Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 2015-02-25 @7:00 MINUTES OJg1.1 SANS 0� , y CITY COUNCIL -- "-_; CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO qL/FOReA¢ REGULAR MEETING MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 33 ARROYO DRIVE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2015 CALL TO ORDER TIME: 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers, Gupta Matsumoto and Normandy, Vice Mayor Addiego and Mayor Garbarino. ABSENT: None. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Garbarino. AGENDA REVIEW None. PRESENTATIONS • Certificate of Recognition for Citizens Thomas Luciani and David Goff and Certificate of Meritorious Conduct for Officer Sharif Limbada. (Mike Brosnan, Deputy Chief). Deputy Chief Brosnan presented a Certificate of Recognition to Thomas Luciani for assisting in the capture of a suspect involved in a hit and run accident. Deputy Chief Brosnan also recognized David Goff who informed police of a robbery assisting in the suspect's identification and capture and proceeded to acknowledge Officer Sharif Limbada with a Certificate of Meritorious Conduct for having applied his training to save a child's life. PUBLIC COMMENTS South San Francisco resident Amy Lam brought attention to the Heart Loan Program which helped her family find and buy a home in the community. Mrs. Lam thanked the City and Council for supporting the program and for permitting her to share their story. COUNCIL COMMENTS/REQUESTS Mayor Garbarino presented a Proclamation to Chief Planner Susy Kalkin to commemorate her retirement. Chief Planner Kalkin expressed appreciation for the opportunities the City had provided, and shared her pride in the work she had done for South San Francisco. Councilman Gupta provided information from the County Board of Supervisors Meeting explaining that the Board approved funding for the first phase of the Community Choice Aggregation Project, which Council had supported with a resolution concerning consumer purchase of electricity from energy efficient and renewable energy sources. He added that the County initiated a study on housing, finding that San Mateo County is the richest in the nation; however, at the same time, the housing situation is in crisis. Accordingly, the Supervisors have recommended a study involving all stakeholders. Councilman Gupta would continue to monitor this issue. Councilwoman Normandy stated the Community Collection Drive for Safe Harbor Shelter was overwhelmingly successful. She thanked residents and encouraged continued donations of needed items. Councilwoman Matsumoto recognized former City Employee Simon Kwong for his excellent work. She thanked him and wished him well in his future endeavors. Councilwoman Matsumoto expressed concern over Proposition 47, concerning felonies and misdemeanors. She asked the Police to monitor the impact of recidivists on the community. Vice Mayor Addiego attended a forum about Latino community concerns and scam awareness. He believed the very helpful forum could have been better publicized. Vice Mayor Addiego requested that the meeting be adjourned in honor of long time Sunshine Gardens resident, Betty Seaver. Mayor Garbarino encouraged residents to be vigilant about guarding against fraudulent scams, which recently targeted City residents. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Motion approving the Minutes of meetings of February 11, 2015. 2. Motion confirming payment registers for February 25, 2015. 3. Resolution No. 17-2015 authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consulting Services Agreement with EMG Corporation of Walnut Creek, California, in an amount not to exceed $105,066 for services on the South San Francisco Comprehensive Facilities Condition and Needs Assessment Project (Project No. pfl 501). (Sam Bautista, Principal Engineer). Item 2 —In response to a question from Councilwoman Matsumoto, Finance Director Lee advised the queried payment reflected a consulting services fee. Item 3 —In response to questions from Councilwoman Matsumoto and Mayor Garbarino, staff responded that all City facilities would be included in the Project. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 25,2015 MINUTES PAGE 2 Motion—Vice Mayor Addiego/Second— Councilman Gupta: to approve the Consent Calendar. Unanimously approved by roll call vote. LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS 4. Motion to waive reading and introduce an Ordinance amending Chapter 11.24 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code to prohibit the intentional obstruction of pedestrian traffic upon sidewalks. (Steve Mattas, City Attorney) Assistant City Attorney Rosenberg introduced an ordinance prohibiting the intentional obstruction of pedestrian traffic upon sidewalks in order to improve accessibility, make safe pedestrian facilities a priority, ensure health and safety, encourage walking as a mode of transportation and reduce daily vehicle trips. Councilwoman Matsumoto asked about wider sidewalk requirements. Assistant City Attorney Rosenberg responded that no specific sidewalk requirements were included with this ordinance, however all sidewalks had to be compliant with the existing zoning code. Councilman Gupta encouraged the City Attorney's Office to assist the Police Department in coming up with ways to enforce the Ordinance. He further queried whether a group of people had to be present in order to induce a violation. Assistant City Attorney Rosenberg responded that one person's actions could violate the Ordinance. A group was not necessary. Sonia Trousse expressed concern about the Ordinance, its ability to be enforced and the disparate groups it might impact. Deputy Chief Brosnan clarified that staff would be educated about enforcement of the Ordinance. From a tactical perspective, enforcement would likely be complaint driven. Vice Mayor Addiego expressed disapproval of the concept of the Ordinance, which he believed invited problematic enforcement issues. Motion—Councilwoman Matsumoto/Second- Councilman Gupta: to waive reading and introduce an Ordinance amending Chapter 11.24 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code to prohibit the intentional obstruction of pedestrian traffic upon sidewalks. Approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilman Gupta, Councilwoman Matsumoto, Councilwoman Normandy and Mayor Garbarino; NOES: Vice Mayor Addiego; ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 5. Mid-Year Budget Review and Resolution No. 18-2015 approving the mid-year 2014-2015 budget amendment changes, amending the City's 2014-15 Operating Budget in order to adjust revenues and expenditures at mid-year and approving the Salary Schedule for the REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 25,2015 MINUTES PAGE 3 Recreation Program Manager Position and approving the Salary Schedule for hourly job classifications. (Richard Lee, Finance Director). Finance Director Lee presented the Staff report. He first introduced Russell Hancock, President and CEO of Joint Venture Silicon Valley. Mr. Hancock gave an overview of the current local economy and indicators. He believed that the current economic upswing in the area was sustainable due to the diversified technology portfolio in Silicon Valley. Finance Director Lee then presented a PowerPoint summarizing the Mid-Year Budget report and concerns. The net impact included $2.3 million more to the City's bottom-line than expected, including total general fund revenue of$3.9 million more than the budget, with expenditures at an additional $1.7 million. The top general fund revenue source contributions were: property taxes, TOT, sales tax, charges for services, motor vehicle license and in-lieu, former RDA property tax allocation, triple flip, building and fire permits, franchise fees, interest and rent. Director Lee continued detailing departmental expenditure requests given the revenue information and need for staffing. He also made recommendations pertinent to budget amendments and recommended approval of the resolution that would accomplish these adjustments. Councilman Gupta cautioned against over confidence based upon one-time boosts to revenue. Councilwoman Normandy queried the one-time adjustment for triple flip. Director Lee advised of the expectation that the triple flip would completely unwind over the next couple years until the City receives its full 1% share of sales tax revenues. Motion- Vice Mayor Addiego/Second- Councilwoman Normandy: to approve Resolution No. 18- 2015. Unanimously approved by roll call vote. 6. Resolution No. 19-2015 supporting the designation of San Bruno Mountain and associated properties within the City of South San Francisco as a Priority Conservation Area. (Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner). Chief Planner Kalkin presented the staff report recommending that Council approve a resolution supporting the designation of San Bruno Mountain and associated properties within the City of South San Francisco as a Priority Conservation Area. She explained the purpose of the designation was to preserve, protect, and enhance natural lands and resources in the Bay area. The designation was part of the Association of Bay Area Governments and Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Plan Bay Area, a state mandated, long range integrated transportation and land use plan. The designation would not change zoning, the general plan, or other land use designations. Rather, it would only identify regionally significant open spaces about which a broad consensus exists for long term protection of the lands. The Chief Planner advised that San Bruno Mountain Watch was working with Northern San Mateo County jurisdictions to coordinate a comprehensive Priority Conservation Area("PCA") nomination centered on San Bruno Mountain. The South San Francisco portion includes a network of open natural lands,public parks, Bay-front and multi-use trails and bikeways which connects the City's regional transit hubs to open space amenities. Private lands had the option of joining the PCA,but were not required to do so. Del Shembari representing San Bruno Mountain Watch thanked Council for consideration of the Resolution and for postponing consideration two (2) weeks to permit time for the group to contact REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 25,2015 MINUTES PAGE 4 private land owners whose parcels might be included in the PCA. He advised that the land owners presently were not interested in the designation,but hoped they might be convinced to consider inclusion in the near future. He emphasized that the designation did not affect zoning or building rights,but simply made the property eligible for certain conservation related funds. Kirk Syme addressed Council and advised his family owned certain acres on the opposite side of Sign Hill. At this time his family was not interested in pursuing the PCA designation for its private lands. He expressed property value concerns, but noted a willingness to talk more about the opportunity. Councilman Gupta encouraged support for the PCA with respect to the public lands and encouraged private land owners to consider the designation in the future. He advised that the designation would make the lands eligible for certain assistance. Vice Mayor Addiego stated support for the designation and received confirmation from Mr. Syme that he would be willing to talk to staff or Council about including his land in the future. Motion- Councilwoman Matsumoto/Second- Councilman Gupta: to approve Resolution No. 19- 2015. Unanimously approved by roll call vote. Recess: 9:05 P.M. Meeting resumed: 9:17 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING 7. 1256 Mission Subdivision CUNEO ANTONIO/Owner City Ventures/Applicant 1256 Mission RD P14-0081: UP14-0009, DR14-0049, SA14-0001 &AHA14-0001 1256 Mission Subdivision - Design Review, Tentative Subdivision Map and Affordable Housing Agreement to construct a new residential development consisting of up to 36 residential units, with a mix of Townhomes and Single Family Dwellings, and authorize Density Bonus Incentives for the southern portion of the site to allow an increase in allowable building height from 25-feet to 35-feet and to allow the use of one architectural prototype, and Use Permit to allow a 5 foot 2 inch tall fence in the required front yard at 1256 Mission Road in the Transit Village Residential Medium Density (TV-RM) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters in accordance with SSFMC Title 19(Subdivisions) and Chapters 20.080, 20.250, 20.300, 20.310, 20.330, 20.380, 20.390, 20.460, 20.480 and 20.490, and determination that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA. (Billy Gross, Senior Planner). CONTINUED TO A DATE CERTAIN, FEBRUARY 25, 2015, FROM THE REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 14, 2015. Public Hearing Opened: 9:18 P.M. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 25,2015 MINUTES PAGE 5 Senior Planner Gross began by noting that Council had received five (5) letters from the public including one from the Sierra Club regarding this item. He then presented the staff report starting with a brief overview of the application site plans (Alternative Option A, Alternative Option B) that Council considered at the last meeting. Revisions had produced differences in Options A and B, and Planer Gross detailed the unit numbers, building heights, elevation, functional differences, and aesthetic impacts. Public Works Director McMinn approached Council to address the percentage differences between Options A and B concerning storm water drainage and regulations. He explained that essentially a larger mechanical treatment system would be needed for Option B to accommodate the expanded impervious area and decreased landscaped area, compared to Option A, which utilized the natural slope of the land to minimize the area for mechanical treatment. Senior Environmental Compliance Inspector Lecel clarified the storm water differences between the Options. He explained the purpose of a landscape-based, biotreatment system included in Option A, which helps filter out trash, sediments, particles, bird droppings, etcetera from storm water. The mechanical vault included in Option B would require higher maintenance cost and comes at an aesthetic price with manhole covers. Biotreatment systems are more effective overall at storm water run-off treatment, which moved the state to essentially outlaw the vault systems with the exception of special projects. Director McMinn addressed Councilwoman Matsumoto's concern about flooding explaining that these drainage systems are designed to treat normal, lower impact storms and drainage. Inspector Lecel added to this discussion noting that the larger landscape in Plan A would mean less run-off for the storm drain to catch. He further explained that the bio-based treatment is specifically utilized for light to normal rain and would still filter out to the larger drainage system when it is overwhelmed. He addressed the cost differences for the mechanical vault compared to the biotreatment option, stating there are long-term and short-term costs and agreements for both. Each has its pros and cons, with bio-based treatment being ultimately superior. Councilwoman Matsumoto queried the approval process for the County's review of the project and specifically the mechanical treatment vaults. Inspector Lecel stated the County has special project reporting requirements, in which case it would take whichever plan is approved under consideration. It may approve the plan or not depending on whether the laws have been interpreted correctly. He believed Plan B might be problematic since it increased impervious area. Planner Gross addressed traffic impacts in the neighborhood explaining the data was based off of the Institute for Transportation Engineering average numbers of five (5) trips per townhome unit, and ten (10) per single family residence. The Average Daily Vehicle Trip Numbers were different depending on the Options and their respective access points. The statistics were as follows; Option A -- 105 trips from Mission Road, 50 trips from Edgewood Way, 40 trips from Baywood Ave, Option B — 145 trips from Mission Road, 0 from Edgewood Way, and 40 trips from Baywood Avenue. It was anticipated that the nearby location of the BART station would help to reduce overall vehicle trip numbers. If Option B was approved then an Alternate Emergency Vehicle Access Point would be needed on Edgewood Way with access restrictions to be worked out with all relevant parties. The staff recommendation was that the City Council select Option A and the preferred site plan and adopt the corresponding Draft Entitlements Resolution approving Planning Application P14 0081, including the Use Permit, Design Review, Tentative Subdivision Map, and REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 25,2015 MINUTES PAGE 6 Affordable Housing Agreement based on the presented findings and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval which indemnifies the city and replaces the current A 18 with A 19. Councilwoman Matsumoto expressed discomfort with the emergency access configuration in Option B and asked the Fire Chief to clarify which Plan is preferred for emergency response. Fire Chief Kohlmann stated Option A was the preferred choice since it presented the path of least resistance and minimized choke points for emergency vehicles. Vice Mayor Addiego noted Option A was not free of choke points. Samantha Houser of City Ventures presented to Council. She stated that at the previous meeting on the subject, Sunshine Gardens neighbors asked staff to study an alternate design option. City Ventures found two workable Options, including A and B. She provided site related context noting the site required improvement, was located right across the street from BART, and would be built in an existing neighborhood. She proceeded to detail differences between the Options starting with how access was addressed in both Plans, which would ultimately yield a comparable vehicle trip rate. Plan A had more landscaping, whereas Plan B had more openness with more asphalt. She further explained that Option B would pursue a gate or bollard system for emergency access on Edgewood Way. On Baywood Avenue, the Option B building height would appear more level. She closed by noting City Ventures excitement at being able to offer these homes in the community and add to the City's housing stock in a wonderful neighborhood. Council heard Public Comments as follows: Antonella Palazzo, a 32 year resident of Baywood Avenue opposed option B. She believed Option A made more sense, while Option B would bring out-of-place townhomes to her street. She advised there was already a tremendous traffic impact on the Avenue from El Camino High school and believed this would make matters worse. Matt Tichnor favored Option A for its inclusion of open space, which he opined was sorely needed in the Bay area. Sonia Trousse supported Option A, although she felt any amount of homes would assist the community. She believed the storm water concerns associated with Option B were too risky. Resident Wes Morgan believed Option A was the preferred option for the transit oriented nature of the area. Anna Bacciagaluppi of Edgewood Drive expressed concern about the traffic Option A would bring to her street. She expressed a preference for Option B. Dennis Rudoni, a longtime resident of Sunshine Gardens expressed a preference for Option B; however, he believed any development was out of place in the existing neighborhood. Jack Ceccacci of Baywood Avenue did not favor either Option. He believed the impact to the neighborhood would be too great. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 25,2015 MINUTES PAGE 7 Andre Covill, who works for the United States military in Mountain View and resides in South San Francisco encouraged the development for its promise of certain affordable housing. Nolani Cohvelo encouraged the development. She noted that housing was needed and the inclusion of affordable housing would ensure working families like hers might have the opportunity to own a home. Greg Young of 1256 Edgewood Way expressed support for Option B, only because the also un- preferred Option A cut his home off from the rest of his neighbors on Edgewood. Luis Mejillas advocated for housing supply and good urban design. He had written a thesis on the housing crisis in the Bay area and noted support for the project. Mr. Bacciagaluppi expressed concern over both options, but supported Option B due to the negative impact he believed Option A would have on Edgewood Way. Public Hearing closed: 10:29 P.M. Vice Mayor Addiego commented on the remarkable thoughts and comments on housing from the public. He cautioned however: while you are planning for the people of tomorrow, don't forget the people of today. He hoped that a resolution of the issue could be reached as he believed the developer had worked in good faith to come up with an acceptable compromise; however, he was very sensitive to the neighbors' concerns. Councilman Gupta stated the need for housing was great and development in the Bay area was a consequence. He believed Option A made the most sense from design, storm water and public safety perspectives. Councilwoman Normandy believed the storm and groundwater concerns associated with Option B made Option A preferable. Councilwoman Matsumoto expressed support for Option A, noting the public safety aspects of the plan were sound. Mayor Garbarino expressed support for option A and asked the developer to work with Mr. Young to come up with an acceptable solution for his property regarding his connection to Edgewood Way. Motion- Councilwoman Matsumoto/Second- Councilman Gupta: to approve Option A deleting condition 18, as Resolution No. 20-2015. On the question Vice Mayor Addiego expressed concern that the scale of townhomes would be out of place vis-a-vis Baywood Drive relative to Option B. Motion approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilman Gupta, Councilwoman Matsumoto, Councilwoman Normandy and Mayor Garbarino; NOES: Vice Mayor Addiego; ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. ITEMS FROM COUNCIL—COMMITTEE REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS None. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 25,2015 MINUTES PAGE 8 ADJOURNMENT Being no further business, Mayor Garbarino adjourned the meeting at 10:55 P.M. in honor of Betty Seaver. Subm' -d by: Approved by: / t, ._4 i/' / / .. 'sa + . ine! ' trty erk Rich Garbarino, ayor Cit• of South Ar Francisco City of South San Francisco REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 25,2015 MINUTES PAGE 9