Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1999-05-26CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL Present: MINUTES CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SPECIAL MEETING May 26, 1999 Municipal Services Building Community Room 6:31 p.m. (Cassette Tape No. 1) Councilmembers Fernekes, Mullin and Penna, Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto and Mayor Datzman. Absent: None ORAL COMMUNICATION: None CLOSED SESSION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9, Existing Litigation - Molieri vs. City of South San Francisco Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9c, Initiation of Litigation - One Case Entered into Closed Session at 6:32 p.m. Reconvened into Open Session at 7:03 p.m. Mayor Datzman announced that direction was given and no action was taken. ADJOURNMENT Motion-Femekes/Second-Mullin: To adjourn the City Council Special meeting at 7:03 p.m. Unanimously approved by voice vote. Respectfully Submitted: Approved: · Payne, City Cl~rk City of South San Francisco y of South San t~,gl~isco 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. MINUTES CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR MEETING May 26,1999 Municipal Services Building Community Room, 33 Arroyo Drive CALL TO ORDER: 7:46 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Femekes, Mullin and Penna, Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto and Mayor Datzman. Absent: None. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE INVOCATION: None given. PRESENTATIONS Resolution Appointing Lura Sellick Lifetime Member Emeritus of the Parks and Recreation Commission Mayor Datzman presented the resolution; due to Ms. Sellick's illness, Parks and Recreation Commission Chair Eva Wright received the resolution in her absence. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Ms. Jan Pont, 111 Belmont Avenue, informed Council that when the South San Francisco Caltrain Station was demolished the pay phone was removed. She asked if it could be replaced, and also, if the entrance could be redesigned as it is awkward to drive. Mayor Datzman stated staff will review Ms. Pont's request and will respond to her directly. City Manager Wilson stated that the City has been working on a redesign of the entrance with the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB). Ms. Linda "Spike" Kahn, 422 Judah Street, San Francisco, AFSCME Business Agent representing the workers at the UCSF-Stanford laundry and storehouse facility on Forbes Boulevard, related to Council the lay-off of 150 employees at that location and moving the facility to Gilroy. She urged Council to approve a resolution asking for a moratorium on layoffs and to contact Mr. Peter Van Etten, CEO for UCSF-Stanford Health Care, and UC Regents, to discuss the issue and pressure them to stop any layoffs, which is scheduled the first week of June. Mayor Datzman stated he was aware of the issue and will review the material that was given to him this evening. In response to Councilman Mullin, Ms. Kahn mentioned that there was an offer to privatize the laundry at the Forbes Boulevard site, but it was an option that Mr. Van Etten's office felt was not economically feasible in comparison to the cost savings at the Gilroy site. Mr. Corey Menutti, AFSCME Local 829 President, San Francisco resident, felt the layoff will effect South San Francisco economically, and the close-down of this facility could become a crisis if medical supplies were needed in San Francisco or on the Peninsula in an emergency situation. He urged Council to contact the UC Regents and to pass a resolution supporting a moratorium. Mr. Don Padilla, resident of San Francisco, stated he has worked at the storehouse for eighteen years, and that the storehouse is currently in a centralized location that ensures the shipment of medical supplies to San Francisco or Stanford within one-half hour. He also expressed his concerns regarding contracting out the facility. Mr. Bobbie Ross, resident of Alameda, stated he has worked at the storehouse for seven years, and does not believe the same service will be delivered if the medical supply storehouse is contracted out and moved to a locations an hour away from San Francisco. Ms. Terry Perez, 928 Masson, (city unknown) stated she is one of the workers being laid off. She is a single parent and seeks Council's help. Mr. Danny Regalado, 640 Florence Street, (city unknown) stated he has worked at the facility for ten years and received a layoff notice, and stated his appreciation to Council if they could help the employees keep their jobs. Ms. Theresa Marino, 314 W. Ellsworth Avenue, (city unknown) stated she has been employed at the facility for eleven years. She discussed the stress the employees are having and how the merger between UCSF and Stanford was a failure. She asked Council to look into what was happening at the Forbes Boulevard facility. M. Gary Saunders, 1519 Rollins Road, Buflingame, business agent for Plumbers and Steamfitters Union Local 467, stated his support for the employees and urged Council to do what they could to stop the layoffs. Councilman Penna stated he was contacted by AFSCME last week and felt the issue should receive Council's support and State Senator Speier should be notified of our support. Councilman Mullin stated his support and suggested that Mr. Van Etten's office be contacted. He felt that there were alternatives that should be discussed. Both Councilman Fernekes and Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto stated their support for the employees and the preparation of a resolution. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 26, 1999 PAGE 2 Mayor Datzman stated the issue will be thoroughly reviewed by the City Manager's office and then a course of action will be taken. Mrs. Anne Waters, 2266 Shannon Drive, Chairperson for Westborough Swimming Pool Committee, a non profit organization, recognized each of the committee members in the audience and presented a plaque to Ms. Eloise Kee and Mr. Gerald Simotas, for their volunteer work with the committee. Ms. Joanne Simotas received the plaque in honor of her father. AGENDA REVIEW City Manager Wilson requested that Agenda items 4 and 12 be moved to Administrative Business COMMUNITY FORUM Councilman Femekes announced that the Cable TV Subcommittee (Fernekes/Datzman), meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, June 2, to discuss TCI complaints. He encouraged all TCI customers to respond to the questionnaire that was being sent out to TCI represented communities. Mayor Pro Tem Masumoto stated that she attended a recent Council of Cities legislative meeting and will prepare a memo for Council's information. She also announced the Cultural Arts Commission is sponsoring a Bonsai show on June 25-27; with a demonstration on June 27. Mayor Datzman commended San Mateo County Supervisor Mary Griffin for her pro-active work regarding the issue of water rates increasing. He requested that the City Manager follow-up and provide assistance on the item. COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS Councilman Femekes briefed Council on the Budget Subcommittee (Fernekes/Mullin) meeting that was held. The subcommittee discussed increasing the monthly stipends to commissioners/ boardmembers from $25 per month to $50 per meeting, with the stipulation that the commissioner/boardmember be in attendance. It was also recommended that the Cultural Arts Commission receive a stipend. There was a consensus from the Council for an increase, including the Cultural Arts Commission. The Council discussed term limits for the Cultural Arts Commission and Councilman Mullin suggested this be part of the proposed ordinance revision that is currently being looked at by the Historic Preservation Commission Subcommittee (Femekes/Mullin). Councilman Mullin gave an update on the Airport/Community Roundtable's Noise Complaints Subcommittee and Legislative Subcommittee meetings. He stated that there is still efforts being made against the A3 reconfiguration alternative, and progress is being made regarding the noise complaint system and making it more efficient and effective. He also stated that recent newspaper articles indicate that Palo Alto, Los Altos, and seven San Mateo County cities are REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 26, 1999 PAGE 3 forming a committee dealing with noise from arrival aircraft. He stated his concern and asked for a consensus from Council to write a letter to the chairman of the Roundtable seeking further information on the seven San Mateo County cities actions. A consensus from the Council was given. Councilman Penna stated that the Public Facilities and Streets Subcommittee (Penna/Datzman) will have a full report at the June 9, 1999 City Council meeting. He asked staff to follow up on a request to see if a street in the development formerly known as Shearwater could be called "Veterans". CONSENT CALENDAR Motion to Approve the Minutes of the May 12, 1999 Regular and Special Joint Redevelopment Agency Meetings 2. Motion to Confirm Expense Claims of May 26, 1999 in the amount of $3,403,879.40 Resolution No. 67-99, Providing Interim Spending Authority During the First 60 Days of the 1999-2000 Fiscal Year (Item #4 moved to Administrative Business) Motion-Femekes/Second-Mullin: To approve the Consent Calendar as presented. Unanimously approved by voice vote. PUBLIC HEARING Resolution Approving Modification to Planned Unit Development for Bay View Villas Allowing Substitution of Common Stairway with Landscaping and Reconfiguring Project Entry Staff report presented by Chief Planner Hamish with a visual presentation. Public heating opened. Mr. Brad Bowman, representing BBG Development, stated his support of the modification and was present to answer questions, if necessary. Public hearing closed. Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto discussed with staff her concern regarding the proposed entry/exit modification from the subdivision. City Engineer Kianpour and Mr. Bowman indicated that this was one of several options proposed to the homeowners, and was favored. Motion-Mullin/Second-Penna: To approve the modification to PUD-88-12/Mod 2, based on the findings and conditions contained in the staff report. Unanimously approved by roll call vote. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 26, 1999 PAGE 4 ...... (Recess: 8:57 - 9:05) Councilman Penna stepped down from his seat in accordance with FPPC regulations. 6. Terrabay Phase III Entitlements - a) b) c) d) Resolution Approving a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program; Resolution Approving an Amended Terrabay Specific Plan, Vesting Tentative Map, and Precise Plan for Phase III; Motion to Waive Reading and Introduce an Ordinance Amending Chapter 20.63 Related to the Terrabay Specific Plan District; Motion to Waive Reading and Introduce and Ordinance Approving the Amended and Restated Development Agreement Pubic hearing opened. Staff report presented by Jim Harnish with a visual presentation. (A letter from Brisbane Planning Director Carole Nelson regarding Terrabay Phase Ill Entitlements was submitted to the City Clerk for the record.) Mr. Dennis Breen, applicant's representative and Director of Development for Sunchase, stated the application was a culmination of several years of work, and listed what the development has provided to the community. He addressed the work that has been put into the proposal, the 135 acres being contributed to open space, the density is less than what's entitled, and the contribution that will be made for the hook ramp. He stated the project will be a gateway to the City, endorses staff's proposal for the archeological site and is willing to meet with Ohlone Indians to see what they would like to see done with the site. Mayor Datzman asked if the model was part of the presentation and Mr. Breen stated it was and indicated that it shows the three pads instead of the originally proposed seven. (1) Mr. Robert Ortiz, 19 Randolph Avenue, speaking against the project, stated his concerns with the development and the changes he has seen in his neighborhood. He has had problems being admitted to the Terrabay Gymnasium, and his children can no longer play on the mountain. (2) Mr. William Nack, 1153 Chess Drive, San Mateo, representing San Mateo County Building and Construction Trades Council, stated his support for the project, and the commitment the developer has made that will employ members of the trade unions. (3) Ms. Evelyn Martin, 524 Commercial Avenue, speaking in favor of the project, asked for preservation of the Indian shellmound, and construction of a cultural center and museum that could be used for Indian educational purposes. (4) Mr. Charles Miller, 225 Bush Street, San Francisco, attorney representing the Ohlone REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 26, 1999 PAGE 5 Indians, speaking against the project, stated the burial site is a living site for Mr. Pat Orozco's family, and is not an archeological site. He discussed the cultural awareness of Indian land that is taking place in the country and the legal filings that are being made to stop development on Indian land. The retaining wall is not appropriate for the site and what is being proposed is a desecration of Indian land. (5) Mr. Patrick Barrette, 703 So. B Street, San Mateo, representing Cement Masons Local 300, speaking in favor of the project, stated his support for the project, and the construction jobs that the development will provide. (6) Ms. Lois Robin, 4701 Nova Drive, Santa Cruz, speaking against the project, stated her support for the preservation of the Ohlone site and that South San Francisco should take advantage of the history in the its own backyard, and to say no to development. (7) Mr. Ray Mendoza Jr., 1057 Grand Avenue, speaking in favor of the project, stated he respects the Indian culture, but also feels the development will bring work to many people. (8) Mr. Peter Fogarty, 5 Thomas Mellons, San Francisco, Operating Engineers Labor Union, speaking in favor of the project, stated his support for the development, that it will be a gateway to the City, and will bring revenue to the City. (9) Mr. Patrick Orozco, 644 Pear Tree Drive, Watsonville, speaking against the project, stated he is an Ohlone Indian, that the development is a desecration of Indian land, and would like to have project moved 1000 feet south of Indian Ridge. He stated that Indians are taught to speak from the heart and he urged Council to deny the development. (10) Coyote, Round Valley Reservation, 2235 California Street, Mountain View, speaking against the project, stated his people are saying important things that they feel, and speaking from their heart; the City has to consider the impact their decision will have on children. He stated a museum is for visiting the dead and the site should amplify life. (11) Mr. Ross Crippen, 68 Randolph Avenue, speaking against the project, asked Council to show the same courage as the Planning Commission and vote down the development because the development doesn't fit. He stated that denying the project will guarantee that land will stay the same. (12) Ms. Esther Ruiz, 36 Randolph Avenue, speaking against the project, stated that the Terrabay development has already had a lot of construction, Sister Cities Boulevard has numerous accidents, rodents come onto her property, and more housing will cause more problems. (13) Ms. Kathy Mannis, Daly City, President of the Friends of San Bruno Mountain, speaking against the project, stated her support for the Ohlone Indians; she suggested that the Ohlone Indians offer activities at the shellmound and provide a living history to the people of San Mateo County. She asked that the Council keep the area open space, or deny all building north of the shellmound, and that buildings near the shellmounds be built of black reflective material. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 26, 1999 PAGE 6 (14,15, and 16) Mr. Marcus Rodriguez, Ms. Summer Reynaga, and their mother (name not given), 539 Santa Ana, San Jose, speaking against the project, stated that they enjoy dancing on San Bruno Mountain and did not want to see any development. (17) Mr. Gary Saunders, 1519 Rollins Road, Burlingame, Plumbers and Steamfitters Union Local 467, speaking in favor of the project, stated his support for the development and for the jobs it will provide the trades people. (18) Mr. Robert Vetter, speaking against the project, stated that a commercial development near the burial grounds was something never realized by residents, and that a more visual presentation of the proposal is needed. He felt the housing would not be affordable for blue- collar workers and that Council's decision will be looked back upon in history. (19) Mr. Ken Mclntire, 235 Old Ranch Road, Redwood City, speaking against the project, read a letter from an anonymous resident of Terrabay Phase I who has had little response from Centex Development regarding erosion and other problems that need attention. The author also questioned the need for more hotels and housing in South San Francisco when it's at the expense of destroying open space. (20) Mr. David Schooley, Brisbane, speaking against the project, felt South San Francisco should slow down its development and that many residents agree. He discussed protests that have occurred over the years and that people are still against any development on the mountain. (Letters against the development were submitted to the City Clerk.) (21) Ms. Jaclyn Jehl, 434 Hemlock Avenue, speaking against the project, stated her opposition to the development, and responded to statements made by Council and Mr. Breen regarding buying property in good faith, the model being not to scale, and construction workers coming from Arizona to build the development. (22) Ms. Gail Mallinson, 2130 23rd Street, San Francisco, speaking against the project, stated she was a member of San Bruno Mountain Watch, Sunchase bought the land for $1 million and have made their profit. A fiscal study shows that the only value gained by the development is the hook ramp; and most costs will be incurred after the 20 years; she believes projects should be built near the town center where public transportation is located. (23) Mr. Fred Andres, 2413 Carlson, Richmond, speaking against the project, addressed the developers' lack of response to Planning. He recently visited Phase I and was not impressed with the development and its quality of work. He stated that people did not want to see any development north of the shellmound, and there is concern with erosion and landslides. (24) Mr. David Schmidt, 235 Douglas Street, San Francisco, speaking against the project, stated he was a historian and compared the site to other famous historic sites that would never allow a development to be built nearby and destroy the environment. He believes Phase III will bring traffic gridlock, and progress doesn't mean building over every available piece of land. (25) Ms. Carol Severson, 814 Baden Avenue, speaking against the project, felt Council should take note of the opposition, and that affordable housing is not being built. She felt REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 26, 1999 PAGE 7 we have a responsibility to respect our forebears, and that the restoration of habitats have not been successful, people have become more educated about the destruction of environments and that San Bruno Mountain should be left alone. (26) Ms. Cindy Marcolulos, 106 Sutton Avenue, speaking against the project, made reference to the 1981 election and that today people are not in favor of the construction on San Bruno Mountain. People are not protesting any of the other developments in South San Francisco. She stated Council's decision is irrevocable, that Council was elected to make the right decisions, and there is more than monetary wealth involved when making this decision. She asked that the land be left as open space. (Recess: 10:57 p.m. - 11:10 pm.) (Cassette Tape No. 3) (27) Mr. Caleb Kleppner, Mill Valley, speaking against the project, stated that legal action would be pursued if Council approves Phase III, there are laws protecting Indian burial grounds, and that the development should be 1000 feet away. (28) Mr. Leland Behan, 186 Huntington Drive, Daly City, speaking against the project, stated his opposition to the development and commented that this is one small area that should be left to honor ancient burial grounds and compassion should be shown. (29) Ms. Linda Tyson Weaver, 1545 Buflingame Avenue, Burlingame, speaking against the project, stated she is employed in Cabot, Cabot & Forbes, is a County Park Commissioner, and urged Council to pause and not approve the development, the shellmound should not be in the middle of a development, and a positive solution should be found for this valuable resource. (30) Mr. Fred Short, 2810 Barbers Point Road, Alameda, speaking against the project, stated he was a senior member of a tribal spiritual commission, and has been fighting this battle since 1975. He does not want a shadow on the burial site, the land is sacred, and does not want a museum there. (31) Ms. Connie Short, 2810 Barbers Point Road, Alameda, speaking against the project, read a quote from Sitting Bull that spoke of the taking of Indian land; she stated greed is behind decisions, and asked Council to show respect for their ancestors. (32) Mr. J.R. Laiwa, 2674 22nd Street, San Francisco, speaking against the project, discussed the ways of Indian people, how they have lived and survived on land that once belonged to them. He asked that respect be shown for his people and to have compassion for each other. (33) Ms. Valerie Tulier, 2674 22nd Street, San Francisco, speaking against the project, respectfully asked that site be referred to as a sacred ancestral burial ground, she discussed the taking of land, property rights, and that their laws should be respected. (34) Ms. Patricia Hemandez, 391 Ponderosa Road, speaking against the project, referred to the Indian way and the destruction of a graveyard and the need to keep what is left. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 26, 1999 PAGE 8 (35) Ms. Charlene Moore, 901 Hillside Boulevard, speaking against the project, stated that the mountain smiled on her today, and how the mountain brings her peace after many problems in her life. She spoke regarding mother earth needing our help, and she feels there will be many more problems from the homeowners in Terrabay Phase I. (36) Ms. Deborah Ruddick, 3921 East Bayshore Road, Palo Alto, Sierra Club, speaking against the project, stated that the project was bad for the area, and mentioned the many effects the project has had on the environment; she spoke regarding general law requirements, for Council to consider alternatives for the site, and no development north of the burial ground. (Submitted letter to the City Clerk.) (37) Mr. Fred Mathews, 44 Duval, speaking against the project, stated he is not against development, but finds San Bruno Mountain to be a pristine site that should have a moratorium on any further development. He discussed the building situation in South San Francisco, the quality of life for our future, and that it should be without Phase III. He stated that San Bruno Mountain is a national treasure we must never build on. (38) Mr. John Ward, 792 Willborough Place, Burlingame, speaking in favor of the project, stated he is on the project team for Sunchase, and was on the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors when this project was looked at in 1976. He spoke regarding a proposed general plan amendment to build a city at the foot of San Bruno Mountain that was voted against, and trade offs were made for permanent open space on San Bruno Mountain. He argued that the mountain is still saved, that the project is considerably less than what was first proposed and extensive research has been made to preserve the shellmound. (Letters were distributed to Council at the beginning of the meeting.) (39) Mr. Del Schembari, 321 Alta Mesa, speaking against the project, responded to Mr. Ward's comments, and asked that Council vote for open space in Phase III. He stated his concern with traffic, his passion for the mountain and to keep it as a natural area, which is rare. (40) Mr. Brian Gaffney, 370 Grand Avenue, Oakland, attorney for San Bruno Mountain Watch, speaking against the project, addressed three issues: 1) aesthetics and community development; 2) the impact on a particular indigenous people, and 3) endangered species e.g., butterfly. He spoke regarding the EIR and the HPC and the Endangered Species Act. (41) Mr. Philip Batchelder, 2915A Wheeler Street, Berkeley, speaking against the project, stated the reasons the development should not be allowed. He stated that the archeological site is 45 acres, not 2.5 acres. He discussed the fiscal analysis and burden that residents will have to pay for later. In response to comments made about building a gateway to South San Francisco, he stated it is a gateway just as is. He stated that the information about the archaeological site has only been available since 1997; that there is a need for open space, and a balance in the community. (Letters submitted to City Clerk.) (42) Mr. Apacho Villareal, 380 Washington Street, Daly City, speaking against the project, stated that the destruction of the burial grounds would be genocide. He questioned whether Council would ever consider digging up other areas of South San Francisco and recalled experiences he had on San Bruno Mountain. He suggested that there be a focus on areas in REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 26, 1999 PAGE 9 South San Francisco that really need attention, and he also suggested that people learn to work together. (43) Ms. Michele Maas, 1156 Geneva Avenue, San Francisco, speaking against the project, stated her objection to San Bruno Mountain being chopped up and a viewing wall for the burial site. She also responded to Mr. Breen's comments regarding community needs and felt Council is the one that provides community needs. (44) Ms. Marie Blackowl, 407 Beech Avenue, speaking against the project, she stated that residents of South San Francisco oppose the development, further destruction of San Bruno Mountain, and this is not the vision that the people envisioned. She also stated her opposition to a buffer to the burial site, and the development is not fight. Public hearing closed. There was a consensus from Council to continue with the hearing and take discussion from each Councilmember. Councilman Mullin felt the hearing and process was beneficial and an exercise in democracy. He stated that even though the development is upscale there are other projects that the City is upgrading, including Willow Gardens, Cypress corridor, etc. In regards to speakers' comments, he stated that taxes will not go up because of Terrabay Phase II. He stated he gave a lot of thought to his decision and that the developer has rights, but he believes the Ohlone site to the north should remain open space, but development south of the site is acceptable. He agrees with Planning Commissioner Sim about a vision and suggested that Terrabay Phase II be split off from Phase III, so that Phase II can go forward. Councilman Fernekes discussed comments made regarding the Antiquity Act and a violation of the Endangered Species Act. Staff felt there were no violations. He also discussed developer commitments, funding and contributions for the hookramps, which the cost of has escalated dramatically. City Manager Wilson stated the funds are coming from a variety of areas, including $8.5 million from the development of Phase III. He further explained the importance of the hookramp and its regional significance. Councilman Fernekes discussed the time he gave considering this item, as he does with other issues that effect South San Francisco. He felt there was an informed public when the election was held in 1981. He stated he agrees with Councilman Mullin and that the area north of the shellmounds be open space and that the area to the south be brought back for further review. Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto stated she had many comments to make, but in an effort to save time, she summarized her position. She stated she voted no on Phase II, but would like to compromise on Phase III. She supports Councilman Mullin and Fernekes, and would like to see the area north of the burial grounds and the "Point" area be dedicated open space, and that the area south come back with a precise plan. She feels the developer has transferred the density and has not really lost anything. Mayor Datzman questioned whether a 30' buffer zone from the shellmound was enough. He also questioned the process for evaluating traffic issues. He questioned whether the REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 26, 1999 PAGE 10 model was to scale, and Mr. Breen stated it was. He stated his concern for the placement of the hook ramp and staff indicated that it would not go through the shellmound area. He also questioned whether or not an Indian learning center was appropriate. In response to Mayor Datzman's question regarding the retaining wall, staff indicated it was recommended by an architectural consultant who has experience with other Ohlone sites in the Bay Area. Mayor Datzman commented on the variety of speakers and their comments, including the comment made about the "tortilla flat" neighborhood, which does not exist in South San Francisco, and specifically that not enough information was known about the proposed Phase III development. He stated that he supports the position taken by the other Councilmembers, and that the following be considered: That Phase II and III be separated, allowing applicant to proceed with Phase II, with the stipulation that the developer agrees to the funds for the hook ramps through an agreement or letter of credit; · A precise plan for Phase III be developed; · A precise plan that addresses the issue of the Ohlone Indian Cultural Center; · Dedicating the "Point" as open space; There was a consensus from Council to support development at the south end of the development, but not at the north end. City Attorney Mattas stated that with Council consensus the item is to be deferred back to the Planning Commission and there is no need to take action at this time. Staff is to work with developer regarding the south end of the development and present it back to the Planning Commission. Mayor Datzman asked if Mr. Breen agreed to this action and he stated he needed time to evaluate Council' s decision, but agreed to the separation of Phases II and III. Councilman Mullin responded to a comment regarding Terrabay Recreation Center and stated that it is a public facility open to all residents of South San Francisco. He also asked that the author of the anonymous letter contact him, otherwise its authenticity is suspicious. Mayor Datzman reiterated that Item 6 is deferred back to the Planning Commission. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS Motion to Adopt an Ordinance Amending Chapter 20.63 Related to the Terrabay Specific Plan District Phase II Motion-Fernekes/Second-Mullin: To adopt Ordinance No. 1244-99, amending Municipal Code Chapter 20.63 (Terrabay Specific Plan District) for Phase II of the Terrabay Development. Approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Femekes and Mullin, and Mayor Datzman; NOES: Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto; ABSTAIN: Councilman Penna; ABSENT: None. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 26, 1999 PAGE 11 o Motion to Adopt an Ordinance Approving the Amended and Restated Terrabay Development Agreement Phase II. City Attorney Mattas suggested this item be rescheduled for the June 9, 1999 City Council meeting. No action by Council needed. (Recess 1:13 a.m.- 1:20 a.m.) Mayor Datzman noted for the record that Councilman Penna was absent. Resolution Awarding a Consultant Contract to Kimley Horn Associates for Design and Engineering of Traffic Signalization at Hilton Avenue and Hickey Boulevard in the Amount of $75,165 and Appropriate $80,000 from the Gas Tax Fund (item moved from Consent Calendar) By consensus of the Council Item #4 was not acted upon and rescheduled for the June 9, 1999 City Council meeting. LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS (Item #s 9 and 10 were taken in reversed order) 10. Resolution Approving an Interim Three Month Rate Adjustment to Current Taxicab Rate Schedule Staff report presented by Police Chief Raffaelli. Councilman Mullin discussed with staff the three month assessment and asked that the item be brought back before Council at the end of the three months. City Attorney Mattas stated the resolution will be amended. Motion-Mullin/Second-Matsumoto: To approve Resolution No. 68-99, amending the taxicab rate schedule. Approved by voice vote. ABSENT: Councilman Penna. ° Motion to Waive Reading and Introduce an Ordinance Restricting the Sale, Possession and Use of Laser Pointer Staff report presented by Police Chief Raffaelli. Motion-Mullin/Second-Fernekes: To waive reading and introduce an ordinance adding Chapter 8.54 the Municipal Code of the City of South San Francisco regarding the sale, possession and use of laser pointers. On the question: Mayor Pro Tern Matsumoto asked if this type of legislation has been effective and City Attorney Mattas stated that it has been effective but no documented evidence. Mayor Pro Tem Matsumoto asked if the penalty was imposed according to the seriousness of the crime and Chief Raffaelli agreed. (Motion continued) Approved by voice vote. ABSENT: Councilman Penna. 11. Appointments to the Conference Center Authority. Staff report presented by City Manager Wilson. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 26, 1999 PAGE i 2 lq Motion-Fernekes/Second-Matsumoto: To consent to the appointments of the hotel representatives Debra Coffelt, and Jeff Henderson to the Conference Center Authority. Approved by voice vote. ABSENT: Councilman Penna. AMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS (continued) 11. Resolution Authorizing Execution of an Agreement with Sierra Point LLC for License fat' Agreement for Public Safety Access to Sierra Point. City Engineer Kianpour presented staff report. Motion-Matsumoto/Second-Mullin: To approve Resolution No. 69-99, authorizing a license agreement with Sierra Point LLC for public safety access to Sierra Point. Approved by voice vote. ABSENT: Councilman Penna. GOOD AND WELFARE Mayor Datzman wished Chief Planner good luck in his new endeavor and stated Council's appreciation for his work. ADJOURNMENT Motion-Mullin/Second-Femekes: To adjourn the City Council meeting at 1:36 a.m. Approved by voice vote. ABSENT: Councilman Penna. Respectfully Submitted: Payne, City Cl~rk City of South San Francisco Approved: ~l;oS fL~ oDu:~ San~anacYisco 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. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 26, 1999 PAGE 13