HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1989-12-14 Mayor Richard A. Haffey
Counci 1:
Jack Drago
Gus Nicolopulos
John R. Penna
~Roberta Cerri Teglia
AGENDA
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
CALL TO ORDER: (Cassette No. 1)
ROLL CALL:
Joint study session with the
Planning Commission for discussion
and review of alternative scenarios
for the Westborough/Gellert
Specific Plan.
MINUTES
City Council
Westborough Park Building
2380 Galway Drive
December 14, 1989
ACTION TAKEN
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
7:40 p.m. Mayor Haffey presiding.
Council present:
Council absent:
Drago, Nicolopulos,
Penna, Te§lia, and
Haffey.
None.
Planning Commissioners present: Boblitt,
DeZordo, Mantegani,
Matteucci, Warren,
Wendler, and Zellmer
Planning Commissioners absent: None.
Director of Planning Smith stated that
this contract with EIP had been signed in
January 1989, and Mr. Gorney had been the
staff planner; and Maureen Morton had
taken over from Mr. Gorney when he left
City employ. She stated that a presen-
tation would be made by Michael Hitchcock
and Ted Adams of EIP, and Mr. Jeurgin
Fehr of Fehr & Peers Assoc. to explain
the alternatives.
She stated that the contract had been
signed a year ago, but there had been
delays, and this was the first meeting to
present the information to either Body.
Senior Planner Morton explained that the
consultants had been working on the plan,
addressing land circulation, land use and
design, the site, collecting data, and
formulating the alternatives, and the
selection of one. She stated that the
major property owner, Mr. Callan, had
been involved in the process of develop-
ment of the alternatives, and had pro-
vided background and technical infor-
mation regarding his site. She stated
that the consultants had met with staff,
Mr. Callan, and his engineer on 3/29/89
to review site conditions and previous
12/14/89
Page I
Joint study session - Continued.
concepts which had been developed for the
site. She stated that after the meeting
staff recommended that Mr. Callan provide
an alternative to be included in the ana-
lysis. She stated that Mr. Callan
declined, and recommended that EIP meet
with his engineer to get information on
the alternatives - which they had done.
Mr. Michael Hitchcock, EIP Assoc.,
questioned if the Council had received
the previous reports submitted to the
Planning Dept. that were not attached to
the staff report.
Mayor Halley stated that they had not.
Mr. Hitchcock stated that the specific
plan was a mechanism to take an area
of land and incorporate it into a general
plan. He explained that the specific
plan was more detailed than the area of a
general plan and could be an amendment to
the general plan; and could be adopted
with the zoning ordinance which the City
tends to do. He stated that EIP Assoc.
was developing this as an amendment, but
it could be turned into an ordinance.
He stated that the specific plan focuses:
on land use and design; traffic and cir-
culation; policy review; geological fac-
tors because of the slope to the west of
Gel lert; and infrastructures to handle
development of the site were all in the
scope of work.
He stated that at one time Mr. Callan had
suggested an economic analysis and a
market study be done of the site, and the
City sent a letter to him asking him to
fund it - and he had declined, so it was
not done.
He explained some of EIP's delays on the
contract had been due to his quitting
EIP, going back to his own company and
contracted his services to EIP; and the
office being closed after the earthquake.
He stated that the analysis looks at
various concepts of development that
12/14/89
Page 2
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
Joint study session - Continued.
could occur on the site. He stated that
on the east side of Gellert there is a
shopping center built out with structures
and parking lots, and there was not room
to put buildings to reconstruct the area.
He stated that the west side that was
undeveloped was difficult, because it was
steep and benches up the hill, and spoke
of the traffic volumes across Gellert to
the side of the road.
He stated that they had looked at
infrastructures to see if there was ade-
quate waste water to handle the site, and
the answer was yes there was.
He stated that they took a look at the
geology of the site - the grading with
two to one slopes, with benches. He
stated that the soil was bedrock, and
could be solid and it was a problem if
they develop it with the slope and the
side slopes as well.
He stated that they addressed the traffic
both existing and the new traffic counts
due to Pak'N'Save, as well as the turning
movements along Westborough and Gellert.
He stated that there was adequate capa-
city to handle development of the site,
and proceeded to describe: the land use
patterns of the area to the west that is
undeveloped; the established uses in the
developed areas; the residential area
above Gellert; the utility easement
running adjacent to the site; retail;
zoning for the area; that it could be
retail commercial with large footprints;
various uses for the area could include
senior care facilities or a hotel; divi-
ding the undeveloped part of the land to
the west into the low zone and the high
zone; how they had constructed an analy-
sis of land use that may be appropriate
or inappropriate for those zones; pro-
duced a matrix and a series of maps;
looked at the various uses and rated each
with the surrounding land use and traffic
access. He stated that the basic conclu-
sion was that the commercial area to the
12/14/89
Page 3
AGENDA ACT]~ON TAKEN
Joint study session - Continued.
east is highly suitable for the use being
made.
He stated that the area by Westborough
was highly established commercial, and on
the lower element would be retail commer-
cial that would have direct access poten-
tial for motels and hotels if there was
an economic plan for that. He stated
that residential would not be suitable
because of the traffic volumes, unless it
was multiple family dwellings.
He stated that based on that data, they
had come up with a series of alternatives
dealing with different land density and
the footprints on the site, and then had
taken a look at the concepts that would
be presented.
He stated that after Council input on the
alternatives, then a specific plan would
be made with the design, traffic mitiga-
tion, geological conditions and stan-
dards, and infrastructure improvements
necessary. He stated that there would
also be an EIR that would focus on the
five topics.
Councilman Nicolopulos expressed concern
that an economic basis had not been pre-
sented or done, and felt that was the
most important thing to have been done.
Mr. Hitchcock stated that he recognized
that as a restriction, and had tried to
design the alternatives more loosely that
would allow more flexibility.
Mayor Haffey stated that there appeared
to be confusion in Mr. Hitchcock's role,
because he had left EIP in the middle of
the contract. He questioned who had taken
the lead role in the City which had
allowed nine months to go by, and this
superficial report being presented to the
two Bodies. He stated that he found it
insulting as a Councilman that the reason
for the twelve months for a report was
because some time was lost in the work
schedule due to staffing changes in the
12/14/89
Page 4
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
Joint study session - Continued.
firm, and EIP's office was closed after
the earthquake.
He stated that the contract was for
$45,000 to complete the report, and
understood why the City was criticized
for hiring consultants.
He stated that the staff report requested
direction - yet there is no data to make
a decision on, and he felt that this was
one of the worst presentations he had
ever seen by a consultant.
He stated that he had high expectations
recognizing the problems in traffic and
circulation, and the existing problems
with the development of twenty years ago;
and the developer most affected is
laughing at the Council. He
questioned the staff supervision that
occurred over the consultants. He stated
that he heard that a staff transition had
occurred with the consultants, and also
had heard early on that there had been a
staff transition with City employees.
Director of Planning Smith stated that
from the staff standpoint, this presen-
tation should have occurred months ago -
and yet we are not half way through. She
stated that some choices could be made by
the Council and Commission for the area.
She stated that there could be some
misunderstandings, because it was concep-
tual, but perhaps they could explain how
they intend to proceed from here.
Mayor Halley questioned why Council did
not have the August 1989 report that Mr.
Hitchcock referred to.
Director of Planning Smith stated that it
was part of the administrative record and
only distributed to the staff.
Planning Commissioner Mantegani stated
that the Commission was expected to make
a decision on one of the alterntives, yet
they had little input or information to
assimilate to make an intelligent deci-
sion.
12/14/89
Page 5
A G E N D A A C T I 0 N T A K E N ;~i.~.L~,q~
1. Joint study session - Continued.
Councilmember Teglia questioned if the
concept of redevelopment of the area had
not been presented to the consultants,
wherein some of the shopping center is
removed to accommodate some other kind of
access into Westborough. She stated that
she did not think the developer would
have come into the City with these types
of footprints, and didn't want any one to
think that the City would entertain
another such density to occur.
She stated that the Council recognized
that the developer had a right to deve-
lop, as well as the problems that the
neighborhood experienced. She stated
that the Council was looking at ways to
bring it all together - which this did
not do.
Councilman Nicolopulos questioned the
consultant's timetable for this work, and
when the Council was supposed to vote on
the matter.
Director of Planning Smith stated that
originally this stage was supposed to be
completed in May, and the Bodies were
supposed to give direction tonight.
Councilman Nicolopulos questioned what
would take place if there had been
Council action in June.
Mr. Hitchcock stated that EIP would have
gotten the preliminary plans and started
the detail work.
Director of Planning Smith stated that
the data was to have been compiled in May
by EIP, and by June the alternatives were
to be generated; workshops were to be
held by the middle of June; Phase 3 was
administrative, based on Council and
Commission action; and the ultimate time
table was December.
Councilman Nicolopulos pointed out that
the consultant was six months behind, and
did not want the firm to proceed in a
hasty manner because of the delay.
12/14/89
Page 6
A G E N D A A C T I O N T A K E N ,'.~:
Joint study session - Continued.
Mayor Halley again expressed his
disappointment, and stated he was not
clear on where staff dropped the ball.
Director of Planning Smith stated that
staff did make a number of phone calls to
the firm, and understood that they were
making staff changes and another person
was working on it.
Mayor Halley stated that because Council
had recommended that a consultant be
used, perhaps this had not been a high
priority to staff and the supervision had
been less than if staff had recommended a
consultant be used.
Director of Planning Smith stated that
there were eleven staff comments on the
document that had gone back to the firm,
which indicated that staff was keeping up
on it.
She stated that it was a little indefi-
nite in starting out in what the product
was to be, and could not say if this was
what staff was expecting for the alter-
natives nor Was she satisfied, because
she expected it to be more comprehensive.
Mayor Haffey stated that the Director
should have reflected that in the staff
report.
Director of Planning Smith stated that
three firms had been interviewed, and
staff felt that this firm came the clo-
sest to coming up with the specific plan.
She stated that the City Manager had
asked what do we do, and she had recom-
mended that we don't go back and start
again.
Mayor Haffey stated that it was unfair
for Council to be asked to provide direc-
tion based on this information. He
stated that this was a $45,000 contract,
and questioned if the full amount had
been expended.
12/14/89
Page 7
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
Joint study session - Continued.
Director of Planning Smith stated that a
third of the amount had been expended.
Mayor Halley stated that he expected that
the City would not be paying further
monies on this contract. He stated that
there should have been more back-up infor-
mation provided.
Director of Planning Smith stated that
there was more back-up information on
parking garages, but was not sure that
was appropriate for the site which a
market analysis would show. She stated
that one of the things that had appealed
to the Council when the proposal came in
was that there was to be computer
drawings on the buildings as to how it
would look.
Councilman Penna questioned if the staff,
in choosing a consultant, had options
presented for an economic or market study
by the firms.
City Manager Armas stated that the draft
proposal had been presented to the
Council to make sure it examined the
areas contemplated, however the economic
or market study was not included.
Councilman Penna stated that from what he
had heard it will never work without an
economic and market study, because a per-
son was not going to put the money on the
line. He saw it as a major dollar pro-
ject and no one knew where the source of
revenue was coming from.
Director of Planning Smith stated that
the costs were up to the developer.
Councilman Drago stated that he
understood that due to staff changes
there was a loss of control, and
questioned if at any point in the last
ten months anyone had said to the con-
sultants that this was not acceptable.
He stated that it bothered him to have
gotten this far without getting what the
Council expected. He stated that the
12/14/89
Page 8
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
Joint study session - Continued.
Council could have been privy to the ana-
lysis, because he remembered before when
Mr. Callan had provided studies and
analyses.
Mayor Halley stated that Councilman
Nicolopulos had suggested that the con-
sultants use Mr. Callan's documents.
Councilman Drago stated that he suggested
using the consultants to settle
this problem with the owner without
jeopardizing the integrity of the neigh-
borhood.
He stated that he still felt that the
City had lost control at the staff level.
Director of Planning Smith stated that
staff had realized six weeks ago that the
work was not done, so staff kept after
them and this document was received which
had more to do with what would go in the
EIR.
Councilmember Teglia stated that the
report did not address: neighborhood con-
cerns; looking for new egresses, perhaps
by the removal of a building; and looking
at a redevelopment of the area. She
questioned if Council concerns had not
been communicated to the consultants by
staff.
Mr. Hitchcock stated that the concerns
cited had not been communicated.
Planning Commissioner Mantegani stated
that the consultant had been instructed
to maximize the use of the site, and he
did not think that the sensitivities and
problems in the neighborhood had been
conveyed to the developer; and had maxi-
mized the site for the developer, which
was not the thrust. He stated that this
had been commissioned because of the
problems in the area and its density, and
he too was very disappointed.
Planning Commissioner Warren expressed
concern over the lack of information on
12/14/89
Page 9
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
.... 1. Joint study session - Continued.
Adjournment of Planning Commission Meeting:
Closed Session for the purpose of
the discussion of personnel
matters, labor relations, property
negotiations and litigation.
RECALL TO ORDER:
ADJOURNMENT:
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Barbara A. Battaya
City of South San Francisco
the traffic problems, as well as not
being able to see Mr. Callan's plans for
the area after the consultant had met
with his engineer.
Director of Planning Smith stated that
Mr. Fehr was present and could answer
questions on circulation matters.
Mayor Haffey stated that he could address
the Council at a later time after first
providing written information that could
be reviewed.
He stated that this matter would be
referred to a subcommittee with two mem-
bers of each Body.
Planning Commission Chairman Zellmer
stated that he was in agreement with the
Mayo r.
M/S Warren/Mantegani - To adjourn the
Planning Commission meeting.
Carried by unanimous voice.
Time of adjournment was 8:38 p.m.
Council adjourned to a Closed Session at
8:38 p.m. to discuss the items noticed.
Mayor Haffey recalled the meeting to
order at 9:40 p.m., all Council present,
no action taken.
M/S Teglia/Penna - To adjourn the
meeting.
Carried by unanimous voice vote.
Time of adjournment was 9:41 p.m.
APPR~OVE, D. / .,, ! t'
C'ty of South S~-~Fr~isco
12/14/89
Page 10
A G E N D A A C T I 0 N T A K E N ,, ;.~
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.
12/14/89
Page 11