Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1985-08-28Mayor Richard A. Halley Vice Mayor Roberta Cerri Teglia Counci 1: Mark N. Addie§o Emanuele N. Damonte Gus Nicolopulos AGENDA CALL TO ORDER: (Cassette No. 1) ROLL CALL: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: INVOCATION: AGENDA REVIEW City Manager Birkelo requested: - That the letter from Jeremiah Lynch, Esq., on behalf of the Poletti Trusts dated 8/14/85 related to the proposed refunding of Gateway Assessment Bonds, which the Council did not act upon at its 8/21/85 meeting, be entered into the record. - Delete Item 3, a Resolution auth- orizing execution of an agreement for motorcycle training for peace officers. - Delete Item 5, a Resolution auth- orizing execution of an agreement for public improvements at 800-890 Dubuque Avenue. - Continue Item 12, Consideration of Civic Center Renovation Project Amendments. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS MINUTES City Council Municipal Services Building 'Community Room August 28, 1985 ACTION TAKEN 7:39 p.m. Mayor Haffey presiding. Council present: Council absent: Nicolopulos, Addiego, Teglia, Damonte and Halley. None. The pledge of allegiance was recited. Reverend Donald Pitts, Good News Chapel, gave the invocation. AGENDA REVIEW So ordered. (A copy of the letter is attached and a permanent part of the record of this meeting.) So ordered. So ordered. So ordered. ORAL COMMUNICATI·ONS Ms. Nancy Nielsen and Ms. Kerry Forni, former members of the Youth Advisory Board, presented a proposal containing recommendations for use in interacting with future members of the Board. 28 MAILING ADDRE~8: POST OI='F'ICIE BOX 208 LAW OI='~'ICE: JEREMIAH J. LYncH A'rI'ORN~ AT ~W 1220 HOWARD AVENUE, ~UITE 2~0 B~LINGAME, CALI~ ~1~421 August 14, 1985 City Council of the City of South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco City Hall 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 Re: Gateway Assessment District No. ST-82-2; Resolution Preliminarily Approving Reassessment Report, Appointing Time and Place of Hearing Protests and Directing Notice Thereof; and Resolution of Intention to Issue Refunding Bonds and Levy Reassessments for the Security Thereof; Agenda Ttem ~8 Dear Council Members and Redevelopment Agency Members: The undersigned represents the Poletti Trust. The Poletti Trust is the owner of certain real property located along, upon and adjacent to the proposed Gateway Boulevard Extension at its intersection with Mitchell Avenue and South Airport Boulevard. The street addresses are 191 and 111 Mitchell Avenue. The Poletti Trust objects to the adoption of any resolutions authorizing in any way the sale of any bonds in connection with the Gateway Redevelopment Project. The certified and approved FEIR for the Gateway Redevelopment Project forecasts an "F" rating for traffic conditions in the after condition at the intersection of South Airport Boulevard, Mitchell Avenue, and Gateway Boulevard (Extension). An "F" rating is defined in the FEIR June 1984 Supplement, p. 48, as a "jammed condition." The Gateway Redevelopment FEIR did not consider the cumulative traffic impacts including dust, fumes, noise and air pollution that will be generated at the same intersection by the U.S. Steel Plant Site Redevelopment Project and the Shearwater Project. Interestingly, the U.S. Steel and Shearwater FEIRs ignored their cumulative adverse traffic impacts on the same intersection on the Gateway Project. 8~28/85 Page la City Council Redevelopment Agency August 14, 1985 Page 2 The undersigned respectfully requests the City and the Redevelopment Agency to take judicial notice of the U.S. Steel and Shearwater FEIRs which projects anticipate construction of 2,000,000 square feet of new buildings, 6,000 employees and 9,000 visitors per day. When the traffic, noise, dust, fumes and air pollution impacts of these projects are superimposed on the main north/south corridor of South Airport Boulevard, Mitchell Avenue and Gateway Extension Boulevard, which already has an rating, the greatest physical and economic blight in history of the State of California will be visited upon the Poletti Trust Properties, including the Super 8 Motel, Budget Rent- A-Car, and Hungry Hunter, and all other existing businesses fronting along and upon South Airport Boulevard and the surrounding street network system. Secondly, the Gateway FEIR. also ignores the cumulative adverse traffic impacts that will be generated by the Frice Company Project on the South Airport Boulevard, Mitchell Avenue, Gateway Boulevard Extension intersection. It is respectfully requested that the Redevelopment Agency conduct a new Subsequent and/or Supplemental Draft EIR for the Gateway Redevelopment Project to address the cumulative impacts of the several projects named herein which were ignored. Said request is made pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., and in particular, California Administrative Code (CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15162 and 15163), which provisions mandate a new EIR when new information of substantial importance to the project becomes available or subsequent changes of a substantial nature occur which impact the circumstances under which the project was undertaken. In the event that the aforementioned cumulative impacts are not addressed in either a Subsquent or Supplemental EIR, the Poletti Trust will have no other recourse but to take appropriate legal action. Kindly have the Clerk enter this letter as part the record for the public hearing. Respectfully submitted, JEREMIAH J. LYNCH Attorney for the Poletti Trust 8~28~85 Page lb JJL:jaa AGENDA ACTION TAKEN ORAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNITY FORUM CONSENT CALENDAR Staff Report 8/28/85 recommending by Motion to deny and refer the following claim to the City's Insurance Adjuster and to the office of the City Attorney: Claim as filed by Mariano Casals alleging personal injuries sustained as the result of negligence and care- lessness on 6ehalf of a City Building Inspector. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS An in-depth discussion followed: on the proposal presented; the purpose of forming the Youth Advisory Board; setting goals and future objectives for the Board; if the two former members would work with the Recreation Department; raising the age limit of members of the Board; forming a community involvement committee for candidates nights; con- tacting other prior members of the Board for feedback; appointing new members in a timely fashion, etc. Ms. Gloria Maltoni, President of the Downtown Merchants Association, questioned the police services for the Art & Wine Festival which were billed at $1,456 when $1,008 had been the agreed upon amount. She requested Council assistance in a 50% defrayment in costs for Christmas decorations for Grand Avenue. Police Chief Datzman explained that the $1,456 accounted for five posts and one over-night security and that he had contributed a Watch Commander which amounted to 91 manhours. Discussion followed: that perhaps the Association should not be billed for all of the manhours in that the service was performed for the community at large; that Ms. Maltoni's requests should be agendized for the next regular meeting. COMMUNITY FORUM No one chose to speak. CONSENT CALENDAR So ordered. 8/28/85 Page 2 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN CONSENT CALENDAR Staff Report 8/28/84 recommending adoption of a Resolution awarding the bid for the Municipal Services Building Expansion Project to Nibbi Brothers in the amount of $384,361 as the lowest responsible bidder. A RESOLUTION OF AWARD OF CONTRACT MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING EXPANSION PROJECT Staff Report 8/28/84 recommending adoption of a Resolution author- izing execution of an indemnity and hold harmless agreement and release, in favor of City of San Mateo for an 82-hour motorcycle training course for peace officers. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF INDEMNITY AND HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT AND RELEASE, IN FAVOR OF CITY OF SAN MATEO ® Staff Report 8/28/84 recommending adoption of a Resolution author- izing execution of an agreement with Group 4/Architecture, Research & Planning, Inc. for architectural services for Magnolia Center. A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHOR- IZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT TO FURNISH ARCHITECTURAL AND RELATED DESIGN SERVICES TO THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO Se Staff Report 8/28/85 recommending adoption of a Resolution author- izing execution of an agreement for construction of off-site public improvements with Crop-Spieker- Singleton, for the construction of storm drains and sanitary sewers at 800-890 Dubuque Avenue. A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHOR- IZING EXECUTION OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE DUBUQUE AVENUE PROJECT CONSENT CALENDAR RESOLUTION NO. 181-85 Removed from the agenda under Agenda Review. RESOLUTION NO. 182-85 Removed from the Agenda during Agenda Review. 8/28/85 Page 3 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN CONSENT CALENDAR Staff Report 8/28/85 recommending by Motion to approve building per- mit determinations of landmarks of 7/9/85 - 740 Larch Avenue and 406 Baden Avenue. Staff Report 8/28/85 recommending by Motion to set 9/11/85 as a Public Hearing date to consider extension of Interim Ordinance No. 962-84 relative to conflicts between General Plan provisions and existing zoning city wide. Staff Report 8/28/85 recommending by Motion to approve building per- mit determinations of landmarks of 7/9/85 - 740 Larch Avenue and 406 Baden Avenue· ~)~ CONSENT CALENDAR Removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion by Councilman Addiego. Public Hearing set for 9/11/85. M/S Teglia/Addiego - To approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of Item No. 6. Carried by unanimous voice vote. Councilman Addiego inquired that since the 15 days had expired, was Council action required. Planning Director Smith stated that Staff had neglected to send the item to Council in a timely manner, and the property owners had not gone ahead with the work, it would be appropriate for Council to take action. Councilman Addiego stated that it was his understanding that this was merely a procedural matter. He explained that when the Ordinance was originally set up it was City wide and had since been reduced to include only the downtown area where the City was anticipating homes within a certain age range. He commented that the Paradise Valley, Pecks Lot and Sterling Terrace areas would not have any homes within the historical range. M/S Addiego/Teglia - To concur with the Planning Director's findings. Carried by unanimous voice vote. 8/28/85 Page 4 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN APPROVAL OF BILLS 8. Approval of the Regular Bills of COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ADMINISTRATION Staff Report 8/28/85 recommending: 1) Adoption of a Resolution approv- ing and authorizing execution of an agreement entitled "Joint Powers Agreement between the City of South San Francisco and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco; 2) Adoption of a joint Resolution of the City Council of the City of South San Francisco and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco (Southern Pacific Land Company); ~ ~P~i~uounc~.°f a ~oi~ ~o~o~f South San Francisco and the R dee velopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco (Budget Rent-a- Car/Traverse Corporation); 4) Adoption of a joint Resolution of the City Council of the City of South San Francisco and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco (Poletti Trust Properties); 5) Adoption of a joint Resolution of the City Council of ~ ~v~o~ ~n[~a~i~ and City of South San Francisco (Poletti Trust Properties); 6) Adoption of a joint Resolution of the City Council of the City of South San Francisco and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco (Poletti Trust Properties); 7) Adoption of a joint Resolbtion of the City Council of the City of South San Francisco and the Redevelopment Agency of the APPROVAL OF BILLS M/S Teglia/Addiego - To approve the Regular Bills of 8/28/85 in the amount of $1,144,866.28 Carried by unanimous voice vote. Councilman Addiego did not participate or vote in the mater of the claim of Brentwood Market. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ADMNISTRATION City Attorney Rogers suggested, "that the City Council incorporate in the record of your consideration of these resolutions the Supplemental EIR that covered the Gateway Boulevard Extension Project, the traffic studies related to that, the letter dated 8/28/85 which was received from Attorney Lynch related to the Poletti Trust Properties which essen- tially they are protesting the resolu- tions related to Poletti Trust Properties." (A copy of the letter is attached and a permanent part of the record of this meeting.) City Manager Birkelo stated that the resolution having to do with the Joint Powers Agreement sets forth the deter- mination of both the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency to exercise their respective powers in the acquisition of the needed properties to carry through the Gateway Extension Project. That the following six resolutions have to do with the individual properties. He stated that adoption of the resolutions would w o n proceedings if necessary. Discussion followed on the letter from Mr. Lynch in protest of the adoption of the Resolutions; that Mr. Lynch was pro- testing the action of the passing of the Resolutions of Intention and taking the property based upon his evaluation of the Final EIR being inadequate and that it doesn't consider cumulative impacts; that further discussion regarding this matter 8/28/85 Page 5 ~ OP'F'ICIr BOX .~LIN~AIM~='. CALJF'OFtJ~A LAW Ol='~lCl=' O~ J. BURLINGAME. CALIFORNIA 9401~4211 August 28, 1985 Mr. Walter Birkelo City Manager City of South San Francisco City Hall,~ 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 Mr. Walter Birkelo Executive Director Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 Re= Resolution of Necessity Authorizing Acauisition of the I.ands of the Poletti Trust Dear Council Members and Redevelopment Agency Members= The undersigned represents the Poletti Trust. The Poletti Trust is the owner of certain real property located along, upon and adjacent to the proposed Gateway Boulevard Extension at its intersection with Mitchell Avenue and South Airport Boulevard. (Acquisition parcels 1, 2 and 4) The Poletti Trust objects to the adoption of a Resolution of Necessity authorizing the acquisition of the lands of the Poletti Trust for the following reasons= A. The'Public Interest And Necessity Do Not Require The Project. The certified and approved FEIR for the Gateway Redevelopment Project forecasts an "F" rating for traffic conditions in the after condition at the intersection of South Airport Boulevard, Mitchell Avenue, and Gateway Boulevard (Extension). An 'F" rating is defined in the FEI~ June 1984 Supplement, p. 48, as a "jammed condition." The Gateway Redevelopment FEIR did not consider the cumulative traffic impacts including dust, fumes, noise and air P°llution that will be generated at the same intersection by the U.S. Steel Plant Site Redevelopment Project and the Shearwater Project. Interestingly, the U.S. Steel and Shearwater FEIRs ignored their cumulative adverse traffic impacts on the same intersection. 8/28/85 Page 5a City Council Redevelopment Agency August 28, 1985 Page 2 The undersigned respectfully requests the City and the Redevelopment'Agency to take judicial notice of the U.S. Steel and Shearwater FEIRs which, projects anticipate construction of 2,000,000 square feet of new buildings, 6,000 employees and 9,000 visitors per day. When the traffic, noise, dust, fumes and air pollution impacts of these projects are superimposed On the main north/south corridor of South Airport Boulevard, Mitchell Avenue and Gateway Extension Boulevard, which already has an "F" rating, the greatest physical and economic blight in history of the State. of California will be visited upon the Poletti Trust Properties, including the Super 8 Motel, Budget Rent- A-Car, and Hungry Hunter, and all other existing businesses fronting along and upon South Airport Boulevard and the surrounding street network system. Secondly, the Gateway FEIR also ignores the cumulative adverse traffic impacts that will be generated by the Price Company Project on the South Airport Boulevard, Mitchell Avenue, Gateway Boulevard Extension intersection. The undersigned requests the City and Agency to take judicial notice of the purported "Negative Declaration" on the Price Club Project and the 6,000 vehicles per day that will visit that project. It is respectfully requested that the Redevelopment Agency conduct a new Subsequent and/or Supplemental Draft EIR for the Gateway Redevelopment Project to address the cumulative impacts of the several projects named herein which were ignored. Said request is made pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., and in particular, California Administrative Code (CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15162 and 15163), which provisions mandate a new EIR when new information of substantial importance to the project becomes available or subsequent changes of a substantial nature occur which impact the circumstances under which the project was undertaken. B. The Project Is Not Planned And/Or T,ocated Tn The ~anner That Will Be Mo~t Compatible With The Greatest Public ~ood And The Least Private Tniur¥. The acquisition of the Poletti Trust properties and the construction of the street extension improvements in the manner proposed will create no less than 6 separate and distinct remainder parcels. The Project, if constructed in the manner proposed, will relegate the Super 8 Motel to a non-conforming sub- standard use contrary to the zoning ordinances of the City. 8/28/85 Page 5b City Council Redevelopment Agency August 28, 1985 Page 3 The Project, as designed, conceived, and constructed, will create massive traffic jams at the intersection of South Airport Boulevard, Mitchell Avenue, and Gateway BouleVard Extension, which will result in physical and economic blight on all lands and existing businesses located south, east.and west of the Gateway Redevelopment Project. The public interest and necessity does not require massive traffic jams in order to accommodate the exigencies of the redeveloper and the Agency. C. The Poletti Trust Property Ts Not Necessary For The pro~ect. For the reasons stated under headings A and B, above, the Poletti Trust real property is not necessary for the Project. D. There ~oes Not ~xist An 'Approved Appraisal' With Respect To The Lands Of The Poletti Trust. The appraiser for the Redevelopment Agency incorrectly assumed that PG&E was the owner of Acquisition Parcel 2 which contains approximately 1.461 acres. Parcel 2 is a fully improved piece of real property that has been filled, culverted, paved, striped, landscaped, improved with parking lot lights, and fenced. It is presently leased for $.12 a square foot. However, Parcel 2 has been incorrectly appraised as part of a larger parcel of land owned by PG&E containing 7 acres, which larger parcel can be considered undeveloped swamp land requiring 8 or 10 feet of fill. The vice of the Agency's appraisal theory of eValuating Parcel 2 as part of a larger undeveloped piece of real property owned by PG&E is to reduce the overall average price of Parcel 2. Such appraisal theory is incorrect. The proper method of appraisal is to appraise Parcel 2 either as a separate and distinct parcel owned by the Poletti Trust or as part of a larger parcel or parcels owned by the Poletti Trust, whichever theory will give Parcel 2 its highest price in terms of fair market value. (people v. Silveira, 236 C.A.2d 604, at 616) As regards Acquisition Parcel 4, the Agency appraiser must have assumed that Parcel 4 was unuseable and land-locked. Such is not the case. Parcel 4 contains 5771 square feet. The Agency has offered $1,000 for Parcel 4, or approximately $.17 per square foot, for the full fee value. 8/28/85 Pa~ 5c City Council Redevelopment Agency August 28, 1985 Page 4 A portion of Parcel 4 is presently rented at $.12 a square foot per month.. Such appra,isal is insulting. The undersigned' contends that the RedevelOpment Agency's appraisal is not a bona fide approved appraisal, in 'that it is predicated upon improper assumptions as regards ownership; it incorrectly assumes that Parcel 2 is part of a larger parcel of real property owned by PG&E; and it fails to consider the income approach as regards fair market value. Finally, the appraisal of acquisition Parcels 2 and 4 are inconsistent with the Agency's appraisal of PG&E Acquisition Parcel No. I containing 1.082 acres or 47,262 square feet. E. The Redevelopment Agency Ha- Not Furnished The Trustees of The Poletti Trust With A Rummary Of The Aj~prove8 Appraisal. Aside from the fact that the Agency's "approved appraisal" is predicated upon improper assumptions, the purported appraisal summary is not a summary of the basis for the amount it established as just compensation. It cannot be ascertained if acquisition Parcels 1, 2 and 4 were appraised as separate and distinct parcels or were appraised as part of a larger parcel or parcels owned by the Poletti Trust. It cannot be ascertained whether the 6 remainders have been diminished in value as a result of severing the part from the whole. It cannot be ascertained what value, if any, the appraiser had on the subject property in the before condition. It cannot be ascertained what value, if any, the appraiser fixed as the fair market value of Acquisition Parcels 1, 2 and 4. It cannot be ascertained what value, if any, the appraiser placed upon the 6 remainders in the after condition. There is no summary of any comparable sales or mention of any sales, or range of comparable sales the appraiser considered in arriving at his "opinion of value". In a word, the purported "Rummary of the masis of the Appraisal" is merely a lump sum offer to purchase the aforementioned acquisition parcels. For the reasons set forth under headings D and E, above, the underszgned contends that the Redevelopment Agency has violated the provisions of Government Code Section 7267.2. 8/ 8/8s Page City Council Redevelopment Agency August 28, 1985 Page 5 It is respectfully requested that this letter be made part of the record at the public hearing Respectfully submitted, 0 - 0 ~-.torney for the Poletti Trust JJL:jaa 8/28/85 Page 5e AGENDA ACTION TAKEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ADMINISTRATION 9. Staff Report 8/28/85 - Continued. City of South San Francisco (Pacific Gas & Electric Company). 1) A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT" BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 2) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY ~1.~ COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO (SOUTHERN PACIFIC LAND COMPANY) 3) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO (BUDGET RENT-A-CAR/TRAVERSE CORPORATION) 4) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO (POLETTI TRUST PROPERTIES) 5) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO (POLETTI TRUST PROPERTIES) 6) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH ~ SAN FRANCISCO AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO (POLETTI TRUST PROPERTIES) 7) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ADMNISTRATION would take place in a Joint Closed Session with the Redevelopment Agency. Mayor Haffey asked those wishing to speak either for or against this matter to step to the dais - no one chose to speak. M/S Addiego/Damonte - To adopt the Resolution on the Joint Powers Agreement. RESOLUTION NO. 183-85 Carried by unanimous voice vote. M/S Teglia/Addiego - To adopt the Resolution on the Southern Pacific Land Company property. RESOLUTION NO. 184-85 Carried by unanimous voice vote. M/S Teglia/Addiego - To adopt the Resoltuion on the Budget Rent-a-Car/Traverse Corporation property. RESOLUTION NO. 185-85 Carried by unanimous voice vote. M/S Teglia/Addiego - To adopt the Resolution on Poletti Trust Properties. RESOLUTION NO. 186-85 Carried by unanimous voice vote. M/S Te§lia/Addiego - To adopt the Resolution on Poletti Trust Properties. RESOLUTION NO. 187-85 Carried by unanimous voice vote. M/S Teglia/Addiego - To adopt the Resolution on Poletti Trust Properties. RESOLUTION NO. 188-85 Carried by unanimous voice vote. 8/28/85 Page 6 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ADMINISTRATION 9. Staff Report 8/28/85 - Continued. COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO (PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY RECREATION & COMMUNITY SERVICES 10. Public Hearing - 1985-86 Community Development Block Grant Budget - continued from 8/14/85 and the 8/21/85 meetings. Staff Report 8/21/85 recommending: 1) Continue the Public Hearing and hear testimony; 2) Close the Public Hearing; 3) Adoption of a Resolution authorizing the submittal of the Final Statement of Objectives and Projected Use of Community Block Grant Funds for Fiscal Year 1985-86. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUB- MITTAL OF THE FINAL STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES AND PROJECTED USE OF COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1985-86 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ADMNISTRATION M/S Teglia/Addiego - To adopt the Resolution on Pacific Gas & Electric Company property. RESOLUTION NO. 189-85 Carried by unanimous voice vote. RECREATION AND COMMUNITY SERVICES Director of Recreation and Community Development Norton stated that the requested action was to adopt the final statement and proposed use of funds so that it could be submitted to the Federal Government. He stated that the budget remained the same and that the shared housing project would contain a general title, and that Staff would investigate ways of administering the program in-house. Mayor Haffey closed the Public Hearing. Discussion followed concerning costs for administering the program; that there was a current federal regulation indicating that the administration costs associated with the program must be within the program; that $15,000 of the $90,000 of the housing rehabilitation funds were for administration; etc. Vice Mayor Teglia expressed concern that $15,000 of the $90,000 would be used for administrative fees and that the costs for administering the program should come out of the $103,000 for administration. An in-depth discussion followed con- cerning the transferring of funds from the administration program to the rehabi- litation program; that the transfer of funds would have no effect on the program; impact on city funds; that there was a flexibility to move funds around if they did not exceed $50,000, otherwise it would require a public hearing, etc. Mayor Haffey closed the Public Hearing. 8/28/85 Page 7 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN RECREATION&COMMUNITY SERVICES 10. Public Hearing-Continued. TECHNICAL AND MAINTENANCE SERVICES 11. Hearing - Show Cause Hearing regarding violations of Chapters 14.04 and 14.08 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code occurring at 1410 E1 Camino Real South San Francisco, California - continued from 5/8/85, 5/13/85, 5/22/85 and 6/12/85, 6/26/85, 7/10/85 and~D~ 8/14/85 meetings. ITEMS FROM STAFF ITEMS FROM COUNCIL RECREATION & COMMUNITY SERVICES M/S Damonte/Addiego - To adopt the Resol uti on. RESOLUTION NO. 190-85 Carried by unanimous voice vote. TECHNICAL AND MAINTENANCE SERVICES City Manager Birkelo stated that the owners of the property Harmonious Holdings had indicated that that they had approval from the County Health Department to put in a new septic tank system at that location. He stated that the firm had indicated today that they intend to enter into an agreement for that on the 7th of September and hope- fully have the work completed by the end of September. He recommended that the hearing be held open until the work is complete and continue the hearing until the first meeting in November. Councilman Addiego questioned the suita- bility of this type of a system within the City limits. City Manager Birkelo stated that the pro- perty had been through the testing program with the County and the soils were adequate and the County felt that it was a remedial step to be taken, and the City did not see the availability of a sewer system there for at least two years. Discussion followed: that under existing ordinance the City can force hook ups to the City's sewer system; and that if a sewer is available within a certain distance of one's property then a connec- tion had to be made; that there was a exception found in the plumbing code, but it did not talk in terms of distance from a sewer system; that once a sewer system becomes available the City can order hook ups; conflicting ordinances between the Municipal Code and the Plumbing Code; to continue the hearing to 11/13/85. 8/28/85 Page 8 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN ITEMS FROM COUNCIL 12. Consideration of Civic Center Renovation Project Amendments - continued from 8/21/85. GOOD AND WELFARE ITEMS FROM COUNCIL City Manager Birkelo stated that at the last meeting the Council had had dif- ferences of opinion as to whether or not ~m~ ~o~lm~d~°~r~h~i~s~8~i~ of the balustrade, cupola, painting and further work in the manager's office area and the conference room. He stated that he was looking for direction. Mayor Haffey stated that that there was a split in the Council and some members wished to move forward and others did not. He stated that he felt that at this point there were too many capital improvements and other priorities and · ° a ' ~ ~r~e~sW~t~ ~n~u~ng ~8~i~ ~~ment budgets and held off Concurrence of Council - To have this matter considered during the 1986-87 Capital Improvement Budget. Mayor Haffey stated that he had received a request from a member of the Personnel Board for a joint meeting of the Board and the Council. He requested that City Manager Birkelo put this item on Council's calendar in the near future. GOOD AND WELFARE Mr. Frank Conrad, 536 Grand Ave., expressed concern over parking on sidewalks, driveways, as well as cars parked for long periods of time on the street. He requested better control from the Police Department in enforcing parking regulations in the area. Councilman Addiego stated that the parking on the 500 block of Grand was impacted by the downtown area and suggested that the downtown parking enforcement be extended to the 500 block. Discussion followed: that the police were dealing with the problem; that daily recordings were being made of every event taking place by patrol cars; that the 8/28/85 Page 9 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN GOOD AND WELFARE 13. Closed Session for the purpose of the discussion of personnel mat- ters, labor relations and litigation. RECALL TO ORDER: ADJOURNMENT RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Battaya, City City of South San Francisco GOOD AND WELFARE Police Chief would forward the report to the Council and Mr. Conrad; the burden being on the Police to prove over parking and the resultant towing; the car behind Wardrobe Cleaners that had been parked there since 7/1/85. Council adjourned to a joint Closed Session at 9:00 p.m., with the Redevelopment Agency to confer with the Agency's Attorney regarding the procedure as to whether to initiate eminent domain litigation concerning property located in the general area of East Grant Avenue, South Airport Blvd. and Mitchell Avenue for the Gateway Extension Project on the following properties: 1) Poletti's Trust, Assessor's Parcel No. 15-12-62, northwest corner of Mitchell & West Harris; 2) Poletti Trust, Mitchell Avenue at South Airport Boulevard; 3) Budget Rent-A-Car, Assessor's Parcel No. 15-121-02, 7 South Airport Boulevard; 4) Poletti's Trust, Assessor's Parcel No. 15-123-54; 5) Southern Pacific Railroad Company, a 1.197 acre parcel off East Grand Avenue which is a part of a larger Southern Pacific ownership; and 6) Pacific Gas & Electric property located directly on East Grand Avenue near Highway 101. Mayor Haffey recalled the meeting to order at 9:40 p.m., all Council present, no action taken. M/S Addiego/Teglia - To adjourn the meeting. Carried by unanimous voice vote. Time of adjournment was 9:41 p.m. APPROVED: Richard' A. H~fK~y,~M~.'or ~ City of South San Fra ciao AGENDA ACTION TAKEN ~The entries of this Council meeting show the action taken by the City Council to dispose of an item. Oral communications, 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. 8128/85 Page 11