HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-11-29 e-packet
SPECIAL MEETING
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, California 94083
Meeting to be held at:
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING
CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY ROOM
33 ARROYO DRIVE
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 2006
7:00 P.M.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 54956 of the Govermnent Code of the
State of California, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco will hold a
Special Meeting on Wednesday, the 29th day of November, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., in the Municipal
Services Building, Cormnunity Rooln, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, California.
Purpose of the meeting:
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Public Comments - comments are limited to items on the Special Meeting
Agenda
4. Closed Session: Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 real
property negotiations related to 435 South Airport Boulevard; Agency
Negotiator: Assistant Director Van Duyn
5. Adjournment
6}1/1 ~
Clerk
:\) 't 1'- S::1-N
~
~ - ~~\
o 0
>-< ......,
~ ~
o 0
C' \.~
41.IFOR~
SPECIAL MEETING
CITY COUNCIL
OF THE
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, California 94083
Meeting to be held at:
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BlTILDING
CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY ROOM
33 ARROYO DRIVE
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 2006
7:30 P.M.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 54956 of the Government Code of the
State of California, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco will hold a Special Meeting
on Wednesday, the 29th day ofNovelnber, 2006, at 7:30 p.m., in the Municipal Services Building,
COlnlnunity Room, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, California.
Purpose of the meeting:
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
INVOCATION
PRESENTATIONS
., Fall 2006 Citizens Acadelny Class Graduation - Assistant to the City Manager Susan
Kennedy
., Developers Update on 333 Oyster Point Boulevard Project
AGENDA REVIEW
PUBLIC COMMENTS
ITEMS FROM COUNCIL
., Announcelnents
., Committee Reports
., Donation to Sister City Atotonilco Mexico Orphanage (Alberque Infantil de Atotonilco)
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Motion to approve the minutes of November 8 and 15, 2006
2. Motion to confirm expense claiIlls of November 29, 2006
3. Resolution authorizing the acceptance of funds fro III the State under the Supplelllental
Law Enforcement Services Fund Progrmll for front line police activities in the mllount of
$120,332
4. Resolution authorizing the acceptance of funds frOIll Genentech Foundation to support
library services in the mllount of $25,000
5. Resolution authorizing the acceptance of funds fron1 Soroptilllist International of North
San Mateo County for library programming in the mllount of $2,500
6. Resolution awarding the consultant agreement to Wetlands Research Association for the
Oyster Point Hook Ramp Wetland Mitigation Project
7. Resolution approving new Illembers to Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Comlllittee
ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS
8. Direction regarding Alta Vista DIive traffic calming cost sharing with San Mateo County
9. Direction regarding San Mateo County plan to improve center llledian on Westborough
Boulevard
10. Motion to deny requests from applicants at 209 AHa Vista Drive and 275 Country Club
Drive, in the unincorporated Country Club area, for extension of sewer service
11. Resolution approving guidelines for the installation of stop signs
12. Resolution approving installation of stop at Alta Vista Drive and Mira Vista Way
COUNCIL COMMUNITY FORUM
ADJOURNMENT
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
NOVEMBER 29,2006
PAGE 2
The Project
SIQugh Estates has been a critical contributor to South San Francisco's biotechnology corridor since opening
the doors of our first area facility in 1997. The state of the art biotech campus that is currently in progress at
333 Oyster Point Boulevard is the most recent addition to the more than three million square feet of
biotech-specific workspace Slough Estates manages in South San Francisco.
Construction Management
Slough Estates and our construction partners have coordinated our efforts with all of the relevant local, state
and federal agencies to develop and maintain appropriate site management practices that ensure the health
and safety of our employees and area residents.
Objective data confirms that no dust from the 333 Oyster Point Boulevard construction exceeds the stringent
applicable regulatory requirements or poses any threat to. the health or safety of workers and area residents.
Dust Management
Before beginning construction, Slough estates worked with the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality
Control Board and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, to develop appropriate soil management
procedures. The soil management plan approved by the Water Board addresses dust suppression and
monitoring, watering, soil stockpiling, reuse and disposal.
The on-site watering truck traverses the site many times a day to wet down prescribed zones and construction
activities, using as much as 24,000 - 32,000 gallons of water on a dry day.
Further, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District requires that no visible dust cross construction site
boundaries. Visible dust is generally considered by industry standards to be dust that registers above 1
milligram per cubic meter (mg/m3). Perimeter dust monitoring data collected from the five perimeter dust
monitoring stations on site show that no visible dust is leaving the site. See Chart.
Chemical Specific Standards
The Bay Area Air Quality standards apply to general construction sites. In addition, because pre-construction
site research identified specific chemicals in the soil at 333 Oyster Point left during past operations, Slough
Estates developed additional, chemical-specific dust action levels to protect on-site workers and area
residents.
These action levels were developed using U.S. EPA, Cal-EPA and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry toxicity criteria. Data confirms consistent compliance with all applicable action levels and ensures
the health of workers and residents is protected. See Chart.
Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material
Some of the fill material at the 333 Oyster Point site is slag. A byproduct of the steel manufacturing process,
slag is a dense, rock-like substance ranging in size from several inches to several feet. Some of the slag at
the Oyster Point site contains naturally occurring radioactive material, caused by the accumulation of
impurities during steel'making.
The radiation exposure associated with the excavation and handling of the slag at 333 Oyster Point has been
evaluated using site data and determined to be less than one percent of worker and public thresholds, an
insignificant amount when compared to routine exposure to radiation from natural sources such as cosmic
rays, radon, soil, and food.
1.20
1
c
o
+i
as
~ 0.60
CD
g
C
o
(.)
+='
fh
:J
c 0.40
Station NO.1
Station No.2
Station NO.3
Station NO.4
Station No. 1 Average
Station No.2 Average
Station No.3 Average
Station No.4 Average
0.20
0.00
(0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (,0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (,0 (,0 (0 (,0 <0 <0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 8
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C\I C\I C\I C\I C\I C\I C\I C\I N C\I C\I N C\I N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
C'i") ~ 1.0 cri' I"- ea 0) 0 "C'"" N eti ~ t.O (0 ~ 00 oi 0 ~ N r;t) ~ t.O (0 I"- 00 ai 0 "C'"" "C'"" N eti ~ t.O cri'
>.. >. >. >. >. >.. >. "C'"" "C'"" "C'"" "C'"" ~ "C'"" "C'"" "C'"" "C'"" "C'"" N N N N N N N N N N M C'i") ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .....
"5 S S "5 S "5 >. .2:- >. >.. >.. >.. .2:- >. .2:- >. .2:- >.. >. >. >.. >. >.. >.. >.. >. >. en en en en en en
::J ::J ::J ::J ::J ::J ::J
J J J J J J J "5 ::J :J ::J S S :J "5 ::J ::J :J "5 "5 "5 "5 "5 ::J S "5 "5 "5 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0)
J J J J J J J J ..., ..., -, J -, -, ...., J J J J ..., J ::J ::J ::::J ::J ::J :J
<( <( <( <( <( <(
Date
.~
~
.....'
:'
~I
~
-",'
~
o
N
~
N
~
iJJ
Notes:
1. The 0.79 mg/m3 Perimeter Dust Action Level is based on the 95% Upper Confidence level for lead as presented in "Perimeter Dust Monitoring Results and the
Development of Chemical Specific Action Levels:' Geomatrix, November 1,2006, Tables C-1 and C-2.
2. Station locations are presented in Figure 1 of "Perimeter Dust Monitoring Results and the Development of Chemical Specific Action Levels," Geomatrix, November
1, 2006.
3. Averages for each station are time-weighted based on the highest dust concentrations measured during 15-minute intervals throughout each workday.
4. Dust monitoring conducted by SI Consultants of Mill Valley, CA. Results presented in "Perimeter Dust Monitoring Results and the Development of Chemical
Specific Action Levels:' Geomatrix, November 1,2006. Values are maximum dust concentrations measured in each 15-minute interval during each work day.
PERIMETER DUST MONITORING RESULTS
JULY-AUGUST 2006
Britannia Oyster Point II
333 Oyster Point Boulevard
South San Francisco, California
Project No. 6207.000
Figure 1
PERIMETER DUST MONITORING RESULTS
SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 2006
Britannia Oyster Point"
333 Oyster Point Boulevard
South San Francisco, California
Project No. 6207.000
Figure 2
1.2
1
c
o
+i
I!
+='
C
(I)
g
c
o
(.)
+='
fh
:J 0.4
c
0.2
0
(0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 8 (0 (0 <0 (0 (0 <0 8 (0 (0 <0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 <0 (0 (0 (0 (0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
t.O <0 I"- ea en 0 'f""' N (V) ~ Lei cri' ~ 00 ai 0 'F' N (V) 1.0 ID I"- ea (j) ci "C'""
N N N N N (V) l- I- l- I- l- I- l- I- I- "C'"" 'f""' "C'"" "I:""" ...- 'f""' 'f""' "C'"" "C'"" N N
I- bo b. t- L.. I- Q) Q) Q) (J,) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) L.. L.. t- t- t- l- t- t- t- l- t- t-
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) .c .c ..n .c .c .c .c .c .c Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) (l) Q) (J,) Q)
.0 .0 .c .c ..a .c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ..a ..a ..a .c ..a ..a ..a ..a .c ..a ..a ..a
E E E E E E t) t) t) 13 t) t) t5 t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
t5 t5 t5 t5 t5 t5 t5 t) t) ..... t) t5
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ()
..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0. 0. 0. 0. 0.. 0.
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
C/) C/) C/) C/) C/) C/) Date
'm
N
~
.....1
Oi
~I
~,
~
~'
R.
o
N
~
g
N
~
iri
Notes:
1. The 0.79 mg/m3 Perimeter Dust Action Level is based on the 95% Upper Confidence level for lead as presented in "Perimeter Dust Monitoring Results and the
Development of Chemical Specific Action Levels," Geomatrix, November 1,2006, Tables C-1 and C-2.
2. Station locations are presented in Figure 2 of "Perimeter Dust Monitoring Results and the Development of Chemical Specific Action Levels," Geomatrix, November
1, 2006.
3. Averages fof each station are time-wighted based on the highest dust concentrations measured during i5-minute intervals throughout each work day, with the
exception of the period from 7:30am October 18 through 6:00pm October 20, 2006 when the maximum values from each i5-minute interval throughout the period
were used.
4. Dust monitoring conducted by SI Consultants of Mill Valley, CA. Results presented in "Perimeter Dust Monitoring Results and the Development of Chemical
Specific Action Levels," Geomatrix, November 1. 2006. Values are maximum dust concentrations measured in each is-minute inteval during each work day with
the exception of the period from 7:30am October 18 through 6:00pm October 20, 2006 when the maximum values from each is-minute interval throughout the
period were used.
1
Station 2
Station No.3
Station No.4
Station NO.5
Station NO.1 Average
Station NO.2 Average
Station NO.3 Average
Station No.4 Average
Station No.5 Average
b 6
CD
.....,
CD
::i
a~
~ 5
o
II...
CD
Q.,
E 4
<<'G
II...
a2'J
-
-
:i 3
10
9
8
7
2
1
o
Uranium
Cobalt
D
10
9
8
7
6 ..:
(I.)
...
(I.)
:&
D~
5~
o
.....
(I.)
c..
4 e
E
m
.-
-
.....
.-
3:&
2
1
Selenium
Silver
Action
(log scale)
D
Antimony
o
Vanadium
FIDENTIAL
Attorney-Client Privileged
Attorney-Work Product
200
-
E
G)
Ib,
E
- 150
G)
en
0
C
100
50
o
Federal limit for
excess dose to public
(per year)
Site during
construction
(entire project
duration)
,
Jet plane travel
round trip SF...NY)
!I!iI
t
Natural background
(per year)
A GENDA ITEM #3
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Novelllber 29, 2006
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Mark Raffaelli, Chief of Police
BUDGET AMENDMENT - SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
SERVICES FUND PROGRAM
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached Resolution accepting $120,332 from
the State under the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) Program and
amending the Department's budget accordingly.
BACICGROUNDIDISCUSSION
During 1996, Assembly Bill No. 3229 passed, which required that $100 million of the State's
1996-97 Budget be appropriated to create a new subvention to augment local law enforcement
efforts. As a result, the City initially received $132,438.20. Although it was reported to be one-time
supplemental funding for front line police activities, we have continued to receive the funding yearly.
Once more, the Department has been made aware the State will continue the SLESF pro graIn for the
2006-2007 fiscal year and our allotment is $120,332.
These funds will be used to supplen1ent our current personnel costs.
To track expenditures, Fund 39 has been established for the Supplemental Law Enforcelllent Services
Fund.
FUNDING
There are no 4feneral fund obligations. The entire an10unt is provided by the State.
//
I /
I / j}//,
} / ,/,.
1/_ /. ~ L/-
By: P~I ,,-ay; -:::9~ Approved:
, '/
Mark Riaffaelfi
Chief of Police
Attachment: Resolution
RESOLUTION NO.
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY COUNCIL TO
ACCEPT $120,332 FROM THE STATE UNDER THE
SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES
FUND (SLESF) PROGRAM AND AMEND THE
DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET ACCORDINGLY
WHEREAS, staff recon1illends the acceptance of $120,332 frOlll the State under
the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund ("SLESF") Progrmll and alllend the
Depaliluent's budget accordingly; and
WI-IEREAS, in 1996, Assembly Bill No. 3229 passed, requiring that $100 million
of the State's 1996-97 Budget be appropriated to create a new subvention to augment
local law enforcement effolis. The City received $132,438.20 as one-tillle supplemental
funding for front line police activities; and
vVHEREAS, the City has continued to receive funding on a yearly basis;
and
WHEREAS, staffis aware that the State will continue the SLESF program
for the 2006-2007 fiscal year. The City's $120,332 allotIllent will be used to
supplement current perSOlTIlel costs; and
WHEREAS, to track expenditures for the SLESF, Fund 39 has been
established; and
WHEREAS, the entire amount is provided by the State alld there are no general
funding obligations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
South San Francisco that the City Council hereby authorizes acceptance of the $120,332
from the State under the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund.
*
*
*
*
*
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and
adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a meeting
held on the day of 2006 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
City Clerk
AGENDA ITEM #4
taff
port
DATE:
November 29,2006
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Valerie Sommer, Library Director
SUBJECT:
RES()LUTIC)N AlJTI-IORIZING 'rI-IE i\.CCEVfANCE OF FUNDING IN
THE AlVIOIJNT OF $25,000 FROlVI TI-IE GENENT'ECI-I FOUNDATION
TO SIJPPORT LIBRARY SERVICES AND AlVIENDING TI-IE LIBRARY
DEPAR'rlVIENT'S 2006/2007 ()PERATING BUI)GET
RECOMMENDA TIONS:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution accepting funding in the amount of
$25,000 from the Genentech Foundation to support Library services, and amending the Library
Department's operating budget for fiscal year 2006/2007.
BACKGROUND:
The Library Department has been awarded $25,000 in funding from the Genentech Foundation. Funds
will be used to support progrmlls for children and families. $8,500 will support the Homework Club at
the Community Learning Center. This program provides homework assistance and skill building
services for children in grades 3 through 5. $8,500 will support Project Read's Learning Wheels Van.
This "preschool on wheels" provides story times, distributes free books and provides information and
referral services to children and families attending and visiting local preschools, home day care centers,
health centers and more. $8,000 will supp0l1 the Children's Services Reader Leader program. This
summer program trains middle and high school students to work with elementary school students to
practice and improve their reading skills.
FUNDING:
The fiscal year 2006/2007 general fund budget for the Community Learning Center anticipated the receipt of
grant funding that includes the $8,500 identified in this staff report. The remaining $16,500 in grant funding
from the Genentech Foundation will be used to amend the Library Department's current budget. Funds not
expended by the end of fiscal year 2006/2007 will be carried over into fiscal year 2007/2008. Receipt of
these funds does not commit the city to ongoing funding after the close of the grant cycle.
:) taU Keport
Subject: Acceptance of $25,000 in grant funding from the Genentech Foundation
Page 2
CONCLUSION:
Receipt of these funds will enable the Library Department to continue augmenting these important progrmns
and services. It is recommended that the City Council accept $25,000 in grant funding to support Library
services and mnend the Library Departlnent's fiscal year 2006/2007 operating budget by $16,500.
BY:{~ ~
Valerie S0111mer
Library Director
Approved
Attachments: Resolution
Grant Proposal
RESOLUTION NO.
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF
$25,000 FROM TI-IE GENENTECH FOUNDATION TO
SUPPORT LIBRARY SERVICES AND AMENDING THE
LIBRARY DEPARTMENT'S 2006/2007 OPERATING
WHEREAS, staff recommends the acceptance of $25,000 from the Genentech
Foundation to support Library services to children and fan1ilies; and
WHEREAS, the general fund budget for the COllllTIlmity LeaIl1ing Center anticipated
the receipt of grant funding including $8,500 of the Genentech Foundation funding; and
WHEREAS, $16,500 of the accepted funds will be used to amend this year's
operating budget of the Library Department.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South
San Francisco that the City Council hereby accepts $25,000 from the Genentech Foundation
to support Library services to children and fmTIilies and amends the 2006-2007 Operating
Budget, to reflect an increase of $16,500 to the Library Departlllent's budget.
*
*
*
*
*
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted
by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting held on the
_day of , 2006 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
840897-1
Proposal to Genentech Foundation
Name of Organization: South San Francisco Public Library Website: http://www.ssf.netJlibrary
Address: 840 West Orange Ave, South San Francisco, CA 94080
Contact: Valerie Sommer Title: Director Email: [email protected] Phone: 650-829-3872
Amount of Request: $25,000 Tax ID #: 94-6000435
Type of Request: Single year, operating funds for three distinct library programs
Introduction
South San Francisco Public Library is entering its 89th year of continuous library service. We are
actively comlnitted to providing the best possible cOlnbination of library materials and services
to meet the informational, educational, and recreational needs of our multicultural comIllunity in
a professional Inanner with a human touch. Our library values the community it serves and
actively participates in joint cOlllmunity based projects. Library services are no longer material-
based, but instead community-based. We respond to the cOlnmunity in which we reside. We
have a long history of collaboration and participation with community partners, moving beyond
the walls of the library and directly into our neighborhoods. We are requesting funding to
partially fund three unique community services: Reader Leader, Learning Wheels and
Homework Club. All three programs support a core Library value of building a community of
readers and supporting lifelong literacy opportunities for all.
Reader Leader - $8,000
Reader Leader provides elelllentary school children support to increase their reading skills over
their summer break. Elementary school children reading below grade level are assigned to
middle and high school volunteers. The teen volunteers help children practice reading on a one-
to-one basis for 6 to 8 hours over the course of the summer. For 17 years, Reader Leader has
been very populm' and each year the number of participants grows. In addition to increasing
elementary school children's reading skills, the program offers a significant volunteer
opportunity for teens. The training and experience the teens gain is invaluable. Readers and
Leaders are also encouraged to join Reading Clubs and explore the variety of literature and
programs available at the library.
Outcome 1: Seventy-five Readers will improve their reading skills
Measurement: We will survey the parents of the Readers before and after the program to
determine if they see an improvement in their child's reading skills
Outcome 2: Seventy-five Leaders will have a meaningful volunteer experience and complete
8-10 hours of community service.
Measurement: We will record the number of hours logged by the Leaders as well as
their comments.
Project Read/Learning Wheels - $8,500
Since 1985, Project Read has been assisting people in meeting their literacy goals and has
produced positive results for thousands of people throughout North San Mateo County. In 2000,
Project Read acquired a literacy van (Learning Wheels) to provide literacy services to families in
1
the hard-to-reach comlnunities of North San Mateo County. Leanling Wheels is designed to be a
preschool on wheels that stops at locations in the community to provide a) free story times with
culturally diverse children's books, b) access to interactive educational toys and a cOlnputer, c)
parenting information and referrals, and d) free books to children. A typical Learning Wheel
week includes at least six site visits with a weekly attendance of 75 to 100 individuals. In 2005,
nlore than 6,000 children (and their parents) participated in an early literacy activity on Leml1ing
Wheels. The same amount of families will be served in 2006.
Outcome 3: Families that participate in Learning Wheel (L W) programming will increase the
number of books they have in their homes by 70%.
Measurement: This change will be tracked through pre/post surveys. Additionally, a
record of the number of books given to each family will be kept.
Outcome 4: Fmnilies that participate in L W will increase the amount of time they read to
young children by 60%.
Measurement: This change will be documented in pre/post surveys and random
interviews.
Community Learning Center/Homework Club - $8,500
Since February 1999, the Community Learning Center has offered a learning environment where
adults enhance their English language fluency, native language literacy, computer competency,
work-related capacity and parenting skills. Children also receive assistance with their
homework. The Homework Club serves 3rd to 5th graders four days a week to help children
understand homework, leanl study skills, and develop a love and excitement for learning. It
serves 100 children during the school year. On a typical afternoon, after eating a snack, children
work on their homework with assistance from staff and volunteers. When they complete their
assignments, children play specific games, do projects, or work in the computer lab. Once a
week they go to Brain Busters, an interactive lllath class, to receive targeted assistance with
particular skills. The day ends with a Gathering of all the children, in which they playa team
gmne, participate in small group activities, or hear a book chapter read aloud.
Outcome 5: Participating youth will turn in homework that is accurate and on tilne, 80-100%
of the time.
Measurement: Results of teacher pre-and post-surveys
Outcome 6: 80% of participants will demonstrate an increase in reading and math skills.
Measurement: Results of teacher pre- and post-surveys.
Volunteer Opportunities:
V olunteers provide an important component to the services offered by the South San Francisco
Library. Opportunities include: a) Project Read Tutor: work six hours a week for at least six
months with an adult to improve basic reading skills b) Trivia Challenge: work up to 20 hours
in October and November to help support the exciting Project Read Trivia Challenge fundraiser.
Volunteer jobs include scorekeeper, silent auction assistance, usher, registrar and n10re. c)
Homework Club: help children with homework one afternoon a week. d) ~omputer Lab: help
adults learn basic computer skills one evening or Saturday morning a week. e) Project Read
Office volunteer: Jobs include mailings, phone calls, data entry 3...l1d more, and f) Genera!
Library volunteer: shelve materials, assist with programs and displays, and Inore.
2
AGENDA ITEM #5
taff
art
DATE:
Novelnber 29, 2006
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Valerie SOlnmer, Library Director
SUBJECT:
RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT A $2,500 GRANT FROM SOROPTIMIST
INTERNATIONAL NORTH SAN MATEO COUNTY TO SUPPORT
LIBRARY PROGRAMMING AND AMEND THE LIBRARY
DEPARTMENT'S 2006/2007 OPERATING BUDGET
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recolnmended the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing acceptance of a $2,500 grant from
Soroptimist International North San Mateo County to support Library programming focused on women's
health and safety issues and amend the Library Department's operating budget for fiscal year 2006/2007.
BACKGROUND
The Library has been awarded $2,500 from Soroptimist International North San Mateo County to fund
year 2 in a series of programs focusing on health and safety issues for women and girls. The Library will
continue to build on the success of last year's programs which included several health spa days and a
class on personal safety at Grand A venue Library. This year, similar programs will be hosted at the
Main Library. In addition, books and other materials will be purchased for the Library's collections
related to health.
Soroptimist members selected this project for support because it fits a number of the organization's core
values: improving the lives of women and girls; volunteer action, fellowship and diversity, etc.
FUNDING:
The funds will be used to amend the fiscal year 2006/2007 operating budget of the Library Department.
Funds not expended at the end of fiscal year 2006/2007 will be carried over into fiscal year 2007/2008.
Receipt of these funds does not commit the City to ongoing support after the close of the funding cycle.
CONCLUSION:
Receipt of these funds will enable the Library to continue programs and services which are not otherwise
funded and will provide the comlnunity with additional health resources. It is recommended that the City
Council accept $2,500 in grant funding to support the Library and amend the Library Depmlment' s fiscal
year 2006/2007 operating budget.
Valerie Sommer
Library Director
Approved :~J l. C. ~
arr M. Nagel
City Manager
By: V~~
RESOLUTION NO.
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF
$2,500 IN GRANT FUNDING FROM SOROPTIMIST
INTERNATIONAL NORTH SAN MATEO COUNTY TO
SUPPORT LIBRARY PROGRAMMING AND AMEND
THE LIBRARY DEPARTMENT'S 2006/2007 OPERATING
WHEREAS, staff recommends the acceptance of $2,500 from Soroptimist
Inte111ational North San Mateo County to support Librm"y programming focused on women's
health and safety issues; and
WHEREAS, the funds will be used to amend this year's operating budget of the
Library Department.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South
San Francisco that the City Council hereby accepts $2,500 from Soroptimist International
North San Mateo County to support Library progrmnming focused on women's health and
safety issues and amends the 2006-2007 Operating Budget, to reflect an increase of $2,500
to the Library Department's budget.
*
*
*
*
*
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted
by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting held on the
_day of , 2006 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
840897-1
AGENDA ITEM #6
taff
art
DATE: November 29,2006
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Marty Van Duyn, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: OYSTER POlNT HOOK RAMP WETLAND MITIGATION AND MONITORlNG
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution awarding the consultant agreement
for the Oyster Point Hook Ramp Wetland Mitigation and Monitoring to WetIands Research
Association (WRA), Environmental Consultants in the amount not to exceed $45,463.00.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The project is located on Bayshore Boulevard from Sister Cities Boulevard north to the city limits with
the City of Brisbane. The construction project involves the creation of new wetlands, restoration and
enhancement of existing wetlands, weed removal within the wetlands area, and providing for wetlands
planting, minor site grading, hydro-seeding and erosion control.
This project was a requirement of the City's permit from the Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE) for the
Oyster Point Flyover and Oyster Point Hook Ramp projects. Due to impacts to the existing wetlands,
ACOE required mitigation of the wetlands with a 3 to 1 ratio. Wetlands Research Association (WRA) is
the wetlands consultant to the City and is responsible for project design, planting specifications and
planting methodology and construction.
In 2005, Shelterbelt Builders, Inc. of Berkeley, CA constructed the wetland mitigation site per plans and
specifications. In accordance with the ACOE permit, the City is required to perform wetland monitoring
and reporting for 5 years. The scope of work for WRA satisfies the requirements mandated by ACOE.
WRA Environmental Consultants of San Rafael, CA, has done numerous wetland mitigation projects for
the Cities of Berkeley, Oakland and San Francisco as well as the National Parks Service and California
State Parks. As a result, they are very familiar with the mitigation requirements of this project and the
ACOE.
Staff Report
Subject: OYSTER POINT HOOK RAMP WETLAND MITIGATION AND MONITORING
Page 2 of 3
FUNDING
The cost breakdown for the project budget is listed here:
Consulting Contract
Contingency (10%)
Total Project Budget
$41,330.00
$ 4,133.00
$45,463.00
This project is included in the City's 2006 -2007 Capital Improvement Program as part of the Oyster
PointlUS 101 Flyover and Oyster Point Hook Ramp project.
CONCLUSION
This project will create, restore and enhance the wetlands at the base of San Bruno Mountain as part of
the environmental mitigation required by the construction of Oyster Point/US 101 Flyover and Oyster
Point Hook Ramp project. The consultant agreement with WRA will ensure the City is in compliance
with the 5-year mitigation monitoring and reporting requirements mandated by the ACOE.
BY:~V~~L-__..._---'
Marty Van Duyn -=-- 0
Assistant City Manager
Approved
RRIRD/DC
Attachments:
Resolution
WRA, Environmental Consultants Proposal
Location Map and Photos
RESOLUTION NO._
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION AWARDING AN AGREEMENT FOR
THE OYSTER POINT HOOK RAMP WETLAND
MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROJECT TO
WETLANDS RESEARCH ASSOCIATION (WRA) OF
SAN RAFAEL IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$ 45,463.00
WHEREAS, staff recommends approval of an agreement between Wetland Research
Association (WRA) and the City of South San Francisco for Oyster Point Hook Ramp Wetland
Mitigation and Monitoring in an amount not to exceed $ 45,463.00; and
WHEREAS, sufficient funds for this project are included in the City's 2006-2007 Capital
Improvement Program budget for the Oyster Point Hook Ramp Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San
Francisco that the City Council hereby awards the agreement for Oyster Point Hook Ramp Wetland
Mitigation and Monitoring to Wetlands Research Association (WRA) in the amount not to exceed
$ 45,463.00.
*
*
*
*
*
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the
City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a meeting held
on the day of , 2006 by the following vote:
A YES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
ENVIRONMENTAl CONSULTANTS
Oyster Point Hook Ramp Wetland Mitigation
CHANGE ORDER
Prepared for:
Tf -CI r1f-'.I'~rqD
.1C~.'...JLJ 'L--_"_~1. " JD
Mr. Ray Razavi, City Engineer
City of South San Francisco
400 Grand Avenue
South San Francisco, California 94080
APR 2 8 2006
BY: ENGINEERING DIVISION
Existing Purchase Order #68442, 04/26/05
April 27, 2006
PURPOSE OF CHANGE ORDER
As requested, WRA, Inc. has prepared an additional scop'e of work to perform environmental
consulting services for wetland mitigation construction inspection, maintenance inspection,
wetland monitoring, and reporting to meet resource agency requirements, and general
consulting services for the Oyster Point Hook Ramp Wetland Mitigation project in South Sa,n
Francisco, California. The scope of work and cost estimate included below are based upon
WRA's current understanding of the proposed project. As the project moves forward, the scope
of work and cost estimates may have to be updated in order to reflect specific requirements
determined through consultation with the City.
ADDITIONAL WORK PRODUCTS
Annual Monitoring Reports (Years 1 to 5)
Maintenance Inspection Field Reports (Years 1 to 4)
Construction Monitoring Field Reports
As-Built Report
Maintenance Specifications
ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF WORK
Task 1. V.Jetland Hydrology Monitoring
The mitigation wetland must meet hydrology performance criteria that includes inundation
and/or saturation for two months. WRA will install one staff gauge in each wetland to monitor
surface water inundation. WRA will make periodic site visits (monthly, January through March)
to determine inundation and/or soil saturation duration. A photographic record will be
developed. Soil erosion will also be monitored and immediately reported if substantial erosion
occu rs.
The estimated cost to perform this task for the 5-year monitoring period is $6,699.
Task 2. Wetland Vegetation and Soils Monitoring
Annual vegetation monitoring will be conducted to determine survival and establishment of
native wetland plants, percent cover of plants within each wetland, plant dominance, and
2169-8 East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 tel (415) 454-0129 fax
[email protected] WWW.wro-ca.com
invasive weed cover. In approximately late April or May of each monitoring year starting in
2006, WRA will visit the mitigation areas, conduct a plant assessment, and make visual percent
cover estimates in wetlands. Soils will be examined for redoximorphic indicators of hydric soil
development, such as sulphuric smell or oxidized root channel formation.
The estimated cost of this work for the 5-year period is $7,844.
Task 3. Annual Wetland Monitoring Reports
WRA will prepare annual monitoring reports that will include descriptions of methodologies
used, results, and discussion pertaining to the progress of the mitigation in meeting
performance criteria. WRA will assess the progress of each mitigation wetland and make
recommendations for any additional work that may be needed to meet performance criteria. A
draft report will be prepared and submitted for review and comment in approximately
September of each monitoring year. A final report will then be prepared for submission to the
Corps and RWQCB by October 15th lof each monitoring year from 2006-2010.
The estimated cost to prepare the five annual reports is $13,580.
Task 4. Maintenance Support and Ins.pections
Maintenance of a mitigation project is typically required during the monitoring period to meet
performance criteria. WRA biologists will make inspections routinely during the annual
monitoring visits described above, however, additional maintenance inspections will need to be
conducted during the summer and fall months when other monitoring work is not scheduled.
Maintenance inspections and support are expected to be needed more infrequently as the
mitigation wetlands mature. Maintenance support and inspection site visits will be conducted
once a month during Monitoring Years 1 and 2 in June through September. During Monitoring
Years 3 and 4, site visits will be made two times during the summer and early fall months.
During these site visits, a biologist will evaluate weed cover, assist the maintenance personnel
to identify and effectively control weeds, and evaluate vandalism. A brief letter report with any
recommendations for mitigation maintenance will be prepared following each inspection.
The estimated cost for this task is $5,389.
Task 5. Construction Monitoring
WRA will perform a variety of activities during Year 1 to support the completion of the
implementation phase of the wetland mitigation. WRA will provide construction monitoring
services for the planting of the remaining wetland plants scheduled for installation in the fall.
Following completion of planting, WRA will prepare an as-built report to submit to the Corps and
RWQCB as required in the wetland mitigation plan. WRA will prepare a draft report for the City
to review prior to submitting the as-built report to the resource agencies. To guide the party
assuming maintenance of the mitigation parcel, WRA will prepare maintenance specifications
for maintenance activities. This task also includes approved construction monitoring and
meeting activities conducted in early 2006 that were requested by the City and not included in
the previous scope of work.
The estimated cost of WRA involvement in this task is $7,819.
ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL COST
The estimated additional cost to conduct the work outlined above is broken down by task as
follows:
Task 1: Wetland Hydrology Monitoring ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " $6,699
Task 2: Wetland Vegetation and Soils Monitoring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. $7,844
Task 3: Annual Wetland Monitoring Reports. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " $13,580
Task 4: Maintenance Support and Inspections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " $5,389
Task 5: Construction Monitorinq ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lZ.&19
TOTAL ............................................................. $41,330
The yearly cost breakdown is as follows:
Year 1 Subtotal
Year 2 Subtqtal
Year 3 Subtotal
Year 4 Subtotal
Year 5 Subtotal
TOTAL
$15,407
$7,323
$6,290
$6,468
$5,842
$41,330
A detailed budget is enclosed for reference. Any additional work at the req uest of the City
during the five-year monitoring period will be billed on a time and materials basis. WRA will
submit a separate proposal for any additional monitoring years required, if the wetland
mitigation area is not deemed successfully complete by the agencies during the five-year
monitoring period.
Thank you again for the opportunity to continue providing professional services for this
important City project. Please call or email me with any questions on this Change Order.
S~ly, _ ~
~~?~
Principal
ApPROVAL TO PROCEED
Scope of Work and Estimated Budget accepted by:
Signature
Date
Printed Name and Title
Signature
Date
Printed Name and Title
For WRA, Inc.
Principal
Date
Principal
Date
4/27/2006
WRA
RATE SCHEDULE
Effective January 2006
T. Fraser $130 per hour
Scientist 93
Senior Technicians 87
Technicians 78
PROJECT: 10001/ Oyster Point Hook Ramp Wetland Mitigation
Budget Prepared: GGrrF
ESTIMATED COST
Task Description
Time Assignment in Hours ---___________________________________________
Senior Expenses
TF Scientist Technicians Technicians
Total*
1. Wetland Hydrology Monitoring
Year 1 (3 Visits X 4 hr ea) 1 12 $90 $1,264
Year 2 1 12 $90 $1,302
Year 3 1 12 $90 $1,340
Year4' 1 12 $90 $1,378
Year 5 1 12 $90 $1,416
Wetland Hydrology Subtotal... ... .............. .......... .............. .......... .................. ............ ......... ..................... ...... ..... $6,699
2; Wetland Vegetation/ Soil Monitoring
Year 1 8 8 $30 $1,480
Year 2 8 8 $30 $1,524
Year 3 8 8 $30 $1,569
Year 4 8 8 $30 $1,613
Year 5 1 8 8 $30 $1,658
Wetland Vegetation/ Soli Monitoring Subtotal..................... ............................................... ......................................................... $7,844
3. Annual Wetland Monitoring Reports
Year 1 2 16 16 $50 $2,950
Year 2 . 1 12 16 $50 $2,546
Year 3 1 12 16 $50 $2,620
Year 4 1 12 16 $50 $2,694
Year 5 1 .12 16 $50 $2,769
Annual Wetland Monitoring Reports Subtotal......... ................................. ................ ........... ... ................................. .................... $13,580
4. Maintenance Support and Inspections
Year 1 (3 Visits X 6 hrea) 18 $90 $1,894
Year2(3VlsltsX6hrea) 18 $90 $1,951
Year 3 (1 Visit X 6 hr ea) 6 $30 $761
Year 4 (1 Visit X 6 hr ea) 1 -, 6 $30 $783
Maintenance Support and Inspe<;:tions Subtotal.....................:.. ... ... ...... ... ............ ... ............ ............ ...... .................. ...... ..... ............ $5,389
5. Construction Monitoring (Year 1 only)
Approved and Completed Construction Monitoring! Meeting Charges (not included in previous contract) $1,143
Fall Planting Inspection (6 visits X 6 hr ea) 36 $200 $3,548
As-Built Report 1 8 $20 $894
Maintenance Specificatfon and Coordination 2 16 $20 $1,768
Project Management 2 2 $20 $466
Construction Monitoring Subtotal.............................. ................................................... ... ...:..................................... . $7,819
Total Hours
Total Expense
Estimated Total Cost
* Inflation factor of3% Cumulative added Years 2-5
25
110
164
120
$1,350
$41,331
YEARLY COST BREAKDOWN
Year 1 Total
Year 2 Total
Year 3 Total
Year 4 Total
Year 5 Total
TOTAL
.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . " . .. .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . .. . .
$15,407
$7,323
$6,290
$6,468
$5,842
$41,330
..................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................
1
I
o
'<
(J)
r+
CD
""'1
1J
o
....
:l
r+
~
CD
r+
-
Q)
:l
c..
(J)
S
....
r+
to
Q)
r+
o
:l
1J
""'1
o
..... .
CD
(")
r+
L
I
M
N'OT. TO SCALE
--
-1
m.
$
~. "'Eft ..:. J
AGENDA ITEM #7
taff
rt
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
November 29,2006
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Susan Kennedy, Assistant to the City Manager
APPROVAL OF NEW MEMBERS TO BICYCLE/PEDISTRIAN ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution appointing two new members to the
Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
In 1998, the City Council adopted a resolution establishing a Bicycle Advisory Committee. This
committee was a requirement for submitting projects under the Transportation Development Act
(TDA) Article 3 funding and their role is to review and/or prioritize TDA Article 3 bicycle projects.
This group also participated in the development and review of bicycle plans. Since that time, the
nmlle of the committee has evolved to include pedestrian issues, thus the change in name to
Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BP AC).
The BP AC is required to be composed of 3 to 5 members who live or work in the City of South San
Francisco and are to be appointed by the City Council. The Planning and Engineering Divisions
provide administrative and technical support to the Committee.
In an effort to enhance our ability to facilitate the submission of ongoing grant applications, it is
requested that Karen Sumner and Debbie Mendes be appointed to join Steve Carlson, Senior Planner,
Dennis Chuck, Senior Civil Engineer and Barry MaJ.lllllini, Senior Building Inspector as nlembers of
this committee. Karen Sumner lives in South San Francisco and works for the San Mateo County
Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance and Debbie Mendes works as the Public Affairs Representative
for Kaiser Hospital, South San Francisco. Both meet the requirement of living and/or working in
South San Francisco.
FUNDING - Administrative and technical support will continue to be accomplished using existing
operational budgets.
CONCLUSION
Approval of the proposed appointees will increase participation on this Committee within the
community at large and will provide us with the lllaximum number of melllbers allowed.
Staff Report
Subject: (Approval of New Members to Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Cormnittee)
Page 2
By:
Approved:
usan E. Kennedy
Assistant to the City Manager
AttachInent: Resolution
RESOLUTION NO.
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ADDITIONAL MEMBERS
TO THE BICYCLEIPEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, as a requirement for submitting projects under the Transportation
Development Act, the City is required to have a Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee;
and
WHEREAS, the Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory COInmittee is required to be
composed of three to five members, who live or work in the City of South San Francisco
and who are appointed by the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE RESOLVED, that the City of South San Francisco
authorizes the appointment to Karen Stunner, resident and Debbie Mendes, Public Affairs
Representative for Kaiser Hospital, South San Francisco as additional members on the
BicyclelPedestrian Advisory Committee.
*
*
*
*
*
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and
adopted b6' the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a special meeting held
on the 29t day of November 2006 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
875258-1
AGENDA ITEM #8
taff
port
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
November 29,2006
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Marty Van Duyn, Assistant City Manager
ALTA VISTA DRIVE TRAFFIC CALMING/COST SHARING WITH SAN
MATEO COUNTY
RECOMMENDA TION
It is reconlmended that the City Council by motion, provide direction to Staff regarding cost
sharing with the County of San Mateo for solar powered radar speed limit signs on Alta Vista
Drive.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
OnJuly 12, 2006, the City received notification from the San Mateo County Department of Public
Works regarding the proposed installation of three (3) speed humps and two (2) dips on Alta Vista
Drive in the County unincorporated area. (See Location Map - Exhibit 1)
The Traffic Advisory Committee (T AC) reviewed the County's proposal and opposed the installation
of speed humps/dips on Alta Vista Drive due to the potential diversion of traffic onto City streets. In
addition, the Fire and Police Departments objected to the installation due to the impact they have on
personnel and emergency vehicles, as well as a delay in response time. T AC sent an opposition letter
to the County dated July 28, 2006 (see attached).
On August 1, 2006, City Staff attended the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors meeting,
opposing the installation of the speed humps/dips on Alta Vista Drive. The Board of Supervisors
directed the San Mateo County Department of Public Works to meet with T AC, California Highway
Patrol (CHP), Sheriff's Office and City representatives to consider other alternatives. The decision to
install the speed humps/dips was continued to the Board's regularly scheduled meeting on October
17,2006.
City Staff met with the County's Department of Public Works on August 16,2006 and reviewed
possible alternatives to deter speeding on Alta Vista Drive besides the installation of speed humps and
dips. City Staff suggested a combination of increased enforcement and installation of solar powered
radar speed limit signs. The County reiterated that their speed hump criteria had been met and they
felt other options would not slow vehicles down as efficiently as humps/dips. However, CHP
indicated they would increase enforcement in the next several weeks to monitor the current situation
and issue citations. In response to the meeting, Ray Razavi, City Engineer, sent a letter dated
September 1, 2006, summarizing the City's recommendations (see attached).
Staff Report
Subject:
ALTA VISTA DRIVE TRAFFIC CALMING COST SHARING WITH
SAN MATEO COUNTY
Page 2 of3
In response to the City Engineer's letter, the San Mateo County Director of Public Works, Neil
Cullen, sent a letter dated September 11, 2006 (see attached), indicating the County's position on our
recommendations. The County indicated that increased enforcement was provided, but this is not a
sustainable method to decrease speed. Installation of solar powered radar speed limit signs was not
approved by the County due to their experience that the effectiveness is short lived. The County
recommended annexing the Country Club Park area to the City, thereby, making the City responsible
for all the existing streets, including Alta Vista Drive, and services, such as police and fire.
City Staff again met with the County, CHP and Sheriff's Office on September 14, 2006 in order to
discuss the proposals outlined in their September 11, 2006 letter. A California Highway Patrol
representative indicated he monitored Alta Vista Drive on two occasions and was unable to cite a
single vehicle.
On October 16, 2006, Mayor Joseph Fernekes sent a letter to the San Mateo County Board of
Supervisors requesting that the October 17' 2006 agenda item be continued to the Board's next
meeting on November 7' 2006 to allow City Staff to research this matter in more detail and provide
notification to residents (see attached).
On November 7,2006, the City Engineer attended the Board of Supervisors meeting and indicated the
City is opposed to the installation of speed humps or any vertical speed reduction measure on Alta
Vista Drive. The City Engineer proposed installation of solar powered radar speed limit signs in both
directions on Alta Vista Drive as an alternative. The Board of Supervisors agreed to install the solar
powered speed radar signs in-lieu of the speed humps if the City agrees to pay for half the cost of the
project. The Board also stipulated that a review period of 6 months and additional review at 12
months be set for measuring the effectiveness of these devices.
The County Staff has proposed a total of two (2) solar powered speed radar signs for this stretch of
Alta Vista Drive and will provide the City with a cost estimate for the project. City Staff has also
obtained price quotes for solar powered radar speed limit signs from 3 vendors. The quotes ranged
from $3,150 to $5,992 per unit, not including shipping, tax and installation. Therefore, Staff estimates
the total cost of the project could range from $8,000 to $18,000 with the City share being between
$4,000 and $9,000. The City may also propose installation of these devices by City's Public Works'
crew with the cost being credited towards the City's share.
FUNDING
Funding for City's share of this project would be obtained from the "Miscellaneous Traffic" fund in
the 06 - 07 Capital Improvement Program.
Staff Report
Subject:
ALTA VISTA DRIVE TRAFFIC CALMING COST SHARING WITH
SAN MATEO COUNTY
Page 3 of 3
CONCLUSION
Staff is requesting City Council to provide direction regarding the County's proposal to share 50% of
the project cost to install solar powered radar speed limit signs on Alta Vista Dri ve in an amount not
to exceed $9,000 as City's share.
BY:~'
Marty Van Duyn
Assistant City Manager
/~----
-, Approved: rQ c;- J
~ Nagel
City Manager
RR/tc/rc
Attachment: Location Map - Exhibit 1
Letter from Traffic Advisory Committee to San Mateo County - July 28, 2006
Letter from City Engineer to San Mateo County - September 1, 2006
Letter from San Mateo County to City Engineer - September 11, 2006
Letter from Mayor to San Mateo County Board of Supervisors - October 16, 2006
6~ CN
~~ /!J ---.l..
~ ~ f'J!.-'- ~ '--J
(,1(,1
t:::I n t::1 -u\J W
iO :c fTI rrlfT1
J> fT1 (I) rrlfT1
Z ~ n H t::It::I GJ
fT1 ^ Cl -U
H Z fT1 Z ;:0 It::I
r t::I fTI 0 C....... ---.l..
to t::1 L 3:\J
2D :< tl:1 tJj rrl -U~ f'0
-S n
n -< -i ~g GJ
e r 0 .......-i
r n l> Z l> ~:c 0
-r Z fT1 ;:0
(l)fT1 fT1 It-! 0
J>Z l> (,1 . ! /' h
Z" t-!
:S:S (,10\ f'0 /\/V\
J>;:o 1-'."
-1fT) ,Ii.) rrl OJ OJ
rl(") ."rrl , ,
lJ ; I
O-i rrl-i CO OJ ',- ,-
0 :n ~~ C)
n;:o f'0 f'0
0 0 -g
Co
Z" "lJ ~rrl aU) co ex)
t-i .
-I 0 t::I :gl] ()l 0
-<\J ['l
e en
to ~fTl ,"......'- f'0
r m N )..-.~
H 0
(") 'fTl '--J ,- '-.J
~ )> ~o ~ ---j 0
0 r q . ::::..
;:0 "".-,. f'0
^ ~ 0 0
(I) '"0 /OJ
t-f 0 - '<,
0 :S 2,-0 (ON
-0 en
PJ -=~--f N i
~ ;.
rt ~ CJl /
1-'- '-J)> .
0 en ()l N
::s lJ I'" -,
::s: m \'--~' N
--D
PJ m / ~
ro 0
;,! OJ
t.rr:1 0 N. ()
:x: 0
:p ~ GJ r-
,.,..-
tJ OJ
1-'-
rt 0 N
f-1 r N
iO 0 OJ
rl
t:::I ~
<U1 N
OUl
OUl 0 N
t:::I
(") m N
no
He ....-- I
-Iz I N
:<-1 ~ N
-< C ~
n ---.l..
J>n ~ '-J 0
rrl
HZ ::f
"-1 U N
Orl 0
iO;:o (J) 0
z.. Z
H
J>U1 (J) CO c:-
-I
:r: N ~- - \...-.)
\D
.f:>.."
Or 0
0\0
Wo ~
..!.;o ." t::I (I)
0\ H l> n
0\ r -i J>
U1 fTI f2l r
:z ~
9 L
C :z
z 0
rrl Z
fTI
g"
Ii.)
a
a
(]'I
OFFICE OF
CITY COUNCIL 2005-2006
THE CITY ENGINEER
(650) 829-6652
FAX: (650) 829-6689
JOSEPH A. FERNEKES, MAYOR
RICHARD A. GARBARINO, VICE MAYOR
MARK N. ADDIEGO, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDRO GONZALEZ, COUNCILMEMBER
KARYL MATSUMOTO, COUNCILMEMBER
BARRY M. NAGEL, CITY MANAGER
July 28, 2006
Mr. Cedric Novenario
Associate Engineer
San Mateo County Department of Public Works
752 Chestnut Street
Redwood City, CA 94063
Subj: Speed Control Devices on Alta Vista Drive
Dear Mr. Novenario:
The City of South San Francisco received the County's notice to property
ownerslresidents dated July 12, 2006, regarding the proposed speed humps/dips on
Alta Vista Drive (between Dorado Way and Alida Way). This is the only notification
received on this subject, with no other coordination with the City.
The City is strongly opposed to this installation due to the potential diversion of traffic
onto City streets. In addition, our Fire and Police Departments have rejected past
attempts to install these devices due to the detrimental impact they have on personnel
and emergency vehicles, as well as delay in response time.
The South San FranCisco Traffic Advisory Committee (TAC) reviewed the proposed
project at its July meeting and is against the installation of speed humps/dips on Alta
Vista Drive. Since the installation of speed humps on Country Club Drive (a County
roadway), an increase in vehicular volume has been observed on Alta Vista Drive.
Therefore, if speed humps/dips are added to AlIa Vista Drive, it is likely that an increase
in vehicular volume will be shifted to parallel streets, such as Northwood Drive.
TAC also reviewed the volume and speed data supporting the installation of speed
humps/dips. The County's volume count was conducted between July 2,2004, through
July 6, 2004, which was a holiday week. Our experience in conducting volume counts
have shown that vehicular volumes drop significantly during the holidays. The City
conducted a volume count on March 9, 2005 as part of the Engineering and Traffic
Survey Report (for radar speed limits) and found the average daily traffic on Alta Vista
Drive between Conmur Street and Valverde Drive to be 2850, which is significantly
higher than your counts. The County speed survey conducted on July 7, 2004 reports
an 85th Percentile speed of 60 mph, which seems exceedingly high. Our speed survey
indicates an 85th Percentile speed of 29.8 mph. Alta Vista Drive is a collector road and
serves to distribute traffic in the Avalon Subdivision. Installation of speed humps/dips
will likely divert traffic to other local roadways, not intended for such high volumes of
ADDR.ESS: 315 MAPLE AVENUE, SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080
MAILING: P.O. BOX 711, SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94083
Mr. Cedric Novenario
July 28, 2006
Page 2 of2
traffic. Given these concerns, T AC is opposed to the installation of speed humps/dips
on Alta Vista Drive.
If you have any questions, please contact Tracy Scramaglia, Associate Civil Engineer,
650-829-6651 or Dennis Chuck, Senior Civil Engineer, at 650-829-6663. We are
available to meet and discuss our concerns at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
Traffic Advisory Committee
Tracy A. Scramaglia, P.E.
Associate Civil Engineer
Engineering Division
cc: San Mateo County Board of Supervisors; Neil Cullen, San Mateo County Director of Public Works
SSF City Council; Barry Nagel, SSF City Manger; Susan Kennedy, SSF Assistant to City Manager; Mark Raffaelli, SSF Chief of
Police; Phil White, SSF Chief of Fire; Ray Razavi, SSF City Engineer; TAC members; Traffic Files
G:\Traffic\Traffic Committee\Resident Letters\Jtem 50-7Itr.SM County Project,Alta Vista Drive
OFFICE OF
CITY COUNCIL 2005-2006
THE CITY ENGINEER
(650) 829-6652
FAX: (650) 829-6689
JOSEPH A. FERNEKES, MAYOR
RICHARD A. GARBARINO, VICE MAYOR
MARK N. ADDIEGO, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDRO GONZALEZ, COUNCILMEMBER
KARYL MATSUMOTO, COUNCILMEMBER
BARRY M. NAGEL, CITY MANAGER
September 1, 2006
Mr. Neil R. Cullen, Director of Public Works
County of San Mateo
Department of Public Works
555 County Center, 5th Floor
Redwood City, CA 94063-1665
Subj: Speed Control Devices on Alta Vista Drive
_1In_ ~.~ HetDl,
Dea~lIen:
We would like to thank you and your staff for taking the time to meet with us on August 16,
2006, to discuss the proposed installation of speed control devices on Alta Vista Drive.
As mentioned in the City's previous letters dated July 28, 2006, and at the Board of Supervisors
meeting held on August 1, 2006, the City remains strongly opposed to this installation due to the
potential diversion of traffic onto City streets and the detrimental impact they have on our Fire
and Police personnel and emergency vehicles.
The City's Fire Department is particularly concerned about the installation of speed dips
because they are difficult to see and regardless of design, tend to damage large fire vehicles.
The City's largest fire vehicle is the Quint 62, which has a 6 foot overhang in the.back, making
small inclines difficult to maneuver.
Based on our discussions at the meeting with you, representatives from the California Highway
Patrol and the Sherriffs Office, we would like to convey the following recommendations for
consideration in lieu of installation of speed humps/dips:
1. County to increase enforcement through the California Highway Patrol and the Sherriff's
Office per our previous discussions.
2. County to purchase and install solar powered radar speed limit signs at a total cost of
approximately $8,500 each. The City's Department of Public Works could assist the
County with maintenance since they are familiar with these devices.
3. County to revaluate the effectiveness of the increased enforcement and installation of
the radar speed limit signs by conducting a new speed survey at the end of a 6 to 12
month study period.
ADDRESS: 315 MAPLE AVENUE, SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080
MAILING: P.O. BOX 711, SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94083
Mr. Neil Cullen
September 1, 2006
Page 2 of2
We believe that the recommendations stated above could yield a substantial savings to the
County of San Mateo and its residents if proven effective. This is an opportunity for the County
and the City to test the effectiveness of new technology, which could result in a large cost
savings benefit in the future.
We look forward to a further discussion at our meeting on September 14, 2006, prior to the
Board of Supervisors meeting on October 17, 2006.
If there are any questions, please contact me at (650) 829-6664 or Tracy Scramaglia, Associate
Civil Engineer, at (650) 829-6651.
tas
cc: San Mateo County Board of SupeNisors; Lisa Ekers ..San Mateo County; Cedric Novenario, San Mate9 County
~SF City.,council; Barry Nagel, SSF CitY"Manger; ZGsan Kennedy, SSF Assistant to City Manager;./\1fcirk Raffaelli, SSF Chief of
Police; ..phil White, SSF Chief of Fire; JI\C members; ,Traffic Files ~M VIi' ~
G:\Traffic\Traffic Committee\Resident Letters\ltem 50-7/tr.SM County Project.Board Letter.Alta Vista Drive
Department of Public Works
COUNTY OF S
MATEO
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
MARK CHURCH
RICHARD S. GORDON
JERRY HILL
ROSE JACOBS GIBSON
ADRIENNE TISSIER
NEIL R. CULLEN
DIRECTOR
555 COUNTY CENTER, 5TH FLOOR. REDWOOD CITY. CALIFORNIA 94063-1665 . PHONE (650) 363-4100. FAX (650) 361-8220
Nlr. Ray Razavi, City Engineer
City of South San Francisco
P.O. Box 711
South San Francisco, CA 94083
September 11, 2006
RECEIVED
SEP 1 2 2006
BY: ENGINEERING DIVISION
Dear Mr. Razavi:
Re: Speed Control Devices on AHa Vista Drive - Country Club Park Area
Thank you for your letter of September 1, 2006, describing the City's concerns with speed dips
and their potential for damaging City fire apparatus; and the recommendation that the County
consider installing solar powered radar speed limit signs and that the Sheriff and CalifOlnia
Highway Patrol (CHP) increase enforcement of the speed 111nit on the unincorporated section of
AHa Vista Drive.
Increased enforcement was discussed at our August 16, 2006 meeting, and while the Sheliff and
CHP staff agreed to provide more enforcement, I believe. there was a general consensus that there
was, and is, insufficient resources to sustain increased enforcement on this one street over a long
period of time.
You also recommended that the County install solar powered radar speed limit signs in
conjunction with increased enforcement in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the signs. I am
reluctant to recOlmnend this alternative, as our experience has been that the effectiveness of
almost any signing is relatively short lived.
The dilemma appears to be that while this section of Aha Vista Drive is currently
unincorporated, it serves as an integral part of the City's transportation network in this area; and
the installation of speed humps and dips consistent with the Board of Supervisors' adopted
policy, is inconsistent with the City's policy of not allowing speed humps in their jurisdiction. In
addition, I understand from our August 16th meeting, that both the City Police and Fire
Departments are concerned with the impacts of speed humps on their response times when using
Aha Vista Drive.
One solution is for the City to incorporate the area thereby allowing the City to detennine and
enforce its policies, and also respond to the traffic complaints of the property owners. I
understand that there are applications before the Local Agency Formation Commission
Mr. Ray Razavi, Ci ty Engineer
City of South San Francisco
Re: Speed Control Devices on AHa Vista Drive - Country Club Park Area
September 11, 2006
Page 2
(LAFCO) to extend City sewer service into the Country Club Park area. Therefore, annexat.ion at
this time appears to be appropriate.
Another option given the constraints as discussed above, is to discourage through traffic on AHa
Vista Drive and thereby reduce the number of all vehicles including those that speed. We can
install a right turn only sign on AHa Vista Drive at Dorado Way in the west bound. direction, and
"one-way" a short section of AHa Vista Drive in the westerly direction just above Dorado Way.
The "one-way" section could be eliminated if the Cityis willing to install a left turn only sign on
eastbound ..Alta Vista Drive at Dorado Way. The configuration could then be monitored for 4 to
6 months to determine if traffic volumes increase significantly on Dorado Way and Country Club
Drive, and if speeds are reduced on AHa Vista Drive.
I realize that some residents may be inconvenienced by this proposaL However, it avoids the
installation of the speed humps and dips while the configuration is evaluated, does not inhibit the
response time of the police or fire departments, and seeks to address the concerns as expressed
by the property owners regarding the .high speed traffic in their residential neighborhood.
Both options can be discussed at our September 14, 2006 meeting.
Very truly yours,
~~.
Neil R. Cullen
Director of Public Works
NRC:sdd
F:\USERS\ADMIN\ESD\Alta Vista\2006\Alta Vista SSF Options September 7.doc
F-36 [366]
cc with enclosure:
Members Board of Supervisors
John Maltbie, County Manager
Mr. Barry Nagel, City Manager, City of South San Francisco
P.O. Box 711, South San Francisco, CA 94083
David J. Clarke, P.E., Deputy Director, Road Services Division
Captain Dial, California Highway Patrol
455 Eighth Street, San Francisco, CA 94103
Lieutenant Ken Jones, Sheriffs' Office
Marcia Raines, Environmental Services Director
Martha Poyatos, LAFCO
CITY COUNCIL 2006
JOSEPH A. FERNEKES, MAYOR
RlCHARD A. GARBARINO, VICE MAYOR
MARK N. ADDIEGO, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDRO GONZALEZ, COUNCILMEMBER
KARYL MATSUMOTO, COUNCIlMEMBER
BARRY M. NAGEL, CITY MANAGER
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
October 16, 2006
Honorable Jerry Hill, President
San Mateo County Board of Supervisors
Hall of Justice and Records
400 County Center
Redwood City, CA 94063
Dear President Hill and Members of the Board of Supervisors:
The City of South San Francisco respectfully requests the Board of Supervisors
continue the following item scheduled for Tuesday, October 17, 2006 to the
November 7, 2006 Board of Supervisor's meeting:
Item 13
Resolution authorizing the Director of Public Works to
install speed control devices on Alta Vista Drive
This request is being put forth to allow the City of South San Francisco additional
time to notjfy its residents. In addition, further analysis .of recent traffic
enforcement activities during the past month and correspondin'g results,
conducted by, the California Highway Patrol, San Mateo County Sheriffs office
and our Engineering Division, is needed.
We appreciate your consideration regarding this important issue for our City and
await your response.
Sincerely,
!fr~ {L ~
Joseph A. Fernekes
Mayor
City of South San Francisco
c: SSF City Council
B. Nagel,. City Manager
City Hall' 400 Grand Avenue' South San Francisco, CA 94080, P,O, Box 711 ' South San Francisco, CA 94083
Phone: 650.877.8500 . Fax: 650.829.6609 . E-mail: [email protected]
AGENDA ITEM #9
29,2006
II
Mayor City
Director of
BAR..T{!ER
Staff is seeking
improve the center
vehicle accidents.
of San Mateo's plan to
Extension to prevent crossover
BACKGROUND/DISCUS SION
Staff has been informed by County officials that it is considering several options to improve the
Westborough Extension to prevent crossover vehicle accidents. This portion of West borough Blvd.,
between West Orange and Junipero Serra Blvd., has a long history of crossover vehicle accidents
some involving Inore than one car and some resulting in fatalities. In the past, the position of the
City has been that the County should install a barrier and our Police Department has sent more than
one letter requesting this action. Options being discussed at this time are: a concrete barrier, also
known as "k rail" or "jersey rail"; a double beam guardrail, exactly like the one which was installed
in the lower stretch just west of Orange and Camaritas; and widening the existing curb and gutter
island by reducing eastbound traffic to one lane. Following is a description/discussion about each of
these options:
Concrete barrier: This option provides for the best protection against crossovers by any vehicle
including large trucks. Truck and heavy vehicle traffic are not COrI1rIlOn nor is speeding generally an
issue for larger vehicles on this road. No crossover by this class of vehicle is known to have
occurred. A concrete barrier, which is reinforced with steel, will deflect cars easily. It is smooth and
uniform in its appearance and provides a level of oncoming headlight protection. Dmnage from a
direct hit requires expensive repairs and these types of barriers are graffiti targets. It is the most
expensive ban-ier to install and would likely cost $400,000 to $500,000.
Staff Report
Subject: Westborough Extension Center Median Barrier Options
Page 2
Metal bean1 guardrail: This option also provides very good protection to prevent crossovers fron1
vehicles. It is not as strong as concrete for protection against a heavier vehicle (i.e. bus, dun1p truck,
etc.) but works very well for passenger vehicles. The cost for this type of barrier is approxin1ately
$250,000 for the san1e 3,000 linear feet and would match exactly what was placed by the County in
the lower stretch of the road several years ago. Construction can be accon1plished quickly.
Widen the Center Median: This option would simply increase the width of the cunent center median
by 12 feet. This would bring its width to approximately 14 feet, which would increase the distance
between the oncoming vehicles. This would be done in the number one lane and it certainly would
not be popular with the public. It will have a traffic calming effect and n1ay not back traffic up to
Junipero Sena but Inay cause a new set of accidents, as traffic will need to Inerge from two lanes to
one. Staff questions, whether an additional 12 feet of distance will be enough to keep specding
westbound cars frOln reaching the eastbound lane. It also would leave a portion of the road adjacent
to Buri Buri Park unprotected. Both lanes would likely need to be reduced to one lane to calm the
vehicle speed and get the distance needed to prevent contact between opposing traffic.
FUNDING
No funds are being sought as pmi of this discussion and no fonnal action is being presented to
Council at this tin1e.
CONCLUSION
Staff is seeking direction fron1 Council as to which option it favors versus that which it n1ay dismiss,
allowing staff to work better with the County to resolve this issue quickly.
,r
( .. .~
/! \ 1...-"-1.1
./ .. 'i. . \: ~..-'"'-
By>-' . i.-------x i A ) /~'- ~-
--...... ,/ . ~
Terry White / )
Director of Pi)J.11ic Works
Approv>
'''---
AGENDA ITEM #10
taff
eport
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
November 29, 2006
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Marty Van Duyn, Assistant City Manager
REQUEST FOR SEWER SERVICE FOR 209 ALTA VISTA DRIVE AND
275 COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE IN THE COUNTRY CLUB AREA/OUTSIDE
CITY BOUNDARIES
RECOMMENDA TION
It is recommended that the City Council deny requests from applicants at 209 Alta Vista Drive
and 275 Country Club Drive, in the unincorporated Country Club Area, for extension of sewer
service.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
City Staff has received several requests regarding connections to the sewer system in the 53-acre
unincorporated Country Club area of San Mateo County. Homes in this area are on septic tank
systems. Staff has informed the property owners that sewer connections cannot be provided without
approval from the City Council. In the past, there have been several properties in this area which
have received City approval and have connected to the City's sewer system, see Exhibit A.
The City's General Plan contains policies related to the unincorporated Country Club area. In
summary, the policies support annexation of the Country Club Park, but only as an entire area rather
than piecemeal, and only after improvements to deficient utility and roadway systems are either made
or guaranteed by San Mateo County or the affected property owners (ref. SSF General Plan Policies
3.6-I-1 & 3.6-1-4).
PROPOSAL
Currently, there are two pending requests for sewer service at 209 Alta Vista Drive and 275 Country
Club Drive. There is an existing residence at 209 Alta Vista Drive. The owner is planning to
construct a second home on his lot. He is requesting sewer service for both homes. The Planning
Division has reviewed this request and has determined that the construction of a second home at 209
Alta Vista Drive would not be in compliance with the Rural Estate District (R-E) prezoning
designation for this property, should the property ever be annexed to the City. The property at 275
Country Club Drive is a vacant lot and the owner intends to construct a home for which he has
requested sewer service.
Staff Report
Subject:
REQUEST FOR SEWER SERVICE FOR 209 ALTA VISTA DRIVE AND 275
COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE IN THE COUNTRY CLUB AREA/OUTSIDE CITY
BOUNDARIES
Page 2 of2
Staff sees access to the City's sewer system as one of the primary incentives that might compel area
residents to collectively seek annexation in the future. If the City continues to provide this service on a
parcel by parcel basis there is less likelihood that the Country Club residents will willingly seek
annexation. Additionally, designing and installing these improvements on a parcel by parcel basis does
not provide the ability to design the best engineering solutions for the needed service improvements for
the entire area. However, should the City Council approve these requests, staff recommends the
following conditions be formally accepted by the property owners prior to connection to the sewer
system:
1. The applicant will agree not to protest the formation of an assessment district for installation of
areawide sewer, drainage, roadway and/or street lighting improvements.
2. The applicant will pay a one-time connection fee similar to any other new residential
connections.
3. The applicant will pay monthly sewer fees.
4. The applicant will be responsible for payment of a processing fee to cover staff and any
consultant's costs.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the City Council deny the requests for extension of sewer service to the subj ect
properties based on conflicts with the City's General Plan policies which seek to annex the entire
unincorporated Country Club area as a whole and only after infrastructure improvements are completed
or guaranteed. As discussed above, continued provision of individual sewer hook ups would likely
hinder progress toward this goal.
!j/~=={v
By:(J~ /
Marty VanDuyn
Assistant City Manager
Approved: ~~
~ r Barry M. Nagel
City Manager
RR/DC/rc
Attachment: Location map
Exhibit A-Existing Sewer Service Connections in the Unincorporated Country Club Area
.://'\
; \
~ \ "l-9J9J
'!>"l-'\) )... '!>~ \
~ ~~. ''I.'1Jl
'---10 ,!>ro"l- /\~ \\
l~ ~ "l-ro'O
tf5~' \
~QV ~ \ ~ " ,
\ c..'\ Gc \
~\?
-;\'1. "\" ,'\ \
'!>\"l- \. ~\. "l-ro9J
\ \ "l-9J1
\\
\
Exhibit A
EXISTING SEWER SERVICE CONNECTIONS IN THE UNINCORPORATED
COUNTRY CLUB AREA
PROPERTY
APPROXIMATE SERVICE DATE
222 Country Club Drive
288 Alta Vista Drive
340 Alta Vista Drive
254 Country Club Drive
201 Alta Vista Dri ve
413 Alida Way
205 Country Club Drive
385 Alida Way
375 Alida Way
202 Alta Vista Drive
210 Alta Vista Drive
281 Country Club Drive
299 Country Club Drive
2002
2000
1997
1996
1995
1994
pre-1970's
pre-1970's
pre-1970's
pre-1970's
pre-1970's
pre-1970's
pre-1970's
AGENDA ITEM # 11
taff
port
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
November 29,2006
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Marty Van Duyn, Assistant City Manager
GUIDELINES FOR INSTALLING STOP SIGNS
RECOMMENDA TION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution directing staff to use the following
guidelines for deciding whether or not to recommend installing stop signs:
1. For the intersection of an arterial or collector street with another street, CaItrans
warrants will apply. The warrants include the following, anyone of which must be met:
a. Stop signs may be installed as an interim measure where traffic signals
are warranted.
b. Stop signs may be installed where there is an accident problem as indicated by
five or more broadside accidents in twelve months.
c. Stop signs may be installed where the traffic volume is such that for any eight
hours of a day, the total volume from all approaches averages at least 500 vehicles
per hour (vph), and the volume from the minor street approaches averages at
least 200 vph.
2. For the intersection of a residential collector or local street with another residential
collector or local street, CaItrans warrants will also apply, except, stop signs may be
considered if residents representing a majority of the homes within a 300 foot radius sign
a petition requesting them.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
In May 1989, City Council passed a motion directing staff to use Caltrans warrants for arterial and
collector roadways, as well as an additional policy allowing stop signs to be installed at the intersection
of local roads if a petition from the majority of residents living within a 300-foot radius of the
intersection is submitted.
Staff Report
Subject: GUIDELINES FOR INSTALLING STOP SIGNS
Page 2 of 2
In the past, these guidelines have exclusively been used by staff as the basis for objectively evaluating
stop sign requests and making appropriate recommendations to City Council. However, staff often
receives requests to install stop signs on collector roads that are located within a residential
neighborhood. According to the current guidelines, Caltrans warrants would apply and they would not
be installed by petition. The amended guidelines would give staff more options for stop sign requests,
as well as allow residents a measure of control over their own environment.
The definition of arterial and collector roadways are as shown on the Street Classifications Map
(Figure 4-1) of the General Plan (see attached). Residential collectors will be defined as collector
roadways located in an exclusively residential neighborhood.
FUNDING
No additional funding would be necessary to accommodate the revised stop sign installation guideline.
The stop signs and poles are in stock with the Street Maintenance Division and the time used to install
the signs and pavement markings would be charged to general street maintenance.
CONCLUSION
Upon City Council adoption of the resolution, staff will use the guidelines for deciding whether or not
:yr henrequest:dbYre:::~::ed:0 __ ~ ~1
Marty Van Duyn ~ Nage
Assistant City Manager City Manager
RRJtas/rc
Attachment: Resolution
Street Classifications Map (Figure 4-1)
RESOLUTION NO.
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING GUIDELINES FOR THE
INSTALLATION OF STOP SIGNS WITHIN THE CITY OF
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
WHEREAS, in May of 1989, the City Council, by motion, articulated a policy for
the installation of stop signs, and directed staff to use Caltrans warrants for arterial and
collector roadways. The City Council also instructed that the City Engineer might
consider stop sign installation at the intersection of local roads if a petition from the
majority of residents living within a 300-foot radius were submitted; and
WHEREAS, under the previous policy, such petitions were considered only for
residential neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer frequently receives requests from citizens
for stop-sign installation along collector roads adj acent to residential collector and
local streets, which, under the current policy, would not be presented to the City
Council for consideration; and
WHEREAS, a minor amendment to the existing policy will afford staff greater
flexibility in evaluating stop sign installation requests, as well as allowing for greater
citizen participation on traffic control measures taken in their immediate neighborhoods.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
South San Francisco that the City Council hereby adopts the attached new policy for the
installation of stop signs, which policy shall supersede the existing policy made by City
Council motion in May, 1989 .
*
*
*
*
*
874740-1
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and
adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a meeting
held on the day of 2006 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
874740-1
City Clerk
City of South San Francisco: Guidelines for Stop Sign
Installation
1. For the intersection of an arterial or collector street with
another street, Caltrans warrants will apply. The warrants
include the following, anyone of which must be met:
a. Stop signs may be installed as an interim measure where
traffic signals are warranted.
b. Stop signs may be installed where there is an accident
problem as indicated by five or more broadside
accidents in twelve months.
c. Stop signs may be installed where the traffic volume is
such that for any eight hours of a day, the total volume
from all approaches averages at least 500 vehicles per
hour (vph), and the volume from the minor street
approaches averages at least 200 vph.
2. For the intersection of a residential collector or local street with
another residential collector or local street, Caltrans warrants
will also apply, except, stop signs may be considered if residents
representing a majority of the homes within a 300 foot radius
sign a petition requesting them.
874740-1
I ~
~
8
non~~ ..
~~~~9
l';:otTJ;:o,...,
~~~~~
-J~;:051tTJ
tTJ ~~
~ ~~
I
PTj
c1Q'
~
CD
,.f:::..
I
I--'
I
\Jl
(/)0
~Lj
~
~=
" .....J
~ t5 \Jl
'" :(J>~
~1'i " 0 ~ >-
1fi~ ~~
~~ ~~o
~~~~~>-rj
.~ ~
" >-<
" >-rj (j
o~
~\Jl
>(j
o
AGENDA ITEM #12
taff
port
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
November 29, 2006
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Marty Van Duyn, Assistant City Manager
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE INST ALLA TION OF STOP SIGNS AT THE
INTERSECTIONOFALTA VISTA DRIVE AND MIRA VISTA WAY
RECOMMENDA TION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the installation of stop signs at
the intersection of Aha Vista Drive and Mira Vista Way.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The Traffic Advisory Committee (T AC) received a request for a three-way stop installation at the intersection
of Alta Vista Drive and Mira Vista Way in May 2006. T AC reviewed this intersection and concluded that it
did not meet the Caltrans warrants for installation.
At the October 25, 2006 City Council meeting, a petition was presented to City Council requesting the
installation of stop signs at the subject intersection. At that time, the City's stop sign guidelines did not allow
for installation of stop signs by petition on residential collector roadways.
New guidelines passed at this meeting direct staff to consider the collection of a petition (by a resident) for
stop signs to be installed at intersections on residential collector and local roadways. The policy indicates that
the majority of residents living within a 300-foot radius of the intersection must agree to the stop sign
installation and therefore sign the petition. This policy was added, as the warrants set by the Department of
Transportation may be (at times) too stringent for residential collectors and local roadways.
Staff reviewed the petition presented to City Council to determine if it meets the new stop sign guidelines. Of
the required 36 signatures, the resident was successful in collecting 21 signatures. Therefore, it meets the
guidelines for installation of a multi-way stop sign.
Exhibit 1 displays the existing condition and the proposed recommendation for the installation of stop
SIgnS.
Staff Report
Subject:
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE INSTALLATION OF STOP SIGNS AT THE
INTERSECTION OF ALTA VISTA DRIVE AND MIRA VISTA DRIVE
Page 2 of 2
FUNDING
No additional funding would be necessary to install the stop signs at this location. The stop signs and
poles are in stock with the Street Maintenance Division and the time used to install the signs and
pavement markings would be charged to general street maintenance.
CONCLUSION
Upon City Council adoption of the resolution, staff will install a three-way stop sign at the intersection
of Alta Vista Drive and Mira Vista Way.
~
By: .
Marty Van Duyn
Assistant City Manager
RR/tas/rc
Attachment: Resolution
Location Map - Exhibit 1
RESOLUTION NO.
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE INSTALLATION
OF 3-WAY STOP SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF
ALTA VISTA DRIVE AND MIRA VISTA WAY
WHEREAS, the Traffic Advisory Committee (TAC) received a request for the
installation of a 3-way stop sign at the intersection of Alta Vista Drive and Mira Vista
Way in May of 2006; and
WHEREAS, City Council guidelines, adopted by Resolution No. _, allow for
City staff to consider petitions submitted by affected property owners for stop sign
installations at intersections on residential collector and local roadways. The guidelines
provide that if a majority of residents within a 300-foot radius of the intersection sign a
petition, the City Engineer may recommend installation to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer received a petition with 21 of the 36
affected residents; and
WHEREAS, staff supports the petition, and the poles and stop signs necessary for
the installation are already in stock with the Street Maintenance Division, so that no
additional budget allocations are required.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
South San Francisco hereby authorizes the installation of a 3-way stop sign at the
intersection of AHa Vista Drive and Mira Vista Way.
*
*
*
*
*
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and
adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a meeting
held on the day of 2006 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
City Clerk
EXHIBIT 1
~r~
~ '
~
APPROX.
150'
(OR MID-BLOCK)
I
I
I NEW
I INSTAllATION
T
APPROX,
150'
1
EXISTING
PROPOSED
!
~
I
;i
!
I
6
~
I
j
~
~
AL T A VI
DRIVE AT MIRA VISTA WAY
....L R1= STANDARD 36" STOP SIGN MOUNTED ON A 2" DIA. POLE
-L W17= STANDARD 36" STOP AHEAD SYMBOL SIGN MOUNTED ON A 2" DIA. POLE
-L R1-2= STANDARD 36" YIELD SIGN MOUNTED ON A 2" DIA. POLE