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