Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1981-02-18Mayor Ronald G. Acosta Vice Mayor Gus Nicolopulos Council: Mark N. Addiego Emanuele N. Damonte Roberta Cerri Teglia MINUTES ~ CITY COUNCIL W. Orange Avenue Library Auditorium February 18, 1981 AGENDA Regul ar Meeting CALL TO ORDER (Side 1 TF-OO1) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AGENDA REVIEW City Manager Birkelo Requested: - Remove Item #3 from the Consent Calendar for discussion. - Closed Session for discussion of litigation and personnel items - Depending upon action taken on Item #3, request to adjourn to the Municipal Services Building for a review with the architect. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of 12/17/80. 2. Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending by Motion authorization to award the bid for Physical Fitness Equip- ment for the Municipal Services Building. 3. Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending by Motion authorization to accept the bid for Artwork and Accessories for the Municipal Services Building. ACTION TAKEN Regul ar Meeting 8:08 p.m. Mayor Acosta presiding. Council present: Teglia, Damonte, Nicolopulos, Addiego and Acosta Council absent: None Recited. AGENDA REVIEW So ordered. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS No one chose to speak. CONSENT CALENDAR Approved. Removed from Consent Calendar by Councilman Addiego. Removed from Consent Calendar under Agenda Review. 2/18/81 Page 1 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN CONSENT CALENDAR 4. Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending by Motion authorization to acquire from the State of California Pro- curement Office fourteen 1981 mid- size model Dodge Diplomat patrol vehicles. 5. Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending adoption of a Resolution of Inten- tion to vacate a portion of Eucalyptus Avenue and set a Public Hearing on 4/1/81. A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO VACATE A PORTION OF EUCALYPTUS AVENUE e Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending by Motion authorization to award the bid for Physical Fitness Equip- ment for the Municipal Services Building. (TF-022) CONSENT CALEDNAR Removed from Consent Calendar by Mayor Acosta. RESOLUTION NO. 18-81 M/S Damonte/Teglia - That Items No. 1 and 5 of the Consent Calendar be approved. Carried by unanimous voice vote. Councilwoman Teglia inquired where the funding for the Physical Fitness Equipment would be derived. She requested clarification that it was not coming from the Police Department's Budget but rather from the overall City Budget and would be for the use of all personnel. Director of Finance Anderson replied that the monies could come from the City's General Fund Reserve, recognizing that the reserves will be increased year end by salary savings. He con- tinued by explaining the reason for this through unfilled positions. Discussion followed in regard to the use of the equipment by other Depart- ments. M/S Teglia/Addiego - To award the bid. Carried by unanimous voice vote. 2/18/81 Page 2 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending by Motion authorization to accept the bid for Artwork and Accessories for the Municipal Services Building. (TF-047) Director of Finance Anderson explained that this was for the proposed award of bids for various items in the Municipal Services Building. He con- tinued by explaining the items and their related costs. Vice Mayor Nicolopulos inquired about the $8,298 cost for maintenance of the plants and if it would be feasible for this service to be provided in-house. Director of Parks and Recreation Norton explained that at the present time there was not enough manpower in the Parks Division to maintain this area. Discussion followed regarding the proposed maintenance of the outdoor grounds, the cost comparison for con- tracting out for these services versus using Park personnel, the furniture and other related items. An in-depth discussion followed re- garding the artwork and the overall cost for the prints and where they were to be positioned. M/S Teglia/Addiego - To accept the bids, with the exception of General Graphics in the amount of $10,000, Fiberlite in the amount of $11,774, and Fiberlite in the amount of $8,298.02. Carried by unanimous voice vote. City Manager Birkelo requested at this time that Council consider a date and time to meet at the Municipal Services Building, with the architect, to con- sider the items not accepted this even- ing. Consensus of Council to meet at the Municipal Services Building on Tuesday, February 24, 1981, at 12:00 p.m. 2/18/81 Page 3 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending by Motion authorization to acquire from the State of California Pro- curement Office fourteen 1981 mid- size model Dodge Diplomat patrol vehicles. (TF-158) APPROVAL OF BILLS 6. Approval of the Regular Bills of 2/18/81. (TF-208) Vice Mayor Nicolopulos questioned the cost of each vehicle. Director of Finance Anderson replied that the cost would be in the vicinity of $8,600 for each vehicle. Discussion followed on the turnover rate for Police vehicles, the process of maintenance, the procedure for selling the surplus vehicles, etc. M/S Teglia/Nicolopulos - To approve the authorization. Carried by unanimous voice vote. APPROVAL OF BILLS M/S Teglia/Nicolopulos - To approve the Regular Bills. Carried by unanimous voice vote. Councilman Addiego did not participate or vote in the matter of the claim of Brentwood Market. Mayor Acosta inquired if the City, in it's agreement with Giffra Enter- prises, had agreed to pay the taxes for 230 - 232 Grand Avenue which the City was renting for $1,000 @ month. Director of Finance Anderson replied that the contract provides that the City would be responsible for any improvements or any tax increases by reason of improvement to the property. The increase in normal taxes is not covered, but increase by reason of improvements were covered and reimburse- able. Discussion followed regarding the types of leases which the City had with other lessees and the benefits received from Proposition 13 and tax savings. 2/18/81 Page 4 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN CITY MANAGER w Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending adoption of a Resolution amending Personnel Rule 5.03 Residency Requirements. A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 118-80 ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS, 1980 EDITION, AND SUPERSEDING PREVIOUS EDITIONS" AND SECTION 5.03 - RESIDENCY REQUIRE- MENTS (TF-231) CITY MANAGER Assistant to City Manager Wilson explained that at the request of some City employees, the Personnel Board had reviewed a section of the Rules and Regulations regarding residency. He continued to explain the areas of con- cern for the employees, which was the hSgh cost of housing a~ailable in the area. He continued to explain the concerns of the Personnel Board which were: tardiness, manpower in the event of an emergency, hinderance of the City's ability to physically verify the ill- ness of personnel and various other concerns. He continued further to explain that the Board, after careful consideration, is recommending that the residency requirements be modified to allow City employees to reside within a 75 mile radius. An in-depth discussion followed on the incentives which were offered by other cities in the Bay Area to attract and retain quality personnel by offering low cost housing and lower interest rates on home loans. Also discussed was the time that employees would conceivably be traveling to and from work if they were to live 75 miles from their place of employment. Further discussion followed relative to the response time of employees in the event of an earthquake or other disaster. Mr. Ray Green, Vice President of Local 1507 and representing the South San Francisco Firefighters, explained that the 75 mile radius was what the majority of the cities in the Bay Area require at the present, and that it encompassed the 9 Bay Area Counties. He further explained that the main concerns of the Firefighters was the costs of homes and rental units. 2/18/81 Page 5 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN CITY MANAGER 7. Staff Report - Continued. CITY MANAGER Mayor Acosta expressed concern that if the 75 mile radius was approved and employees move - would it be fair to assume that they would look for em- ployment closer to their residences. Discussion followed regarding the high cost for homes within the present 25 mile radius, the need for employees to be able to purchase homes for affordable prices, etc. Motion by Addiego - To adopt the Resolution with the amendment that in place of the 75 mile radius, that an unlimited radius be inserted. Discussion ensued on the problems which could arise if this was adopted. Councilwoman Teglia read into the record the 5 findings of the Personnel Board which resulted in the recommen- dation of a 75 miles radius. Vice Mayor Nicolopulos inquired if there had been specific reasons why the Personnel Board had recommended the 75 mile radius rather than an unlimited radius. Mr. Ray Green replied, that it had been recommended because it included the 9 Bay Area Counties. Mayor Acosta asked if there was a Second to Councilman Addiego's Motion. Motion Seconded by Councilwoman Teglia. City Manager Birkelo explained that there would be no residency requirements and would delete that section of the Personnel Rules and Regulations. Councilwoman Teglia asked how that would affect Department Heads. 2/18/81 Page 6 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN CITY MANAGER 7. Staff Report -Continued. RECESS: RECALL TO ORDER: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 12. Public Hearing - UP-80-563/Joseph P. & Claire Haggarty Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Planning Commission, approving UP-80-563 and Negative Declaration No. 274. (TF-494) CITY MANAGER Acting City Attorney Rogers explained that legally a Department Head could not be required at this time to live within the City's boundaries. He continued to explain that they had the same status as other employees. Councilman Addiego asked that his Motion read: "strike Section 5.03, Residency Requirements of the Personnel Rules and Regulations." Mayor Acosta called for a vote on the Motion and Second. The Motion and Second failed by majority roll call vote. Damonte, Nicolopulos and Acosta voted no, Motion by Nicolopulos - To adopt the Resolution. Carri~ed by majority roll call vote. Councilman Damonte voting no. Mayor Acosta declared a recess at 9:35 p.m. Mayor Acosta recalled the meeting to order at 9:45 p.m., all Council present. Mayor Acosta announced that Item No. 12 under Community Development would be heard next. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Senior Planner Christians explained that the Planning Commission had approved the subject Use Permit and Negative Declaration on 1/15/81 to construct a mini-storage complex. He continued to explain that the Planning Commission had approved the Use Permit based on five findings: two of the findings were that the pro- posed facility would provide needed smaller storage space for Westborough 2/18/81 Page 7 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 12. Public Hearing - Continued. Public Hearing Opened: (TF-514) (TF-583) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT residents and that the project would not have an adverse effect on the surrounding residents. He further explained that 4 Public Hearings were held on this item and the area's residents generally spoke in favor of the application, however, at the hear- ing of 1/15/81 a petition containing 24 names was submitted in opposition to the application. He also explained that specific conditions of approval were set by the Planning Commission to mitigate any adverse effects on the surrounding area caused by the project. Mayor Acosta declared the Public Hearing open. Mayor Acosta invited those who wished to speak in opposition to the Use Permit to step to the dais. Mr. Donald G. Gamma, 3790 Cork Place, read his letter to Council expressing his concerns with the construction of the subject mini-storage unit complex and related facilities. He cited the increasing crime rate in the Westborough area in comparison with other areas of South San Francisco. He requested the City Council return this matter to the Planning Commission, thereby giving the homeowners the· opportunity to meet with the Planning Department and Mr. Haggarty to possibly come up with a better solution. He continued to explain that he had written a letter to Council previously advising them that the homeowners in this area have never been notified of these plans. Mr. William Craib, 3550 Carter Drive, Unit #48, spoke in relation to the manner in which residents were notified of public hearings and his frustration at not being able to speak at a Planning Commission Meeting when the Haggarty matter had been postponed. He felt that 2/18/81 Page 8 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 9 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 12. Public Hearing - Continued. (TF-614) (TF-660) (TF-668) (TF-690) (TF-707) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT with the construction of the storage units there would be increased traffic and the crime rate would rise to a higher incidence level. Mr. Michael Dewey, 3550 Carter Drive, Unit #83, explained that he was a new resident in the Westborough area and had purchased his condominium based on the fact that the area offered an opportunity to be close to his work. He stated that the construction would block his view and that it would diminish the resale value of his home. Mayor Acosta invited those who wished to speak in favor of the Use Permit to step to the dais. Ms. Mary Price, resident of the Westborough area, requested that Council approve the Use Permit because the storage facilities were needed by many of the residents. Ms. Virginia Connor, 2525 Tara Lane, expressed her desire that the storage complex be built and would have use for its facilities. She continued to explain that she had previously worked for a storage company and during her years of service had not known of incidents of vandalism or increased traffic or other deterrants in the area. Mr. John Diva, 3705 Palos Verdes Way, explained that he was very much in favor of the storage complex being built and felt that the area was in need of this type of facility. Ms. Raquel Benavides, 217 Village Way, spoke in favor of the storage complex and explained that she was planning to store her household items there once construction was completed. 2/18/81 Page 9 AGENDA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 12. Public Hearing - Continued. (TF-715) (TF-732) Public Hearing Closed: ACTION TAKEN i0 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ms. Lisa Nelson, 852 Commercial Avenue, expressed her desire to have the storage complex built so that there would be space for her family to store items which they were no longer using. Mr. Daniel Modena, Attorney at Law 421 Grand Avenue, legal representative for Mr. Joseph Haggarty, expressed dismay at the opposition when the matter had been approved and that the opposition claims to have been unaware of the pro- ceedings which took place before the Planning Commission. He continued by presenting to the Council a visual concept of the storage area to be constructed and further addressed the concerns of the opponents of the Use Permit. He continued by informing the Council that Mr. Haggarty had met with homeowners in the area and discussed the concerns and had tried to work out compromises so that the residents would be satisfied with the proposed development. Mr. Modena presented slides to Council of the condominiums which would be affected by the construction of the mini-storage complex and pointed out that in no way was this storage complex going to have negative effects on the surrounding area. Mayor Acosta closed the Public Hearing. Discussion followed on the crime factor and the concerns of traffic with relation to the construction of the mini-storage complex. Councilwoman Teglia inquired if the opponents to this project had had an opportunity to read what the Planning Commission approved and the revised special conditions that have been placed on this project. 2/18/81 Page lO AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 11 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 12. Public Hearing - Continued. (TF-949) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Mr. Gamma and Mr. Craib replied that no, they were not aware of what the Planning Commission had approved and also not aware of the revised special conditions. Discussion followed concerning these conditions. Senior Planner Christians read the revised special conditions which had been placed on the project. Councilwoman Teglia explained that 6 of the 20 conditions recited, addressed either directly or indirecty the potential crime situation. Councilwoman Teglia continued by requesting that Police Chief Datzman present his comments on the previous statements on crime relating to this particular type of use and what the Police Department had in mind in terms of a security plan for this particular project. Police Chief Datzman replied, that the concerns of crime in the Westborough area were burgulary related and this was largely attributed to a number of things: density, open green concept, hidden front doors and lack of neighborhood contact. He con- tinued by stating that he felt it was not the Police Department's job to say yes or no to this type of project unless it was clearly shown that the development would have an adverse community effect that was endangering the public or creating a need for excessive police resources. He did recommend safety measures and this was addressed in the report submitted in regard to this Use Permit. Discussion followed on other uses for the subject property. 2/18/81 Page 11 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 12. Public Hearing - Continued. (TF-1020) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 10. Public Hearing - UP-80-570/ McDonald's Corporation (Airport Boulevard) Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Planning Commission in denying UP-80-570, a Use Permit appli- cation to construct a McDonald's drive-through fast food restaurant at the northwest corner of South Airport Blvd. and Highway 101 northbound on-ramp. (TF-1038) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Councilwoman Teglia inquired why the various homeowner associations in the Westborough area were not notified of the Public Hearings on this Use Permit. Senior Planner Christians replied that the two homeowner associations affected by this construction had been notified. M/S Addiego/Nicolopulos - To deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Planning Commission. Carried by unanimous voice vote. Mayor Acosta requested a review of the remaining Agenda. City Manager Birkelo replied that there were three remaining Public Hearings on the Agenda which should be heard and the remainder of the items could be continued. Discussion of the importance of the various items ensued. Consensus of Council to hear the Public Hearings and if time allowed to consider the remaining items. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Director of Community Development Dell'Angela explained, the Planning Commission on 12/9/80 denied the subject Use Permit and made 5 findings which are contained in the Planning Commission Staff Report dated 12/9/80. He further explained the concerns raised by the Planning Commission and by City Staff which was the traffic flow; that if the City allowed this particular use it would be difficult to prohibit other fast food restaurants from apply- ing for use in that area; certain architectural features of the building; signs proposed for the site; possible crime and vandalism in the area; parking; and pedestrian safety. 2/18/81 Page 12 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 12 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 10. Public Hearing - Continued. Public Hearing Opened: (TF-1104) (TF-1204) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Vice Mayor Nicolopulos inquired where the pedestrian traffic would be anti- cipated. Director of Community Development Dell'Angela explained that it was largely anticipated from the nearby hotels and motels and the problem would arise when persons would be crossing on the ramps and on the six lanes of traffic along Airport Boulevard. He continued to explain that no provisions had been made to protect pedestrians in this area. Mayor Acosta declared the Public Hearing open. Mayor Acosta invited those who wished to speak on behalf of the appellant to step to the dais. Mr. Xenophon Tragoutsis, Attorney at Law, 1486 Huntington Avenue, legal representative for McDonald's Corpora- tion, expressed the need for a fast food restaurant in the area in question. He explained that the facilities presently located in that area catered to the managerial and executives of the surrounding com- panies. He continued by stating that the cost and the time involved for the average working person was too great to avail their using these establishments. He further addressed the concerns of Staff explaining in detail the positive effects of having a McDonald's Restaurant in this loca- tion and stated that his client would be willing to work with the City's Staff to accommodate the concerns of the City. Mr. Barnard C. Johnston, 415 Monticello Street, San Francisco, Professional Civil and Traffic Engineer, presented to Council copies of his latest traffic report relating to the proposed McDonald's Restaurant. He proceeded to explain that he had been retained by /18/ 1 age I~ AGENDA ACTION TAKEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 10. Public Hearing -Continued. (TF-1372) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT the McDonald's Corporation to prepare this report and had observed the pro- posed site in relation to the traffic conditions at various times of the day; counted cars; in general observed con- ditions during the critical hours of traffic flow. Mayor Acosta inquired if the statement which had been related was true, that there could be a 750% increase in traffic on the proposed site if the Use Permit was granted. Mr. Johnston replied that the correct percentage would be 650%, which re- presented 3,000 vehicle trips in and out of the proposed site per day. He continued to address the concerns of Council and Staff in relation to the number of cars during peak hours; the egress and ingress in re- lation to McDonald's and the various other concerns relative to pedestrian and traffic safety. Mayor Acosta questioned the hours the restaurant would be open for business. Mr. Larry Dorsey, representative from McDonald's Corporation, replied that the hours would be either 6:30 or 7:00 a.m. to ll:O0 or 12:00 p.m. Mr. Johnston further explained the traffic report. Mayor Acosta inquired if there had been access ways for pedestrians to accommodate getting from the eastside to the westside. Mr. Johnston explained the plan which had been included in the report. Discussion ensued relating to the possibility of a sidewalk being installed and adding another cross- walk in the future, should pedestrian traffic indicate the need. 2/18/81 Page 14 AGENDA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 10. Public Hearing - Continued. (TF-1609) (TF-1682) ACTION TAKEN 15 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Mayor Acosta inquired if there was any data in relation to accident frequency in the subject area. Mr. Johnston replied that he had the records for 1978, 1979 and 1980, relating to accidents in the vicinity of the proposed McDonald's site and explained that there were accidents occurring which involved rear-end collisions at the signals; problems with trucks negogiating turns at the corners and other minor accidents. He continued by explaining that there were only two accidents which occurred in the 1979-80 time span which involved personal injury and they were minor. Discussion followed regarding the amount of traffic which would be traveling along Airport Boulevard, the amount of pedestrian traffic, safety factors involved, consideration of various types of signs, etc. Mr. Dorsey, McDonald's representative, addressed Council concerns with the proposed Use Permit. He explained that McDonald's Corporation is recep- tive to meeting the conditions re- commended by staff in relation to the entrances to the on-ramp and the subsequent traffic problems. Further discussion followed entailing the concerns of the traffic situation and the problems with communication between the City Staff, Council and the developer. Mr. Tragoutsis said Council had not received the revised traffic report and requested that the consideration of this project be continued for further information to be submitted to Council. Discussion followed regarding the type of restaurant proposed: sit-down, drive-through or drive-in, standards 2/18/81 Page 15 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 16 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 10. Public Hearing - Continued. (TF-1770) (Side 1 - TF-O06) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT to be met, potential crime element, etc. Police Chief Datzman explained that the area had been investigated and a subsequent report had been sub- mitted regarding the things to be taken into consideration for this type of development. Motion by Teglia - To uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal. Vice Mayor Nicolopulos requested clarification of the Use Permit being applied for and its denial. Acting City Attorney Rogers explained: the question of the parking, sit-down restaurant versus a drive-in because the requirements for parking for each is different. The decision will be related to the type of use decided upon and the consideration of the zoning ordinance. He continued to explain that based upon the knowledge he has gathered that the decision should be based upon the appropriate uses of a drive-in. M/S Damonte/Nicolopulos - To continue this item for two weeks. Councilman Addiego explained that he had been contacted by Mr. Basin, a legal representative of McDonald's Corporation, to meet and discuss any concerns Councilman Addiego may have had regarding the project and further indicated that they might go to lunch. A meeting was subsequently scheduled in City Hall. He comtinued to explain that Acting City Attorney Rogers subsequent to the scheduling of the meeting to be held in City Hall, indicated that it would not be advisable to lunch with Mr. Basin in that he had met two other members of Council. Councilman Addiego requested the names of the members of Council who had met with Mr. Basin, the terms under which they 2/18/81 Page 16 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 10. Public Hearing -Continued. (TF-O14) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT had met and the topic of conversation. Mr. Basin replied that the meetings had been with Vice Mayor Nicolopulos and Mayor Acosta separately. He continued to explain that the three remaining members of Council had been contacted and he had indicated beforehand the purpose of the meeting, to discuss the particular concerns each Councilmember would like addressed at the Public Hearing to adequately present all the information to consider the issue. Councilman Addiego inquired where the meetings had been held, the topic of conversations and other pertinent information. Mr. Basin replied that the meetings with both members of Council had been held at the Holiday Inn, during the lunch hour. The discussions pertained to the McDonald's application for a Use Permit and the remainder of the conversation was of a general nature and did not pertain to the McDonald'm matter. Mayor Acosta requested that Acting City Attorney Rogers clarify this matter for the purpose of informing the general public of the ruling of the Attorney General and its implica- tions on Council. An in-depth discussion ensued regarding the pros and cons of Council meeting with members of the community to dis- cuss their concern$;'the difference of meeting with appellants involved in a forthcoming PUblic Hearing where Council will be making a decision based on the information submitted at the Public Hearing and not at a previously discussed private meeting. Acting City Attorney Rogers explained that the attorneys representing 2/18/81 Page 17 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 10. Public Hearing - Continued. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT McDonald's had the right to contact Councilmembers and if put in terms of lobbying, they had the right to put forth their positions. The Attorney General's opinion was in fact that if a Redevelopment Agency and City Council met without having a quorum of either agency with others and briefed their agency of these meetings prior to an agency meeting, but they did give an indication of their vote, the Attorney General's opinion said that these were meetings in violation of the Brown Act. The Brown Act says "that you may not meet in private with a quorum or more than a quorum of your body except in certain limited situations," the Closed Session is the main example. He continued to explain that he had spoken with the gentlemen who wrote the opinion and that yes, a private citizen could meet in private without a quorum of Council and be in violation of the Brown Act. The issue of whether or not a person lobbying individual members until he had a quorum, was an item which had been discussed at great length by many attorneys and had not been answered nor had an opinion been expressed. He explained that with an individual meeting of Council, amount- ing to a quorum, with an individual who had a pending item before Council it could appear to be a violation of the Brown Act. He stated that all in- formation regarding a Public Hearing should only be considered and dis- cussed at a Public Hearing and open to the public. Discussion followed on the various interpretations of the Brown Act and its effect on the actions of the Council as a body and as individuals with relation to meeting with constituents. Mayor Acosta called for a vote on the Motion to continue the Public Hearing for two weeks. 2/18/81 Page 18 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 10. Public Hearing - Continued. ll. Public Hearing - UP-80-573/ Neftali Tinoco Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Planning Commission in denying UP-80-573, a Use Permit application to add additions to two rooms in an existing non-conforming structure located at 658 Baden Avenue. CITY MANAGER e Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending adoption of a Resolution approving a contract with San Mateo County for Library Management Services. 0 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO FOR PROVISION OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO LIBRARY Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending adoption of a Resolution amending the South San Francisco Employee Classification Plan by the addition and modification of certain classes. A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO EMPLOYEE CLASSIFICATION PLAN BY THE ADDITION AND MODIFICA- TION OF CERTAIN CLASSES COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Director of Community Development Dell'Angela expressed his concerns that the findings of the Planning Commission would not be altered with a continuance of two weeks. Carried by majority voice vote. Councilmembers Addiego and Teglia voted no. Consensus of Council to continue to 3/4/81. CITY MANAGER Consensus of Council to continue to 2/24/81. Consensus of Council to continue to 2/24/81. 2/18/81 Page 19 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN FIRE 13. Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending the adoption of an Ordinance adopt- ing the Uniform Fire Code, 1979 Edition; 1) Waive the reading of the Ordinance in its entirety and that the Ordinance be passed and adopted by reading title only; 2) Introduce and read for the first time. 1st Reading/Introduction AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO ADOPTING THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE, 1979 EDITION, INCLUDING APPENDICES A THROUGH J, AND THE STANDARDS, PRINCIPLES, TESTS, METHODS, PUBLICATIONS AND SECONDARY CODES REFERRED TO THEREIN OR ADOPTED THEREIN BY REFERENCE: PROVIDING PERMITS AND FEES THEREFOR: AND RE- PEALING ORDINANCES 535, 654, 697, 716, 738 AND 746 PARK AND RECREATION 14. Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending adoption of a Resolution approving the Priority Plan as adopted by the Technical Committee of San Mateo County. A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE PRIORTIY PLAN FOR EXPENDITURE PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA PARKLANDS ACT OF 1980 POLI CE ~ ~ 15. Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending adoption of an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 825-80 on Building Security; 1) Waive the reading of the Ordinance in its entirety and that the Ordinance be passed and adopted by reading title only; 2) That it be passed and adopted. 2nd Reading/Adoption AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 825-80 AND ADDING A PROVISION FOR ADDITIONAL SECURITY MEASURES FOR COMPLEX PRODUCTS FIRE Consensus of Council to continue to 3/4/81. PARK AND RECREATION Consensus of Council to continue to 2/24/81. POLICE Consensus of Council to continue to 2/24/81. 2/18/81 Page 20 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 2][ PUBLIC SERVICES 16. Public Hearing - Hillside Estates Subdivision Vaca- tion of Slope and Drainage. Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending l) conduct a Public Hearing and 2) adopt a Resolution ordering vaca- tion of a public service easement southwest of Chestnut Avenue and Hillside Blvd. 17. A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE VACATION OF A PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT - EXISTING SLOPE EASEMENT AND TWO 10' DRAINAGE EASEMENTS SOUTHWEST OF CHESTNUT AVENUE AND HILLSIDE BLVD Staff Report 2/18/81 recommending the adoption of an Ordinance that adopts the 1979 Uniform Building Code; 1) Waive the reading of the Ordinance in its entirety and that the Ordinance be passed and adopted by reading title only; 2) Introduce and read for the first time. 1st Reading/Introduction AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULATING BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES, AND ACTS RELATED THERE- TO: PROVIDING FOR PERMITS, FEES, AND PENALTIES: REPEALING ORDINANCE NOS. 691, 767 AND 774, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE INTERNATIONAL CON- FERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS UNIFORM BUILDING CODE AND UNIFORM BUILDING STANDARDS, 1979 EDITION GOOD AND WELFARE CLOSED SESSION: PUBLIC SERVICES Consensus of Council to continue to 3/4/81. Consensus of Council to continue to 3/4/81. GOOD AND WELFARE No citizens chose to speak. Council adjourned to a Closed Session at 1:08 a.m. 2/18/81 Page 21 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN RECALL TO ORDER: ADJOURNMENT: RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, The meeting was recalled to order at 1:25 a.m., all Council present, instructions were given to Assistant to City Manager Wilson regarding labor negotiations. M/S Teglia/Addiego - That the meeting be adjourned to Tuesday, February 24, 1981, at 12:00 p.m., at the Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco. Carried by unanimous voice vote. Time of adjournment 1:25 a.m. APPROVED: uar~)ara A.~-~at-ta~-~i ty~ 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 re- corded 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. 2/18/81 Page 22