Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1981-09-22Mayor Gus Nicolopulos Vice Mayor Roberta Cerri Teglia Council: Ronald G. Acosta Mark N. Addiego Emanuele N. Damonte MINUTES CITY COUNCIL Municipal Services Building Community Room September 22, 1981 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Government Code 54956 of the State of California, that the South San Francisco City Council and the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors will hold a Joint Special Meeting on Tuesday, the 22nd day of September, 1981, at 7:30 p.m., in the Community Room of the Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, California. Purpose of the meeting: PUBLIC HEARING - Consideration of the Concept Plan for the South Slope of San Bruno Mountain. Dated: September 10, 1981 Gus Nicol op~Xo~,~q~ayo~~- City of South San Francisco AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING CALL TO ORDER: (Side 1 TF-OO1) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ACTION TAKEN SPECIAL MEETING 7:44 p.m. Supervisor Ward'presiding. Council present: Damonte, Acosta, Teglia, Addiego and Nicolopulos. Council absent: None. Supervisors present: Speier, Bacciocco, Gregorio, Schumacher and Ward. Supervisors absent: None. Recited. Supervisor Ward stated that he would chair the meeting, in that the County was the Lead Agency on this matter, and conduct the Public Hearing. He asked that anyone wishing to testify should fill out a speakers card. He opened the Public Hearing and 9/22/81 Page 1 AGENDA Consideration of the Concept Plan for the South Slope of San'Bruno Mountain. (TF-IO1) ACTION TAKEN introduced Mr. David Hale, San Mateo County Planning Director, and said that Staff members would make an initial presentation. Mr. David Hale presented a staff report with a number of photographic reductions of the plan itself as proposed by W. W. Dean and endorsed by the Planning Commissions of both jurisdictions at the conclusion of the joint meeting on August 26th. He said that Exhibit B showed the Hillside Recreation Center as proposed by the Developer at the last Public Hearing. He went on to explain that Exhibit C was the comprehensive staff report used at the Public Hearing and that Exhibit D was a verbatim copy of the analysis of the staff report as prepared by the citizens opposing the development; and that Exhibit E was the Staff response to the analysis. He stated that the last Exhibit was the Fiscal impact Study as prepared by Recht Hausrath & Associates of San Mateo. He further described in detail how Staff from both jurisdictions, if direction was given tonight, would then prepare the Specific Plan and the environmental impact report. He stated that the planning process itself was defined in a Letter of Understanding that was adopted by both legislative bodies in which a careful review process was outlined with a requirement for approval by the City and the Board of Supervisors. He gave background on the planning for the San Bruno Mountain which spanned a decade. He stated that tonight being considered was a concept plan for the South Slope. He continued, that there was a proposal by the Developer W. W. Dean for 745 dwelling units and other related usages for the South Slope. Director of Community Development Dell'Angela stated that the Developer was in attendance and would present slides of the proposed plan of the project. 9/22/81 Page 2 AGENDA Consideration of the Concept Plan for the South Slope of San Bruno Mountain - Continued ACTION TAKEN 2 He described in depth the Concept Plan and that the approval of the Plan did not grant the Developer any specific privileges. He continued, that only after a Specific Plan was prepared, environmental impact documents analyzed, and adverse impacts mitigated, can approvals be given. He stated that a denial of a Concept Plan at this time would indicate to the Developer that the Developer did not have a viable development plan that was worthy of pursuing to the Specific Plan stage. He continued, that since tile South Slope was located in the sphere of influence of South San Francisco it was assumed the Slope would be annexed to the City after Specific Plan approval is granted. He said that it was important to note that if this area is not annexed to the City and it is developed by the County or another City then this City can only recommend what type of development should or should not take place. He spoke at length of the development plan as proposed by W. W. Dean and said that Juncus Ravine was not proposed at this time for development. He said that the Project would not burden City facilities, in particular the sewage treatment plant. He stated that Staff recommended that the Concept Plan be approved based on the seven findings contained in the Staff Report. Mr. Richard Recht, Recht Hausrath & Associates, addressed the fiscal concerns in light of the passage of Proposition 13 and the loss of property taxes. He spoke in detail of the costs of the services to be provided if development was to take place on the Slope and the revenue from the proposed project. He stated that the Developer was required by an agreement to contribute one-half of the cost of the Hillside Boulevard Extension which would be an added benefit to the City. He said the Developer had offered to contribute a fire station, a collector system for 9/22/81 Page 3 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN Consideration of the Concept Plan for the South Slope of San Bruno Mountain - Continued. (TF-342) (TF-533) drainage and carry it over to the Bay> a recreational center, etc. He spoke of the various costs the City would acquire through the Project, i.e, staffing of the fire station, traffic signals, a generator for the fire station; police services for a new beat; annual costs for resurfacing of the roads; recreation programs, etc. Councilman Addiego asked who had selected the firm for the fiscal impact study. Mr. David Hale said the selection of the firm was done jointly by the Staff of the City and the County. Councilman Addiego asked how many firms had been considered. Mr. David Hale responded that this firm was the only firm that was considered. A discussion followed as to why a fiscal impact study was being done before the Concept Plan had been adopted and in light of the possibility that the Specific Plan might be different. Mr. David Hale explained that the Task Force had directed Staff to look for an economic analyst to do the work. A discussion followed on whether the costs would be different if the County were to take over the project~ improv- ing the operation of the pumping station~ a comprehensive traffic study~ recreational facilities, etc. Supervisor Bacciocco asked that County Staff apprise everyone on how the costs would differ if the County was to provide the services in the event that South San Francisco were barred from supplying the services. Mr. Gellert, Assistant County Manager, stated that there had been an initial look at the sewer capacity of the County and it was found to be able to extend those services but at a higher 9/22/81 Page 4 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN Consideration of the Concept Plan for the South Slope of San 6runo Mountain - Continued. (TF-662) (TF-957) (TF-1276) cost which would necessitate more costly housing or greater density to recover the costs. He addressed the County revenue to be gained, i.e. Transient Occupancy Tax and the lack of the tax if a hotel was not built. Vice Mayor Teglia questioned the development schedule for the South Slope and asked if it was documented or was this a projection from the Developer; one time capital costs - who was to pay for the fire station to be equipped. Mr. Recht responded that the schedule had been supplied ~ the Developer and 2) that the Developer had said he would pay for the fire station but not pay for furnishing the station. Chairman Ward invited Mr. Dean to speak. Mr. W. W. Dean, Developer, introduced the following members of his Staff: Mr. Bob Eppler, Project Engineer, and Mr. Doug Dowling, Project Architect and Land Planner. He said he had been at many Task Force meetings and Public Hearings and had received approval from the Joint Planning Commissions for the Concept Plan. Mr. Bob Eppler gave a presentation on behalf of Mr. Dean and the Project and showed slides outlining the concept of community needs. He gave a lengthy background on the Project and the interfacing of the Project with the City. Mr;' Doug Dowlin9 described the topography and clustered development into pockets to conform to the mountain itself and the areas of townhouses, terraces, tennis courts, parking, office buildings, restaurants, recreation center, etc. Chairman Ward invited speakers to limit their presentation to five minutes in length and step to the dais. 9/22/81 Page 5 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN Consideration of the Concept Plan for the South Slope of San Bruno Mountain - Continued. (TF-1485) (TF-1733) Ms. Antoinette Brown, 3310 Fleetwood Drive, San Bruno spoke in favor of the Concept Plan due to the swimming and recreation facilities in South San Francisco. Ms. Pat Johanson, 458 Comerwood Court, spoke in favor of the Plan due to a need by the citizens for further swimming facilities. She spoke of the opportunity for a 50 meter pool when West Orange pool was built that was lost and hoped that with the new facility that dream could be a reality. Mr. Bill Hamilton, 2231 Greendale, reiterated the comments of the two women before him and stated that if Mr. Dean erected a 25 meter pool it would not be adequate for the citizens needs for competitive swimming. Mr. Larry Casey, 363 Forestview Dr., stated that he had been for controlled growth and had been labelled no growth. He encouraged the Council to vote for this project and the Board of Super- visors to pass this Resolution and protect the citizens. Mr. Joseph G. Stevenson, President Building Industry Assoc., urged the two bodies to endorse the Concept Plan and spoke of the need of young people for median housing that this development would serve. Chairman Ward invited those members against the Concept Plan to speak. Ms. Doris Agee, 319 Ridge Court, expressed concern over the medium to high density and did not believe that the houses would be at affordable prices. The Board and the CQuncil directed the Staff to respond to the following concerns of Mrs. Agee: 1) density; 2) maintenance fees; 3) fire protection on the fingers of the development. 9/22/81 Page 6 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN Consideration of the Concept Plan for the South Slope of San Bruno Mountain - Continued. (Side 2 TF-O01) (TF-131) Mr. Douglas Butler, 133 Adrian Ave., addressed the following issues: "That it is both unfortunate and untimely that this meeting is being held tonight. On 10/6/81 the citizens of South San Francisco will be given the opportunity to vote on an initiative petition on the South Slope; 2) ... Mr. Ron Grudzinski, Project Manager of Visitacion Associates at that time, stated at those hearings that acceptance of the LAFCO Sphere of Influence Study was in no way a commitment on the part of South San Francisco for annexation; 3) The recreation center is proposed for an undesirable location for such a facility because of the wind, weather and lack of proximity to the general city public; 4) The overwhelming conclusion of these survey studies was that new residential development does not pay its way in the post-Proposition 13 world; 5) "We have been told that such a fiscal analysis could only be done after a specific plan has been submitted and only in conjunction with an EIR. Now this document is before us but I have yet to see the specific plan of development or the EIR; 6) Mr. Mike Gubner, Associate Director of the San Mateo County Restaurant & Hotel Owners Assoc, said at the 9/16/81 City Council meeting that the hotel/motel business has shown a steady decline since 1979." He presented figures that projected an annual deficit of $118,300 and stated that this was not cost effective. Supervisor Bacciocco requested that at the end of the meeting Staff or the Fiscal Consultant address the true development costs and the summary figures presented by Mr. Butler. Mr. A1 Savery, 6 Iris Court, stated that he viewed this hearing as a public relations .exercise to influence votes in the upcoming election. He stated that he had requested a copy of the public opinion survey from Mr. Dean's office and it had not been received. He felt that since 9/22/81 Page 7 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN Consideration of the Concept Plan for the South Slope of San Bruno Mountain. - Continued (TF-182) (TF-269) the public opinion telephone survey was offered and accepted for the public record in a public hearing. He felt that the information from which the conclusions were drawn should also be open to public inspection. He addressed the issues: that building on San Bruno Mountain would not preserve open space; that the traffic design was not sufficient; that the proposed development was not consistent with the city plan; that if the initiative was successful there will not be a need to design solutions for muni- cipal problems. Mr. Gerald Julian, 135 Belmont Ave., spoke against the development and the recreation center as not being a cure 'for the many problems assoc- iated witlhh~gh density housing. He suggested enclosing the pool already in use at E1Camino High School to provide better utilization of that pool for both the public and the school as this would not necessitate the need to cross Hillside Blvd. A discussion followed on the various study sessions with community involve- ment and whether the citizen concerns had been addressed. Ms. Sidney Behrendt, 128 Claremont, addressed the following concerns: How can a County with a 10 million monetary backlog in road projects add yet another 3 million to the taxpayers burden; why hasn't a comprehensive traffic study been done to provide information to make a clear and logical judgment on the Concept Plan; the issue of driveways being relocated in the Bowl area is another evasion of the concrete problem - that of intolerable con- gestion of traffic at the confluence of 101 off-ramp; why isn't Brisbane included in the traffic problems created by the building in the Bowl area, etc. 9/22/81 Page 8 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN Consideration of the Concept Plan for the South Slope of San Bruno Mountain - Continued. (TF-369) (TF-431) (TF-453) Mr. Dan Shattuc, 907 W. Cardinal Dr., Sunnyvale spoke of other big building projects in the mountainous portions of Redwood City and San Carlos and the resultant tampering with the natural sponge areas. He stated that these projects were later followed by bond issues to correct problems caused by inadequate drainage. He spoke of areas of South San Francisco where the purchase of flood insurance was mandatory because of the flooding dangers. He said that the LAFCO Report stated that there has never been a hydrology study on San Bruno Mountain. Ms. Jan Pont, lll Belmont, asked the following questions: who was going to pay for the clean up of Colma Creek when the silt runs off of San Bruno Mountain and what type of landscapping was going to be put around the fire break. She made mention of the roof rat problem that exists in the City and her concern that the citizens had to pay for the cancellation notice of the Dean picnic. Mr. Tom Nolan, 2121 So. E1 Camino Real, San Mateo spoke in favor of the development and stated that it provides needed housing and urged the approval of the Concept Plan. Ms. Ellie Larsen, 456 Hawthorne Ave., San Bruno spoke against the approval and asked if Mr. Dean is contemplating an option on Juncus Ravine now or in the future. Mr. Dean stated that he did have an option on Juncus Ravine which he acquired after the Initiative was placed on the Ballot. Ms. Larsen stated that for many years a group of citizens have requested that the mountain be treated as a whole and requested that c~nsideration be given in the E.I.R. to include the Juncus Ravine area. 9/22/81 Page 9 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 10 Consideration of the Concept Plan for the South Slope of San Bruno Mountain - Continued. (TF-563) (TF-641) (TF-714) RECESS Supervisor Bacciocco said that the General Plan Amendment that was written in 1976 described Juncus Ravine as open space and that there was always the possibility that Juncus Ravine would be donated as open space. He said that he did not anticipate a change in the General Plan designation of Juncus Ravine as other than open space. Ms. Nancy Truman, 108 Claremont, said she felt that the majority of the two bodies had already made up their minds and that the 10/6/81 election was the only way the citizens could fight back. She felt that parks were worthless because of crime and dope addicts and would not send her c~ildren to any park. She found it difficult to believe that the City would sanction more condos in light of the Citywide problems with roofs, home slippage, etc. She objected to the full page ad by Dr. Pat Salteri about "saving our mountain" when he is and was a resident of Hillsborough. Ms. Margaret Warren, 790 Stonegate Dr., said she objected strongly to the publicity campaign waged by Mr. Dean on the picnic that he was responsible for having cancelled. She reminded the Board and the Council that this City votes for the two bodies and the duty was to the citizens and not to any developer. Mr. Butler spoke of the high negative risk factor that the hotel will not be built and the steady decline in hotel occupancy. He spoke of the additional costs of six police officers, fire fighters and park maintenance which contributed to the total deficit. Mayor Nicolopulos stated concern that all the citizens had not been able to give input. Chairman Ward declared a recess at 11:15 p.m. 9/22/81 Page 10 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN !1 Consideration of the Concept Plan for the South Slope of San Bruno Mountain - Continued. RECALL TO ORDER (TF-770) Chairman Ward recalled the meeting to order at ll:30 p.m. all Council and Board members in attendance. Dr, Pat Salteri said that his ties in South San Francisco went back twenty-six years. He stated that development on the Slope would correct the fire problems and he was also interested in living in a condo in South San Francisco. Chairman Ward questioned the Board and Council to close the Public Hearing and continue the matter due to the many questions that had been raised. Mayor Nicolopulos said that Council had a policy of evaluating the agenda at 11:00 p.m. and adjourning the meeting at midnight. Vice Mayor Teglia suggested finishing up the testimony tonight and some of the questions on the Concept Plan and the fiscal analysis and adjourn to Thursday. Councilman Acosta suggested adjourning the meeting now since the testimony had been concluded and request that Cable TV be in attendance. Supervisor Gregorio stated he would be unable to attend the adjourned meeting on Thursday. Concensus of the Board and the Council to reconvene on Thursday, 9/24/81, at 7:00 p.m. Mr. James Keegan, 1244 Crestwood Dr., expressed concern that there would not be time for a notice to the public of the adjourne~ meeting. Chairman Ward directed the Staff of both bodies to print and post notices of the reconvened meetings. 9/22/81 Page 11 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN Consideration of the Concept Plan for the South Slope of San Bruno Mountain - Continued. (TF-1039) (TF-1112) M/S Schumacher/Gregorio - That the Public Hearing be closed. Carried by unanimous voice vote. Mr. Keegan said that it was the policy in South San Francisco of allowing the people to speak on the Question and he wanted that option t~ remain at the adjourned meeting. Councilman Acosta said that the testimony portion of the meeting was being closed however if a motion was made anyone could speak on the question. M/S Acosta/Damonte - That the Public Hearing be closed. Carried by unanimous voice vote. Councilman Addiego stated that the process in South San Francisco was that under the question, once the Motion is made and Seconded and the Council is on the question, the Council does allow additional comments by the public. Supervisor Bacciocco said that Thursday night there would be no public testimony until a Motion is made to accept or reject the Concept Plan. Supervisor Gregorio stated that his consideration of the evidence and his leaning towards approval of the Concept Plan was predicated on those eventualities of annexation to the City, service by the City to the developer and develop- ment under the City. He said that he had heard little of a County sponsored development and was far from making a consideration that it was feasible. He spoke of the finance analysis and that the average income for the households was a high of $60,000 and a low of $43,000, which was predicated on a 12% mortgage interest rate. He said the suggestion of a 16% mortgage rate would be a closer figure to use and he did not feel that the people who would 9/22/81 Page 12 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN Consideration of the Concept Plan for the South Slope of San Bruno Mountain - Continued. (TF-1345) ADJOURNMENT: buy the homes would be working in the Gateway complex. He said he did not feel that there was permanence in a dedication to open space, unless there was always a 3 to 2 Council vote for open space. Vice Mayor Teglia asked the Board members what the intentions were on alternative methods to provide services to the Mountain. She said that Supervisor Gregorio had indicated that he had not received sufficient information, yet Mr. Gellert had anticipated the possibility that the Initiative might pass and had contingency plans. She said she would also like the Developer to give consideration to an in-lieu gift of cash to begin a fund to eventually realize the establishment of a 50 meter pool. She said that she would like some discussion with the Developer for a decrease in density and to address the Bowl Area with an office complex. Supervisor Speier requested a response on Thursday to the drainage problems addressed by Mr. Shattuc. She further requested the County Staff to address the deficit figure Mr. Butler raised in the event a hotel was not built. Chairman Ward asked the County Staff to make a list of all the questions addressed to the Developer and forward those for comment on Thursday. M/S Speier/Schumacher - To adjourn the meeting to Thursday, 9/24/81, at 7:00 p.m. in the Municipal Services Building. Carried by unanimous voice vote. M/S Teglia/Acosta - To adjourn the meeting to Thursday, 9/24/81, at 7:00 p.m. in the Municipal Services Building. Carried by unanimous voice vote. 9/22/81 Page 13 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, APPROVED: Barbara A. Battaya, City ~qerk City of South San Francisco City of South San Francisco The entries of this Council meeting show the action taken by the City Council to dispose of an 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 are available for inspection, review and copying. 9/22/81 Page 14