Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1985-07-17Mayor Richard A. Haffey Vice Mayor Roberta Cerri Teglia Counci 1: Mark N. Addiego Emanuele N. Damonte Gus Nicolopulos AGENDA ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING CALL TO ORDER: (Cassette No. 1) ROLL CALL: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: AGENDA REVIEW City Manager requested that the following items be added: - Add as Item 3 a request to set 8/14/85 as a Public Hearing date to consider adoption of the Community Development Block Grant Budget for 1985-86. Staff Report 7/17/85 recommending: 1) Motion to waive further reading of the Ordinance; 2) Motion to adopt the Ordinance to include the position of Secretary II - City Manager's Office (non-competitive) and delete the competitive service classification of Administrative Secretary. 2nd Reading/Adoption AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 3.12.010.A1 AND B OF THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL CODE AND SUBSECTION 6.A(1) AND 6.B OF ORDINANCE 449 AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RECREATING AND RE- ESTABLISHING A PERSONNEL SYSTEM FOR THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND REPEALING ORDINANCE 216 AND ALL INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES" MINUTES City Council City Council Conference Room City Hall July 17, 1985 ACTION TAKEN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING 5:43 p.m. Mayor Haffey presiding. Council present: Addiego, Teglia and Halley Council absent: Nicolopulos and Damonte. Pledge of allegiance was recited. AGENDA REVIEW So ordered. City Clerk Battaya read the title of the Ordinance in its entirety. M/S Teglia/Addiego - To waive further reading of the Ordinance. Carried by unanimous voice vote. M/S Teglia/Addiego - To adopt the Ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 989-85 Carried by unanimous roll call vote. 7/17/85 Page I AGE.DA ACTTO, TAKE, Staff Report 7/17/85 recommending: 1) Motion to waive further reading of the Ordinance; 2) Motion to adopt the Ordinance approving the Redevelopment Plan for the South San Francisco U.S. Steel Plant Site Redevelopment Project. A letter of protest was presented to the City Clerk and is attached hereto and made a permanent part of the record of this meeting. City Clerk Battaya read the title of the Ordinance in its entirety. 2nd Reading/Adoption AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO U.S. STEEL PLANT SITE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT M/S Teglia/Addiego - To waive further reading of the Ordinance. Carried by unanimous voice vote. M/S Addiego/Teglia - To adopt the Ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 990-85 Carried by unanimous roll call vote. 3. Request to set August 14, 1985, as a Public Hearing date to consider adoption of the Community Block Grant Budget for 1985-86. 5D~c GOOD AND WELFARE M/S Addiego/Teglia - To set 8/14/85 as a Public Hearing date. Carried by unanimous voice vote. GOOD AND WELFARE No one chose to speak. M/S Addiego/Teglia - To adjourn the meeting. Carried by unanimous voice vote. ADJOURNMENT Time of adjournment 5:50 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: City of South San Francisco APPROVED: City of South Sa~ancisco 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. 7/17/85 Page 2 LAW OFFICE OF JEREMIAH J. LYNCH BURLINGAME, CALI~ July 17, 1985 City Council City of South San Francisco City Hall 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 Re: ORDINANCE APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO U.S. STEEL PLANT SITR RRDRVRT,OPM~NT PROJECT (Second Reading) Dear Councilmembers: The undersigned represents the Poletti Trust. The Poletti Trust is the owner of certain real property located along and upon the proposed Gateway Boulevard Extension at its intersection with Mitchell Avenue. The Poletti Trust objects to the adoPtion of the above- captioned Ordinance for the following reasons: 1. Contrary to representations made at the July 10, 1985, public hearing, the Final EIR presented in connnection with the U.S. Steel Plan Site Redevelopment Plan was not an EIR for the Redevelopment Plan. In fact, the Shearwater EIR was used as the U.S. Steel Plan EIR by merely changing covers. The U.S. Steel Final EIR is a subterfuge. 2. The approved Supplemental Final EIR for the Gateway Redevelopment Project, which studied the environmental impacts of both the new Gateway Boulevard Extension Project and the addition of 700 hotel rooms in the Gateway Redevelopment Project, failed to consider the intensity of development and anticipated traffic flow which the U.S. Steel Plant Site Redevelopment Project would generate. Therefore, a further supplemental EIR on the Gateway Redevelopment Project is required in light of the major changes in anticipated circumstances and impacts. 3. The U.S. Steel Plant Site Redevelopment Plan is in violation of Section 33333 of the Community Redevelopment Law of California in that "the Plan does not show by diagram and in general terms: 7/17/85 Page 2a City Council July 17, 1985 Page 2 (a) The approximate amount of open space to be provided and street layout; (b) Limitations on type, size, height, number, and proposed use of roadways; (c) The approximate number of dwelling units; (d) The property to be devoted to public purposes and the nature of such purposes." 4. The public hearing draft of the U.S. Steel Redevelopment Plan did not contain a time limit, not to exceed 12 years, for commencement of eminent domain proceedings to acquire property within the Project Area. This is required by Section 33333.2(3) of the Community Redevelopment Law. 5. The South San Francisco U.S. Steel Plant Site Redevelopment Plan is so generally and vaguely written that it is contrary to the intent and spirit of the Community Redevelopment Law of California. 6. Section IV, B, 1 of the Redevelopment Plan (page 13) lists Gateway Boulevard as a major public street within the Project Area. Yet, Gateway Boulevard is not shown on Exhibit A of the Plan. 7. Section IV, C of the Redevelopment Plan (page 14) allows interim uses in the Project Area which are not in conformity with uses permitted in the Redevelopment Plan. The term "interim uses" is not defined in the Plan. This provision/section is contrary to the spirit and intent of land use provisions of the California Community Redevelopment Law. This section is also in conflict with Section IV, D of the Redevelopment Plan. 8. Section III, I, 3 of the Redevelopment Plan requires that at least 15 percent of all new or rehabili- tated dwelling units developed in the U.S. Steel Project Area by public or private entities or persons other than the Agency, shall be for persons and families of low or moderate income; and of such 15 percent, not less than 40 percent thereof shall be for very low income households. This provision is contrary to the Final EIR adopted for the project which identifies no such units in the project as being set aside for low and moderate income persons and families. 7/17/85 Page 2b City Council July 17, 1985 Page 3 9. Exhibit C of the U.S. Steel'Redevelopment Plan does not list Gateway Boulevard as a Proposed Public Improvement and Facilities in the ~roject Area. This Exhibit is in conflict with Section IV, B, 1 of the Redevelopment Plan. 10. The Redevelopment Plan Map (Exhibit A) does not identify the major streets which are proposed in the Project Area. Gateway Boulevard and the Oyster Point Boulevard/U.S. 101/SPRR Overcrossing are not shown on this Exhibit. 11. The Redevelopment Plan Map (Exhibit A) does not specifically designate the major land uses authorized within the Project Area, all in violation of Section 33333 of the Community Redevelopment Law. In light of the foregoing it is respectfully submitted that: 1. The above-captioend Ordinance be repealed; 2. That the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency adopt a resolution ordering the preparation of a new EIR, separate and distinct from the Shearwater EIR, for the U.S. Steel Plant Site Redevelopment Project; 3. That the Redevelopment Agency take whatever steps are necessary by appropriate resolution to decertify the Final Environmental Impact Report for the U.S. Steel Plant Site Redevelopment Project on the ground that said Final EIR is inadequate in both form and substance and does not constitute a separate and independent EIR for the U.S. Steel Plant Site Redevelopment Project; and, 4. That the Redevelopment Agency adopt an appropriate resolution ordering a new Supplemental Final EIR for the Gateway Redevelopment Project addressing the unanticipated major impacts occasioned by the U.S. Steel and Shearwater projects. It is kindly requested that this letter be made part of the record of the public hearing scheduled for 5:30 p.m. on July 17, 1985. JJL:jaa Very truly yourS, ~-EREMIAH J. LYNCH CC: The Poletti Trust 7/17/85 Page 2c