HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1988-05-11Mayor Jack Drago
Counci 1:
Mark N. Addiego
Ri chard A. Haffey
Gus Nicolopulos
Roberta Cerri Teglia
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER: (Cassette No. 1)
ROLL CALL:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
INVOCATION:
--PRESENTATIONS
MINUTES
City Council
Municipal Services Building
Community Room
May 11, 1988
0155
ACTION TAKEN
7:50 p.m. Mayor Drago presiding.
Council present:
Council absent:
Haffey,
Nicolopulos, Teglia,
and Drago.
Addiego
City Clerk Battaya related that
Councilman Addiego had informed her
Office that he was on vacation and was
unable to attend tonight's meeting.
The pledge of allegiance was recited.
Reverend Luis Alana, Hispanic Seventh Day
Adventist Church, gave the invocation.
PRESENTATIONS
Mayor Drago stated that the Atotonilco
Folkloric Dance Troup had been in South
San Francisco for two days and had con-
ducted three performances for the com-
munity. He proceeded to welcome the
dance troup and wished them a very
pleasant stay in South San Francsico.
Mr. Midge Damonte, Sister City Committee,
stated that in 1978 an affiliation had
been established with Lucca, Italy for a
Sister City exchange program, and that
last year one had been effected with
Atotonilco, el Alto, Jalisco, Mexico with
the Mayor and members of the Chamber of
Commerce visiting South San Francisco.
He stated that members of Council, Staff
and the Sister City Committee had visited
Atotonilco in December and had effected a
Sister City Program.
He stated that the Atotonilco students
had been invited to dance in Stockton for
Cinco de Mayo festivities and had also
been encouraged to visit and perform in
this City.
5/11/88
Page i
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
015
..... PRESENTATIONS
Proclamation - Older Americans Month -
May, 1988
Proclamation - Independent Living Month
- May, 1988
Proclamation - Historic Preservation
Week - May 8 - 14, 1988
Debate and discussion on Proposition 72
- Emergency Reserve, Dedication of ~1~
Certain Taxes to Transportation/
(Appropriation Limit Change) -
suggested Resolution to be adopted
in opposition entitled "A RESOLUTION
OPPOSING PROPOSITION 72 THE "SPENDING
LIMIT IMPROVEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT
ACT"
PRESENTATIONS
Mayor Drago and Mr. Mario Gonzales had
each student introduce themselves and
they were presented with pins of the
City.
Councilman Nicolopulos read the
Proclamation aloud and presented it to
County Commissioner on Aging James
Hamrick.
County Commissioner Hamrick thanked the
Council and proceeded to describe the
various programs sponsored by San Mateo
County.
Vice Mayor Teglia read the Proclamation
aloud and presented it to Mr. Eldon Luce
from the Center for the Independence of
the Disabled.
Councilman Haffey read the Proclamation
aloud and presented it to Historic
Preservation Commissioner Gookin.
Commissioner Gookin presented Ms.
Margarite Schwartz whose home at 519
Grand Avenue was to be declared an
historic resource. She stated that the
home had been built in 1905, and pre-
sented a plaque to Ms. Schwartz.
Ms. Debbie Hamber stated that Council had
taken a stand to support Proposition No.
71, and she urged the Council to oppose
Proposition No. 72. She related the
following: the League of California
Cities opposed Proposition No. 72, while
it supported Proposition No. 71; ARP, the
Commission on Aging, League of Women
Voters, the State Superintendent of
Schools, California Highway Patrol and
120 statewide organizations were against
Proposition No. 72; that Proposition No.
72 does not update the Gann spending
limit, but instead made exceptions to the
limit; it made transportation the top
spending priority in the State; if the
Proposition passes, it was estimated
$200,000,000 to $300,000,000 would be
5/11/88
Page 2
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
PRESENTATIONS
Proposition 72 Debate - Continued.
PRESENTATIONS
taken away from education, law enfor-
cement, health care, senior programs and
would be given to transportation, etc.
She stated that money was needed for
roads and transportation, but not at the
expense of these vital services.
She stated that the recent budget short-
fall was $1,000,000,000 and Proposition
72 would take a bad situation and make
it a nightmare. She stated that in
addition to the shortfall, $200,000,000 a
year would be taken away from vital ser-
vices. She urged the Council to take a
position in opposition to Proposition 72.
Mayor Drago questioned what would happen
if both Propositions passed - which would
take precedence.
Ms. Hamber stated that those provisions
that are not in conflict would go
through.
Mayor Drago stated that he felt it was
excellent to give people the opportunity
to discuss the propositions before the
public pro and con, however, he did not
believe the City Council should take
votes on County, State or Federal
measures unless they directly affect the
well being of this City. He stated that
he voted in support of Proposition 71
because of those organizations that are
supporting it which included ARP, Aging,
Highway Patrol, Fire Chiefs, etc. He
stated that he did not believe it was
confident at this time to vote against
Proposition 72.
Ms. Hamber stated that many transit
districts have supported Proposition 71
and gone against Proposition 72, because
Gann says the gasoline tax is going to go
to transportation - statewide money, so
that the money now being received for
local transit districts will no longer be
received locally. She continued,
5/11/88
Page 3
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
--- PRESENTATIONS
Proposition 72 Debate - Continued.
PRESENTATIONS
Proposition No. 72 does nothing for
local government and would severely
impact local transit districts, local
government in terms of schools, and law
enforcement.
Mayor Drago stated that this was like the
Coastal Initiative A and B, and
Proposition 72 was confusing to him. He
stated that Proposition 72 affected the
residents of the City but not the City
operation, as it was a separate entity
of its own. He stated that he did not
believe the School District or the City
was in any danger of exceeding the Gann
limit right now, and therefore he did not
see how it pertained to this City. He
stated that there was reserve money that
went back to the taxpayers in 1987, so
that money rather than being returned to
the taxpayers would have been used for
transportation with the passage of
Proposition 72.
Ms. Hamber stated that those funds would
go into an emergency reserve to be used
for transportation rather than having
various funds earmarked for schools,
senior programs, etc.
Councilman Halley stated that he shared
the Mayor's concern on not having items
come before this Council that do not
relate to City business or its operation,
or to the community. He continued,
however, in relation to a no on
Proposition 72, he believes that if it
passes it would affect the School
District directly and would affect the
City. He stated that he had attended a
subcommittee meeting with the School
District and Councilman Nicolopulos and
if education is to be put behind
transportation, as Proposition 72 is pro-
posing, the Council would see the School
District changing some of its priorities
- and might come to the City wishing to
renegotiate some of the agreements in
which currently they provide support for
various facilities throughout the City.
5/11/88
Page 4
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
~-- PRESENTATIONS
Proposition 72 Debate - Continued.
PRESENTATIONS
Mayor Drago questioned if anyone wished
to speak in support of Proposition 72.
Mr. Michael Siebert, CA State Automobile
Assn., stated that his firm was a motor
club with over 2.8 million members, and
strongly supported Proposition 72. He
cited reasons for the support and why it
was essential to California's transpor-
tation future: that California has tra-
ditionally relied on user based fees,
such as gas tax and weight fees to fund
transportation needs for over fifty
years; rising fuel prices and a switch in
fuel efficient vehicles produced a
decline in fuel consumption; that at the
same time high inflation produced a dra-
matic increase in road building costs;
motorists today pay less in fuel taxes
for miles traveled than they did a decade
or more ago; transportation needs have
increased, and the funding has decreased
dramatically; Proposition 72 dedicates
sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuel to
the building and maintenance of highways,
roads and mass transit, and says that the
Gann Initiative will not apply to those
fees; does not decrease the overall
spending authority under the Gann limit -
those revenues could be replaced either
from the surplus or from additional taxes
which might be raised to fund other
projects.
He stated that unless the gas tax was
increased or a new revenue source was
found for transportation, we are in
serious danger of our transportation
system falling so far behind, for example
if the repair of a road or highway was
delayed beyond the point it could be
rehabilitated, you are looking at a cost
that could be four times the original
price to rebuild that road.
He stated that there were a lot of
misconceptions on how Proposition 72
would relate to local government, and it
would not take funds away that are
5/11/88
Page 5
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
.... PRESENTATIONS
Proposition 72 Debate - Continued.
(Cassette No. 2)
PRESENTATIONS
designated for local government through
the transportation process. He con-
tinued, it is designed so that the 11/4%
that goes to local government is not
affected, and only affects the 4 3/4%
state share of the sales tax on gasoline.
He stated that if Proposition 72 passes
the sales tax on gasoline is dedicated to
transportation purposes under Article 19,
and half of those funds would be
available to local government for funding
of streets and roads, etc.
He stated that our economy was based upon
our ability to move people and goods, and
the economy suffers as a result of our
transportation system, as well as the
entire tax base suffering. He strongly
urged the Council to support Proposition
72.
Discussion followed: distribution of
gasoline tax funds; the impact on trans-
portation of the $600,000,000 through
Proposition 72; that Proposition 71 did
not dedicate any new funds to transpor-
tation; the formula used in Sacramento to
distribute transportation funds; that
Proposition 71 would not raise taxes,
etc.
Mr. Jake Jones, 12 E1Campo Dr., stated
that he was very disappointed in Council
support of Proposition 71, and felt the
Council should not support either
Proposition. He stated that in 1979,
Proposition 4 had passed by 74.3% of the
voting population, and that proved that
the people did not want the lid lifted
off spending - there has to be a ceiling.
He stated that he had read the ballot
pamphlet about five times, and the only
sense it had made was in the analyst's
analysis.
He stated that this last year there was a
State employee on the Board of
Equalization, who retired at $190,000 a
year - guaranteed. He stated that this
5/11/88
Page 6
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
· ' PRESENTATIONS
Proposition 72 Debate - Continued.
Further discussion and debate on
Proposition 71 (Appropriations Limit
Adjustment. ~l~
AGENDA REVIEW
City Manager Lewis requested:
PRESENTATIONS
was a pointed example of government
spending.
He stated that he spoke to a Councilman
after a Resolution was passed in support
of Proposition 71 questioning the
rational of the vote, and was told that
it was because ARP supported it. He
stated that as a member of ARP he had the
main issue of their magazine, and there
was not one mention of supporting
Proposition 71. He stated that only an
individual member in a Park and
Recreation senior communication had
endorsed Proposition 71, and not the
national association. He stated that he
had spoken to the ARP member who had said
that as a retired school employee
Proposition 71 would build up the pension
fund, and retired she only made $25,000
per year.
He urged the Council to rescind their
support of Proposition 71, and leave the
issues up to the voters.
M/S Haffey/Teglia - To adopt the
Resolution opposing Proposition 72.
RESOLUTION NO. 55-88
Carried by majority roll call vote, Drago
abstained on the principle of taking
sides on propositions, and he personally
could not support Proposition 72.
Mayor Drago stated that there were propo-
sitions on contributions and campaign
contributions that he would like to see
the Council take an action on, but he did
not feel that was proper. He stated that
the Park and Revenue Bonds Proposition
was a measure that directly affected the
City by $180,000, and that was the type
of information he would like to pass on
to the public - but not for a Council
vote.
AGENDA REVIEW
5/11/88
Page 7
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
AGENDA REVIEW
- Hold Item 7 until after the
Closed Session.
Vice Mayor Teglia Requested:
- Add Item lOa. Complaints on
Cable TV.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMUNITY FORUM
AGENDA REVIEW
So ordered.
Mayor Drago requested that future items
dealing with Closed Sessions be placed at
the end of the Agenda to not incon-
venience the audience.
So ordered.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
City Attorney Armento stated that Janet
Andrews, Chamber of Commerce had to leave
the meeting and proceeded to relate her
announcement: Quarterly Blood Drive
would be held at Kaiser on 5/16/88 from
12:00 - 5:00 p.m., and was being spon-
sored by the Chamber, Lyons Club, Elks
Club and Kaiser Hospital. She stated
that anyone who works or lives in South
San Francisco is eligible to benefit from
the blood that is collected, and to date
there was over 2,400 pints of blood from
the inception of the program.
COMMUNITY FORUM
Vice Mayor Teglia stated that a woman and
her daughter came to City Hall to commend
two City workers for saving their home
and maybe their lives. She stated that
City employees Paul Fernandez and Ted
Lynn were working on Tennis Dr. and
noticed smoke coming from the backyard of
one of the homes, they looked over the
fence and saw the back wall was on fire;
while one called the Fire Dept. the other
ran around the front and knocked on the
door alerting the residents; and the Fire
Dept. was able to control the fire.
Mayor Drago stated that the Fire Chief
was researching the matter and there
would be recognition forthcoming on the
25th.
Vice Mayor Teglia spoke of a project
5/11/88
Page 8
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
- COMMUNITY FORUM
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Approval of the Minutes of the
Regular Meeting of 4/13/88.
®
Staff Report 5/11/88 recommending
adoption of a Resolution approving~o~
plans and specifications, author-
izing the work and calling bids
for Dechlorination Conversion
Project.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS, AUTHORIZING THE
WORK AND CALLING BIDS FOR
DECHLORINATION CONVERSION PROJECT
®
Staff Report 5/11/88 recommending
adoption of a Resolution modifying
the provisions of paragraph 2c of
the "Purchase Agreement, Surplus
Real Property located southwest of
the Hillside/Chestnut Intersection,
dated 1/3/84 (Mantegani).
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT
TO A PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR SURPLUS
REAL PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTHWEST OF
THE HILLSIDE/CHESTNUT INTERSECTION
0
Staff Report 5/11/88 recommending
adoption of a Resolution author-
izing submittal of applications for
COMMUNITY FORUM
adopted by the Firefighters in their off
hours wherein on 4/26/88 the St. Francis
Foundation received a check for $6,681.62
for their Burn Center as the result of
Firefighters Brian Niswonger and Jim
Selvitella developing the concept of a
fund raising golf tournament that was
very successful. She stated that one of
the Firefighters had been a patient in
the Center.
Councilman Nicolopulos reiterated earlier
announcements of the 75th Anniversary
activities for South San Francisco High
School.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Approved.
RESOLUTION NO. 56-88
RESOLUTION NO. 57-88
5/11/88
Page 9
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
CONSENT CALENDAR
4. Staff Report - Continued.
child care facility licenses to the
California Department of Social
Services and designating the
Director of Recreation and
Community Services as Administrator.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL
OF APPLICATIONS FOR CHILD DAY CARE
FACILITY LICENSES TO THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES AND
DESIGNATING THE DIRECTOR OF
RECREATION AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
AS ADMINISTRATOR
APPROVAL OF BILLS
5. Approval of the Regular Bills of
5/11/88.
RECREATION & COMMUNITY SERVICES
Public Hearing - Consider proposed
activities for the use of Community
Development Block Grant Funds for fo
Fiscal Year 1988-89.
Staff Report 5/11/88 recommending:
1) Open the Public Hearing and hear
testimony; 2) Close the Public
Hearing; 3) Adoption of a
Resolution.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND
AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF THE
STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES AND
PROJECTED USE OF COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 1988-89
CONSENT CALENDAR
~0o&
RESOLUTION NO. 58-88
M/S Teglia/Haffey - To approve the
Consent Calendar.
Carried by unanimous voice vote.
APPROVAL OF BILLS
M/S Haffey/Teglia - To approve the
Regular Bills in the amount of
$910,304.89.
Carried by unanimous voice vote.
RECREATION & COMMUNITY SERVICES
Mayor Drago opened the Public Hearing.
Acting Director of Recreation & Community
Services Goodrich stated that this was
second Public Hearing on the Community
Development Block Grant Funds for the
next fiscal year. She stated that the
Council had $458,000 available in the
coming year's funds, plus an estimated
carry over of $35,835. She stated that
the second public hearing gave the
Council opportunity to hear from the
public and those agencies that had made
application for CDBG funds.
She stated that Staff was suggesting that
the Resolution be passed tonight,
however, there was one more meeting if
5/11/88
Page 10
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
RECREATION & COMMUNITY SERVICES
6. Staff Report - Continued.
RECREATION & COMMUNITY SERVICES
the Council chose to carry it over and
still be within the time frame of the
City making application to the Federal
Government by the 31st of May.
She stated that the staff report inclu-
ded: statement of objectives of the use
of the funds; the Federal application;
summary of two proposed options for
expenditures; Community Development Plan
for 1988-89; report on carryover funds
from the current fiscal year; accumula-
tive report on performance; and copies of
proposals of the non-profit agencies.
Councilman Halley requested an explana-
tion of the difference between Option 1
and Option 2.
Acting Director of Recreation & Community
Services Goodrich stated that staff took
the conservative approach with the
limited funds, and suggested Council fund
everything at the same level as last year
with the exception of the day care
program, which would receive the left
over $2,200 which was Option 1.
She stated that Option 2 was different in
response to Council feedback received to
date by the interest in the Project Reach
proposal, and the request to shave money
allocated to other agencies to fund
Project Reach for beginning services,
etc.
Vice Mayor Teglia stated that last year
Project Reach had not submitted a request
for funds, but they had been funded the
year before. She stated that she did not
know that the City was in a position to
do an expansion at this time, rather to
continue the services established.
Councilman Nicolopulos questioned how
many South San Francisco residents were
served by the program, and whether it
included those participating in the
Special Olympics.
5/11/88
Page 11
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
RECREATION & COMMUNITY SERVICES
6. Staff Report - Continued.
RECREATION & COMMUNITY SERVICES
Ms. Shirley Moore, Project Reach, stated
that there were currently 15 families out
of the 75 in the program that were from
South San Francisco, and some could be
involved in the Special Olympics. She
stated that she was not interested in
taking from money other agencies as
funding, because all the services were
vital to the community.
She stated that the new program would
teach recreation people to do the
program's work, and that the initial
request had been for $26,000 to provide
that training. She continued, the second
request for $12,000 would continue the
existing programs and she would solicit
grant funds for the remainder. She
stated that some cities used General Fund
monies to fund public agencies.
Vice Mayor Teglia stated that the $5,200
should go to current services if funded,
not to new services, and that $68,700 was
all that the Council could expend on all
agencies.
Acting Director of Recreation & Community
Services Goodrich stated that the Council
could only expend 15% of the CDBG funds
for public services.
Councilman Halley stated that he
appreciated Ms. Moore not wanting to take
funds away from other agencies, and he
would personally support Option 2. He
stated that he did not like money being
expended from the General Fund for agen-
cies. He stated that he was on the Board
of the Boys Clubs, and knew that the
organization had a healthy budget.
Vice Mayor Teglia stated that the Council
was under budget constraints, and she
was interested in creative funding if any
of the agencies had such input.
Mr. Elton Luce, C.I.D., stated that the
recommendation by staff was to cut their
5/11/88
Page 12
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
RECREATION & COMMUNITY SERVICES
6. Staff Report - Continued.
RECESS:
RECALL TO ORDER:
CITY MANAGER - LABOR RELATIONS
®
Staff Report 5/11/88 recommending
adoption of a Resolution amending
the City's employee classification
plan for the positions of Building
Inspector, Code Enforcement Officer
RECREATION & COMMUNITY SERVICES
allocation by one-half, yet because their
goals had been exceeded not all of last
year's funds had been used.
Acting Director of Recreation & Community
Services stated that the funds would be
reviewed at the end of the fiscal year
and if money was available it could be
given to C.I.D.
Ms. Connie Mitchell, Friends to Parents,
stated that she was very thankful for the
years of Council support, and requested
Council support legislation on child care
facilities which were becoming scarce.
Ms. Jolly Perkocka, Director of Home
Sharing Program and Informational Center,
stated that the program allowed shared
housing for people needing a place to
live at an affordable price. She stated
that some cities used redevelopment
agency set aside funds for low and
moderate income housing to fund this
program.
Councilman Haffey stated that there was
one more meeting to find out about the
redevelopment funds being used, and
suggested staff investigate the matter.
Mayor Drago closed the Public Hearing.
Consensus of Council - To continue the
item to the next meeting.
Mayor Drago declared a recess at 9:40
p.m.
Mayor Drago recalled the meeting to order
at 9:59 p.m., all Council present.
CITY MANAGER - LABOR RELATIONS
Heard after the Closed Session.
5/11/88
Page 13
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
CITY MANAGER - LABOR RELATIONS
7. Staff Report - Continued.
and Lead Building Maintenance
Custodian.
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE SOUTH SAN
FRANCISCO EMPLOYEE CLASSIFICATION
PLAN FOR THE POSITIONS OF BUILDING
INSPECTOR, CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER
AND LEAD BUILDING MAINTENANCE
CUSTODIAN
CITY MANAGER - PLANNING
®
Public Hearing - Consideration of
Planned Unit Development Permit
(PUD-88-9) and vesting Tentative
Subdivision Map (SA-88-98 of
Westborough Development
Corporation to develop a 46 unit
residential project.
Staff 5/11/88 recommending: 1)
Open the Public Hearing and hear
testimony; 2) Close the Public
Hearing; 3) Motion to approve
Negative Declaration No. 623;
4) Motion to approve PUD-88-9; 5)
Motion to approve SA-88-98.
CITY MANAGER - LABOR RELATIONS
CITY MANAGER - PLANNING
Mayor Drago opened the Public Hearing.
Director of Planning Smith presented the
staff report and stated that Conditions
12, 13 and 14 were being added, as well
as Condition 15 which was stated in the
Attorney's memo (a copy of all conditions
are attached and a permanent part of the
record of this meeting). She stated that
Condition 15, which had been given to the
Council tonight, dealt with prevailing
wages. (A copy of the staff report is on
permanent file in the Clerk's Office for
public review.)
Councilman Haffey stated that in the
General Plan Policies the Council had
wanted to control the use of private
driveways, and he had a problem with com-
mon roads.
Director of Planning Smith stated that
Stonegate and Blonden Way had private
driveways to accommodate the steep
slopes.
Councilman Nicolopulos questioned the
amount of in-lieu park fees for this
project.
Director of Planning Smith stated that
the in-lieu park fees were $108,000.
Mr. Gordon Jacobi, Vice President of
Development for Venture Corp, highlighted
5/11/88
Page 14
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
SUBJECT:
FROM:
May 11, 1988
Planning Director
WESTBOROUGH DEVELOPMENT GROUP - PUD 88-9
City Attorney
The following special condition should be added to the Westborough Development
Group project which is on the May 11, 1988 City Council agenda:
Before a building permit is issued the developer shall either (a) provide
the City with a bond, subject to the approval of the City Attorney,
guaranteeing the timely completion of construction of the project, or
(b) provide proof to the City that it agrees to pay during construction
the general prevailing rate of per diem wages as determined and published
by the California Department of Industrial and Labor Relations pursuant to
Section 1770 et seq. of the Labor Code.
VALERIE J. ~RMENTO
City Attorney
VJA/mm
cc: City Council
cc: City Manager
5/11/88
Page 14a
SS/205 (7/87)
ADDITIONAL SPECIAL CONDITIONS
PUD-88-9
12.
13.
14.
An informational sign and decorative pavement treatment,
clearly indicating the private nature of the common
driveways, shall be provided at each driveway entrance
subject to the approval of a specific design by the Planning
Division.
A six-foot-high solid decorative fence shall be provided
along the southerly property line (except within required
setbacks adjacent to the two public streets) subject to
approval of a specific design by the Planning Division. The
design should incorporate concrete block columns and solid
wood panels.
Six-foot-high temporary fencing shall be provided around all
construction areas to prevent unauthorized access.
5/11/88
Page 14b
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
CITY MANAGER - PLANNING
8. Staff Report - Continued.
(Cassette No. 3)
CITY MANAGER - PLANNING
the design features of the project:
medium density, that had been approved
previous for a 53 unit townhouse
project; that the slope was steep and
had been tailored; that grading had been
done to take advantage of the slope; that
his firm had gone over the plans with
staff and the Planning Commission for a
pedestrian stairway that would go from
Gellert to Sellick Park; that shared
facility stairways would be turned over
to the City; that he agreed to all con-
ditions being added tonight.
Mr. Cris Craiker, Architect, stated that
five different floor plans had been
created to accommodate the conditions,
and that the architecture would be
Victorian Queen Anne, with trellis and
lattice work; single family detached,
etc.
Vice Mayor Teglia questioned whose idea
it was to have the stairway dedicated to
the City.
Director of Planning Smith stated that
she assumed that no one had made it a
requirement, however, it was an access to
a park.
Councilman Halley questioned why it was a
pedestrian walkway when the homeowners
would have to maintain the landscaping -
they should also maintain the stairway.
Mr. Jacobi stated that he would rather
sit down with the City Attorney to fully
discuss the question of liability being
passed on to the homeowners.
Mr. Lee Overcraft, Project Manager,
stated that it had been dedicated as a
right of way on the maps, however, he did
not know if it had been accepted by the
City.
Vice Mayor Teglia questioned if his
client was aware of the per diem wage
5/11/88
Page 15
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
~-- CITY MANAGER - PLANNING
8. Staff Report - Continued.
CITY MANAGER - PLANNING
memo, and whether it had been accepted.
Mr. Jacobi stated that he had agreed with
Mr. Gilmore and his firm was accepting
it, and hoped that in future it would
become a Citywide policy.
Councilman Halley stated that this
Developer had a place in Stonegate that
he had sold and the approved conditions
go with the land, yet the new owner is
balking -- concerned that the same
thing could happen with this project.
City Attorney Armento stated that she had
been approached by the new owner, and had
told him that the conditions go with the
land and are the owner's responsibility.
Discussion followed: costs for stairway
and landscape maintenance; that this
would be in the homeowners budget; that a
policy should be established for future
projects that there will be no more pri-
vate streets or have the Developer come
forward with a request for a variance;
problems with private streets; standards
of construction for streets; was there
sufficient funds set aside to maintain
the streets; who would enforce parking
requirements; market price for was
$230,000-$240,000 for a single-family
unit, etc.
Mr. Briz Kansal, Boardmember Westborough
Way Homeowners Assn., cited the eight
concerns of the Association letter (a
copy is attached and a permanent part of
the record of this meeting).
Mr. Jacobi stated that conditions I - 7
had been agreed to, however, condition 8
was not acceptable.
Councilman Haffey stated that the $100,000
was to be used for capital improvements
for parks, and the City had already
donated land for a pool for the resi-
dents. He stated that the residents had
5/11/88
Page 16
Weetborough WoW
P.O. Box 5355
South San Francisco, Cg B~OBO
Citw council
citw of South San Francisco,
Maw S, 1BBB.
The rmgular Weetborough WoW HOA Board of Oirectors meeting
woe held on Tuesdaw HaW 3 1BBB. Mr. Gordon Jacobw, Wire Pre-
sident of Wsstborough Osvslopment Corporation, presented the
plane for the housing development adjacent to our propertW.
The following pointe and issues were raised bW members of the
Westborough WoW HOA and hopfullw will be considered prior to
final approval of the project.
1. A separation between Westborough WoW and Sunriee proper-
ties, south-east propertw line, is needed. Suggesting a
foot wall, similar in conetruction to the wall allong Gellert
Blvd.
2. Fencing of propertw during conetruction, preventing chil-
dren from trespassing. At present shortest wow to Foxridg
echool.
3. Prevention of dust duci.ng grading and construction. Maw
become a problem due to water shortage.
~, Removal off "No Parking" eignes along Appian uaw between
~ellert and Uallewview Wow, hill side. Present No Perking
will force parking of construction vehicles in adjacent
neighborhood.
5. Routing of all heavw traffic related to c~nstruction via
Westborough-Sellert, not Avalon-Uallewview
~. Parkin~ space, drive uaw entrW ffrom Sellert, is at present
ehown against south east propsrtw line. Move parking closer
to unit C, awaw from propertw line and provide eome landscap-
ing allong proposed wall. Same on lower drivewag.
7. Landscaping and lighting should be designed to preserve
privacw of present propertw ownere allong south-eaet propertw
line.
B. It is our understanding that the devsloper is pawing the
titW approximatlw $1~'~DD.~ for parks etc. We kindlw re~om-
mend, that the monew will be allocated to tbs dmsperatlw nee-
ded swimmin~ pool ~unds, proposed at the new Westborough
Communitw/Recreation Center.
Yours v.9~rW trulw, ~
5/11/88
Page 16a
5/11/88
Pa§e' 16
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
-- CITY MANAGER - PLANNING
8. Staff Report - Continued.
(Cassette No. 4)
CITY MANAGER - PLANNING
been told they had to raise money to
build the pool.
Vice Mayor Teglia stated that the City
did not promise Westborough a pool nor
had it ever committed to the construction
of a pool.
Mayor Drago stated that in-lieu park fees
from projects were used throughout the
City for capital improvements.
Councilman Halley stated that in the past
Westborough residents had been neglected,
however, in recent years major projects
had been completed in the area: Sellick
Park, and Westborough Community Center.
Ms. Kay Wilson stated that she was an
adjoining property owner north of the
pedestrian way, and had worked with this
Developer on the project. She urged the
Council to retain a flexible attitude on
the private streets issue because it was
a unique site, and she had been pro-
ceeding on her project based on general
staff endorsement of the private streets.
Police Chief Datzman stated that narrow
streets did cause problems for the
public, and requested a clear policy be
set by the Council.
Mayor Drago stated that the Fire
Marshall's report indicated that the
access shown was acceptable, and that no
objections had been stated by the Police
Department in their report.
Mr. Robert Gilmore, Business Manager San
Mateo Trades Union, stated that he was
happy that Mr. Jacobi had approved the
prevaling wage condition, and not happy
that the last project had been sold with
the new owner not liking the condition.
Vice Mayor Teglia stated that a lot of
junk had been constructed in the past, in
pocket sized projects, that were not good
contributions to this City.
5/11/88
Page 17
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
...... CITY MANAGER - PLANNING
8. Staff Report - Continued.
ITEMS FROM STAFF
ITEMS FROM COUNCIL
9. Appointment to the Housing
Authority - One Seat.
10.
Appointments to the Personnel Board
- Two Seats.
lOa. Complaints on Cable TV. ~1~4)
.... GOOD AND WELFARE
CITY MANAGER - PLANNING
M/S Haffey/Teglia - To have Staff take
all comments back to the Planning
Commission for reconsideration, and the
item returned to the Council in a timely
manner.
Carried by unanimous voice vote.
ITEMS FROM STAFF
City Manager Lewis stated that after the
Closed Session the meeting would be
adjourned to a stated time and hour with
items to be discussed.
ITEMS FROM COUNCIL
M/S Teglia/Haffey - To reappoint Donald
Nelson to the Housing Authority - dura-
tion of term is 3/31/88 - 3/31/92.
City Clerk Battaya added the written vote
announced that the following vote was
unanimous to reappoint Oscar Galeno and
Bel Zertuche to the Personnel Board -
duration of term 12/31/86 - 12/31/90.
Mayor Drago stated that Councilman
Addiego had told him earlier that had he
been able to attend the meeting he would
have voted for the two incumbents.
Vice Mayor Teglia suggested appointing
future Boardmembers in advance of the
appointed term, so that they could
observe Board meetings.
Vice Mayor Teglia stated that a consti-
tuent had called with the following
complaint: that an old T.V. required a
rental box from Cable to bring in a
signal, yet if a new state of the art
T.V. was purchased the box was not
needed; and Cable still required the ren-
tal of the box. She requested staff
research the matter.
GOOD AND WELFARE
No one chose to speak.
5/11/88
Page 18
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
..... CLOSED SESSION
CLOSED SESSION
11.
Closed Session for the purpose of
the discussion of personnel mat-
ters, labor relations, property
negotiations and litigation.
Council adjourned to a Closed Session at
11:26 p.m. to discuss the items men-
tioned.
RECALL TO ORDER:
Mayor Drago recalled the meeting to order
at 11:59 p.m., all Council present, no
action taken.
Vice Mayor Teglia announced she will not
be present at the 5/18/88 meeting.
Staff Report 5/11/88 recommending
adoption of a Resolution amending
the City's employee classification
plan for the positions of Building
Inspector, Code Enforcement Officer
and Lead Building Maintenance
Custodian.
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE SOUTH SAN
FRANCISCO EMPLOYEE CLASSIFICATION
PLAN FOR THE POSITIONS OF BUILDING
INSPECTOR, CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER
AND LEAD BUILDING MAINTENANCE
CUSTODIAN
M/S Haffey/Teglia - To adopt an amended
Resolution that reflects an 8.5% increase
for the position of Building Inspector
and Code Enforcement Officer; and a 7.5%
increase for the Lead Building
Maintenance Custodian.
RESOLUTION NO. 59-88
Carried by unanimous voice vote.
M/S Haffey/Teglia - To adjourn the
meeting to Wednesday, 5/18/88, at 7:00
p.m., at Council Chambers at City Hall
for a study session to discuss the WQCP
capital improvements; and a Closed
Session for labor relations.
Carried by unanimous voice vote.
ADJOURNMENT:
Time of adjournment was 12:00 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED ,
Barbara A. Battaya, City ~l'erk
City of South San Francisco
APPROVED.
/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 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.
5/11/88
Page 19