City Council

UPDATE ON SOUTH LINDEN AVE AND SCOTT STREET GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT JANUARY 28, 2025 HAE WON RITCHIE CITY COUNCIL CITY ENGINEER/DEP PW DIRECTOR AGENDA I. Objective II. Introductions III. Background IV. Caltrain Presentation V. Tonight’s Recommended Action VI. Next Steps VII. Questions 2 OBJECTIVE Provide City Council with an Update on the South Linden Avenue and Scott Street Grade Separation Project and Seek Direction on the Optimized Alternative 3 Introductions • Caltrain  Robert Barnard  Navdeep Dhaliwal  John Valsecchi (Jacobs)  Liliam Perez • Darrell Maxey (RSE) • Jessica Manzi (SMCTA) 4 BACKGROUND  Planning Phase (Project Study Report) Completed 2021  Preferred Alternative 1 selected  Raise railroad tracks slightly  Close Scott Street to vehicular traffic across tracks  Construct pedestrian/bicycle undercrossing Current Conditions Alternative 1 – Looking North Alternative 1 – Looking South 5 DISCUSSION  Preliminary Engineering / Environmental phase started 2022  Grant funding from SMCTA  Caltrain retained designer (RSE) in 2023  Caltrain and RSE performed value engineering  Caltrain to present results of this effort 6  CALTRAIN PRESENTATION 7 South Linden Avenue Item #6.e. 6/2/2022 and Scott Street Grade Separation (LSGS) Project San Bruno City Council Special Meeting Presentation Outline  Introduction  Background  Original Preferred Alternative  Optimization Effort  Comparison  Summary  Questions – Next Steps 2 Background: Project Location/Key Features South San Francisco Station N Colma Creek UPRR/ Granite Rock San Bruno Station City Limit SSF and SB South Linden Ave Scott St I-380 to San Francisco to San Jose Southline 1,850 feet Development Stakeholders Logo and Roles Implementing Agency Project Sponsors Funding Partner 4  Scott Street South Linden Ave Granite Rock N N Central AT&T Concrete Parking Lot Scott St Southline Development Airgas Storage 5  Pedestrian/Bicycle Undercrossing Only PSR Alternative 1 - with Scott Street Crossing Closed 6 PSR Alt 1 – Key Features at Scott Street Temporary Construction Easement (TCE) for Shoofly and signal house. Reduce Herman Street to one lane and no parking Pedestrian/bike Undercrossing AT&T Parking Lot ROW required for access ramp to pedestrian/bike Undercrossing Scott St Tracks raised 2.5 ft. Scott Street - closed when shoofly is constructed. 7  No-Build Alternative The No-Build Alternative will fail to address:  Growth in Future Auto Traffic on Scott  56% increase in Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)  Level of Service lowered to F (Delay > 80 sec)  Extensive queues with spillovers, blocked driveways, and intersections  Growth in gate down time ranging from 100% to 250%  Growth in future train crossings ranging from 100% to 400% 8  PSR 1 Alternative Challenges  Original Project Study Report (PSR) from 2020 focus: Conc e ptua l Engine e ring De s ign Only  Recent re-evaluation effort focus: Cons truc ta bility 2024 effort found new issues and challenges with PSR 1:  Building the PSR Alt 1 - up to s e ve n ye a rs to construct – will take much longer than assumed  Building the PSR Alt 1 has multiple im plica tions especially c os t a nd s c he dule due to:  Ve ry lim ite d a c c e s s for construction work near operating trains and site access  La rge footprint due to shoofly and elevated tracks  Sa fe ty re quire m e nts related to construction near tracks  Funda bility 9 Construction Methodology Re-evaluation In 2023, a new design consultant was tasked with performing a review of the PSR Alternative 1 design, the constructability and other issues. The consultant took a deeper dive into:  Cons truc ta bility – Staging, sequencing, and duration  Environmental  Utility Relocations  Traffic impacts  Compatibility with re duc e d work windows 10 Box Jacking – Keep Existing Surface Improvements – Eliminate Shoofly and Elevated Tracks Push or Jack a precast concrete box beneath existing railroad tracks  PSR 1 vs Optimized Alternative Scott Street Undercrossing Key Characteristics • Rail - Raised 2.5 ft • Scott Street - Closed when shoofly is constructed. • Pedestrian / bicycle undercrossing • Rail - Remains at-grade • Scott Street – Remains at-grade during OA construction. May possibly remain open during portions of construction. • Undercrossing will need to be lowered No material changes to Scott Street’s fundamental undercrossing configuration. 12 Comparison - Scott Street Undercrossing PSR Alternative 1 Optimized Alternative 13 Rendering - Scott Street Undercrossing 10PM 24 AM Facing West 14 Rendering - Scott Street Undercrossing 10PM 4 2 AM Facing East 15  Project Comparisons (for both Scott Street and South Linden Avenue) Project Aspect PSR Alternative 1 Optimized Alternative Construction Schedule 84 months 36 months Risk (schedule / cost / High Low environmental) Cost High 25% less Environmental Impacts High Low Road Closures / Traffic Long duration Moderate duration Impacts Operational Impacts (RR) Extensive Minimal Project Footprint Impacts Extensive Moderate (No change in San Bruno) 16 Project Development Timeline Caltrain & RSE continue development and minor refinements of OA while conducting Caltrain & RSE shared decision Project Study Report outreach to gather feedback from Caltrain, to Evaluate Preferred (PSR) Phase city managers, and other stakeholders Alternative​ 2016 – 2021 July – August 2023 December 2023 – November 2024 June 2023 September – November 2023 RSE begins work on Preliminary Studies and Preliminary Caltrain & the Cities of San Bruno and Engineering South San Francisco further developed the Optimized Alternative (OA) 17 Caltrain Lessons Learned Caltrain wants to share and inform stakeholders about the c ha nging la nds ca pe of c os t e s tim a te s . These lessons learned include:  Exploring different construction methods and techniques that are le s s im pa c tful, s upport c os t s a ving s olutions , m itiga te s ris k, a nd re duc e the proje c t c ons truc tion s c he dule. Examples include:  Elimination of Shoofly (detour) tracks  Addressing the reduced work windows impacts caused by electrification  Use of new technology - Box Jacking  Collaboration with all technical project stakeholders on va lue - e ngine e ring s olutions , s e tting c le a r tim e line s for the proje c t, next s te ps , a nd ide ntifying de c is ion points 18  Summary With new analysis of the design, constructability, and risks, Caltrain endorses the Optim ize d Alte rna tive as a m ore e ffe c tive and re a lis tic option to advance forward with design. By contrast, the PSR Alternative is a le s s pra c tica l alternative due to:  7-year construction dura tion  the large im pa c ts (ROW, the environment, the footprint, traffic)  the higher c os t, higher risk, and fundability  the impacts of s a fe ty clearances  the construction ine ffic ie nc ie s (constrained site access, electrified operating railroad environment) 19  Next Steps • Ongoing engagement with property/business owners • South San Francisco City Council • February 12, 2025 • Upon council approval: preliminary engineering & environmental phase (15%-35%) 20 Questions 21 TONIGHT’S RECOMMENDED ACTION • Receive update on the South Linden Avenue and Scott Street Grade Separation Project and provide direction on the Optimized Alternative • Staff recommendation is to proceed with the Optimized Alternative 8 NEXT STEPS  South San Francisco City Council on February 12, 2025  Preliminary engineering  Environmental review phase 9 QUESTIONS? 10  January 28, 2025 Update for the San Bruno City Council San Mateo County Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District Len Materman, CEO info@OneShoreline.org Agenda  Introduction to OneShoreline and flooding in San Bruno  Short-term and long-term actions to reduce flooding  Outreach and what we heard from Belle Air residents  Roles for key agencies, including the City of San Bruno 7th Avenue looking north at Hwy. 380 2 2 Ba c k g ro u n d Climate change is a transformative challenge that requires regional collaboration. With the support of the County and all 20 cities, State legislation established OneShoreline as a special district on January 1, 2020. It is the first independent government agency to plan and build regional resilience to the water-related impacts of climate change: flooding, sea level rise, groundwater rise, coastal erosion, and drought. 3  O n g o in g P rio rit ie s  Plan land use, private development, and public infrastructure for climate-driven conditions and with regional resilience projects  Advance aligned resilience projects  Alert people to, and reduce the impacts of, extreme storms  Secure funding to sustain these efforts and leverage outside funding 4 Flooding around the county – more extreme storms and higher tides San Mateo San Carlos Redwood City San Carlos Half Moon Bay Half Moon Bay 5 Most San Bruno properties pay taxes Colma Creek into a flood zone Flood Zone established decades ago by San Mateo County, now administered by OneShoreline. City of San Bruno San Bruno Creek Flood Zone 6 Complex flooding issues in and around the Belle Air neighborhood • Belle Air is located along the last mile of San Bruno Creek before it crosses Hwy. 101 and drains into the Bay. • The Creek winds through major infrastructure owned by, or in the jurisdiction of, multiple agencies, which has made solving the chronic flooding difficult. 7 Recent actions to reduce flooding • Completed the San Bruno Creek Emergency Tide Gate Repair Project in 2022 • Replaced three out of the four pumps in the Walnut Pump Station over multiple winters • Hand-cleared Creek vegetation to maintain flow capacity (with SFO). 8 San Bruno Creek Flood Zone funds have historically been used to maintain the existing infrastructure. Given the age of the infrastructure, and the fact that it was designed for historic and not future climate change conditions, OneShoreline looks to replace its infrastructure. OneShoreline Regional Infrastructure Project builds upon past studies, current studies, and local expertise to develop a regional project from the Caltrain tracks to SSF Water Treatment Plant that overcomes jurisdictional complexities. 9 OneShoreline Regional Infrastructure Project Anticipated Project Schedule Timeframe Activities Spring 2025 Convene multi-agency Technical Advisory Committee Summer Issue Consultant RFPs and 2025 Execute Consultant Contracts 2026 – 2028 Community Engagement Project Alternatives and Conceptual Designs 2028 Apply for Project Final Design and Implementation Funding 10  Private partner citizen feedback platform ISeeChange Flood Early Warning System 11 FEMA National Flood Insurance Program’s Community Rating System Reduces flood insurance premiums in communities with floodplain management practices and communications beyond minimum NFIP requirements Activities Required for City Participation • Pass a Community Assistance Visit • Designate CRS Coordinator • Implement activities • Maintain records • Recertify each year • Participate in verification cycle visits Through June 2025, a OneShoreline consultant can support city exploration and potential application to join CRS 12 Outreach and what we heard OneShoreline convened an outreach team that worked to better understand experiences and information gaps related to flooding in Belle Air. oneshoreline.org/projects/san-bruno-creek 13  Laying Sandbags What residents are doing to protect Sharing themselves information ACTIONS Moving vehicles & belongings TAKEN Installing sump pumps Joining Resilient San Bruno 14 Roles for the Key Agencies Project OneShoreline City CRC * C/CAG Convene Resilient San Bruno ● ● OneWatershed Project ● ● Regional Infrastructure Project ● Stormdrain capacity improvements ● Stormwater detention project(s) ● ● ● Lead role Most agencies have a supporting role in most efforts * CRC = Climate Resilient Communities, a CBO based in San Mateo County 15 City of San Bruno potential investments and participation Update the City’s storm drain plan and implement storm drain improvements Participate in community engagement Participate in OneShoreline’s regional project: staffing, funding, and land use FEMA CRS to reduce flood insurance premiums 16  Thank you info@OneShoreline.org  D r a ft O n e W a t e r s h e d Fr a m e w o r k Re p o r t Reid Bogert, C/CAG Stormwater Program Director – rbogert@smcgov.org City of San Bruno Council Meeting, January 28, 2025 Image Source: http://astanehelaw.com/2020/09/02/san-mateo-county-passes-emergency-ordinance-establishing-paid-sick-leave-for-the-coronavirus-covid-19-pandemic/ St o rm w a t e r – W h a t ’s t h e Big D e a l? • Urbanization = hard surfaces and pollutants • Rain washes pollutants away • Flows into inlets and underground pipes (as quickly as possible under traditional engineering designs) • Discharge directly to creeks, the Bay, or ocean • No treatment to remove any pollutants • Impacts water quality and aquatic life  Stormwater 101 Pre-Urban Development  Stormwater 101 Urban Development Local Impacts Gre e n In fra s t ru c t u re • Using natural systems to capture, treat, and infiltrate stormwater • Restores “natural” stormwater management • Distributed, small-scale systems or large-scale regional projects • Multi-benefit, including for key water issues –Adaptation for climate change impacts –Flooding –Groundwater recharge • Includes public and private projects • Integrated with “grey infrastructure” i.e., storm drain pipes and other drainage infrastructure • City of San Bruno adopted its Green Infrastructure Plan in 2019  Stormwater 101 Balanced Development Orange Memorial Park Regional Stormwater Project Orange Memorial Park Regional SW Capture Project (South San Francisco) • $15.5M from Caltrans • 7 agencies in the watershed (including San Bruno) • First in Bay Area • Innovate climate resilience focused project • Part of the overall OneWatershed strategy W h a t is t h e O n e W a t e rs h e d Fra m e w o rk ? An equity-focused, integrated approach to climate resilience in San Mateo County • Effort led by C/CAG in partnership with other regional stakeholders (including OneShoreline) • Watershed scale vs. agency specific approach • Climate Hazards evaluated: • Sea level Rise/Groundwater Rise • Extreme Precipitation • Extreme Heat/Drought/Wildfire • Watershed Assets evaluated for risk exposure: • Water Supply • Storm Drainage • Waste Water Services • Groundwater Basins W h a t is t h e O n e W a t e rs h e d Fra m e w o rk ? Potential OneWatershed Projects: • Focus on green stormwater infrastructure (benefits to flood/stormwater/water supply/wastewater systems) • Sustainable Streets • Regional stormwater capture projects • School/park retrofits • May also include: • Grey infrastructure improvements • Shoreline resilience projects • Diversion to WWTPs • Creek Restoration W h a t is t h e O n e W a t e rs h e d Fra m e w o rk ? Overall Goals: • Stormwater permit compliance related to green infrastructure + local planning efforts • Holistically address climate impacts: • Geographically connected water sector utilities and resources (opportunities to enhance overall system resilience and leverage projects to benefit multiple sectors) • E.g., increase stormwater capture, reduce need for upsizing pipes, reduce impacts of I/I on sewer system, increase opportunity to recharge groundwater • Compound effects of climate (sea level rise/storm flooding) • Form partnerships for funding • Include communities in planning and address priority communities first • Collaborative approach to climate resilience with other regional efforts, including OneShoreline and other partners O n e W a t e rs h e d P ro je c t P a rt n e rs • C/CAG Stormwater Program – project lead • Climate Resilient Communities – CBO lead • City of San Bruno – San Bruno Creek Watershed lead • County of San Mateo Sustainability Department • South San Francisco-San Bruno Regional Water Quality Control Plant • Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency • San Mateo County Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District (OneShoreline) 7 Primary Tasks Workplan and Initial Engagement Community-Led San Bruno Creek 1 4 OneWatershed Climate Resilience Plan OneWatershed Data Inventory NOAA Grant Application 2 5.1 OneWatershed Framework Project Administration 5 3 Report and OneWatershed Dashboard 8 Project Groups/Committees Group Membership Oversight Project Management Team Partners and Consultant team Entire Project Technical Advisory Committee Agency Representatives OneWatershed Framework Development Non-profits/CBOs and other Equity Priority Community Group stakeholders Community Engagement Plan and OneWatershed Framework Climate Change Community Team San Bruno Community Members San Bruno Creek OneWatershed Plan San Bruno Community Members San Bruno Creek Community San Bruno Creek OneWatershed and other stakeholders Member Workshops Plan Photo Credit: OneShoreline Photo Credit: OneShoreline Draft OneWatershed Framework Report • Provides context and background on climate hazards in the county and the OneWatershed approach • Summarizes the Climate Hazard Exposure Assessment methods and outputs • Defines the process for developing OneWatershed Climate Resilience Plans, i.e., San Bruno Creek OneWatershed Plan OneWatershed Framework follows CalOES Adaptation Planning Process • Climate hazard exposure for each asset category and each climate hazard are available through the OneWatershed Dashboard • Visual representation, averaging exposure scores across all climate hazard categories and OneWatershed infrastructure network categories: Pilot Application to San Bruno Creek Watershed • In 2025, the Project will pilot the OneWatershed Framework in the San Bruno Creek watershed • Step 1: Identify multi-agency, multi-stakeholder collaborative partnerships – the collaborative partnerships established through this project and the Resilient San Bruno team • Step 2: Assess watershed-scale vulnerability of OneWatershed infrastructure and assets to climate hazards – will use the Exposure Assessment and San Bruno Creek Community Vulnerability Assessment led by CRC P ilo t Ap p lic a t io n t o Sa n Bru n o Cre e k • Step 3: Identify and prioritize climate resilience projects - In close coordination with the Resilient San Bruno Team, the PMT and the Consultant Team will identify potential climate resilience projects that could address prioritized vulnerabilities within the watershed. • Watershed-based plans will be referenced to compile previously identified project opportunities. Projects identified through the Community Vulnerability Assessment will also be considered. • These projects will be prioritized to maximize the climate hazard resilience benefits provided, in alignment with community priorities. P ro je c t Ne xt St e p s • Draft OneWatershed Framework Report for review - January • Final OneWatershed Framework Report – February/March • The San Bruno Creek Pilot will be initiated in early 2025 –Public Workshops through spring 2025 • Coordinated with City of San Bruno, OneShoreline and Climate Resilient Communities –Draft/Final San Bruno Creek OneWatershed Plan fall/winter 2025  Q UESTIO NS? Reid Bogert, C/CAG Stormwater Program Director – rbogert@smcgov.org Image Source: http://astanehelaw.com/2020/09/02/san-mateo-county-passes-emergency-ordinance-establishing-paid-sick-leave-for-the-coronavirus-covid-19-pandemic/ ASSET PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH COMCAST FOR THE SALE OF CITYNET SERVICES JANUARY 28, 2025 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA I. Objective II. Background III. Sale Terms and Price IV. Evaluation and Financial Implications V. Recommendation 2 OBJECTIVE Approve an Asset Purchase Agreement with Comcast for the Sale of the San Bruno CityNet Services, Authorizing the City Manager to Take Certain Actions in Connection therewith and Finding the Action Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act 3 Background CityNet established 1971 As of 2023, CityNet has negative equity of $21.5 million Council affirms FY25 initiative to stabilize CityNet fiscal situation April 2024, request for interest issued June 2024, authorized to executive letter of intent from Comcast 4 SALE TERMS AND PRICE • CityNet will continue to operate as it does today, and the City will continue to bear all costs and receive all customer revenues until the closing of the sale • Agreement requires several conditions be met prior to closing:  Comcast must establish a physical interconnection of Comcast’s cable system with the CityNet cable system  System must have at least 5,000 internet subscribers at close  Closing must occur within 180 days following execution 5 SALE TERMS AND PRICE, continued Maximum purchase price Comcast will pay for CityNet assets at the closing is $8 million: • Purchase price could be reduced if total customers drop below 5,400 prior to the closing • Comcast will withhold 10% of the purchase price for one year from the date of closing to secure the City’s indemnity obligations 6  SALE TERMS AND PRICE, continued • Following the closing, the Agreement provides for a transition period of up to 6 months • During the transition period, the City must continue to operate CityNet while Comcast performs upgrades and physically transitions customers, area by area, to Comcast’s service platform • City must transmit all customer revenues to Comcast, less a management fee retained by the City in the amount of $75 per customer per month to cover the City’s costs of operating and maintaining the system • Sale does not include any real estate assets occupied by CityNet, the CityNet vehicle fleet, or CityNet employees. Nor will any CityNet vendor or other contracts be assigned to Comcast, with a few exceptions • CityNet employees will be governed by the existing memoranda of understanding 7 EVALUATION AND FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Net loss Scenario Upsides Downsides (millions of $) • CityNet customers CityNet • Disposition of lose continuity of shuts $1.8 - 2.5M CityNet remains on service down schedule • No sale value to offset losses • Remainder of $8 • Sale time tied to CityNet million sale price Comcast’s sold to $1.7 - 1.9M • Continuity of interconnection and Comcast service for CityNet upgrade completion customers 8 ANALYSIS • Fiscal Impact – If the sale proceeds and closes, the City would receive $8 million - less any reduction for loss of customers as provided in the APA, costs associated with the negotiation, communications and transition of the CityNet service, and any actual indemnification claims • Environmental Impact – Exempt 9 RECOMMENDATION • Public comment • Questions and comments from City Council • Adopt a Resolution Approving an Asset Purchase Agreement with Comcast of California IX, Inc. for the Sale of the San Bruno CityNet Services, Authorizing the City Manager to Take Certain Actions in Connection therewith and Finding the Action Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act 10  CityNet to Comcast Transition: Ensuring a Seamless Experience 1 For Headlines Use Comcast New Vision Semibold 24pts • For optional sub-heading use Comcast New Vision Light • For bullet copy use Comcast New Vision Regular 2 3 Customer Impact and Support • Ensuring a Seamless Experience for Residents CityNet Customers Continue with Minimal Pop up Stores Multichannel Network Disruption and Community Marketing Device Upgrades Upgrades During outreach Campaign Transition to Comcast Network 4 5 MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 10.24 AND 10.28 JANUARY 28, 2025 CITY COUNCIL OBJECTIVE Consideration of introduction of an ordinance to amend the Municipal Code to Repealing Chapter 10.24 Municipal Cable Television And Communications System and Amending Chapter 10.28 State Video Franchises 2 BACKGROUND • Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act of 2006 (DIVCA), codified in California Public Utilities Code Section 5800, et seq.and the proposed sale of CityNet to Comcast require changes to Title 10 of the San Bruno Municipal Code • DIVCA does not apply to municipal cable systems such as CityNet but does apply to private companies like Comcast 3 PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS • Repeals provisions in Chapter 10.24 governing CityNet as it will no longer be relevant upon the sale of CityNet assets to Comcast • Amends Chapter 10.28 to fully exercise the regulatory authority that the city retains over holders of state video franchises such as Comcast under DIVCA, including to collect franchise fees and public, educational and governmental access (PEG) fees 4 ANALYSIS • Fiscal Impact – None • Environmental Impact – Not subject to CEQA 5  RECOMMENDATION • Public comment • Questions and comments from City Council • Recommended Action: Introduce, read by title only and waive further reading of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Bruno Repealing Chapter 10.24 (Municipal Cable Television And Communications System) and Amending Chapter 10.28 (State Video Franchises) and Finding Such Action Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act 6