HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Minutes 1999-12-08_ MINUTES
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE
C1TY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 8, 1999
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING
COMMUNITY ROOM
33 ARROYO DRIVE
CALL TO ORDER: 7:03 p.m. (Cassette Tape No. 1)
ROLL CALL Present: Boardmembers Datzman, Mullin and Penna,
Vice Chair Fernekes and Chairman Matsumoto.
Absent: None.
AGENDA REVIEW No changes.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Motion to Approve Minutes of the November 10, Regular Meeting and November 17,
1999 Special Meeting
2. Motion to Confirm Expense Claims of December 8, 1999 in the amount of $68,305.25
3. Motion to Cancel the Regular Meeting of December 22, 1999, and Schedule a Special
Meeting for December 15, 1999
4. Resolution No. 18-99 Authorizing Execution of a Pre-Development Agreement with
BRIDGE Housing to Prepare Construction Drawings for the Chestnut Creek Senior
Housing Project in an Amount Not to Exceed $275,000
5. Final Acceptance for Improvements at 472 Grand Avenue/306 Spruce Avenue, South San
Francisco Health Center
Motion-Penna/Second-Mullin: To approve the Consent Calendar as presented.
Unanimously approved by voice vote.
PUBLIC HEARING
6. Precise Plan and Environmental Impact Report (PP-99-048 and EIR-97-027) to Construct
a 136,000 Square Foot Retail Store in the Bay West Cove Development; Applicant: Wal
Mart, Bay West Cove LTD (continued from September 22, and November 10, 1999
meetings)
Counsel Mattas advised the Agency to reopen the public hearing.
Motion-Fernekes/Second-Penna: To reopen the public hearing. Unanimously approved
by voice vote.
Staff report presented by Assistant Director Van Duyn
Judy Davidoff, Baker & McKenzie, Two Embarcadero Center, 24th Floor, San Francisco,
representing Wal Mart, stated that staff has recommended approval of this project. She
urged the Agency to approve the Wal Mart Precise Plan tonight. She explained that the
only new information before the Agency this evening are the economic and fiscal studies
prepared by The Sedway Group and Economic Research Associates. Conclusions from
both reports were similar. A few of the similarities were that Wal Mart would generate
substantial new sales tax for the City, that the day worker population spends their
earnings elsewhere, and that the effect on business on Grand Avenue would be minimal.
The businesses on Grand Avenue were local serving and service oriented. She stated that
the community wants a Wal Mart in South San Francisco and presented the Agency with
over two thousand cards in support of Wal Mart.
The Sedway Group (on behalf of Wal Mart), Three Embarcadero Center, Suite 1150, San
Francisco made a brief presentation on Economic and Fiscal Impact Study. Their
conclusions were that the City would receive net revenues in the amount of $326,000,
Wal Mart would recapture sales leaking to other cities and that there would be
employment opportunities of 300-350 jobs.
(Chair Matsumoto stopped the public hearing momentarily for the pledge of allegiance
and invocation to be given, refer to City Council Minutes)
William Lee, Economics Research Associates (on behalf of the Redevelopment Agency),
388 Market Street, Suite 1580, San Francisco gave a summary of Retail Sales and
Community Income Impact Analysis. Their opinions were that Wal Mart would provide a
new source of sales tax revenue, Wal Mart's competition is other big box retailers, and
the central business district is not strongly impacted by the arrival of Wal Mart and they
tend to drive down wages.
Daniel L. Cardozo, Adams Broadwell Joseph & Cardozo (on behalf of the United Food
and Commercial Workers Union, Local 101), 651 Gateway Boulevard, Suite 900, stated
the proposed Wal Mart project is inconsistent with the policies of the 1999 General Plan
requiring the City to act affirmatively to promote and maintain the downtown area.
Daniel T. Smith, Smith Engineering & Management (on behalf of the United Food and
Commercial Workers Union, Local 101), 5311 Lowry Road, Union City, gave a brief
summary on the traffic issue in the Bay West Cove site.
Walter Johnson, 334 Holly Avenue, speaking against the project, stated that South San
Francisco is the proud home of working people and requested that the Agency vote
against Wal Mart.
Tom Cornehlsenn, Milpitas, speaking in favor of the project, stated that Wal Mart is a
wonderful place to work and that they would be good neighbors.
REGULAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DECEMBER 8, 1999
MINUTES PAGE 2
Doris Gelene, 700 Newman, speaking in favor of the project, stated that the citizens of
South San Francisco should have the opportunity to shop at Wal Mart.
Robert Ortiz, 19 Randolph Avenue, speaking against the project, felt that Wal Mart will
bring trouble to his neighborhood and the people that they would hire will be non-union.
Bill Price, 233 Wicklow Drive, speaking against the project, stated that the downtown
area is built up and that Wal Mart should not be allowed in South San Francisco.
(Recess: 8:20 p.m. - 8:27 p.m.)
Randell Oyler, 736 McClay Road, Novato, speaking against the project, stated that when
the malls were built the downtown area went out of business. He felt this would happen
once again if the Wal Mart project were approved.
Gary Saunders, 1519 Rollins Road, Burlingame, representing Local No. 467, speaking
against the project, stated that Wal Mart will replace the higher wage jobs. Another issue
he raised was the looks of a big box at the entrance of the city. He would like to see the
project turned down.
Russell Champlin, 6105 Maree Court, San Jose, speaking in favor of the project, read
various letters from his community thanking Wal Mart for their donations.
Stephanie Torres, 465 Weskow Drive, San Jose, speaking in favor of the project, stated
that Wal Mart takes care of their employees and that everyone should have an
opportunity to shop at Wal Mart.
Rosemarie Martin, 10300 Joyce Court, San Jose, speaking in favor of the project, stated
that she has been an employee for almost ten years and that she is very happy working for
them.
Stanley J. Scovill, 838 Newman Drive, speaking in favor of the project, stated that the
primary reason for a union was jobs and people. He felt that the unions here tonight
should be organizing the people to become union members. He urged the Agency to give
the people what they want.
Joe Deal, 24772 Pear Street, San Jose, speaking in favor of the project, stated that Wal
Mart respects their employees and that Wal Mart would be an asset to the community.
Jim Firth, 208 Miller Avenue, representing Local No. 101, speaking against the project,
commented on the traffic and pollution Wal Mart would be bringing into the community.
Betty Harris, 770 Harmony Drive, Hayward, speaking in favor of the project, stated that
Wal Mart is the best company she has ever worked for. She urges the Agency to give
Wal Mart a chance.
Jesus de Los Santos, 723 Highpoint Way, Hayward, speaking in favor of the project, that
Wal Mart is a great neighbor. They contribute to different organizations within the
communities.
REGULAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DECEMBER 8, 1999
MINUTES PAGE 3
Ruth Sack, 2248 Shannon Drive, speaking against the project, felt that people who work
for Wal Mart should earn enough money to live within South San Francisco. She brought
up the fact that Wal Mart has been sued many times and urged the Agency to vote against
Wal Mart.
Stan Warren, 55 Fillmore Street, San Francisco, representing Local No. 40 speaking
against the project, commented on the fact that Wal Mart had a campaign to "Buy
American," but in fact purchased items overseas. He urged the Agency to vote no on
Wal Mart.
John Scantlin, 2220 Newton Drive, Brentwood, speaking in favor of the project, stated
that Wal Mart is the largest retailer in the United States. They are a family organization
and the employees are treated with respect.
William Nack, 1153 Chess Drive, Foster City, representing the Building and
Construction Trades Council of San Mateo County, speaking against the project,
questioned whether the Agency wanted a big box at this site or were there other options.
He urged the Agency to reject the project.
Shelley Kessler, 1153 Chess Drive, Foster City, representing San Mateo County Central
Labor Council, speaking against the project, commented that it is difficult for people to
survive with wages earned from Wal Mart. She urged the Agency to reconsider and vote
no on Wal Mart coming to South San Francisco.
Cynthia Lin, Orange County, speaking in favor of the project, stated she attended an open
forum sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce. Wal Mart also sent out a direct mail
survey and received over two thousand responses in favor of Wal Mart coming to South
San Francisco. Wal Mart offers items that are not available in the local community; they
complement them. She concluded by saying that she hopes the people voices are heard.
Chad Hagen, 1038 Houghton Court, San Jose, speaking in favor of the project,
commented that working for Wal Mart has been one of the best experiences in his life.
He said, that if Wal Mart was allowed to come into the community it would generate
money for the city.
Elizabeth Quintanilla, 1861 Girard Drive, Milpitas, speaking in favor of the project, felt
that if Wal Mart was allowed to come to South San Francisco, people would get off
unemployment and public assistance. The City would increase revenues if Wal Mart
were allowed in South San Francisco.
Dan Rush, 208 Miller Avenue, representing Central Labor Council of San Mateo County,
speaking against the project, questioned why Wal Mart pays millions of dollars to law
firms and not to their employees. He reminded the Agency that they had the opportunity
to stop Wal Mart from coming into the community.
Lisa Orlowski, 208 Miller Avenue, representing Local No. 101, speaking against the
project, stated that Wal Mart is not handicap friendly. As a resident of Marin County, she
commented that the Board of Supervisors was tempted by the potential revenue from Wal
Mart, but decided against letting them in the community.
REGULAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DECEMBER 8, 1999
MINUTES PAGE 4
Jackie Williams, 242 Longford, speaking against the project, was concerned with the
traffic, guns being sold, and the downtown area being affected. She also felt the public
was not notified regarding a big box being constructed at the Bay West Cove site.
Richard Hedges, 208 Miller Avenue, representing Local 101, speaking against the
project, stated he was surprised that ERA was selected to do the Income Impact Analysis
Report, since that was not their expertise. He further commented that the Union had
submitted quite a few documents for review. He also stated that the employees have not
been treated fairly by Wal Mart.
Chair Matsumoto commented that she was the one who suggested the Agency place ERA
on its consultant list.
Nick Tentes, 306 Grand Avenue, speaking against the project, gave a synopsis of the
history of Grand Avenue. He felt the City did not need to go out and solicit more
businesses. He said, we do not need a Wal Mart in our town.
Earl Anexston, 1131 Escalero, Pacifica, speaking against the project, commented on the
60 Minutes television program.
Public hearing closed
Because of the lateness of the evening, Chair Matsumoto sought direction from the
Agency as to whether they would like to proceed or continue the meeting at a later date.
Boardmembers Mullin and Penna suggested that the Agency proceed with their
comments. Boardmember Datzman and Vice Chair Fernekes were ready to make their
decisions tonight.
(Recess: 9:40 p.m. - 9:50 p.m.)
Chair Matsumoto explained that there were three people who had not spoken because a
notice had gone out with the wrong time.
Public hearing reopened
Leo Torio, 215 Linden Avenue, speaking against the project, commented that he has
spoken to many people in the community and that they are against Wal Mart. He is
afraid that if Wal Mart is approved, in a few years there will be meetings on how to
revitalize the downtown area. He appealed to the Agency to vote against the Wal Mart
application.
John Guilaiano, 304 Arroyo Drive, speaking against the project, commented that he just
found out about the meeting tonight. He urged the Agency to think about the community
and the people who showed up tonight.
Martha Larson, 713 Almond Avenue, speaking against the project, commented that she
shops on Grand Avenue and feels it is an asset to the city. There are shops that will be in
competition with Wal Mart and they will go out of business. When you have people
thinking of South San Francisco, do you want them to think of Wal Mart or Grand
Avenue?
REGULAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DECEMBER 8, 1999
MINUTES PAGE 5
Counsel Mattas suggested the Agency have rebuttals as part of the public hearing.
Judy Davidoff, Baker & McKenzie, Two Embarcadero Center, 24th Floor, San Francisco,
commented that the Sedway Study interviewed over three hundred businesses and only
two showed up tonight. She felt there was not an overwhelming objection. She continued
by commenting on Mr. Cardozo's statements.
(Cassette Tape No. 2)
Dan Cardozo, Adams Broadwell Joseph & Cardozo, 651 Gateway Boulevard, Suite 900,
reiterated that there is evidence supporting severe impact and displacement of downtown
businesses. He asked the Agency to deny the action.
Public hearing closed
Boardmember Mullin stated he and Vice Chair Fernekes visited two Wal Marts. He
continued to describe the stores and their locations. He questioned all three of the reports
regarding benefits, wages, employee donations, and customer base.
Boardmember Datzman also visited four different Wal Marts and was pleased with what
he saw. He commented on the location site at Bay West Cove, the consistency with the
Specific Plan, the success of Wal Mart and the revenue that would be generated if Wal
Mart was to be at the Bay West Cove site.
Boardmember Penna visited two Wal Marts. His main concerns were salaries, loss of
business on Grand Avenue, land use and the appearance of the entrance to the city. He
questioned Counsel Mattas if there were other alternatives that the Agency could pursue.
Counsel Mattas replied that if the Agency wanted to modify the Specific Plan and
Shearwater zoning area they would have to go through a legislative process. He
continued to explain that if the Agency wanted to adopt an interim ordinance for a
moratorium to prohibit use permits during the time the Agency considers the appropriate
uses in the area.
Vice Chair Fernekes described the various stores and locations that he and Boardmember
Mullin visited. His concerns were wages, benefits, traffic patterns, Grand Avenue
businesses, and the site as a gateway to the city. He concluded by saying that a big box
was not the best use of the land.
Boardmember Mullin felt that the Sedway Report and the ERA Report did reflect the
same information regarding the impact to the Downtown Area. He also commented on
new businesses that would be coming to the area if Wal Mart were allowed to proceed.
He said that the Specific Plan does not meet the long-term goals for the area. He
concluded by saying that he is prepared to change the Specific Plan for that area.
Boardmember Penna and Vice Chair Fernekes are in support of a moratorium.
Chair Matsumoto was concerned with the displacement of jobs, impact of the traffic and
the interpretation of the General Plan. She questioned if she voted against Wal Mart
would that include the moratorium. Counsel Mattas explained that the moratorium would
REGULAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DECEMBER 8, 1999
MINUTES PAGE 6
have to be on the agenda for City Council. He continued to explain the zoning for the Bay
West Cove Area.
Boardmember Datzman questioned that if there was a moratorium, would it affect the
current projects. Counsel Mattas answered that it could affect the adjacent parcels.
Counsel Mattas suggested the Agency review the owner participation agreement they
have with the master landowners.
Assistant Director Van Duyn explained the moratorium could be the entire Specific Plan
Area or the underdeveloped portion area in its present state.
Motion-Penna/Second-Fernekes: To continue Precise Plan and Environmental Impact
Report (PP-99-048 and EIR-97-027) to construct a 136,000 square foot retail store in the
Bay West Cove Development: applicant Wal Mart, Bay West Cove LTD to December
15, 1999. Unanimously approved by voice vote.
7. Precise Plan (PP-99-053) to Approve a Freeway Oriented Pylon Sign and Overall Master
Sign Program for the Bay West Cove Development; Applicant: Wal Mart, Bay West
Cove LTD
Motion-Mullin/Second-Penna: To continue Precise Plan (PP-99-053) freeway oriented
pylon sign and overall master sign program for the Bay West Cove Development to
December 15, 1999. Unanimously approved by voice vote.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion- Fernekes-Penna: To adjourn the meeting at 11:38 p.m. Unanimously approved by
voice vote.
Respectfully Submitted: Approved: '
Lgfida Patrick, Deputy Clerk at*s
City of South San Francisco City of South San Francisco
The entries of this Redevelopment Agency meeting show the action taken by the Board 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.
REGULAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DECEMBER 8, 1999
MINUTES PAGE 7