HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1980-04-23Mayor Ronald G. Acosta
Vice Mayor Gus Nicolopulos
Council:
Mark N. Addiego
Emanuele N. Damonte
Roberta C. Teglia
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL
W. Orange Avenue Library Auditorium
April 23, 1980
2!1
AGENDA
Adjourned Regular Meeting
CALL TO ORDER: (TF-OO1 Side 2)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
AGENDA REVIEW
City Manager Birkelo Requested:
- Move Item No. 4 to be heard before
Item No. 1.
- Executive Session prior to opening
the Public Hearing.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
RECALL TO ORDER:
PUBLIC SERVICES
Staff Report 4/23/80 - requesting 1)
Open the Public Hearing; 2) Close
the Public Hearing; 3) Adopt a
Resolution approving the Modified
Engineer's Report; 4) Adopt a
Resolution changing the maximum interest
rate; 5) Adopt a Resolution authorizing
the execution of an Agreement with the
County.
A RESOLUTION ORDERING CHANGES AND
MODIFICATIONS (PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS)
DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION PROJECT NO,
ST-79-1 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
A RESOLUTION ORDERING CHANGES AND
MODIFICATIONS (INTEREST) DOWNTOWN
REVITALIZATION PROJECT NO. ST-79-1
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
ACTION TAKEN
Adjourned Regular Meeting
7:48 p.m.
Council present:
Council absent:
Mayor Acosta presiding.
Nicolopulos, Addiego,
Damonte, Teglia and
Mayor Acosta.
None.
Recited.
AGENDA REVIEW
So ordered.
Council adjourned to an Executive
Session at 7:50 p.m.
The Meeting was recalled to order at
8:05 p.m., all Council present, no
action taken.
PUBLIC SERVICES
Mayor Acosta opened the Public Hearing.
City Manager Birkelo recalled the
history of one year ago when a Public
Hearing was held before the bids were
received for the project. When the
bids were received they were exceedingly
high and made it impossible to fund the
project on that basis. Staff worked
in conjunction with the Downtown
Merchants and a revised plan was con-
ceived and made it necessary for this
Public Hearing to be held on modifications
on the Assessment District.
Director of Public Works Yee showed
maps of the basic and proposed plan of
the Downtown Revitalization Project.
4/23/80
Page 1
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 2!2
PUBLIC SERVICES
4. Staff Report 4/23/80 - Continued.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION
OF AN "AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY
OF SAN MATEO AND THE CITY OF SOUTH
SAN FRANCISCO FOR THE GRAND AVENUE
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT" - ST-79-1
PUBLIC SERVICES
Director of Public Works Yee described
the changes between the original plan
and the proposed plan, i.e. the medium
in the center of Grand Avenue, land-
scapping, brick and exposed aggregate.
He spoke in-depth of the lighting,
planters, benches, widening the street
from 50 feet to 60 feet, painting of
all the fixtures in a uniform color.
He stated that the low bidder was
Huettig & Schromm for $1,312,670 and
the high bid was from McGuire & Hester
in the amount of $1,686,843. He
detailed the funding for the project
in the amount of $1,863,670.
Mayor Acosta invited the proponents
to speak in favor of the Project.
Mr. Joe Rousso, 340 Vallejo Drive,
Millbrae, California welcomed the new
members of the Council and congratulated
Mr. Yee and the members of the Steering
Committee of the Downtown Merchants on
a job well done. He felt this Project
was desperately needed for not only a
standpoint of asthetics but of safety.
The widening of the street he felt
would reduce the number of fender
benders, the sodium vapor lighting has
been proven in other parts of the nation
as precluding crime.~ He spoke of the
citizens who had brought suit to block
this action and stated that in a project
such as this there would always be
dissatisfied parties. He urged Council
to go ahead with this Project no matter
what happens and would like to see the
plan go through.
Mr. Dennis Rosaia, 536 Orange Ave., a
merchant from Grand Avenue extolled the
virtues of Mr. Yee's plan and felt this
project that would enhance this town.
This plan does not eliminate as many
parking places as the original plan does
and will encourage the merchants to fix
up their store fronts.
4/23/80
Page 2
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 212
PUBLIC SERVICES
4. Staff Report 4/23/80 - Continued.
(TF-109)
RECESS: (TF-161)
RECALL TO ORDER:
PUBLIC SERVICES
Mr. Rosaia said that in extrapolating
the assessement figures it would cost
the individual merchant $36.00 per
month to fix up his property and
felt that was a reasonable sum and
the end result would be a beautiful
downtown.
Mr. Milton Bronstein, 608 Lasson Street,
stated he had been in business on Grand
Avenue for 34 years and thought this
project was a long time in coming. He
felt that if it was not done there would
be metal gates in front of all the
stores and the rent would go down because
they will not be attacting businesses.
Mayor Acosta invited those in opposition
to the Project to speak.
Mrs. Helen Price, Redwood City, stated
she has had a business on Grand Avenue
for 43 years and felt she had under-
standing of the Peninsula. She stated
that her answer to revitalization is
an unequivocable no. She felt it was
wrong because of the soaring inflation
to put a further burden on the merchants.
She felt that parking was the most needed
thing and that revitalization has not
helped any of the other Peninsula cities.
Mr. Victor Brincat, 301 Linden Avenue,
presented a landscape drawing of the
Assessment District and said the object-
ion was that the school property was
not assessed and his school was assessed.
Mayor Acosta declared a recess at
8:44 p.m.
Mayor Acosta recalled the meeting to
order at 8:53 p.m., all Council present.
Sydney C. Flores, Esq., Attorney for
some of the Grand Avenue property owner%
he stated the property owners opposition
to the formation of this special assess-
ment district. He stated there were
4/23/80
Page 3
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
PUBLIC SERVICES
4. Staff Report 4/23/80 - Continued.
(TF-182)
PUBLIC SERVICES
several matters and these matters were
pending in the Court of Appeals in the
First Appellate District #4. He stated
that an Appellant's Brief had been sub-
mitted and the next step would be the
City's Response Brief. He continued
that the protest this evening encompasses
those matters before the Appellate Court:
1) Pursuant to Streets and Highways Code
28043 there were improper proceedings
conducted, in that there were not
sufficient signatures of the owners to
constitute 60% of the area of the property
subject to the assessments; 2) The
property owners did file an action in
response to the City's action to attempt
to validate the assessment bonds and
cross-complaint at that point in time
which he felt was appropriate procedural
aspect of this protest and he felt that
the protest back in April was valid
and constituted sufficient notice to
the Council at that time not to proceed;
3) There are also some substantive
Constitutional issues, i.e. the violation
of the First Amendment of the United
States Constitution - the exempting of
the Catholic Church on the upper part
of Grand Avenue which violates the
Constitution to the extent of its
entangling State powers with religious
preference. On that basis the exempting
of that religious institution is a
violation of the Constitution, and thus
also is to require failure of the 60%
requirement because one wOuld have had
to have their land constituting the 60%
required for signatures on the petition
to waive proceedings as to the special
investigative proceedings required, tf
you don't have 60% of the property owners
signing for a petition to waiver those
special proceedings, they can't be waived.
Sydney C. Flores, Esq. stated that the
property owners are well aware of
Council's attempt to come to some medium
and are rather appreciative of City
Council and City Staff attempting to
cut down the cost as much as possible
and bring the assessment down from $200
to $135, but given another basis for
4/23/80
Page 4
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
PUBLIC SERVICES
4. Staff Report 4/23/80 - Continued.
(TF-236)
(TF-244)
PUBLIC SERVICES
the protest, there were property owners
given representation by Staff that the
assessment would not exceed $100 a foot
and on that basis they are protesting
what is now $135. Essentially what,bis
clients instructed him to do is proceed
if Council does entertain proceeding on
this matter he will file an Injunction
requi'ring that the City not proceed
pending appeal on this action until a
decision is made by the Appellate Court
as to the validity of the property
owners protest - their claims that the
Revitalization District has improperly
proceeded substantively.
A discussion followed between Vice Mayor
Nicolopulos and Mr. Flores on the 60%
requirement necessary to waive the
special proceedings, whether someone
signing the petition could withdraw
their support after they had signed,
the exemption of the Church, etc.
Mayor Acosta declared the Public Hearing
closed.
Councilwoman Teglia requested Mr. Jones,
Attorney for the Assessment District,
to comment on the exemption of the school
property and the political reforms that
the gentleman spoke about. She made
reference to property she owned and
perhaps there was conflict.
Mr. Jones, Attorney, asked that the
Hearing be reopened before he spoke
so that it would all be part of the
record.
Mayor Acosta reopened the Hearing.
Mr. Jones, Esq. explained that beautific-
ation enhances the value of the property
and improvements such as curbs and
gutters also enhance the property. He
stated that the the Church property was
exempted because of the lack of access,
the physical existence of a retaining
wall and the considerable slope that
continues up behind the 7 foot retain-
ing wall - and not because it was a
church. 4/~3/80
Page 5
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
PUBLIC SERVICES
4. Staff Report 4/23/80 - Continued.
PUBLIC SERVICES
He continued, that the recommendation
by the engineers and himself was to
exempt the property because of the
frontage, if this is wrong then the
Court will tell us it is wrong.
Mr. Jones rebutted Mr. Flores testimony
and stated that a Validating Suit had
been filed by the City and Mr. Flores
Answered and filed a Cross-Complaint
and raised issues over and above
Proposition 13 including the violation
of the Federal Reform Act and the non-
assessment of the Church frontage and
other issues. The matters were sub-
mitted to the Superior Court of this
County and the Court held, for various
reasons, that there was no merit for
those allegations and entered a
judgment for the City. This was a
final judgment subject to appeal and
Mr. Flores has appealed it and those
questions are now pending before the
Court of Appeals. He stated that a
Mr. Aubrey from his office has been
personally handling the case.
Mr. Jones stated that the petition was
circulated among the property owners,
signed and filed. Mr. Yee compared the
signatures with the owners of record
in the County Assessors Office and then
filed a formal certification with the
City Clerk which stated that the signi-
tures represented the owners of more
than 60% of the area of the property
proposed to be assessed. The Council
received that petition and that certif-
icate and made a formal determination
by Resolution that the signatures did
represent more than 60% of the area.
He stated that the Court ruling stated
there was no violation of the Political
Reform Act in that ownership of land
was land that was not within the bounds
of the Assessment District and came to
the substantive conclusion that that was
not a factor in deciding the fate of
the Assessment District.
4/23/80
Page 6
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
PUBLIC SERVICES
4. Staff Report 4/23/80 - Continued.
(TF-312)
PUBLIC SERVICES
Sydney C. Flores, Esq. stated that he
was involved in the litigation and the
transcript is clear but the Judge indic-
ates that this matter has to go up and
he really did not get to the substantive
issues as to whether or not there was
a violation of the Political Reform Act
or what. The Judge was just looking
proceedurally at expediting this matter,
the only substantive matters he discussed
with Mr. Aubry and myself were the pro-
cedural aspects of this case such as
whether or not particular statutes of
the Streets and Highways Code would
preclude a Court action being brought
against the City.
Mayor Acosta stated that in order to
file an appeal there must be a Court
judgment on file to be appealed and
if a judgment was rendered then it
had to be based on some basis and
his written judgment is what decides it.
Mayor Acosta stated that parking had
been one of the issues raised and asked
one of the Parking Place Commissioners
to speak on the issue.
Mr. John Penna, Parking Place Commissioner,
presented some of the alternatives the
Commission has been working on for
increased parking; Walnut Avenue becoming
one-way street going south and putting
parking on each side, there are studies
being made for parking on Cypress Avenue
and Maple Avenue
Mr. Milton Bronstein expressed concern
that if the appeal takes longer than
80 days what would happen to the firm-
ness of the price of the revitalization
and if the opposition loses the case
if there was to be restitution of the
monies to the property owners.
4/23/80
Page 7
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
PUBLIC SERVICES
4. Staff Report 4/23/80 - Continued.
(TF-337)
(TF-349)
PUBLIC SERVICES
Mr. Jones stated that the City has a
firm bid for the work and if the City
decides to proceed then the contract
can be awarded, if the contract is
awarded without disposing of the
litigation then the sale of the bonds
would be most difficult. People do
not want to buy bonds when there is
litigation going on, so if the City
decides to proceed then the City has
to be prepared to carry the cost of
the Project until the litigation is
resolved. If the ultimate disposition
of the case is favorable to the City
then the City can sell the bonds and
recoup the money the City had to
advance in the meantime. If the
opponents of the Project filed an
injunction against the work going ahead,
the Court should require that they post
a bond to assure the City restitution
in the event of loss because the
litigation disposition was unfavorable
to them.
Mrs. Helen Price asked that the three
lowest bids be reiterated by Mr. Yee.
Mayor Acosta declared the Public Hearing
closed.
M/S Teglia/Damonte - To adopt a Resolution
approving the Modified Engineer's Report.
RESOLUTION NO. 39-80
Carried by unanimous roll call vote.
Motion by Teglia - To adopt a Resolution
changing the maximum interest rate.
RESOLUTION NO. 40-80
Carried by unanimous roll call vote.
Mayor Acosta stated that his policy was
that on a Resolution someone would intro-
duce the Resolution and there would be
a roll call vote, if it is a Motion then
there would be a Motion and a Second
and the vote.
4/23/80
Page 8
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
PUBLIC SERVICES
4. Staff Report 4/23/80 - Continued.
Staff Report 4/23/80 - requesting a
Motion authorizing the City Manager
to forward communications to the
California Transportation Commission
objecting to the proposed changes in
the Local/State cost sharing polic-
ies for crossings of and connections
to freeway and expressways.
(TF-361)
o
e
Letter from Scampini, Mortara & Harris
requesting a change in the Public
Hearing date from May 7, 1980 to
May 21, 1980 for the Southland Corp.
(7-11 Food Store) UP-79-529.
Request for a recommendation on the
endangered species (butterflies) on
South Slope.
A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE PROTECTION
OF ENDANGERED SPECIES ON SAN BRUNO
MOUNTAIN
PUBLIC SERVICES
Motion by Teglia - To adopt a Resolution
authorizing execution of an Agreement
with the County.
RESOLUTION NO. 41-80
Carried by unanimous roll call vote.
M/S Teglia/Addiego - To authorize the
City Manager to forward communications
to the California Transportation
Commission.
A discussion followed on the State
assuming the responsibility and expense
for construction of necessary freeway
crossings and connections of local roads.
Carried by unanimous roll call vote.
Consensus of Council to approve the
date of May 21, 1980 for a Public
Hearing on the Southland Corporation.
Council discussed the legal requirement
of notice within 300 feet of a proposed
Use Permit Appeal.
City Manager Birkelo stated that this
Resolution requested the United States
Department of the Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service, to seriously consider
the needs of the local community in its
designation of critical habitat bound-
aries for the Callippe Silverspot
Butterfly and to provide technical
assistance which will address endangered
species concerns in the planning for
necessary development of the south
slope of San Bruno Mountain.
City Manager Birkelo gave the history
of the various meetings and in-depth
description of the areas adversely
affected by being included in the
boundary lines and asked that full
consideration be given to the City of
South San Francisco in its final desig-
nation of critical habitat boundary lines.
4/23/80
Page 9
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 220
PUBLIC SERVICES
3. Request for a recommendation - Cont.
(TF-485)
PUBLIC SERVICES
A discussion followed on the habits
and eating preferences of the butterfly,
ability to move the butterflies to
another location, penalties of exter-
mination of the butterflies, housing
needs of the redevelopment process.
Mr. Jim Keegan, 1244 Crestwood Drive,
asked that the Resolution be read
to the audience.
City Manager Birkelo read the Resolution
into the record.
Motion by Teglia - to adopt the
Resolution.
Mr. Jim Keegan expressed concern that
Staff was giving arguments in favor
of the development of San Bruno Mountain
and he felt this was not the time to
be doing that. He cited the Planning
Commissioner who was reprimanded by
Council six months ago for prejudging
the south slope project by saying that
he favored the project and that he
would do whatever he could to further
the project. He felt the Resolution
gave support to the development when
there had not been public input or
environmental impact reports prepared
on the south slope development and
that the butterfly question only should
be discussed.
Mayor Acosta stated that this was nOt
a position paper but was addressing the
issue of an endangered species of
butterflies. It is not saying that San
Bruno Mountain will be developed, what
it is saying is that it may prevent
development of San Bruno Mountain.
A discussion followed on the County
Resolution referrin9 to the urgent need
for affordable housing on the south
slope of San Bruno Mountain to include
20% of low and moderate income housing
which would require Federal Agency par-
ticipation and does not mention the
commercial and industrial.
4/23/80
Page 10
AGENDA
PUBLIC SERVICES
3. Request for a recommendation - Cont.
(TF-618)
ITEMS FROM COUNCIL
GOOD AND WELFARE
(TF-644)
ACTION TAKEN
PUBLIC SERVICES
Councilman Addiego stated he had not
seen plans for affordable housing
and did not understand why these were
included in the Resolution.
A discussion followed on the Hillside
Development and the Federal Funds
involved.
Mayor Acosta called for a roll call vote
on the Resolution that was introduced
for the protection of the endangered
species of butterfly.
RESOLUTION NO. 42-80
Carried by majority roll call vote,
Councilwoman Teglia and Councilman
Addiego voting no.
ITEMS FROM COUNCIL
Mayor Acosta said that a meeting was
held at City Hall on bikers and San
Bruno Mountain as to its use. Supervisor
John Ward, members of the Citizens Action
League - Mr. Latham, Mr. Casey and the
Mayor, Chief of Policeand some bikers
were in attendance. There is a Task
Force set up by the County and locations
have been tenatively set for the motor-
cyles in different areas of the County
and considerations will have to be
given by the Cities to designated areas
set up for cyclists.
GOOD AND WELFARE
Mr. John Penna stated that on San Bruno
Mountain there is a 4,000-7,000 year old
Indian Village Site and stated that he
had seen bike tracks on the site and
thought it would produce damage to the
artifacts.
Ms. Teresa Latham, 495 Holly, asked if
the City had the authority to remove the
sewer service if it found that an approval
had been given for a Colma sewer hookup
for a single family residence and after
the connection had changed the use to
4/23/80
Page !!
A G E N DA A CT I O N TA KE N. 2~-~,~.
GOOD AND WELFARE
ADJOURNMENT TO STUDY SESSION:
(TF-717)
RECALL TO ORDER:
(TF-909)
ADJOURNMENT
GOOD AND WELFARE
a duplex.
Director of Public Services Yee stated
that if Council gave the approval for
a sewer hookup for a single family
dwelling and that was later changed to
a duplex that Council could discontinue
the connection.
Mr. Ronald Brown, 217 Country Club Drive,
stated that the Habitat Group is trying
to obtain a permit to build a 39 unit
apartment building on Blondin Way, yet
on this same property they were going to
build a 36 unit condominium and Cits]
Planning Commission had required a
scoped environmental impact report.
He questioned why whether a condo or
an apartment house was to be built on
Blondin Way why the same scoped envir-
onmental impact report was not required.
City Manager Birkelo stated that yes
Habitat had made application for a
permit and if they meet the Code
requirements then the permit would be
approved.
MaYor Acosta directed the City Manager
to check the matter out with the City
Attorney.
Mayor Acosta adjourned the meeting to
a Study Session at 10:39 p.m.
Mayor Acosta recalled the meeting to
order at ll:20 p.m.
M/S Damonte/Teglia - That the meeting
be adjourned.
Carried by unanimous voice vote.
Time of adjournment: 11:23 p.m.
4/23/80
Page 12
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
APPROVED:
'Barbara A. Battaya, Clt~Clerk
City of South San Francisco
Ronald G. Acosta, Mayor
City of South San Francisco
The entries of this Council meeting show the action taken by the City Council to
dispose of the item. Oral presentations, arguments, and comments are recorded on
tape. The tape and documents related to the items are on file in the office of
the City Clerk and available for inspection, review and copying.
4/23/80
Page 13