City Council - Regular Meeting

Recording in progress. So let's go ahead and call this regular meeting of the South San Francisco City Council to order for this Wednesday, August the 26th. And we'll begin with a roll call.

Council Member Coleman.

Here.

Council Member Flores.

Present.

Council Member Nicholas. Present. Vice Mayor Nogales.

Here.

Mayor Adiego.

Here. And after much negotiation, I have have settled on a member of the public that would like to step up and lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. And it's none other than Meredith Baxter from Sunshine Gardens, my down the hill neighbor, who will normally waves at me at the time I drive by, normally waves. So we'll stand and you'll begin.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic which it now stands, one nation under God, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you very much. Thank you for being here.

We'll move along to Levine Act disclosures. Does the council have any reporting tonight?

It would appear not.

No reporting, so we'll now move along to announcements from staff.

Thank you. We would like to invite the community to come to one of our tree lightings on Monday, August the 31st at 7 p.m. We will be getting ready to do the tree lighting, which is going to be lit up in gold for Childhood Cancer Awareness Month. The event is going to actually take place in this building, LPR. in the community room on the second floor. So we hope that folks can join us for that event. Thank you.

That completes the reports? Announcements? Great.

We'll move along to council comments and requests.

Okay, who would like to go first this evening?

I don't have much to share.

You've been busy with things you can't comment on.

Yes. The United Methodist Church in Daly City actually had a prayer... prayer service at Alta Loma Park, and I was invited to come and welcome the individuals there. So thank you for the invite. I appreciate also the comments that were received that they really loved our parks and our facilities. So I wanted to make sure I share that. And just recently, we had a board and commission meeting where we appointed several great individuals to several of our commissions. And I know in the past, Mr. Mayor, we've done some sort of board and commission year at the end dinner. And I hope we get to do that again because I love hearing about just the accomplishments that they achieved and how we partnered with them. So if that's something we can do at the end of the year, I really appreciate it. So all I have, Mr. Mayor, thank you.

Like to go next?

May I?

Yes, you may.

Thank you, Mayor. So congratulations to our newly promoted police officers and staff, and welcome to those who have just joined our South San Francisco family. It was great to see all of their family and those who love them at the last badge and swearing in ceremony held here at the council chambers. And like Mark, I'm impressed with the people who came forward to join our commissions. Thank you to everybody who came and spent some time with us. To those who were not appointed please stay engaged and ensure that we continue the work that needs to be done. And last Friday we had our first in the movie night at the Terra Bay gym hosted by our Parks and Rec I thought there will be more families who will come because you know they will be protected from the cold and the wind but I was a little disappointed that there's less than what we were expecting but maybe it's the first so maybe hopefully next time it will be a better attendance for the Terra Bay gym and I would like to request that our meeting be adjourned today in memory of two individuals. One is Dr. Jose, I mean, Jesus Abayan, who died on August 6th. He worked at Stanford Medical Center and Veterans Affair for 20 years after a 20 year successful practice in the Philippines. And another one is a Sunshine Garden resident for a long time, Lucille Casey. She was a parishioner at Madre de la Rosa for a long time. She used to work at Spruce School in the San Mateo Courthouse, San Mateo County Courthouse. She was preceded in death by her husband, Larry. May their souls rest in peace.

Thank you, Flora. Okay, gentlemen, one of you gets to go next.

All right, I shall go next. So this past Saturday morning, I believe it was Saturday morning. Yes, it was. We had a community hike on Sign Hill and it was a well attended event. I believe there's around 30 people there and we hiked. up and down Sine Hill around the letters. I just wanna give big kudos to city staff for being incredible for that event. I didn't expect a whole educational tour of Sine Hill about the history of the hill, about how the conservation efforts happening there and the habitat restoration efforts with the butterflies. I learned a lot about the butterflies there. And a little known fact is, The letters that we see on Sign Hill today weren't the only letters that have ever been on Sign Hill. There used to be a big sign, I believe, from a beer company. And then eventually, knowing how windy Sign Hill is, the letters blew over and weren't put back. So what a lovely event. And I hope that we can have future events you know, getting people outside, taking walks, taking hikes, because it's really important for us to all go outside, touch some grass and get some exercise. And that's all I have for today, thank you.

Okay, Councilman Flores. Great, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yes, I joined my colleague here on thanking city staff. I was able to join him as well as our city manager and thank you to city staff, Greg and the team there, Kandins, everyone at Parks and Rec, thank you so much for putting it together. and all the residents who came out and also to our city staff for communicating. Many actually heard about it through our social media channels. So thank you for doing that. Thank always Loretta and Chuck as they continue their commitment and advocacy to that open space. Saturday I also was invited and joined close to 200 members of the Oyster Point Yacht Club who invited me over to their event this past Saturday. It was a great opportunity to meet constituents in that part of town. They were great in hosting and being in community. This is an important part and they were very thrilled for all the development and new changes that have been happening around Oyster Point. They're very grateful to this council for the work we have invested in making that part of town welcoming and beautiful. I was told to share those words back to you all. I joined also city staff in attending the opening and welcoming of assembly member Diane Papin's new district office. It was a very nice convening. So if you have any need to contact her office, know that she has a new office right here in the city of San Mateo. I want to also join in in congratulating the new promotion and swearing in of all the men and women who serve our city and their families during the police department promotion. Lastly, I attended a Chamber of Commerce reception with Northeast Medical Center, known as NEMS, and at the restaurant Rocoto in downtown. It was a very well attended event, and I wanna thank everyone who came out, including business owners and chamber members, as it continues to bring forth networking opportunities and connections to our business corridor. And I wanna especially thank NEMS for being an active partner since they have arrived here in South San Francisco, getting involved with the community, both providing medical services as well as engaging with our business district. That's all I have to report, thank you.

Okay, thank you, Councilman Coleman. You'll like to know that those butterflies that you mentioned, one is called the Calippie Silver Spot, and the other was the Mission Blue. They are the reason why the housing does not work all the way up the hill of San Bruno Mountain, because they were discovered, they were an endangered species, and they had to put together the first habitat conservation plan in America, so.

Some sometimes great things happen here even on the environmental front and during that hike they Are I guess our tour guide Candace, right? Said that they had found the clippy silver spot in Sign Hill, which means that they can actually fly Across from San Bruno Mountain to sign Hill and potentially in the future. We can see a larger population there. I

right expanding yeah that's right um i just have a couple of things um i too wanted to i was in this hall with um with floor and um and eddie you were there for the police uh badge the new people that were getting badges pinned on but um lieutenant sean kermy who is one big deal in sunshine gardens If he was ever on the ballot, he would eclipse me big time. And I was told by both his godfather, Brian Shapara, and his wife, Sean's aunt, Carmen, that I needed to be at this event for Sean. So I was. Mm-hmm. But that's kind of the beautiful thing about South San Francisco. You know, it's not easy for somebody who has to enforce the law, right, to live in the community because you keep bumping into people that maybe, you know, it wasn't such a good experience on their side. But it's wonderful when somebody has the tenacity and the willingness to live in the community that they serve. It's a great thing. Recently, I was invited out. Well, it's not a new company. I guess it's been here for six years, but there's a company called the zip line that's in the east of 101. So there was a large warehouse there that used to do vertical farming. So it had very tall roofs and this company's zip line. that's been featured in a lot of news magazines on television and such, has been there for six years and is getting ready to expand greatly. I had no idea how much was occurring there, but in their manufacturing plant, which was the tour that I received, it's about 50,000 square feet, and they're going to double in the near future. But in manufacturing, what happens when you double your square footage is you need more people. to activate that space. So right now they're maybe at 600 employees. And I was told by the person that will do the hiring that they're looking for four or 500 more. The really wonderful thing about it, it was all younger people that were so enthusiastic the way they were working in that, it's not an assembly line, but There's so many components that go into those drones. And this company got its start by delivering medicine and blood supplies in the country of Rwanda, because there were some people, some villages that didn't have access to roads, so it would take so very long to get anything. So that's where they started. And then from Rwanda, I guess they went to another area that maybe has problems with roads and situations, travel like that. So they're in Dallas, Texas. And they're delivering both medicine, but also now they're delivering consumer goods and food. So it could really explode. And it's just remarkable to see that that sign on the hill that says the industrial city is kind of relevant again, because we're making stuff. So anyway, that was a highlight of the month, I think for me. So with that, we'll move ahead to the next item.

Thank you, Mayor. Move along to public comments. I don't have anyone signed up to provide a comment, but I'll look to the audience just to make sure that we have no one looking to provide.

So Mr. Chikudi's in the audience, but he's not going to speak to us this evening? Okay. Margaret, you, would you like to? Okay. All right. So we all get a pass tonight, yeah.

And looking on Zoom, we also have no speakers. So we can move along to the next item. Move along to the consent calendar. Item number one is a motion to approve the minutes from the meetings of August 12, 2026 and August 19, 2026. Item two is a motion to approve the reappointment of three bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee members, one conference center authority member, one housing authority member, and one library board member. Item number three is a report regarding resolutions authorizing amendments to the consulting services agreements with Swinerton Management and Consulting and ELS Architecture and Urban Design for the Orange Memorial Park Aquatic Center project. Items number 3A and 3B are the resolutions. Item number four is a report regarding a resolution approving program supplemental agreement number F028 revision three. with the state of California for the Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program and authorizing the approval of budget amendment number 27.001. Item four is the resolution. Item number five is a report regarding a resolution authorizing the acceptance of $4,387.14 and funding from the San Mateo County Registration and Elections Division to support an early vote center at the main library, Library Parks and Recreation Center for the November 3rd, 2026 statewide general election and amending the library department's fiscal year 26 to 27 operating budget via via budget amendment number 27.009. Item 5A is the resolution. Item number six is a report regarding a resolution accepting $4,829.95 from the South San Francisco Friends of the Library to support library collections programs and services amending the library department's fiscal year 26 to 27 operating budget and approving budget amendment number 27.010. Item number 6A is a resolution. Item number 7 is a report regarding a resolution authorizing the acceptance of $58,000 from the California State Library to support Project Read through the Adult Literacy Services Program as projected in the library's department's fiscal year 26 to 27 revenue estimate. Item number 7A is the resolution. Item number 8 is a report regarding a resolution authorizing the acceptance of $34,048 from the California State Library to support the project read through the family literacy services program and amending the library's department's fiscal year 26 to 27 operating budget and approving budget amendment number 27.013. Item eight is a resolution. Item number nine is a report regarding additional information and a resolution approving a first amendment to the product and services procurement purchasing agreement for body worn cameras, mobile audio and video equipment, conducted energy devices, video software and cloud storage services, with Axon Enterprise Inc. in an additional amount of $1,937,507.88 and for a new not to exceed total amount of $2,737,507.88 and authorizing the city manager or authorized designee to execute the agreement. Item number 9A is the resolution.

Thank you, Jasmine. Would any council person like to remove an item from consent? Okay, so just me, item number nine. So we'll invite Lieutenant Seriaty up to the podium. And when last we met, we had a somewhat robust discussion about consent. a lot to do with the funding, the mechanism for funding, which for myself, at second glance, looks to be solid. I'm not really having a problem with that. But I am interested in the staff report. There's some pretty lofty goals here. And I wanted to understand specifically how we would reach them. So the conclusion of the report says that it's intended to improve officer safety, equipment reliability, evidence management, transparency, operational effectiveness, and community trust. So if all those items can be If all those items come to fruition, then I don't really have a problem with an extra 1.9 million, but I'd like to know how, what aspects of these items lead to this outcome where there's so much improvement.

Yes, first, good evening, Mr. Mayor, Vice Mayor, members of council. Yes, this package, it helps to build transparency and community trust, which is something that is very important to the South San Francisco Police Department. It's going to be connecting technology across investigations, evidence, also performance review. So with body-worn cameras comes accountability, and that's where also the public trust comes through. When we have critical incidents or even just arrests that occur, we have the opportunity to release body-worn camera footage when warranted. That's especially important when we are involved in critical incidents to show what the officers responded to, how it was dealt with, and the community gets to see the larger picture than what they may hear just in a social media post or a press release. It also leads to, I spoke a couple weeks ago about the AI translation. That's also going to build our community trust with those body-worn cameras. If an officer comes into contact with a monolingual or bilingual citizen, they are able to immediately press the button on their body-worn camera. And that's going to foster trust because sometimes when we're in the process of translation, things get lost in translation or they may not be heard. So we're going to be getting information quicker and be able to help those citizens in a faster manner. And then I also spoke about the updated tasers that will come with that package. And with that is upgraded, less lethal tools that officers will be able to have. I also spoke about the VR training that comes with that package where officers are going to be receiving more training in that, which that also will foster improved officer safety, more community trust. We'll be able to use that trainings in our community academies so that citizens can firsthand see what the officers are utilizing out on the street and how they're being trained. This ecosystem that I spoke about a couple weeks ago, that's what is going to strengthen when I talk about officer safety and public trust and evidence. It's all working together in one ecosystem. It's that one-stop shop where we're going to have GPS capabilities, live stream capabilities, more situational awareness when officers are responding to calls. So if a supervisor isn't able to immediately be on that scene, they could still be looking at that FUSIS system and making sound decisions, which then in help will help our community members.

Okay. So, I mean, it sounds like so much of this is really centered around the body worn camera and I guess the expansion of software that allows it to do so much more.

Yes, our prior Axon contract that we've had since 2021, we had just purchased the body worn cameras and the fleet in car camera systems. So now everything's integrated with our drones. Our drones will be part of that FUSA system as well that we've already utilized and have shown success with us responding to calls for service.

The officer would have access to the drone video?

Officers and dispatchers and supervisors have access to the drone footage. We also can have different levels of security where we can set it so that only supervisors have live stream access or dispatchers. Each one is dependent on the security levels.

Lieutenant, I was trying to envision what actually happens on the scene. So if the drone is up, maybe from his car, from the screen in the car, is he able to see what the drone sees when he's on the scene?

Yes, obviously when an officer is on scene, we may have the drone pilot is focusing more on the drone footage so that the officer who's actually on scene dealing with whatever the incident is, they're focused on that incident at hand. However, a supervisor, if they're at a command post, they'll be able to watch that footage as well as dispatchers.

Okay. So this, at some point it talks about, like the insurance companies do, bundling. You put everything together, you get maybe a better deal. With insurance, I sometimes wonder. So this is... This is everything that they offer, right? It was, I can't remember the name of the service, but it was something 10 plus. It was everything that they offer would be part of this program for the $2 million.

Yes, it's not actually everything they offer. So we are looking at the officer safety plan 10 plus. That's the middle plan that they have. They have a premium plan, and then they have that basic plan. I did look at the basic plan, and we were adding... all the cart items, we wanted the AI assistant, we wanted to continue utilizing the community link that we provide our citizens with a link and they're able to upload evidence that they have for their case, which has also fostered relationships and community trust that way because they're able to upload their own evidence to their case. So we wanted to add that and those things weren't part of that basic package. So then when you were looking at ID, adding them separately, it was going to increase the cost. Therefore, it was more cost effective to go with that middle plan.

Okay. And Lieutenant, the AI translation, I've had occasion to use Google Translate, and sometimes what you get back is more funny than helpful. So did we test drive what they're providing to know that it's of a caliber that is what we need?

We have not personally utilized it. I did speak with nearby agencies in San Mateo County who did start utilizing it. They said they were happy with it. I also spoke with the district attorney's office who said it was acceptable for us to use the translation services through Axon. And it does record the conversation while it's occurring. So that also is going to be uploaded as evidence to a case as well.

Okay, and then when we were, you know, I was so pleased a couple of weeks ago when we were getting a report from the fire department that when they were negotiating a contract for the EMS services, you know, the billables and whatever, that they actually sat down with the company and they were able to negotiate a better deal. Who did the negotiations on this contract?

I did.

and you negotiated it hard.

I did, I actually was speaking with Axon and about the savings that we will get over the course of the five years. And I asked, how did we come to that number? And they said it was through the bundle and through staff's negotiation.

Okay, can you expand a little bit on that?

Yes. So in in the contract, it has a yearly savings. And so average savings per year is going to be $273,989. And that is based on those Bundles since we did go with the bundle with the added services that we wanted and there are different aspects where we need certain licenses per officer for the equipment and with the purchase of so many were added on a few of those licenses. Um, so then we don't have to pay extra for those.

Well, I'm, I'm reassured and I hate to tell the fire department, but you, the clips, what they were able to achieve. So, but it's a whole different, they weren't spending $2 million. Um, no, thank you for the update. I just needed some more time to consider it, consider this and hear a little bit more about what we're buying. I mean, $2 million over the five years is not a tremendous amount of money. I think, um, uh, you know, if, if we can achieve the goals that are mentioned in this conclusion, um, then we're in a much better place. So thank you for the report.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

So with that, you can get a motion on the entire consent calendar. So moved. I'll second. Okay, a motion and a second. And roll call.

Council Member Coleman.

Yes.

Council Member Flores.

Yes.

Council Member Nicholas. Aye. Vice Mayor Nogales. Yes. Mayor Adiego.

Yes. Thank you, Lieutenant.

Thank you. Have a good night.

Now move along to our public hearing. Item number 10 is a report regarding consideration of an ordinance adopting zoning tax amendments to Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code to update regulations pertaining to accessory dwelling units to comply with California state law and determination that the proposed zoning tax amendments are statutorily exempt from California Environmental Quality Act. Item number 10A is the ordinance.

So I'll go ahead and open the public hearing and welcome Ms. Gangos to the podium.

Thank you. Good evening, mayor, vice mayor, council members. Tonight, I will be presenting proposed updates to the city's ADU ordinance to bring it into compliance with state requirements. The state continues to adopt new legislation on ADUs annually, accessory dwelling units, to help streamline the creation of this as a housing opportunity. Local jurisdictions are required to incorporate these mandated requirements into their ADU ordinances. There are very limited areas where a local jurisdiction can retain control in relation to ADU requirements. They include specific design details when an ADU is considered non-exempt from the state. and some administrative details provided that they don't conflict with or block state requirements. So the local jurisdiction is required to incorporate these mandated requirements into their local ordinance and submit that ordinance to the California Department of Housing and Community Development for their review within 60 days of adoption. At that time, HCD will review for state compliance and issue a letter finding the ordinance in compliance with state requirements or not in compliance. And if the latter, then the local ADE ordinance is deemed null and void. Again, ADU regulations by the state are adopted annually. They change on a yearly basis. Staff does keep up with these changes. Most of the changes become effective January 1 of the following year, and city practices have been updated for the review and approval of ADUs. However, the state requirements have not been formalized in our local ADU ordinance since June of 2024. That was our last round of updates to the ordinance relating to ADU regulations. And so tonight is the proposed amendments are to bring our local ordinance up to date with state regulations that have become effective since June 2024. For a high level summary of the changes, they relate to five areas. The first one, maximum number of units allowed have changed for a single unit lot or a multiple unit lot. A single unit lot is one that has an existing single family dwelling or a proposed single family dwelling. And the ADUs allowed on such a lot have increased from two ADUs to four ADUs. For multiple unit lots, which are lots with two or more existing proposed or proposed dwelling units, The total number of allowed ADUs has been increased by one additional ADU. The overall total for these lots vary because it's dependent on the number of existing dwelling units on a site. So there will be a wide range of allowed units on that type of lot, but they have been increased overall by one. Maximum floor area has been clarified to refer to interior livable space when calculating allowable square footage for an ADU on a lot. Parking replacement requirements essentially remain the same that any demolition of existing garages or parking for the creation of an ADU That parking does not have to be replaced. However, they have incorporated new requirements that require the demolition of any demo permits that are required to go simultaneously with the creation of the ADU, the building permit required for the ADU. Owner occupancy requirements have been removed for junior ADUs that have separate sanitation facilities. Just a refresher, owner occupancy essentially stated that a property owner had to reside in either the primary dwelling unit or the new junior ADU. That has been removed for junior ADUs with separate sanitation facilities. And lastly, there's been some changes regarding fire sprinklers. Fire sprinklers cannot be required for an ADU if they have not been required for the primary dwelling. Additionally, the construction of a new ADU shall not trigger the requirement for fire sprinkler installation within the existing primary unit. There has been some vagueness in state law regarding this and 21 Elements, a group that we work with closely has been working with various jurisdictions to clarify that vagueness. And staff will keep you posted on that if there are any changes. The modifications to the city's ADU ordinance are statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to the public resources code section 21080.17 and CEQA guidelines section 15282.1H. and no further environmental review is required at this time for the proposed ordinance update. Staff is recommending that the City Council conduct a public hearing and follow the recommendation of the Planning Commission and determine that the proposed zoning ordinance update does not require further environmental review and is exempt from CEQA and introduce an ordinance updating ADDU regulations to bring the ordinance into compliance with state requirements. That concludes my presentation. I am available for any questions.

Okay, Stephanie, before we ask our questions, are there any public comments on this item?

No public comments, Mayor.

Any questions? Council?

I'll go. So I was reading this multiple times and I was still trying to understand the maximum allowed ADUs on the different lots. And so I think the confusion is still gonna be out there. And so we partner with, I forget what the agency was called, the Hello Housing. And we still do that now, correct?

That's correct, and also through the 21 Elements group that we're part of, there is an ADU resource center for San Mateo County that is available for both staff and residents to seek help or clarification, and I will say that staff has used them many times for trying to understand the new requirements.

No, that's fantastic, because I was reading this, I'm like, okay, if I have a lot split, in a single unit, like different categories. I was trying to do some sort of flow chart and I couldn't do it. So I was still looking at this and I still couldn't quite get it. So that's good, we're still working with Hello Housing. So I just wanna make sure I got this right. For a multiple unit lot with an existing multiple unit dwelling, they can have up to eight detached ADUs?

So the way that it works is, If there's an existing multifamily residential building, they could potentially get up to eight detached ADUs. They would have to have eight units themselves. So if it was an existing six-unit building, they could only have up to six detached ADUs.

So it has to match the number of units. Yes. Okay. I appreciate that. And then, um, there was something here about a letter that we received from the California housing defense fund. And there are some questions about, I guess the proposed amendments to be, uh, do we rectify this in terms of their argument? I'm going to be able to get sky.

Um, We responded to, for both Planning Commission hearings, Cal HDF submitted a letter to each one. For each one, we provided a written response. The core issues that they identified, I'm just going to be direct about this, they simply misstated the law and misrepresented what was in HCD's handbook. The main issue, the issues turned around the deed restriction that the city requires pursuant to the ordinance related to the use of the ADU. All of the requirements that are recorded through the deed restriction enforce requirements in state law. Their main point was that they believe that this is not a deed restriction that could properly be recorded against the property to restrict the ADU. But in fact, this is something that state law actually requires to be done. And then as to the HCD handbook, what it says is that you can't require a deed restriction to require the ADU to be an affordable unit. And the city does not do that and has not done that for multiple ADU updates. So I'm not sure where exactly they're coming from with this letter. They may be addressing other communities where cities have attempted to impose those kinds of restrictions in a way that was improper. But we have reviewed the ordinance in response to each letter and made sure that the provisions of the ordinance implementing the deed restriction do no more than state law requires to be done and that it is compliant with HCD's guidance on the issue. Okay, thank you.

Any other questions for staff on this item?

Yes, brief question. So in the staff report, there's a couple figures about lots that have SB 9. How many SB 9 projects has our city had?

We've had one.

One, okay.

Since it went into effect, and that was a couple years ago.

And I remember back when it was a bill active in the legislature, there was a lot of fear of what this would bring to South City, and then in reality, there's only been one project. And so I think when we look at state laws, oftentimes the bills aren't meant, and I think normally, I mean, how many lots have we seen more than one ADU built in South City?

I will say a handful, and it's been a converted garage into a JADU and possibly a detached ADU.

Right. Great. Thank you. And so I think when it comes to some of these state laws that are coming down, they're envisioning a smaller house with a bigger lot. And when you look in South City, there aren't many like that. And so for those who are kind of, you know, fearful of this new law, I think we can take a deep breath. And there won't be, you know, too much. I mean, sure, we'll see a couple, right, but there won't be too much change in South City. Thank you.

Councilman, while you were asking that question, I was thinking of downtown where before all of this, we were allowing lot splits to get that second home that wouldn't be they wouldn't be on the same lot. So in fact, more people would have an opportunity to buy a single house than two houses on one lot. And that was before all this discussion, we realized that that was a good way to go to make housing a little bit more affordable. My only worry is that there are still a number of lots downtown that are the original configuration where it may be 50 feet wide in front, but it's 140 feet deep. going back to the lanes because in times past, much before I arrived, that's where you kept your horse and your carriage, 140 feet away from your home on the back lane. And now, some of those would be conducive to building maybe four ADUs behind the main house. And if I was, I think if I was gonna today build a multifamily structure, an apartment house, I'd be required to have sprinklers, wouldn't I?

I would have to defer to someone knowledgeable about building code better than myself.

The deputy chief is here. If he wants to be recognized, he could come up. And we were having a discussion about the need for fire sprinklers. So if I'm building a multifamily, you're going to answer for the chief?

That's great.

No, good for you. Good for you. I couldn't quite get his attention, so thank you.

I mean, Sky may correct me if I'm wrong, but I am nearly certain that a new multifamily dwelling would require sprinklers.

Right. And we saw what happens when a building was built in the 80s down in our neighboring town of Foster City. So if we stack ADUs, the state is telling us we no longer have to have fire sprinklers. So we're stepping back. I think like Councilman Coleman said, a lot of what comes down at the state level is aimed at communities other than South San Francisco. But I could see a potential problem in that, but we're not going to change the wisdom that emanates from Sacramento. So any other questions?

No, there are actually still lots that are big. We used to live in Peck's lot, and those are big lots that we have there. So, you know, I really do commend you guys for making sure that our local jurisdiction ordinances are in line with the state laws. It's very important that we have a diversity of housing types here because we know that affordable housing is an issue.

Okay, so with that, why don't I go ahead and close the public hearing and we'll see if we can get a motion to move this along. So moved. Okay, a motion on the floor. I'll second. Second from the Vice Mayor, roll call.

Council Member Nicholas. Aye. Vice Mayor Nogales.

Yes.

Mayor Adiego.

Yes.

Council Member Flores.

Yes.

Council Member Coleman.

Yes. Thank you, Stephanie.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

We'll now move on to item number 11 is a report regarding consideration of an ordinance to amend Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code to allow for residential entitlements to be extended by up to two years and determination that the proposed amendments are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act per section 15378 of the CEQA guidelines. Item number 11A is the ordinance.

Public hearing, so we'll go ahead and open it up. And Adina, please.

Great, thank you very much. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Council Members. Adina Friedman, Chief Planner, and I will be presenting a very focused zoning text amendment tonight. This is really focused on the timeframe that planning entitlements are valid after project approval, only for residential projects. So how it is today, With our current regulations, discretionary approvals are valid for two years with the opportunity for a one year extension. So a project after approval, discretionary approval means something that needs review and approval by either the design review board and chief planner, planning commission, or city council. So not a project that goes straight to building permits, obviously. So a project in that category would have three years total to obtain building permits. And in the past at least six years, maybe longer before the pandemic, nearly every large complex project that does not have a development agreement has requested that one year extension. That's pretty much just standard. So there are a few, there's a challenge for residential projects with the current timeline. An applicant must obtain financing prepare construction plans, and obtain building permits within three years. And it can be challenging to achieve this, particularly for larger complex residential projects and affordable housing projects, which often receive funding in different chunks on annual cycles, so they can't obtain building projects until they get that funding. And after expiration, resubmittal of permits is expensive and time consuming. It does not benefit the city, applicants, or the community. So there are a few solutions or options for projects. The first is development agreement, which can be a great tool for commercial development. Particularly here in South San Francisco, we see a lot of office and R&D projects that are built in phases over time, and commercial developers have the financial resources to invest in a development agreement. Council has reviewed many development agreements over the past few years for large commercial projects in this situation, which know that they are going to need more time to obtain building projects and build out their projects. So that's a good solution for commercial. Now for residential, during the pandemic and a few years after, the state provided several legislative extensions for residential development in recognition of the housing crisis and the difficulty for obtaining financing. So that means that the state said, even if you expire, you have an additional 18 months in one case. I think the other one was an additional six months. However, those have all expired, and the state does not have any options like that currently available. So as a result, residential development often needs more time and flexibility, and we have seen projects being challenged by this three-year timeline. So the proposal in front of council tonight would allow for up to a two year extension for a total of four years to obtain building permits for residential projects only. This would apply if approved, this ordinance would apply to several categories of projects. Projects that have been approved have not yet expired, but have not yet been issued building permits. residential projects that are currently in the entitlement pipeline, if they are approved, and all residential entitlements going forward. And we have quite a few projects that would fall into these categories. The projects that have active entitlements and that are either working towards building permits or haven't been able to apply for building permits yet is about 850 units. We have another about 450 or so in the entitlement pipeline now that are under review by the city. This next slide, I'm not gonna go into it in detail, it just goes into all of the wording that would be provided to update the code to have a two year extension. The proposal is consistent with the general plan vision of providing diverse housing types and also helps to meet several critical housing element goals of facilitating housing and removing constraints for housing development. The Planning Commission reviewed this proposal in July and recommended approval. The Planning Commission noted that this is a timely amendment. It's responding to the economy. It is an important tool for housing projects and an additional year can make a big difference for housing projects, particularly affordable projects. This project is exempt from CEQA or CEQA guidelines section 15378 as it is minor in nature and would not be considered a project under CEQA. With that, I am going to conclude my staff presentation and recommend that city council conduct a public hearing follow the Planning Commission's recommendation, and adopt an ordinance updating regulations pertaining to entitlement, expiration, and extension. Concludes my presentation, and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

Okay, thank you, Ms. Freeman. Do we have any public comments?

No public comments, Mayor.

Public comments, okay. So, any questions from the staff? Can you identify, maybe a couple of specifics of what's at stake here? You've got the total numbers, which are of great concern. We wouldn't want everyone to be starting over.

Like specific projects?

Yeah, a couple of the larger ones.

Yeah, we have a project at 1477 Huntington that was approved for about 260 units, so that's one that will be coming up. It would expire in 2027. There was a project, we call it the Bertolucci's Project on a Bertolucci site for 99 units. That one expires, is it the end of this year? End of this year. And then 500 Linden was approved. That's an all-affordable project. That project has applied for building permits, which is great, but it was approved last year. So it needs to obtain building projects. Another one is 500 Railroad, which the City Council approved last year. They have not yet applied for building permits, so they're currently within their first two-year block. Those are some of the big ones off the top of my head.

So the only way that there's some movement on this on the financial side is if, you know, miraculously the cost of money comes down like a point and a half, I think, right, to change the landscape financing these projects, or rents were to move up substantially again. Any sense of any direction on that? On what's happening in the... Oh, on the financing side? Yeah, in the financial world.

I would ask Nell if she has any ideas about that.

Right.

I realized I didn't introduce myself last time, the last public hearing. Nell Seelander, Economic and Community Development Director. So for two of these projects in particular that Adina noted, I wanted to draw attention to them. 1477 Huntington actually has a brand new owner that is building in the region currently and is very bullish on this site. And part of, they're working actively toward a building permit and seeing- And this is directly across from the Syrez project that's well underway? Correct. Yeah.

That should be motivation if they're successful.

Precisely. And directly behind their property will back right up to that beautiful new park the city just built, Centennial Park South. So it's a really incredible location. So we feel really hopeful about that project moving forward. And then Adina also mentioned the Rotary Gardens Phase 2 project, which is the family building. That project has, other than a tiny bit of city funding, no funding secured yet. And so... They're sort of in this place where it could take three to five years to assemble that financing, and they really can't advance a building permit too substantially until they're almost fully financed. So that project alone is sort of falling right into this timeline where it could benefit from this extension without having to come back for a development agreement, which would be a very discretionary approval, and costly. It's a costly permit to get through the city. or have to re-entitle the site.

Okay, thank you, Ms. Zylinder. Any other questions from staff on this? Go ahead and close the public hearing and let's see what the pleasure of council is on this item. Anyone?

I'll make the motion. Second.

Okay, general plan amendment. On the floor, roll call.

Council Member Flores?

Yes.

Mayor Adiego?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Nogales? Yes. Council Member Coleman? Yes. Council Member Nicholas? Aye.

Thank you, Ms. Freeman.

I have the next item.

Oh, you do? Wow. Okay. Keep going.

Item number 12, sorry, is a report regarding consideration of a general plan amendment to comply with Senate Bill 1425 to create a new general plan policy and actions that address equitable access to open space, climate resilience, and rewilding opportunities in determination that an addendum to the 2040 General Plan Environmental Impact Report is the appropriate CEQA document per CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164.

Another public hearing? Go ahead and open it up and you're on.

Thank you very much. This one's going to be very quick. After we noticed the item for this public hearing, the city determined that it would be better to continue this item to a future date. So staff requests that the city council will make a motion to continue this item to a future date uncertain.

Is anybody up for that? I'll close the public hearing. Now we'll see if we want to move to an uncertain date. So moved. Second. And a second. Roll call.

Mayor Diego?

Yes.

Council Member Nicholas? Aye. Council Member Flores?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Nogales?

Yes.

Council Member Coleman?

Yes.

We can now move along to items from council, committee reports, and announcements.

Anybody want to take the last shot at the... No, nothing? Okay, wow. And then on to the next items.

Next item is our closed session item, number 13, conference with real property negotiators, property, vacant city property located at 356 Grand Avenue, agency negotiators, Ernesto Lucero, economic development manager, and Nell Sealander, economic and community development director, negotiating party, Ventre Group, under negotiation, price and terms, Item number 14, conference with legal counsel, anticipated litigation, significant exposure to litigation pursuant to government code section 54956.92, one potential case.

Okay, the counsel will enter a closed session at this time.