Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Minutes 1981-11-30 THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO November 30, 1981 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to the Government Code of the. State Of California, that the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San'Francisco will hold a Joint Study Session. with the South San Francisco City Council on Monday, November. 30,.1981, 4:30 p.m~ in the Conference Room, City'Hall, 400 Grand Avenue, South San Francisco, California, The purpose of the meeting: Review of Gateway Project - Precise Plan - Phase I - Assessment Proceedings for Off Site Improvements - Scope of Development.- Modifications /s/ Gus Nicolopulos Gus Nicolopulos, Chairman The Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San FranciSco Dated: November 20, 1981 Mayor Gus Nicolopulos M I N U T E S Vice Mayor Roberta Cerri Teglia Council: CITY COUNCIL Ronald G. Acosta Mark N. Addiego City Hall Conference Room Emanuele N. Damonte November 30, 1981 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Recited. CALL TO ORDER - CITY COUNCIL 4:42 p.m. Mayor Nicolopulos presiding. (Side 2 TF-OO1) Council present: Damonte, Acosta, Teglia and Nicolopulos. Council absent: Addiego. CALL TO ORDER - REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 4:43 p.m. Chairman Nicolopulos presiding. ~embers present: Damonte, Acosta, Teglia and Nicolopulos. Members absent: Addiego. City Manager Birkelo explained that this was a joint meeting of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency to discuss the following items: 1) Precise Plan - Phase I; 2) Assessment Proceedings for Off Site Improvements; 3) Scope of Development - Modifications. He requested that the matter of the Assessment Proceedings be discussed fi rst. Consensus of Council-Redevelopment Agency Members to discuss the Assessment Proceedings for Off Site Improvements fi rst. City Manager Birkelo indicated that there were slides covering the trip taken by two Members of the Agency and two Staff members to Atlanta and Dallas to investigate site developments in relation to the City's development. 1. Assessment Proceedings for Off-Site City Manager Birkelo stated that Improvements. the matter of Assessment District proceedings had been discussed during negotiations with Homart and was in- cluded in the Owner Participation Agreement; and that the City would con- sider the use of Assessment District proceedings to construct off-site , 11/30/81 Page 1 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 1. Assessment Proceedings for Off Site improvements related to 'the project. Improvements - Continued. He commented that the summary sheets which had been given to Council con- tained information on the types of improvements which would be necessary and which costs would be the Agency's and which would be Homart',s. Director of Public Services Yee commented on the street, sanitary sewer, storm drain, undergrounding of existing overhead utilities and of~ site traffic improvements. An in-depth discussion followed on the cost of the undergrounding of the utilities relative to the amount which had been agreed upon to be paid by the City and the estimate which had been received from PG&E which was ex- ceedingly higher. Further discussion followed relative to the of~ site improvement costs with City Manager Birkelo stating that "with the exception of $160,000 in sanitary sewers and the $500,000 in undergrounding, that we would ex- pect all the City's of~site costs to be included within the assessment pro- ceedings, so that they could be con- structed at the same time that Homart is constructing theirs. But that our payment for our share would be worked out on a schedule that would take tax increment funds when they became avail- able and plug them into a repayment pro- gram to take care of our share." (TF-095) Mr. Ken Jones, Attorney at Law, stated that "the financing program that your moving into here is based on the premise that the development itself is going to generate the means of financing. As Homart procedes with their construction program they are going to be generating assessed valu- ation which is taxable property, that in turn will generate tax increment money which as it materializes will bE 11/30/81 Page 2 A6ENDA ^CTION T^K£N 1. Assessment Proceedings for Off-S.ite plowed back in to help finance the Improvements - Continued. project. That will happen in two ways; one is for that money to be used directly to repay tax allocation notes and/or bonds which the Agency will issue to finance the East Grand Overpass, that will be the first call on those bonds; the second method of using them would be to apply them to the payment of the Agency's share of the cost of the public improvement pro- gram. In effect the Special Assessment District which is a direct charge to the property owner - the Homart property owner, that mechanism will be used as a means for the Agency to finance its share of costs right along with Homart financing its share of the cost. The desirable thing from the point of view of the Agency is that your commitment to use that financing method is limited to the amount that is generated." He indicated that the revenues to be re- ceived from the bonds would be in the area of $12,000,000. Discussion followed relative to the information which had been provided to PG&E concerning the undergrounding of the existing utilities in the pro- ject from which the costs were based. Members of Council expressed concern with the costs as presented by PG&E for the undergrounding. (TF-176) Mr. Herman Fitzgerald stated that "Depending upon the nature of the relocation and what utilities are relocated from the existing street, which is abandoned by PG&E to a new street, I feel under the law and based upon some litigation we had and some reported cases -- that PG&E would be liable to re- locate utilities that are above ground to underground when the street is vacated and abandoned ..... and subsequently relocated to provide that same service." Mayor Nicolopulos inquired if PG&E was being kept apprised of the status of the development so that they would be prepared'for the undergrounding. 1 ¥/30/81 Page 3 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 1. Assessment Proceedings for Off-Site Director of Public Services Yee Improvements - Continued. responded that the City had met with PG&E on numerous occasions and that they were aware of the project. Mayor Nicolopulos then presented slides from the trip taken by Councilman Acosta, Director of Con~nunity Development Dell'Angela, City Manager Birkelo and himself to Atlant~ Georgia and Dallas, Texas to inspect other Homart developments. 2. Precise Plan - Phase I Mr. John Aguilar, Homart Development Company, stated that a summary pre- sentation of the Precise Plan would be given. He then introduced Mr. Tom Gerfen, Architect; Mr. Paul Rhimer, Environmental Consultant; Mr. George Homolka, Engineer; and Mr. Dio Shaumi, Project Engineer. Mr. Aguilar con~nented on the three major activities in the overall master schedule. He indicated that the schedule was revised about every two weeks and explained the progress being made presently with relation to the demolition and grading of the area for Phase I. He commented on the East Grand Overcrossing opening and indicated that the first building would be scheduled for opening at approximately the same time. He stated that once approval had been given on the Precise Plan, that the next phase would be to apply for a building permit and working drawings. He said that the architects and engineers had been working with Staff to resolve some of the building, fire and security measures. (TF-332) Mr. Tom Gerfen then presented the Precise Plan. He commented that there were two basic elements: one was Gateway Boulevard and that would be landscapped as part of the first development in the project. He stated that it would be landscapped so that it would act as a funnel and carry the cars through the project and indicated that the areas would be flat grades and 11/30/81 Page 4 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 2. Precise Plan - Phase I hydroseeded with various colors of Continued. natural grasses. The inside along Gateway Boulevard would be developed with a six foot raised area with a row of pappas that would contain a view and the other side would have a natural mound containing flowering trees. The second part is how to deal with a wide open area with one road going through. He stated that there would be three major green zones, the first would be out on Gateway Boulevard where a .hotel or one of the office complexes may be developed in the future, the center site would contain most of the office pro- jects, and the third would be along Oyster Point Boulevard with parking in between eucalyptus trees. Mr. Gerfen continued to explain that Phase I consists of 21 acres and embodies three major intersections coming into Gateway Boulevard. He commented on the parking capacity and the constructual design of the buildings. Vice Mayor Teglia requested further information regarding the landscapping which would be visible from the highway. Mr. Gerfen responded that presently there were railroad tracks and a drainage ditch in the area, he pro- ceeded to explain that there would be a fence approximately 6 to 8 feet tall planted with a series of ivy and vines. He stated that trees would be planted which would be similar to those planted by CALTRANS. Discussion followed concerning the use of eucalyptus trees in the area and the virtues and possible alter- natives to their use. Also discussed were the types of materials to be used in the construction of the buildings. Vice Mayor Teglia requested information regarding the installation of ponds and lakes in the development in the future. 11/30/81 Page 5 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 2. Precise Plan - Phase I Discussion followed relative to the Continued. possibility of salt water intrusion affecting the fibrous root trees, the effect of the court yard being shaded all year long, and the amount of glass which could be used in con- struction. RECESS: Mayor Nicolopulos declared a recess at 6:23 p.m. RECALL TO ORDER: The meeting was recalled to order at 6:35 p.m., all Council present. City Manager Birkelo asked if Council had any questions concerning the building design and features. Councilman Acosta con~nented that he felt that those who had visited the other Homart developments had a reasonable idea of the projected construction. Vice Mayor Teglia expressed concern that the building was not unusual in design. She stated that she had expected something out of the "common mode." Mayor Nicolopulos asked if a decision had been made by the architect as to the way the buildings would be con- structed. Mr. Aguilar replied that yes, a decision had been made. He stated that in order to obtain prices to estimate the cost a decision as to the types of materials and design had to be made. He indicated that minor modifications could be made without changing the cost dramatically. Discussion followed concerning the overall design of Phase I followed with a suggestion by Mr. Aguilar that Council hold a session at the site office and view the overall Gateway model. 11/30/81 Page 6 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 2. Precise Plan - Phase I Discussion followed concernin§ the Continued. use of sculpture or other pieces of art for focal points within the development. City Manager Birkelo commented that a memo, which had been written after returning from the tour of other Homart developments, had stated that the City had not reached a decision as to the design of the proposed buildings. Director-of Community Development Dell'Angela stated that he had been under the impression that there would be connecters joining the individual buildings, however plans which had been presented did not represent this'idea. Mr. Gerfen stated that because of the earthquake code certain types of design would not be considered. Discussion followed on the time needed to prepare perspectives showing the proposed plans. Further discussion followed rel- ative to the City's approval of the plan and other areas of concern to members of Council and Homart. Councilman Acosta questioned the concerns expressed by others and indicated that he found no prob- lem with the design of the building, but with the textures to be used in the construction. Vice Mayor Teglia stated that her concerns had to do with the design as well as the materials proposed for use and indicated that she would like to see the design and materials all together. Mr. Aguilar commented that if Council was not going to make a decision re- garding the precise plan until January then he would like at least two weeks to prepare the display for Council. 11/30/81 Page 7 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 2. Precise Plan - Phase I Vice Mayor Teglia asked what problems Continued. Staff would have with respect to the consideration of the Plan by the 16th of December. Director of Community Development Dell'Angela stated that Staff would not be able to complete their reviews of the Plan by that time. He explained the process of review and comment by the various departments involved, and in- dicated that this would take at least two weeks. 3. Scope of Development - Modifications. City Manager Birkelo explained that this involved the increase in the R & D parcel, a 22 acre parcel which needed to be increased. He stated that this presented a problem in terms of whether any significant change in the total scope of development, in terms of density, would require the reopening of the EIR process. He indicated that this would not be desirable at this point in the development. He said that Homart and the prospective buyer of that parcel were still negotiating. He further related that Homart would be coming in with a proposal, assuming the negotiations had gone well, and ask for an amendment to the Owner Participation Agreement which might ask Council to agree with an "intent" to meet the needs of the R & D parcel without guaranteeing them in the absence of an Environmental Impact Report which would justify the amendment. Vice Mayor Teglia indicated that she did not mind modifications as long as when you change one set of variables you indicate in some other report how the other things are affected. She stated that she wanted to know how the changes would flow with the rest. Mayor Nicolopulos mentioned the factor of public transportation. He commented that he felt the development would cau- an increase in traffic flow. Director of Community Development Dell'Angela stated that the Transportation Management Plan was a mitigation measure 11/30/81 Psge 8 AGENDA ~ACT I ON TAKEN ~8~ 3. Scope of Development - Modifications. to the project, and indicated that it was in the process of being prepared by the developer. Mr. Aguilar commented on the Transportation Management Plan. He stated that within the scope of the development there were certain goals, objects that had been agreed upon in terms of usage. Mr. Rheimer stated that the transportation systems management program addressed three main categories of improvement on the site: l) flexible work hours; 2) encouragement of ride sharing; and 3} improvement of accessibility to public transit. Vice Mayor Teglia stated that she would want to know more about the flexible work hours and if there was a way to guarantee the hours. Mr. Rheime? responded that high fuel costs and congestion were negative motivations which will be prime mo- tilvators of change. He stated that one of the risk implications was identified along the Airport Boulevard and various intersections. The pro- jections are in terms of mitigation from the Gateway project that are going to influence traffic to reduce the impact on those intersections. Vice Mayor Teglia asked if SAMTRANS had considered servicing the area in the advent of the development. Director of Community Development Dell'Angela replied that SAMTRANS had been supplied with a list of businesses within the area by the Finance Department and they were investigating various possibilities. He further commented on the concerns of staff with the development in the area in conjunction with the traffic flow, the relationship to Oyster Point Boulevard, and the potential redevelopment of the U.S. Steel site and Healy Tibbits. 11/30/81 Page 9 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 3. Scope of Development - Modifications. Discussion followed on the inclusion of existing traffic flow in the EIR, placing a sealing on the amount of development in the area, use of buses by United Airline employees, etc. City Manager Birkelo stated that Staff would be ready to make a recommendation for the selection of a fiscal consultant who would be required to prepare the prospectus for the slae of the tax allocation notes and to also assist in the legal validation of those notes and subsequent bonds at the next Redevelopment meeting. Mr. Fitzgerald stated that once the consultant is selected, it is the consultant who makes the calculations as to the amount of money necessary to service the sale of a bond issue in a certain amount. Thereafter, we will ask the Agency to adopt a resolution directing the Executive Director to proceed with the sale of bonds as the first step. The City Manager will in his capacity as the Director, refuse to do this on the advice of bond counsel Mr. Jones. In that Proposition 4 may require or may involve this process, we will then file as the Agency to authorize the filing of a lawsuit to validate this in effect. In other words, to direct Mr. Birkelo to proceed with financing the bonds. The lawsuit will be in effect a friendly law suit in order to have the court rule that Proposition 4 does not include Redevelopment Agencies. We will then have removed a taint or question to a bond purchaser that Proposition 4 does not involve the Redevelopment Agency bonds in the City of South San Francisco. Discussion followed relative to the length of time for this action. Mr. Fitzgerald indicated that it would take approximately 90 to 120 days. Also discussed was the possibility of a third party intervening in the 11/30/81 Page l0 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN lawsuit, etc. M/S Damonte/Acosta - That the Redevelopment Agency meeting be adjourned. Carried by unanimous voice vote. REDEVELOPMENT ADJOURNMENT: Time of adjournement 7:30 p.m. CLOSED SESSION: Council adjourned to a Closed Session at 7:31 for purposes of litigation. RECALL TO ORDER: The meeting was recalled to order at 7:55 p.m., all Council present, no action taken. M/S Damonte/Acosta - That the City Council meeting be adjourned. Carried by unanimous voice vote. CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNMENT: Time of adjournment 7:56 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, APPROVED: [~arDara A. Battaya, ~l~y'c~er~ Gus Nicolopulos, Mayor 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. 11/30/81 Page 11