Loading...
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