programs and
parallel with several children’s classes.For this pilot program,staff are adopting a subsidy model in which
families who receive free or reduced lunch benefits can enroll for free.Alternatively,families can also apply for
a partial or full subsidy by providing income information that will be measured against the income limits
developed by San Mateo County.Households making less than $140,000 per year would be eligible to have
fees waived.Confirmation of household income would require little documentation other than a self-attestation
form, similar to what is used by the Big Lift funded Little Steps Preschool at the Community Learning Center.
Given most neighboring residents will likely qualify for a fee waiver,staff is only anticipating a modest
$10,000 in revenue this year for this program but will adjust revenue targets at mid-year based on actual
revenues realized.
STRATEGIC PLAN
Approval of this budget request supports Strategic Plan Priority #2:Build and Maintain a Sustainable City by
expanding and strengthening learning programs offered by the City.
FISCAL IMPACT
If approved,$676,748 in additional General Fund monies will be required to successfully execute the programs
at Paradise Valley Park Recreation Center ($524,100)and expansion of the existing After School Program at
Buri Buri Elementary School ($152,648)in Fiscal Year 2022-23.Due to a significant start-up cost,subsequent
years would require a lesser amount -approximately $400,000 in annual operating funds ($270,000 for
Paradise Recreation Center and $130,000 for the Buri Buri After School Program)unless additional program
staffing or supplies are needed. This will be further refined in next fiscal year’s budget process.
CONCLUSION
Staff requests approval from the City Council to move forward with expansion of much-needed child care
services at Buri Buri Elementary School for an additional 50 children,and new after school club drop-in classes
at Paradise Valley Recreation Center to serve an additional 40 children per day.The appropriation of $524,100
will fund the new after school program services,facility improvements,and architectural and programming
studies at the Paradise Valley Recreation Center,and $152,648 will fund the expansion of the licensed before
and after school program at Buri Buri Elementary School.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/22/2022Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™8
Attachment 1: Proposed Budget
Paradise Valley After School Club Program
Staff Annual Cost One Time Cost
Recreation Coordinator - 40 Hour Temp $ 90,000
Hourly Staff (RLIV Hourly) - Club Program $ 43,000
Hourly Staff (RLIII Hourly) - Club Program $ 41,000
Custodian (Hourly) $ 42,100
Hourly Staff (RL / Instructor) – Day Time
Programs $ 30,000
Total Salaries / Wages $ 246,100 $ -
Supplies / Services
Snacks $ 10,000
Fingerprinting / Staff Onboarding $ 1,800
Classroom Supplies $ 10,000
Start Up Supplies/Materials $ 25,000
Custodial Supplies $ 6,400
Moving Costs $ 5,000
Interior Paint and Flooring $ 34,000
Exterior Paint $ 13,700
Window Treatment $ 15,000
Alarm + Monitoring $ 100 $ 3,000
Utilities (Gas / Electric) $ 2,000
Utilities (Water) $ 2,000
Deferred Maintenance and Facility Planning $ 150,000
Total Supplies / Services $ 32,300 $ 245,700
Total Cost (Salaries + Supplies) $ 278,400 $ 245,700
Program Grand Total $ 524,100
Buri Buri After School Recreation Program
Staff Annual Cost One Time Cost
Hourly Staff (RLIII Hourly) $ 80,328
Custodial Costs $ 42,100
Total Salaries / Wages $ 122,428 $ -
Supplies / Services
Snacks $ 4,500
State Licensing Fees $ 2,420
Fingerprinting / Staff Onboarding $ 800
9
Attachment 1: Proposed Budget
Classroom Supplies $ 7,500
Start Up Supplies / Materials $ 10,000
Custodial Supplies $ 5,000
Total Supplies / Services $ 20,220 $ 10,000
Total Cost (Salaries + Supplies) $ 142,648 $ 10,000
Program Grand Total $ 152,648
10
Agenda Item 1. 22-603 Report regarding a resolution authorizing the appropriation of $524,100 to fund the new after school club program, facility improvements, and architectural and programming studies at the Paradise Valley Recreation Center, and $152,648 for the expansion of licensed before and after school programs at Buri Buri Elementary School and amending the Parks and Recreation Department's Fiscal Year 2022-23 Operating Budget pursuant to budget amendment #23.010. (Greg Mediati, Director of Parks and Recreation)
Legislation Text Attachment 1 - Paradise Valley After School Club Program and BBS Expansion
Budget Request
9 Public Comments
•
Guest User at July 27, 2022 at 12:18pm PDT
Support
I am writing to urge the city council to fund more spots at Buri Buri Elementary's afterschool
program. I have two children in the program and they love it, but there is only enough space
for them to attend part time. I have had to change jobs in order pick them up on the days
they don't have aftercare. I make less than I used to at my old job so now I have to work
more hours and I get less time with my kids. A fully-funded program would really help
families out.
•
Guest User at July 27, 2022 at 10:40am PDT
Support
So many families need care and are stressed about finding options that work for their busy
work schedules. I am lucky to have a grandparent watch my children but if that wasn’t
available and I couldn’t find childcare I don’t know how me and my husband would be able to
work.
11
•
Guest User at July 27, 2022 at 9:22am PDT
Support
I have an incoming 1st grader at Buri Buri. We have been on the waitlist for over a year.
Please support the measure to expand the after school programs at Buri Buri Elementary.
We love the elementary school, but the lack of quality after school programs in SSF is
stressful on full time working parents. Please support this measure!
•
Guest User at July 27, 2022 at 7:03am PDT
Support
I have two children enrolled in after school care at Buri Buri. I was super fortunate enough to
have my older child get accepted after Kindergarten. The kindergarten year alone was tough
because you are taking time away from your work in the middle of your day to pick up the
child and when they are home- it is difficult to continue work. I am lucky because of the
sibling that already had the spot that my younger child was immediately accepted when he
was in Kinder. After school programs are essential for families with two working parents. In
general, I can’t say I know many families who can survive on one income.
•
Guest User at July 27, 2022 at 1:37am PDT
Support
Please expand the afterschool program at Buri Buri! There's a huge need for high quality,
affordable, onsite afterschool care, and not enough spots for kids. My daughter attended the
afterschool program there and loved it. After school, she gets to hang out with friends, get
exercise, and get help with homework. The program has been a lifesaver for us working
parents, and it's also great for the kids.
12
•
Guest User at July 26, 2022 at 10:23pm PDT
Support
Dear SSF City Council,
My wife and I moved to SSF 6 years ago when we had our daughter who will be entering 1st
grade at Buri Buri this year.
We are two weeks away from her first day of real school and the best description I have for
the feeling we have is helplessness. We do not currently have an after school program
locked down despite being on all the waitlists. We both work long hours, 5-6 days a week
just to be able to afford to live in the Bay Area and the lack of availability to after school care
is a tremendous stressor. Please help by supporting this agenda item. I wouldn't be
surprised if most of us parents in this position would be willing to help support such a
program beyond current means allocated/proposed in this agenda item. I know we would.
Thank you.
•
Guest User at July 26, 2022 at 4:43pm PDT
Good Afternoon, I have two daughters that attend Buri Buri and we have been on the waitlist
for over a year. We enrolled our girls in the Boys and Girls club and they very much dislike
the program. They are so looking forward to being on campus this year in the afterschool
program. Both my husband and I work an hour away so to know that they are on campus in
a secure and educational environment is a huge relief to us. It is so hard in the Bay Area to
find trustworthy and affordable programs. Please expand the program for other parents and
kids like us.
•
Guest User at July 26, 2022 at 4:10pm PDT
13
Good afternoon, my name is Grace Rhee and I am a parent of 2 boys in the Buri Buri After
School Program and it has not only been an enriching experience for the both of my boys,
but a lifesaver as a working mom. Most households need to be a dual income family in order
to live in the Bay Area and most people do not get out of work at 2:40pm if they are working
full time. Childcare has been one of my main concerns after having kids and I was very lucky
to be one of the last people to get into the Buri after school program after standing in line at
4am at Orange Park a few years back. Funding for the expansion of the program at Buri will
help many families like myself, find childcare for their kids while not having to worry about
cutting back their hours or even quitting their job which would be detrimental to their
finances.
I know of many families who struggle to find childcare and are on the waitlist, and moving
forward with this agenda would be a huge benefit and weight off of their shoulders. Please
consider the working families and support us parents.
•
Guest User at July 26, 2022 at 3:55pm PDT
Support
Please expand the Buri Buri Afterschool program! I was on the waitlist the last time this was
expanded (2019-2020 year), and I had to wait a month or two during the beginning of that
school year while caretakers were hired. My daughter went to the Boys and Girls Club during
that time. It was fine, but my daughter is shy and the Boys and Girls club was hard for her to
feel comfortable at, even through the teachers and organizers there are nice. Buri Buri ASRP
finally opened a spot and as soon as my daughter started going there after school, she
changed 180 deg like night and day. She was comfortable, supported, and came out of her
shell. She now tells me to 'not pick me up too early', and she was brave enough to go to
Summer Camp @ Terrabay without any reservation (and she had a great time this past
summer!). Please expand this program so other children who may be shy or introverted can
benefit from a supportive, engaging and friendly atmosphere. Bonus that she gets some
homework done :)
14
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:22-604 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:1a.
Resolution authorizing the appropriation of $524,100 to fund the new after school club program,facility
improvements,and architectural and programming studies at the Paradise Valley Recreation Center,and
$152,648 for the expansion of licensed before and after school programs at Buri Buri Elementary School and
amending the Parks and Recreation Department’s Fiscal Year 2022-23 Operating Budget pursuant to budget
amendment #23.010.
WHEREAS,the Parks and Recreation Department offers licensed before and after school programs at four
school campuses,Spruce Elementary School,Monte Verde Elementary School,Buri Buri Elementary School,
and Ponderosa Elementary School,and two After School Education and Safety Grant (ASES)funded programs
at Los Cerritos Elementary School and Martin Elementary School; and
WHEREAS,the existing Buri Buri Elementary School After School Program (ASRP)operated by the City of
South San Francisco has a capacity of 130 children,but due to a great deal of growing need,the South San
Francisco Unified School District has requested the expansion of the program to accommodate 50 additional
children; and
WHEREAS,the South San Francisco Unified School District identified adequate space on the Buri Buri
Elementary School campus for the program to use; and
WHEREAS,the total budget request for the Buri Buri ASRP expansion is $152,648 for the first year of the
expanded program (Fiscal Year 2022-2023),and $142,648 for each subsequent year,not including additional
labor-negotiated wage increases; and
WHEREAS,in March 2022,staff learned of the merger of the Boys and Girls Clubs of the Peninsula,Mid-
Peninsula Boys and Girls Club and Boys and Girls Clubs of North San Mateo County,into one overarching
organization - the Boys and Girls Clubs of the Peninsula; and
WHEREAS,Parks and Recreation Department and City Manager’s Office staff have drafted plans to offer near
-term services at the Paradise Valley Recreation Center to include an after school class based program in a drop
-in format to serve up to 40 additional children; and
WHEREAS,an appropriation of $524,100 will fund the new after school program services,facility
improvements, and architectural and programming studies at the Paradise Valley Recreation Center.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby
authorizes the appropriation of $524,100 to fund the new after school club program,facility improvements,and
architectural and programming studies at the Paradise Valley Recreation Center,and $152,648 for the
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/28/2022Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™15
File #:22-604 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:1a.
architectural and programming studies at the Paradise Valley Recreation Center,and $152,648 for the
expansion of licensed before and after school programs at Buri Buri Elementary School and amending the
Parks and Recreation Department’s Fiscal Year 2022-23 Operating Budget pursuant to budget amendment
#23.010.
*****
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/28/2022Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™16
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:22-595 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:2.
Report regarding a resolution making draft findings and declaring an intent to consider overruling the San
Mateo City /County Association of Governments (C/CAG)Airport Land Use Commission’s (ALUC)
determination of inconsistency with respect to noise policies for the proposed residential portion of the
redevelopment project located at 180 El Camino Real and to provide notice pursuant to the Public Utilities
Code to the Airport Land Use Commission and the State of California Department of Transportation’s Division
of Aeronautics regarding such findings and intent to consider overruling (Billy Gross, Principal Planner)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution making draft findings and declaring an intent
to consider overruling the San Mateo City /County Association of Governments (C/CAG)Airport Land
Use Commission’s (ALUC)determination of inconsistency with respect to noise policies for the proposed
residential portion of the redevelopment located at 180 El Camino Real and to provide notice in
accordance with Sections 21676(b)and 21676.5(a)of the State Public Utilities Code to the Airport Land
Use Commission and the State of California Department of Transportation’s Division of Aeronautics at
least 45 days prior to the scheduled public hearing date for the proposed project and proposed
overruling action by the City Council.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Steelwave is proposing to redevelop the project site at 180 El Camino Real into a mixed-use life-sciences
campus with multi-family residential and commercial uses.This project site is 11.21-acres and is located
approximately 1/2 mile from the San Bruno BART station.The project includes 184 residential units located in
the northeast portion of the site,approximately 750,000 square feet of research and development spread
between three buildings,ground-floor commercial uses,open space amenities,and an associated parking
structure.
Airport Land Use Consistency
The 180 El Camino Real (180 ECR)project site is located approximately two miles northwest of the San
Francisco Airport (SFO),and is located within the Airport Influence Area B (AIA B),the “Project Referral”
area,and is subject to review by the C/CAG Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC),for a determination of
compatibility with San Francisco International Airport Land Use Consistency Plan (ALUCP).In accordance
with these requirements, the City referred the 180 ECR project to the ALUC for review in June 2022.
The ALUC reviewed this project for consistency with the ALUCP at its July 14,2022 meeting and found the
project to be inconsistent with the policies of the 2012 ALUCP,due to its location within the airport noise
contours.The ALUC resolution is attached to this staff report (Attachment 1).As a final review authority,the
City Council may,after a public hearing,choose to overrule the ALUC’s decision by following the procedures
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/22/2022Page 1 of 4
powered by Legistar™17
File #:22-595 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:2.
City Council may,after a public hearing,choose to overrule the ALUC’s decision by following the procedures
established in Public Utilities Code Sections 21676 and 21676.5.The applicant is requesting that the City
Council consider overruling the ALUC determination of inconsistency.
Overrule Process
The first step in the process to overrule the ALUC is for the City to provide notice to the ALUC and the State of
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)Division of Aeronautics (Division)of the City’s intention to
consider overruling the ALUC’s determination by providing them with a Notice of Intent with associated draft
findings at least 45 days in advance of the consideration of overruling action by the City Council.At this time,
staff is requesting that City Council authorize staff to initiate the overrule process by sending the Notice of
Intent to the ALUC and the Division,and requesting comments.This is a procedural step to comply with the
process outlined by the Public Utilities Code,and does not constitute consideration or approval of the project,
nor does it predispose the City’s future action on the project or the decision to overrule.
Because the project is considered inconsistent with the ALUCP with respect to noise policies,the proposed
draft findings (Exhibit A to the Resolution)indicate that recent airport noise patterns are less than anticipated in
the ALUCP,and that the Project site is currently less impacted by airport noise than at the time the ALUCP was
adopted.However,even with aircraft noise patterns at the 70 dB noise contour,an ALUC Environmental Noise
Analysis prepared by Salter,dated February 28,2022,illustrates that implementation of noise control measures
and construction standards will lessen noise impacts to residents.These measures and construction standards
include the following, which would required as conditions of approval for the project:
·Prior to issuance of building permits,detailed acoustical analyses shall be completed as part of the final
design for the proposed residential structures.
·The Project shall incorporate construction methods,sound attenuation features,and sound reducing
barriers that reduce noise impacts in accordance with Section 21670,State Building Code,and General
Plan requirements to meet the interior noise levels of 45 dBA CNEL.
·Sound control treatments shall include mechanical ventilation for all units so that windows can be kept
closed at the resident’s discretion to control noise,and special building construction techniques (such as
sound-rated windows and building façade treatments) for all units.
·The Project is also required to include real estate disclosures in residential leases,disclosing the
presence of an airport within two miles of the property,per Section 11010 of the Business and
Professions Code.
In addition to noise related findings,the proposed draft findings also discuss consistency with ALUCP safety
and airspace protection policies.It should be noted that the proposed research and development portion of the
project is located within ALUCP Safety Zone 4.Within Safety Zone 4,hazardous uses,such as biosafety level
2 uses (which the majority of research and development uses are considered)are determined to be “not
incompatible”but are classified as uses that should be “avoided unless no feasible alternative is available”.
Based on this,the ALUC will require that the City make specific findings that there is no feasible alternative for
the proposed inclusion of biosafety level 2 uses on the site.The draft findings indicate that no feasible
alternative for the proposed inclusion of a biosafety level 2 use is available on this site because the majority ofCity of South San Francisco Printed on 7/22/2022Page 2 of 4
powered by Legistar™18
File #:22-595 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:2.
alternative for the proposed inclusion of a biosafety level 2 use is available on this site because the majority of
life science users blend Biosafety Levels 1 and 2 in facilities,making it too difficult for a landowner to compete
for laboratory tenants if a facility is restricted to Biosafety Level 1.
Any comments received by the ALUC and the Division are advisory to the City Council.However,should
comments be received,the City must include them in the public record of any final decision to overrule the
ALUC determination.The ALUC and the Division may provide comments on the intent to overrule within 30
days of receiving the documents;if they fail to provide comments within that time frame,the City may proceed
without considering their comments.
Following providing notice to the ALUC and the Division of the draft findings and intent to consider an
overrule at least 45 days in advance of the action,the second step in the process is to hold a public hearing
through which the City Council would make specific findings that the proposed overruling is consistent with
the purposes stated in Public Utilities Code 21670,namely the protection of public health,safety,and welfare in
the areas surrounding airports.Following the required 45-day period,staff would bring the 180 ECR Project to
the City Council for consideration at a public hearing,including the entitlements application,CEQA
determination, and overrule request.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.
RELATIONSHIP TO THE STRAGETIC PLAN
While this action does not entitle the 180 ECR project,it is a necessary step in the approval process.If
approved,the project will help achieve the following goal of the City’s Strategic Plan:Priority Area 2:Quality
of Life, Initiative 2.3 - Promote a balanced mix of housing options.
The 180 ECR project would provide 184 new multi-family residential units on an underutilized parcel.These
residential units would add to the City’s diverse housing stock, helping to achieve this Strategic Plan goal.
CONCLUSION
Approval of this resolution will authorize staff to initiate the ALUC overrule process for the 180 ECR project,
consistent with State law.This is a necessary procedural step in this project’s review and approval process.
Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council take the following action:
Adopt a resolution making draft findings and declaring an intent to consider overruling the San Mateo
City /County Association of Governments (C/CAG)Airport Land Use Commission’s (ALUC)
determination of inconsistency with respect to noise policies for the proposed residential portion of the
redevelopment project located at 180 El Camino Real and to provide notice in accordance with Sections
21676(b)and 21676.5(a)of the State Public Utilities Code to the Airport Land Use Commission and the
State of California Department of Transportation’s Division of Aeronautics at least 45 days prior to the
scheduled public hearing date for the proposed project and proposed overruling action by the City
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/22/2022Page 3 of 4
powered by Legistar™19
File #:22-595 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:2.
Council.
Attachments
1.ALUC Resolution, July 14, 2022
2.180 ECR Site Plan and ALUCP Noise Contour Map
Associated Document and Exhibits
1.Resolution Authorizing a Notice of Intent to Overrule for the 180 ECR Project (File ID#22-596)
A.Draft Findings
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/22/2022Page 4 of 4
powered by Legistar™20
RESOLUTION 22-64
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY/COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENTS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY, ACTING AS THE SAN MATEO COUNTY AIRPORT LAND
USE COMMISSION, DETERMINING THAT THE 180 EL CAMINO REAL, SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
“PREFERRED SITE PLAN”, COMPRISED OF THREE LIFE SCIENCE/RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
(R&D) BUILDINGS, A 7-LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE, AND A MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
BUILDING, IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE POLICIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE AIRPORT LAND USE
COMPATIBILITY PLAN FOR THE ENVIRONS OF SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT.
RESOLVED, by the Board of Directors of the City/County Association of Governments of
San Mateo County (C/CAG), in its capacity as the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Commission,
that,
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65302.3 states that a local agency General
Plan, Zoning Ordinance and/or any affected specific plan must be consistent with the applicable
airport/land use criteria in the relevant adopted Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP); and
WHEREAS, the 180 El Camino Real Preferred Site Plan (Project), comprised of a mix of
residential and life science/R&D uses, is located within Airport Influence Area B of San Francisco
International Airport (SFO), the area subject to formal C/CAG/ALUC review; and
WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco has referred the Project to the C/CAG Board,
acting as the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Commission, for a determination of consistency
with the SFO ALUCP; and
WHEREAS, three sets of airport/land use compatibility policies and criteria in the SFO ALUCP
relate to the Project: (a) noise compatibility policies and criteria; (b) safety policies and criteria; and (c)
airspace protection policies, as discussed below:
(a) Noise Policy Consistency Analysis - In accordance with SFO ALUCP Policy NP-1
Noise Compatibility Zones, Exhibit IV-5 identifies the noise compatibility zones for the
purposes of the SFO ALUCP, with greater detail shown on Exhibit IV-6. As depicted in these
exhibits the project site is located almost entirely within the 70-75 dB CNEL contour. Pursuant
to SFO ALUCP Table IV-1, Noise/Land Use Compatibility Criteria, multi-family residential
use is identified as “Not Compatible” within that contour, unless at the time of adoption of the
SFO ALUCP (2012) the site had been zoned exclusively for residential use, which is not the
case with the subject development site. “Not Compatible” is further clarified in SFO ALUCP
Noise Policy NP-2 to mean “that the proposed land use is incompatible with aircraft noise at
the indicated CNEL level”, regardless of proposed mitigation. Accordingly, the Project is
determined to be Not Compatible, and therefore not consistent with the Noise Policies of the
SFO ALUCP.
(b) Safety Policy Consistency Analysis - The SFO ALUCP includes five sets of safety
zones and related land use compatibility policies and criteria. As shown on SFO ALUCP
47 21
Exhibit IV-8, much of the Project site, including the three R&D structures, are located within
Safety Zone 4, the outer Approach/Departure Zone (OADZ). The residential structure is not
located within a safety zone.
Per the SFO ALUCP, the safety compatibility criteria are established in Table IV-2. Within
Safety Zone 4, residential use is not restricted. Hazardous Uses, such as biosafety level 2 uses
(which encompasses the life sciences/R&D use) are determined to be “not incompatible” but
are classified as uses that should be “avoided unless no feasible alternative is available”. In
addition, the safety compatibility criteria state that where such use is allowed, habitable
structures need to be provided with at least 50% more exits than required by codes.
(c) Airspace Protection Consistency Analysis –
1. Structures - Pursuant to the SFO ALUCP, airspace protection compatibility of
proposed land uses within its AIA is evaluated in accordance with the following
criteria: (1) 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 77 (FAR Part 77), “Safe, Efficient Use
and Preservation of the Navigable Airspace”, which establishes the standards for
determining obstructions to air navigation; and (2) FAA notification surfaces.
In order to be deemed consistent with the ALUCP, the maximum height of a new
building must be the lower of (a) the height shown on the critical aeronautical surfaces
map or (b) the maximum height determined not to be a “hazard to air navigation” by the
FAA in an aeronautical study prepared pursuant to the filing of Form 7460-1.
As depicted on Exhibit IV-17 of the SFO ALUCP, the critical aeronautical surfaces
above the Project are at an elevation of between approximately 159 and 168 feet above
mean sea level MSL. The estimated maximum elevations of the highest buildings,
which range from 159’-10” to 160’-1”, including rooftop appurtenances), would be
below the critical aeronautical surfaces, but by a small margin, estimated at 1-2 feet.
In accordance with SFO ALUCP Exhibit IV-11, the project site is located within an
area that requires filing FAA Form 7460-1, Notice of Proposed Construction or
Alteration, for structures of the heights proposed in the application.
2. Other Flight Hazards - Within AIA B, certain land use characteristics are
recognized as hazards to air navigation and, per SFO ALUCP Policy AP-4, need to be
evaluated to ensure compatibility with FAA rules and regulations. South San Francisco
Municipal Code Section 20.300.010 includes performance standards to ensure that
development does not create an aircraft hazard.
WHEREAS, the Project site is located within Airport Influence Area (AIA) A for San Francisco
International Airport, where the real estate disclosure requirements of state law apply. Neither South
San Francisco’s Municipal Code nor the project application materials address this requirement; and
WHEREAS, at its June 23, 2022 meeting, based on the factors listed above the Airport Land Use
Committee recommended that the C/CAG Board of Directors, acting as the Airport Land Use
Commission, determine that the Project is not consistent with the Comprehensive Airport Land Use
48 22
Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Francisco International Airport, specifically with the Noise
Compatibility Policies; and,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Directors of the City/County Association
of Governments for San Mateo County, acting as the San Mateo County Airport Land Use
Commission, that the Project is determined not consistent with the applicable airport land use policies
and criteria contained in the Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of
San Francisco International Airport.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, THIS 14TH DAY OF JULY 2022.
Davina Hurt, Chair
49 23
Attachment 2:
180 ECR Residential & Office/R&D
24
/(*(1'&1(/&RQWRXU)RUHFDVW$LUSRUW3URSHUW\%$576WDWLRQ&$/75$,16WDWLRQ6FKRRO3ODFHRI:RUVKLS+RVSLWDO0XQLFLSDO%RXQGDU\5DLOURDG)UHHZD\5RDG3ODQQHG /DQG 8VH 3HU*HQHUDO 3ODQV 3XEOLF0XOWL)DPLO\5HVLGHQWLDO6LQJOH)DPLO\5HVLGHQWLDO0L[HG8VH7UDQVLW2ULHQWHG'HYHORSPHQW&RPPHUFLDO,QGXVWULDO7UDQVSRUWDWLRQDQG8WLOLWLHV/RFDO3DUN*ROI&RXUVH&HPHWHU\5HJLRQDO3DUNRU5HFUHDWLRQ$UHD2SHQ6SDFH3ODQQHGXVHQRWPDSSHG6RXUFHV 1RLVH&RQWRXU'DWD 'UDIW(QYLURQPHQWDO$VVHVVPHQW3URSRVHG5XQZD\6DIHW\$UHD3URJUDP6DQ)UDQFLVFR,QWHUQDWLRQDO$LUSRUW856&RUSRUDWLRQDQG%ULGJH1HW,QWHUQDWLRQDO-XQH&RXQW\%DVH0DSV 6DQ0DWHR&RXQW\3ODQQLQJ %XLOGLQJ'HSDUWPHQW/RFDO3ODQV %XUOLQJDPH%D\IURQW6SHFLILF$UHD3ODQ$XJXVW%XUOLQJDPH'RZQWRZQ6SHFLILF3ODQ-DQXDU\ %XUOLQJDPH*HQHUDO0DS6HSWHPEHU 1RUWK%XUOLQJDPH5ROOLQV5RDG6SHFLILF3ODQ)HEUXDU\&ROPD0XQLFLSDO&RGH=RQLQJ0DSV'HFHPEHU'DO\&LW\*HQHUDO3ODQ/DQG8VH0DS +LOOVERURXJK*HQHUDO3ODQ0DUFK0LOOEUDH/DQG8VH3ODQ1RYHPEHU 3DFLILFD*HQHUDO3ODQ$XJXVW 6DQ%UXQR*HQHUDO3ODQ'HFHPEHU6DQ0DWHR&LW\/DQG8VH3ODQ0DUFK6DQ0DWHR&RXQW\=RQLQJ0DS 6RXWK6DQ)UDQFLVFR*HQHUDO3ODQ 1257+ 0LOHV([KLELW,912,6(&203$7,%,/,7<=21(6'(7$,/&RPSUHKHQVLYH$LUSRUW/DQG8VH3ODQIRUWKH(QYLURQVRI6DQ)UDQFLVFR,QWHUQDWLRQDO$LUSRUW&&$*&LW\&RXQW\$VVRFLDWLRQRI*RYHUQPHQWVRI6DQ0DWHR&RXQW\&DOLIRUQLD5%:6$10$7(2$9(ColmaBrisbaneDaly CitySouth San FranciscoOOWWLLWW(6$1%5812$9(San Bruno<PacificaMillbraeBurlingameWƌŽũĞĐƚ^ŝƚĞ"UUBDINFOU410225
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:22-596 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:2a.
Resolution making draft findings that approval of a proposed residential portion of a redevelopment project
located at 180 El Camino Real is consistent with Public Utilities Code Section 21670 and declaring an intent to
consider overruling the San Mateo City /County Association of Governments (C/CAG)Airport Land Use
Commission’s (ALUC)determination of inconsistency with respect to noise policies for the proposed
residential portion of a redevelopment project located at 180 El Camino Real and to provide notice in
accordance with Sections 21676(b)and 21676.5(a)of the State Public Utilities Code to the Airport Land Use
Commission and the State of California Department of Transportation’s Division of Aeronautics at least 45
days prior to the scheduled public hearing date for consideration of the proposed project and proposed
overruling action by the City Council.
WHEREAS,Steelwave LLC has proposed construction of a high-density mixed-use development,consisting of
184 residential units,approximately 750,000 square feet of research and development spread between three
buildings,ground-floor commercial uses,open space amenities,and an associated parking structure at 180-188
El Camino Real and 415 South Spruce Avenue,APN 014-183-110 (collectively referred to as “180 ECR Project
Site”) in the City; and
WHERAS,the 180 ECR Project Site is located within Airport Influence Area B of the San Francisco
International Airport (SFO),the area subject to formal C/CAG Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC)Review;
and
WHEREAS,on May 12,2022,pursuant to the provisions of Section 21670 et seq.of the Public Utilities Code,
the City referred the proposed development project to the C/CAG ALUC of San Mateo County for a
determination of consistency with the ALUC’s Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP)
for the San Francisco International Airport; and
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/28/2022Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™26
File #:22-596 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:2a.
WHEREAS,on July 14,2022,the ALUC,acting pursuant to its authority under Section 21670 et seq.,
determined that the 180 ECR project is inconsistent with SFO ALUCP Policy NP-1,Noise Compatibility
Zones,and Table IV-1,Noise/Land Use Compatibility Criteria,as the majority of the Project site,including the
proposed multi-family residential building,is located within the 70-75 dB CNEL noise contour,and multi-
family residential use is identified as “Not Compatible”within that contour,unless at the time of adoption of
the SFO ALUCP (2012)the site had been zoned exclusively for residential use,which is not the case with the
180 ECR Project Site; and
WHEREAS,as a final review authority,the City Council,may,after a public hearing,choose to overrule the
ALUC determination by a two-thirds vote of the City Council,if the City makes specific findings that the
proposed project is consistent with the purposes of the Public Utilities Code Section 21670 regarding the
protection of public health,safety and welfare in the areas surrounding airports and by providing the C/CAG
ALUC and the Caltrans Division of Aeronautics (“Division”)with notice of the City’s intent to consider
overruling the C/CAG ALUC determination along with supportive findings at least 45 days prior to the City's
action to overrule the ALUC; and
WHEREAS,the Public Utilities Code provides that the C/CAG ALUC and the Division shall respond to the
referral of the findings of override within 30 days of receiving the proposed decision and findings; and
WHEREAS,in the event that the ALUC or Division’s comments are not available within this timeframe,the
City may act without them;
WHEREAS, the comments by the C/CAG ALUC and Division are advisory to the City under State law; and
WHEREAS,the City Council shall include comments from the C/CAG ALUC and the Division in the final
record of any final decision to overrule the ALUC,which may only be adopted by a two-thirds vote of the City
Council; and
WHEREAS,the City Council’s adoption of this resolution is procedural and does not constitute the proposed
project’s approval nor does it predispose the City’s future action on the 180 ECR project or the decision to
overrule the ALUC’s determination; and
WHEREAS,the draft findings attached as Exhibit A to this resolution do not constitute the final findings of the
City with regard to the Project’s consistency with the purposes of Public Utilities Code Section 21760 and such
draft findings may be revised,amended,and/or supplemented as part of any final decision to overrule the
ALUC’s determination and/or approve the Project entitlements; and
WHEREAS,should the City Council adopt this resolution making the draft findings and declaring an intent to
consider overruling the C/CAG ALUC determination that the 180 ECR project is inconsistent with respect to
noise policies and directing staff to transmit the required notice to the ALUC and the Caltrans Division of
Aeronautics,a public hearing will be required for City Council consideration of the final override and the
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/28/2022Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™27
File #:22-596 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:2a.
Aeronautics,a public hearing will be required for City Council consideration of the final override and the
Project entitlements.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby takes the
following actions:
1.Makes the draft findings attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A; and
2.Declares an intent to consider overriding the Airport Land Use Commission’s determination that the
proposed 180 ECR project is inconsistent with the Airport Land Use Consistency Plan of the Environs
of the San Francisco International Airport with respect to noise policies; and
3.Directs staff to provide notice in accordance with Sections 21676(b)and 21676.5(a)of the State Public
Utilities Code to the Airport Land Use Commission and the State of California Department of
Transportation’s Division of Aeronautics at least 45 days prior to the scheduled public hearing date for
consideration of the proposed Project and proposed overruling action by the City Council.
*****
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/28/2022Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™28
Exhibit A: DRAFT Findings
Page 1
SECTION 1 FINDINGS
1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this Resolution.
2. That the Public Utilities Code Sections 21676 and 21676.5 provide that a local governing
body may overrule the Airport Land Use Commission if it makes specific findings that the
proposed action is consistent with the purposes of Public Utilities Code Section 21670. The
City Council therefore finds the following:
a. The first purpose of Section 21670 is to provide for the orderly development of each
public use airport in this State, and the area surrounding these airports so as to promote
the overall goals and objectives of California airport noise standards and to prevent the
creation of new noise and safety problems. The second purpose of Section 21670 is to
protect public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports
and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public’s exposure to excessive
noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these
areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses.
b. With respect to Safety Policies, the majority of the proposed Project site is located
within Safety Zone 4, the Outer Approach / Departure Zone. Within Safety Zone 4,
residential use is not restricted. Hazardous uses, such as biosafety level 2 uses (which
encompasses the life science uses proposed on the project site) are determined to be
“not incompatible” but are classified as uses that should be “avoided unless no feasible
alternative is available.” In addition, the safety compatibility criteria state that where
such a use is allowed, habitable structures need to be provided with at least 50% more
exits than required by codes.
The Biosafety Levels used in the ALUCP are derived from guidance from the Center
for Disease Control, Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories (SFO
ALUCP at IV-33), which also explains that Level 2 involves agents “that are already
present in the community” and that with “good microbiological techniques, these
agents can be used safely.” Because Level 2 does not authorize respiratory or
aerosolized agents, it does not present a materially greater risk to public safety than
Level 1 activities.
All uses proposing hazardous materials use are reviewed by the City of South San
Francisco Fire Department (SSFFD) and Building Division to ensure hazardous
materials requirements are met prior to construction, including required separation
between hazardous materials and sensitive land uses and proper hazardous materials
storage facilities. Any businesses that generate or use hazardous materials within the
29
Exhibit A: DRAFT Findings
Page 2
Planning Area would also be subject to existing hazardous materials regulations such
as those implemented by San Mateo Environmental Health Services, which is the local
Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). The CUPA and SSFFD also conduct
inspections for fire safety and hazardous materials management of businesses and
residential dwellings. Businesses storing or handling hazardous materials over
threshold quantities are required to submit Hazardous Materials Business Plans
(HMBP) pursuant to federal, State, and local regulations. These HMBPs must include
measures for safe storage, use, and handling of hazardous materials, along with a
contingency plan that describes the facility’s response procedures in the event of a
hazardous materials release.
Per ALUCP requirements, any structure within the project that is located within Safety
Zone 4 and that contains a use classified as Biosafety Level 2 will be required to provide
at least 50 percent more exits than required by applicable codes.
No feasible alternative for the proposed inclusion of a biosafety level 2 use is available
on this site because the majority of life science users blend Biosafety Levels 1 and 2 in
facilities, making it too difficult for a landowner to compete for laboratory tenants if a
facility is restricted to Biosafety Level 1. The applicant has represented that in order to
make the project commercially feasible, Biosafety Level 2 is necessary.
c. With respect to the Airspace Protection Policies, per the ALUCP, airspace protection
policies are established with a two-fold purpose: 1) To protect the public health, safety,
and welfare by minimizing the public’s exposure to potential safety hazards that could
be created through the construction of tall structures, and, 2) To protect the public
interest in providing for the orderly development of SFO by ensuring that new
development in the Airport environs avoids compromising the airspace in the Airport
vicinity. This avoids the degradation in the safety, utility, efficiency, and air service
capability of the Airport that could be caused by the attendant need to raise visibility
minimums, increase minimum rates of climb, or cancel, restrict, or redesign flight
procedures.
The proposed Project site includes five buildings (three life science buildings, one
multifamily residential building and one parking structure), with the maximum height
of the tallest building on the site at approximately 160 feet above Mean Sea Level
(MSL). The proposed Project site is located within an area that requires filing FAA
Form 7460-1, Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration, for structures exceeding
30 feet in height. The project will include a Condition of Approval requiring that the
applicant demonstrate compliance with this FAA requirement, prior to obtaining
building permits. The Project site is also located within the Part 77 airspace protection
surfaces for SFO. The applicant has submitted a detailed airspace analysis completed
30
Exhibit A: DRAFT Findings
Page 3
by Williams Aviation Consultants which concludes that the Project will not penetrate
the Part 77 Imaginary Surface. The critical aeronautical surfaces above the Project Site
are at an elevation of between approximately 159 and 168 feet above MSL. Maximum
structure heights would be approximately 160 feet above MSL. A structure built at a
maximum of 160 feet above MSL would be below the critical aeronautical surface
height established. Based on the height being close to the maximum allowable, the
applicant will document that all structures, including appurtenances, will be
constructed below the heights shown on the SFO critical aeronautical surfaces map
prior to issuance of any project building permits. Therefore, the proposed Project would
be consistent with the airspace policies as established in the adopted 2012 SFO
ALUCP.
Per ALUCP Policy A4, proposed land uses with characteristics that may cause visual,
electronic, or wildlife hazards, particularly bird strike hazards, to aircraft taking off or
landing at the Airport or in flight are incompatible in Area B of the Airport Influence
Area. The South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance (Section 20.300.010) contains
performance standards to ensure that all development protects the community from
nuisances, hazards and objectionable conditions, including those which could be
aircraft hazards, including light, glare, air contaminants, or electromagnetic
interference. As proposed, the 180 El Camino Real project is consistent with the
performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance and would not create an
aircraft hazard.
d. With respect to Noise Policies, ALUCP Policy NP-1 Noise Compatibility Zones
identifies the noise compatibility zones for the purposes of the ALUCP. As depicted,
the majority of the project site, including the multi-family residential building, is
located within the 70-75 dB CNEL contour. ALUCP Policy NP-2 stipulates that
noise/land use compatibility shall be determined according to the criteria contained in
ALUCP Table IV-1 which lists various land use types and whether the use is
“compatible”, “conditionally compatible”, or “not compatible” within a given noise
contour range. Life science uses are not specifically listed in Table IV -1, but it is
considered comparable to “Commercial Office, Business and Professional Uses”,
which is identified in Table IV-1 as “compatible” within the 70-75 dB CNEL contour
without restrictions. Multi-family residential uses are identified as “not compatible”
within the 70-75 dB CNEL contour.
An ALUC Environmental Noise Analysis prepared by Salter, dated February 28, 2022,
indicates that recent airport noise patterns are less than anticipated in the ALUCP, and
that the Project site is currently less impacted by airport noise than at the time the
ALUCP was adopted. The Noise Analysis also illustrates that implementation of noise
31
Exhibit A: DRAFT Findings
Page 4
control measures and construction standards will lessen noise impacts to residents.
Prior to issuance of building permits, detailed acoustical analyses shall be completed
as part of the final design for the proposed residential structures. The Project shall
incorporate construction methods, sound attenuation features, and sound reducing
barriers that reduce noise impacts in accordance with Section 21670, State Building
Code, and General Plan requirements to meet the interior noise levels of 45 dBA
CNEL. Sound control treatments shall include mechanical ventilation for all units so
that windows can be kept closed at the resident’s discretion to control noise, and special
building construction techniques (such as sound-rated windows and building façade
treatments) for all units. The Project is also required to include real estate disclosures
in residential leases, disclosing the presence of an airport within two miles of the
property, per Section 11010 of the Business and Professions Code.
e. As illustrated by the above discussion, approval of the proposed Project as configured
would provide for orderly development adjacent to the airport and promote the overall
goals and objectives of the California airport noise standards and prevent the creation
of new noise and safety problems because the proposed Project provides much needed
housing near transit on an underutilized site, while also utilizing advanced construction
techniques to minimize any noise impacts to residents; because there is no feasible
alternative for the proposed inclusion of a biosafety level 2 use within the portion of
the site that is located with Safety Zone 4, and all uses storing or handling hazardous
materials are required to comply with federal, State, and local regulations that ensure
safe storage, use, and handling of hazardous materials safe on this site. Furthermore,
subject to documentation that all structures, including appurtenances, will be
constructed below the heights shown on the SFO critical aeronautical surfaces map
prior to issuance of any project building permits, approval of the proposed Project does
not create any aircraft hazards.
3. The documents and other material constituting the record for these proceedings are located
at the Planning Division for the City of South San Francisco, 315 Maple Avenue, South
San Francisco, CA 94080, and in the custody of the Planning Manager, Sailesh Mehra.
3601533.1
32
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:22-611 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:3.
Report regarding a ballot measure to adopt an ordinance authorizing the City of South San Francisco to
develop, construct, or acquire affordable, low-rent housing units pursuant to Article XXXIV of the California
Constitution, subject to the approval of the voters, and adopting a resolution establishing November 8, 2022 as
the date for a municipal election on the proposed ballot measure.(Sky Woodruff, City Attorney and Mike
Futrell, City Manager)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council vote to take the following actions:
1.Introduce an ordinance authorizing the City of South San Francisco to develop, construct, or
acquire affordable, low-rent housing units pursuant to Article XXXIV of the California
Constitution, and waive further reading; and
2.Adopt a resolution:
a.establishing November 8, 2022 as the date for a municipal election on a proposed ballot
measure seeking voter authorization for the City of South San Francisco to develop,
construct, or acquire affordable, low-rent housing units pursuant to Article XXXIV of the
California Constitution;
b.submitting to voters a proposed ordinance authorizing the City to develop, construct, or
acquire affordable, low-rent housing units pursuant to Article XXXIV;
c.establishing policies and procedures in connection with such an election; requesting the
Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo consolidate the election with the
statewide primary election pursuant to section 10403 of the Elections Code; and
d.providing for submittal of ballot arguments and rebuttals and authorizing the filing of an
impartial analysis.
BACKGROUND
During prior City Council meetings and study sessions, City manager, ECD staff and the City Attorney’s Office
presented a draft ballot measure regarding Article 34 authorization which, if approved by the voters, would
authorize the City to develop, construct, or acquire low-rent housing for a certain period of time. The City
Council previously reviewed the draft ballot measure and requested additional information including referral to
the Housing Standing Committee for further review. Subsequently, comments and directions from both the
Council and the Committee were incorporated into a revised version of the draft measure, which was presented
to the City Council at the July 13, 2022 study session.
At that meeting, the Council received further presentation from City staff and BAE Urban Economics, the
City’s economic development consultant, and thereafter provided direction to move forward with placing the
proposed measure on the November 2022 election ballot. The specific ballot measure question is as follows:
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/22/2022Page 1 of 5
powered by Legistar™33
File #:22-611 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:3.
Without increasing local taxes, shall the City of South San Francisco be authorized to develop,
construct, and/or acquire affordable, decent, and safe rental housing for low-income persons, including
families, seniors, people with disabilities, and veterans, in an amount up to 1% of the total number of
existing housing units in the City of South San Francisco annually for an eight (8) year period, with any
year’s unused units being carried over each year?
The proposed ballot measure, if adopted by the voters, would authorize the City to be able to construct or
acquire 1% of the total number of existing housing units in the City for eight years. The eight-year period is
intended to align with the City’s Housing Element adoption cycle and the associated Regional Housing
Allocation (RHNA) obligations.
DISCUSSION
Overview of Article 34 Requirements
Article XXXIV of the California Constitution (“Article 34”) requires that a city’s voters grant prior approval
before any federal, state, or local public entity can develop, construct, or acquire certain types of low rent
housing projects in that city. The requirements of Article 34 are implemented by Health & Safety Code section
37000 et seq. This statute specifically define certain terms, including:
·“Low Rent Housing Project” means any urban or rural dwellings, apartments, or other living
accommodations for low income residents, financed in whole or in part by a federal, state, or local
government.
·“Low income” means households earning 80% or less of area median income. In San Mateo County,
this includes a single individual earning less than $102,450 a year, or a household of four earning less
than $146,350.
·“Financed in whole or in part by a federal, state, or local government” includes supplying labor,
guaranteeing payment of liens, or other forms of financing.
Consequently, a public entity may not develop, construct, or acquire low rent housing projects until the voters
have authorized the public entity to do so. While the scope of Article 34 is broad, statutory exemptions exist
that exclude certain types of projects from Article 34’s voter approval requirements, and that specify certain
public entity actions as not considered as developing, constructing, or acquiring a low rent housing project.
Proposed Ballot Measure and the Number of Units Authorized
The proposed draft ballot measure, if approved by the voters, would authorize the City to do the following:
·Develop, construct, and/or acquire affordable rental housing for low-income persons;
·The number of units authorized would be in an amount “up to 1% the total number of existing housing
units in the City” for an eight (8) year period; and
·Any unused portion of each year’s authorized units will be carried over to subsequent years.
Consequently, the total number of units authorized will grow each year. The 1% annual authorization
does not expire at the end of a year.
·At the end of the eight-year period, the City would retain the ability to develop, construct, and/or
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/22/2022Page 2 of 5
powered by Legistar™34
File #:22-611 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:3.
acquire the number of authorized units not built or acquired during the eight-year term of the measure.
The Department of Finance (“DOF”) publishes annual data determining the number of existing housing units in
local jurisdictions. DOF currently lists the total number of housing units in the City as 22,495. The proposed
ballot measure, as written and if approved, would authorize the City to develop and/or acquire units in the
amount of 1% of this figure annually. Any units unused in the prior year would be carried over to the next.
Assuming that each year’s allotment of units is used, and that the number of units from the prior year(s) are
added to the total number of housing units existing in the City that is used to calculate next year’s 1%
allotment, the number of units authorized under the proposed draft ballot measure above would be as follows
for a five year period (assuming no other growth in the number of units in the City):
Table A:assuming each year’s 1% allotment is used
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Est. Total
Units
Authorized
Per Year*
225 227 229 232 234
*Numbers have been rounded to their next whole unit for all tables.
As previously mentioned, there is no requirement that each year’s allotment be used - in that case, the units
authorized in the previous year would roll over to the next year. For example, if 225 units are authorized in
2022 but no units are developed, constructed, or acquired, then the number of units in 2023 that could be
developed, constructed, or acquired would be 450 units. This is illustrated for a five-year period in the
following table, which assumes no growth in the number of units in the City:
Table B:assuming that each year’s 1% allotment of units are not used and rolled over
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Est. Total
Units
Authorized
Per Year
225 450 (225+225)675 (450+225)900 (675+225)1125
(900+225)
Text of Proposed Ballot Question
As noted above, the proposed resolution includes the text that would appear on the ballot, in the form of a ballot
question. The question is limited by state law to 75 words, and read as follows:
Without increasing local taxes, shall the City of South San Francisco be authorized to develop,
construct, and/or acquire affordable, decent, and safe rental housing for low-income persons, including
families, seniors, people with disabilities, and veterans, in an amount up to 1% of the total number of
existing housing units in the City of South San Francisco annually for an eight (8) year period, with any
year’s unused units being carried over each year?
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/22/2022Page 3 of 5
powered by Legistar™35
File #:22-611 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:3.
Filing of Argument in Favor of Measure and Potential Rebuttal Argument
The attached resolution authorizes at least one member of the City Council to submit an argument (and rebuttal,
if necessary) on behalf of the City Council. The City Council may select at least one member-and no more than
two-to file the argument before adopting the resolution. The argument may be signed by up to five people and
may be any combination of members of the City Council, authorized representatives of bona fide associations,
or individuals eligible to vote on the measure. The City Council only needs to select the authorized filer at this
time. The composition of signers of the argument can be decided later. An argument authorized to be filed on
behalf of the City Council will receive priority in selection by the City Clerk for inclusion in the voter
information guide, if more than one argument were filed. The deadline to file the argument in favor of the
measure is August 19, 2022.
Additional Timelines
Additional deadlines required for a November 8, 2022 ballot measure are as follows:
August 12 Last day that measures may be placed on the ballot (consequently, the last regular
Council meeting to do so is August 10.)
August 19 Primary Arguments due
August 29 If authorized, Rebuttals Arguments due
City Attorney’s Impartial Analysis due
RELATIONSHIP TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN
The first goal set out in the Housing Plan of the City’s Housing Element is to promote the provision of housing
by both the private and public sectors for all income groups in the community. This goal includes promoting the
development of housing for extremely low-, very low-, and lower-income households. Submission of an Article
34 ballot measure question to the voters has the potential to contribute to this goal and would be consistent with
the City’s General Plan, including its Housing Element. Consequently, the proposed measure would help
achieve the following goal/objective of the City’s Strategic Plan: Initiative 2.3 - Promote a balanced mix of
housing options.
FISCAL IMPACT
This ordinance does not increase taxes and does not require the City to undertake any housing projects. The
City will incur charges from the County for conducing the election and incur other related costs; the latter are
accounted for within departmental operating budget. To cover the cost of elections provided by the County
Elections Office, the City may need to approve a budget amendment to the City Clerk’s Fiscal Year 2022-23
Operating Budget.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends the City Council:
1.Introduce an ordinance authorizing the City of South San Francisco to develop, construct, or acquire
affordable, low-rent housing units pursuant to Article XXXIV of the California Constitution, and waive
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/22/2022Page 4 of 5
powered by Legistar™36
File #:22-611 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:3.
further reading; and
2.Adopt a resolution:
a.establishing November 8, 2022 as the date for a municipal election on a proposed ballot measure
seeking voter authorization for the City of South San Francisco to develop, construct, or acquire
affordable, low-rent housing units pursuant to Article XXXIV of the California Constitution;
b.submitting a proposed ordinance to voters authorizing the City to develop, construct, or acquire
affordable, low-rent housing units pursuant to Article XXXIV;
c.establishing policies and procedures in connection with such an election; requesting the Board of
Supervisors of the County of San Mateo consolidate said election with the statewide primary
election pursuant to section 10403 of the Elections Code; and
d.providing for submittal of ballot arguments and rebuttals and authorizing the filing of an
impartial analysis.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/22/2022Page 5 of 5
powered by Legistar™37
Agenda Item 3. 22-611 Report regarding a ballot measure to adopt an ordinance authorizing the City of South San Francisco to develop, construct, or acquire affordable, low-rent housing units pursuant to Article XXXIV of the California Constitution, subject to the approval of the voters, and adopting a resolution establishing November 8, 2022 as the date for a municipal election on the proposed ballot measure. (Sky Woodruff, City Attorney and Mike Futrell, City Manager)
Legislation Text
1 Public Comment
•
Guest User at July 26, 2022 at 9:52pm PDT
Oppose
There will be too many opportunities to stir up mischief.
Sounds like socialism to me!
Our city has enough to deal with, please don't add this ballot measure.
Laura Fanella
38
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:22-612 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:3a.
Resolution establishing November 8, 2022 as the date for a municipal election on a proposed ballot measure
seeking voter authorization for the City of South San Francisco (“City”) to develop, construct, or acquire
affordable, low-rent housing units pursuant to Article XXXIV of the California Constitution; approving a
proposed ordinance authorizing the City to develop, construct, or acquire affordable, low-rent housing units
pursuant to Article XXXIV; establishing policies and procedures in connection with such an election;
requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo consolidate said election with the statewide
primary election pursuant to section 10403 of the Elections Code; and providing for submittal of ballot
arguments and rebuttals and authorizing the filing of an impartial analysis.
WHEREAS, Article XXXIV of the California Constitution (“Article 34”) was approved in 1950 and requires
local voter approval before a “state public body” may develop, construct, or acquire a “low rent housing
project;” and
WHEREAS, a city is considered a “state public body’ under Article 34; and
WHEREAS, under Article 34, a “low rent housing project” means any urban or rural dwellings, apartments or
other living accommodations for low income residents, financed in whole or in part by a federal, state, or local
government, including supplying labor, guaranteeing payment of liens, or other forms of financing; and
WHEREAS, the City’s State mandated Regional Housing Needs Allocation includes affordable housing goals
as described in the City’s certified Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, the acquisition, development, and construction of low-income housing is consistent with the City’s
General Plan, including its Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the public interest would be well served by asking the voters
of South San Francisco to authorize the City to develop, construct, and/or acquire affordable, decent, and safe
rental housing for low-income persons, including seniors, people with disabilities, and veterans, in an amount
up to 1% of the total number of existing housing units existing in the City of South San Francisco annually for
an eight (8) year period, with any year’s unused units being carried over each year; and
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/28/2022Page 1 of 4
powered by Legistar™39
File #:22-612 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:3a.
WHEREAS, voter approval of the ballot measure does not increase taxes, has no fiscal impact, and does not
grant approval for any specific project, as each project would go through the public review process; and
WHEREAS, voter approval of the ballot measure is not a commitment to undertake any specific project; and
WHEREAS, CEQA review will be performed on any specific project undertaken pursuant to the authorization
granted by approval of the ballot measure at the appropriate time; and
WHEREAS, based on all of the information presented at the January 12, February 16, May 11, July 13, and
July 27, 2022 City Council meetings, both written and oral, including without limitation the staff reports,
minutes, and other relevant materials (hereafter the “Record”), the City Council finds that under CEQA
Guidelines 15060(c)(2), voter approval of the ballot measure does not constitute a project under CEQA and
therefore review under CEQA is not required; and
WHEREAS, a proposed ordinance attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A would
implement this authorization.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of South San Francisco hereby RESOLVES as
follows:
SECTION 1.Findings. The City Council finds and determines that each of the findings set forth above are
true and correct.
SECTION 2.Call for Election. Pursuant to California Elections Code Section 9222, the City Council hereby
calls an election at which it shall submit to the qualified voters of the City of South San Francisco a measure
that, if approved by a majority vote, would authorize the City of South San Francisco to develop, construct,
and/or acquire affordable, decent, and safe rental housing for low-income persons, including seniors, people
with disabilities, and veterans, in an amount up to 1% of the total number of existing housing units existing in
the City of South San Francisco annually for an eight (8) year period, with any year’s unused units being
carried over each year and the City authorized to develop, construct, and/or acquire any unused units at the end
of the eight-year period. This measure shall be designated by letter by the San Mateo County Registrar of
Voters. Pursuant to California Elections Code Section 10400 et seq., the election for this measure shall be
consolidated with the established statewide election to be conducted on November 8, 2022.
SECTION 3.Ballot Language. The ballot language for the proposed measure shall be as follows:
Without increasing local taxes, shall the City of South San Francisco
be authorized to develop, construct, and/or acquire affordable,
decent, and safe rental housing for low-income persons, including
families, seniors, people with disabilities, and veterans, in an
amount up to 1% of the total number of existing housing units in the
City of South San Francisco annually for an eight (8) year period,
with any year’s unused units being carried over each year?
YES
NO
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/28/2022Page 2 of 4
powered by Legistar™40
File #:22-612 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:3a.
The measure will be approved if at least a simple majority of votes cast on the question are in the affirmative.
SECTION 4.Proposed Ordinance. The ordinance authorizing the measure to be approved by the voters
pursuant to Section 3 is as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto. The City Council hereby approves the
proposed ordinance, the form thereof, and its submission to the voters of the City at the November 8, 2022
election.
SECTION 5.Publication of Measure. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause notice of the measure to be
published once in an official newspaper, in accordance with Section 12111 of the California Elections Code and
Section 6061 of the California Government Code.
SECTION 6.Request to Consolidate and Conduct Election and Canvas Returns .
(a)The City Council hereby requests that the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors consolidate
the election called by this Resolution with the statewide election to be conducted on November 8, 2022 and
order the election to be conducted by the Registrar of Voters. The City Clerk is directed to file a certified copy
of this Resolution with the Board of Supervisors of San Mateo County and the Registrar of Voters of San Mateo
County on or before August 12, 2022. The City of South San Francisco acknowledges that the consolidated
election will be held and conducted in the manner prescribed in Elections Code Section 10418. The City
recognizes that the County will incur additional costs because of this consolidation and agrees to reimburse the
County for those costs.
(b)The election on the measure set forth in Section 3 shall be held and conducted, the voters
canvassed and the returns made, and the results ascertained and determined as provided for herein. In all
particulars, the election shall be held in accordance with the Elections Code of the State of California
(c)The election on the measure set forth in Section 3 shall be held in San Mateo County in the City
of South San Francisco on November 8, 2022, as required by law, and the Board of Supervisors of San Mateo
County is authorized to canvass the returns of the election with respect to the votes cast in the City of South
San Francisco and certify the results to the City Council of the City of South San Francisco.
(d)At the next regular meeting of the City Council of the City of South San Francisco occurring
after the returns of the election for the measure set forth in Section 3 have been canvassed and the results have
been certified to the City Council, or at a special meeting called for such purpose if required by law, the City
Council shall cause to be entered in its minutes a statement of the results of the election.
SECTION 7.Submission of Ballot Arguments and Impartial Analysis.
(a)The last day for submission of direct arguments for or against the measure shall be by 5:00 p.m.
on Friday, August 19, 2022.
(b)The last day for submission of rebuttal arguments for or against the measure shall be by 5:00
p.m. on Monday, August 29, 2022.
(c)Direct arguments shall not exceed three hundred (300) words and shall be signed by not more
than five (5) persons.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/28/2022Page 3 of 4
powered by Legistar™41
File #:22-612 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:3a.
(d)Rebuttal arguments shall not exceed two hundred fifty (250) words and shall be signed by not
more than five (5) persons; those persons may be different persons than the persons who signed the direct
arguments.
(e)The City Attorney shall prepare, by Monday, August 29,2022, an impartial analysis of the
measure showing the effect of the measure.
(f)Pursuant to California Elections Code Section 9285, when the City Clerk has selected the
arguments for and against the measure, which will be printed and distributed to the voters, the City Clerk shall
send copies of the argument in favor of the measure to the authors of the argument against it, and copies of the
argument against it to the authors of the argument in favor. Rebuttal arguments shall be printed in the same
manner as the direct arguments. Each rebuttal argument shall immediately follow the direct argument that it
seeks to rebut.
SECTION 8.Appropriation of Necessary Funds. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to
expend the necessary funds to pay for the City’s cost of placing the measure on the election ballot.
SECTION 9.Services of City Clerk. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to take all steps
necessary to place the measure on the ballot and to cause the ordinance or measure to be printed. A copy of the
ordinance or measure shall be made available to any voter upon request.
*****
EXHIBIT A
ORDINANCE
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/28/2022Page 4 of 4
powered by Legistar™42
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:22-613 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:3b.
An ordinance authorizing the City of South San Francisco to develop, construct, or acquire affordable, low-rent
housing units pursuant to Article XXXIV of the California Constitution.
WHEREAS, Article XXXIV of the California Constitution (“Article 34”) was approved in 1950 and requires
local voter approval before a “state public body” may develop, construct, or acquire a “low rent housing
project;” and
WHEREAS, a city is considered a “state public body’ under Article 34; and
WHEREAS, under Article 34, a “low rent housing project” means any urban or rural dwellings, apartments or
other living accommodations for low income residents, financed in whole or in part by a federal, state, or local
government, including supplying labor, guaranteeing payment of liens, or other forms of financing; and
WHEREAS, the State mandated Regional Housing Needs Allocation includes affordable housing goals as
described in the City’s certified Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, the acquisition, development, and construction of low-income housing is consistent with the City’s
General Plan, including its Housing Element;
WHEREAS, this ordinance does not increase taxes, has no fiscal impact, and does not grant approval for any
specific project, as each project would go through the public review process; and
WHEREAS, the authority granted by this ordinance is not a commitment to undertake any specific project; and
WHEREAS, CEQA review will be performed on any specific project undertaken pursuant to the authorization
granted by this ordinance at the appropriate time; and
WHEREAS, based on all of the information presented at the January 12, February 16, May 11, July 13, and
July 27, 2022 City Council meetings, both written and oral, including without limitation the staff reports,
minutes, and other relevant materials (hereafter the “Record”), the City Council finds that under CEQA
Guidelines 15060(c)(2), the authorization granted by this ordinance does not constitute a project under CEQA
and therefore review under CEQA is not required; and
WHEREAS, the authority granted by this ordinance will only become effective if approved by a majority of the
City’s voters at the November 8, 2022 municipal election.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, SUBJECT TO
VOTER APPROVAL, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1.Incorporation of Recitals.
The City Council of South San Francisco, subject to voter approval, finds that all Recitals are true and correct
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/28/2022Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™43
File #:22-613 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:3b.
and are incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION 2.Title.
This voter approved ballot measure shall be known as the City of South San Francisco Article 34 Authorization
Ordinance.
SECTION 3.Definitions
Whenever the following terms are used in this chapter, they shall have the meaning established by this section.
(a)“Article 34” shall mean Article XXXIV of the California Constitution.
(b)“City of South San Francisco” or “City” shall mean the City of South San Francisco of the State
of California and shall include the City and any other City agency for which the City Council serves as the
governing body.
(c)“Housing Unit” shall mean a residential dwelling designed for human occupation, and shall
include but is not limited to apartments, condominiums, townhouses, single family homes, duplexes, and
mobile homes.
(d) “Existing Housing Units” shall mean the total number of existing housing units in the City per
year as determined by data released annually from the State of California Department of Finance.
(e) “Low-Income Persons” shall have the meaning of “persons of low income” as defined by
Article 34.
(f)The terms “develop,” “construct,” and “acquire” shall be interpreted in accordance with Article
34, Health Safety Code Section 36000 et seq. and 37000 et seq., and any successor legislation thereto.
SECTION 4.Article 34 Authorization.
Consistent with Article 34 of the California Constitution, the City of South San Francisco is authorized to
develop, construct, and/or acquire affordable, decent, and safe rental housing for low-income persons, including
families, seniors, people with disabilities, and veterans, in an amount up to 1% of the total number of existing
housing units in the City of South San Francisco annually for an eight (8) year period, with any year’s unused
units being carried over each year. At the end of the eight-year period, if all housing units authorized by this
ordinance have not been developed, constructed, and/or acquired, then the City shall retain the authority to
develop, construct, and/or acquire any housing units authorized by this ordinance that have not been developed,
constructed, or acquired.
SECTION 5.Severability.
If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, the
remainder of the ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be
affected thereby.
SECTION 6.Effective Date.
If this ordinance is approved by a majority of the voters voting on the issue at the November 8, 2022 election,
pursuant to Elections Code Section 9217, this ordinance shall be considered adopted on that date and shall
become effective 10 days after the City Council certifies the results of the election.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/28/2022Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™44
File #:22-613 Agenda Date:7/27/2022
Version:1 Item #:3b.
SECTION 7.Voter Approval Required.
This ordinance shall only become operative if the Article 34 authorization is approved by a simple majority of
voters voting on the question at the November 8, 2022 election.
SECTION 8.Publication.
This ordinance shall be published once, with the names of those City Councilmembers voting for or against it,
in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of South San Francisco, in accordance with Government Code
Section 36933.
SECTION 9.Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act
The approval of this ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources
Code §§ 21000 et seq. (“CEQA”) and 14 Cal. Code Reg. §§ 15000 et seq. (“CEQA Guidelines”). This
ordinance provides the City with authorization to develop, construct, and/or acquire affordable housing units; it
does not grant approval for any specific project and is not a commitment to any particular action. As such,
under CEQA Guidelines section 15060(c)(2), the ordinance is not a project within the meaning of CEQA
because it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.
CEQA review will be performed on any specific project undertaken pursuant to the authorization granted by
this ordinance at the appropriate time. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15060, CEQA analysis
is not required.
*****
City of South San Francisco Printed on 7/28/2022Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™45