Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1991-10-16 Mayor Jack Drago Council: Richard A. Haffey Gus Nicolopulos John R. Penna --Roberta Cerri Teglia MINUTES City Council Municipal Services Building Community Room October 16, 1991 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 54956 of the Government Code of the State of California, that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco will hold a Special Meeting on Wednesday, the 16th day of October 1991, at 7:00 p.m., in the Municipal Services Building Community Room, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, California. Purpose of the meeting: 1. Motion to adopt the Findings of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Oyster Point Interchange EIR. 'Barbara A. Battaya~ City of South San Francisco Dated: October 10, 1991 AGENDA CALL TO ORDER: (Cassette No. 1) ROLL CALL: Motion to adopt the Findings of ~l~g Approval and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Oyster Point Inter- change EIR. ACTION TAKEN 7:09 p.m. Mayor Drago presiding. Council present: Haffey, Nicolopulos, Teglia, and Drago. Council Absent: Penna. Councilman Haffey stated that he would have to leave at the conclusion of this meeting due to a family commitment. Director of Public Works Parini stated that the purpose of this item was to take the next steps in the environmental actions for the interchange project. He stated that in August 1990 the Council certified the Final EIR and now further steps were required, such as to adopt Findings of Approval and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program that are based upon the Final EIR. He stated that he had noted in the staff report that a portion of a drainage ditch affected by the project construction met the definition of a wetland, and was a habitat for a special insect called 10/16/91 Page 1 ^ E,OA At,tO, §OI c,© Motion - Continued. the S.F. Forktail Damsel Fly; and is included on a candidate list as an endangered species. He stated that because of this, a wetlands permit would have to be obtained from the Corp. of Engr. and through discussions with that Agency believed the permit would be issued and would not delay the project. Mr. Richard Cole, Environmental Science Assoc., summarized the addendum document before the Council, and reiterated that the impact was not significant on the insect habitat as determined by indepen- dent biologists. Discussion followed: that the threshold for significance of a wetland was about one acre; and construction takes place in stages and when the construction was completed there will be more habitat because it would be planted. Councilman Penna Arrived: Councilman Penna arrived at 8:14 p.m. M/S Haffey/Teglia - To adopt the Findings of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Oyster Point Interchange EIR. Carried by unanimous voice vote. M/S Teglia/Haffey - To adjourn the meeting. Carried by unanimous voice vote. ADJOURNMENT: Time of adjournment was 7:18 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Barbara A. Battaya, City~rk City of South San Francisco APPROVED. ~ ~.Ma~yor ~ ~- . ~/o~ 3outn 3an francisco 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. 10/16/91 Page 2 Mayor Jack Drago Council: Richard A. Haffey Gus Nicolopulos John R. Penna --Roberta Cerri Teglia AGENDA ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING CALL TO ORDER: (Cassette No. 1) ROLL CALL: AGENDA REVIEW 1. Joint meeting with BART Advisory Committee. MINUTES City Council Municipal Services Building Community Room October 16, 1991 ACTION TAKEN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING 7:30 p.m. Mayor Drago presiding. Council present: Council absent: Haffey, Nicolopulos, Teglia and Drago. Penna. AGENDA REVIEW City Manager Armas stated that there were no additions to the Agenda, however, Items 2 and 3 would be considered together because the purpose of the joint meeting was to discuss capital improve- ments to the District. BART Committee Members present: Bertetta, Garbarino, Keegan, Kevranian, Mariano, and Terry. Mayor Drago stated that he would turn the meeting over to Mr. Keegan for comments in that they had asked for the meeting, and the Council would respond to any questions. Mr. Keegan read the attached report into the record and stated that he hoped it would stimulate discussion. He related that the statement represented a 5-1 majority, and the one dissenting opinion was from Mr. Bertetta. Mr. Bertetta stated that he was in favor of having the BART station at Hickey Blvd. because BART would be used by everyone and not just to the Airport; which would include Pacifica, Half Moon Bay and other communities to relieve highway congestion. Mayor Drago stated that there was a sta- tement he would read at a Samtrans meeting on Friday in San Carlos on this 10/16/91 Page 1 FROM: TO: SUBJECT: DATE: MEMORANDUM BART CITIZEN'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO CITY COUNCIL PROPOSED BART EXTENSION OCTOBER 16, 1991 The proposed Bart extension through South San Francisco could be the single most important land use event in the history of the City. It could have serious negative effects that might be impossible to mitigate. The recently published study of the Hickey Station option sounds an ominous note. It describes the E1 Camino intersections at Chestnut Ave. and at Hickey Blvd. as level of service F, the lowest mark on the scale, characterized as "extreme delay and severe congestion". And this is without Bart. The study goes further discussing parking slopping over onto residential streets, car burglaries, parking permits for residents, noise and more. To date, South San Francisco has proposed two changes to the Bart plan, undergrounding instead of a retained cut and moving the station from Chestnut to Hickey. The latter will do little to mitigate the problems discussed in the Wilsey-Ham study; and the former is not even directed toward those problems. And undergrounding has a problem with financing. A recent Bart cost analysis shows an additional net cost of 51.8 million dollars for the subway option. Who will pay the difference? There is a precedent. In 1966, the City of Berkeley objected to an above ground alignment through a portion of its city. Bart persisted and Berkeley voters authorized 20.5 million dollars in bonds to go underground. It is the opinion of this committee that the choice of a station at Chestnut or Hickey is no choice at all. Hickey in place of Chestnut is the same choice which the State of Utah gives a condemned man when it gives him the choice of the gas chamber or the firing squad. Other cities, namely, San Bruno and Millbrae have been very vocal in pointing out to Bart and MTC the problems which the original Bart plan would bring to their cities. San Bruno has raised the strongest objections. 1 10/16/91 Page Ia At several meetings with the two agencies, some of which members of this committee attended, elected officials, staff and members of the public all let Bart know that they would go the whole route - whatever it would take to stop Bart from "dividing its city in half with the devastating consequence its plan would bring." Millbrae has been no less persistent in its objection to being Bart's end of the line. It has taken its case not only to Bart but also to the airport and to the county. San Bruno offered an option of its own which would bypass its city by going underground through the so called 1-380 corridor. Bart has included this option in its study as Alternative 6 which would end at an internal station at $.F.O. It would solve many of San Bruno's problems and also relieve Millbrae from being the end of the line. San Bruno not only got enough grease for its own squeaking wheel but also enough for Millbrae's. Is there another option for So. San Francisco aside from a Chestnut or Hickey station? This Committee thinks so, and is proposing that Bart pass underground through South San Francisco without stopping, going directly from Colma to the Tanforan station. The Tanforan station is already in South San Francisco and the Colma station is close. Bart is also planning, as part of Alternative 6, a station near United Air Lines with a 2100 space parking lot on currently undeveloped Airport property just north of San Bruno Ave. Again very close to South San Francisco. So close in fact that the preliminary information received from Bart consultants shows that part of the station parking lot is in South San Francisco. The direct route option through South San Francisco possesses a rare quality; it would cost less. It would eliminate the cost of an underground station and its required parking. And of course it would lower the misery level which a Bart station would bring to the center of our city. 10/16/91 Page lb AGENDA ACTION TAKEN Joint meeting - Continued. City's position. He stated that the BART Committee does not answer to the Council but answered to MTC Policy Committee, and he knew there would be differences of opinion between the two sides. Discussion followed: that the Committee was composed entirely of S.S.F. residents and the Council could chose to take their input for inclusion in forming its posi- tion; Mr. Keegan felt there was an impli- cit direction for the Committee to report to the Council, because they had perhaps more information compiled on the subject; that MTC had set up the Committee and the process; the alternate committee proposed plan for BART pass underground through S.S.F. without stopping, going directly from Colma to the Tanforan station - which is already in S.S.F.; that the Council felt that a Hickey station had the least impact on S.S.F.; the auxiliary parking lot by BofA and the United Airlines Facility was partially in S.S.F. as a station, as well as the proposed Tanforan station; that the present BART evaluation was examining environmental and use points of view and because of the concerns that have surfaced in neigh- boring communities, other alternatives are being looked at to envision stations with parking that is convenient for patrons to use; whether foregoing a S.S.F. station generates enough of a savings for BART to consider - that all of the stations were above ground, that the UAL station was easily accessible to S.S.F. passengers, and more accessible than a Chestnut or Hickey station would be; if the City took a position of not having a station, then BART would pursue the Chestnut station; that BART must demonstrate sufficient passenger capacity to obtain federal funding; that the people had voted for a station in S.S.F.; whether BART would choose Hickey or Chestnut for a station. Mr. Mariano stated that the reason the Committee was here was because they were not getting information from BART to 10/16/91 Page 2 AGENDA Joint Meeting - Continued. ACTION TAKEN answer questions on whether a station was needed in S.S.F. He stated that the Committee believed that the Tanforan sta- tion was in S.S.F., so the choice was not Chestnut or Hickey. He spoke in detail of Alternative 6, 1-380 corridor, which is a proposed sta- tion which would end at an internal sta- tion at S.F.O., and would impact S.S.F. worse than Chestnut and Hickey through the converging traffic at Tanforan. Mr. Keegan stated that if BART did not go into the Airport, Millbrae would be the end of the line - which the Millbrae Council opposed unanimously because of the traffic impacts on Center Street. Councilwoman Teglia pointed out that the Council did not have the ability to decide this issue nor did Millbrae or San Bruno. City Manager Armas stated that Alternative 6 was merely studying a dif- ferent configuration, and no one should assume that it was a foregone conclusion that it is the one that is going to be accepted because they are looking at dif- ferent configurations, he stated that the Tanforan platform crosses into S.S.F.'s boundaries, but the parking is in San Bruno to the extent that S.S.F. is able to prohibit access to the platform. Director of Economic & Community Development Costello described the alter- native alignments: that one and two were basically no plan and used transportation systems management and no construction; that three was Colma/Chestnut/Tanforan/ external Airport station and was the one that generated so much controversy because it goes along Huntington and divides up that community by closing off streets and being disruptive to San Bruno and Millbrae; four was an end of line commuter station in San Bruno and then goes into an internal station at the Airport which added substantial cost; 10/16/91 Page 3 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN Joint Meeting - Continued. five and six go underground after Tanforan, close to 280, continuing underground to an external Airport station. She stated that BART was supposed to be making a recommendation by March or April on the alternate and an EIR document should be out by December, and then hold hearings and make a determination by March or April. Discussion followed: the 380 corridor alignments have to go underground because of the freeway; S.S.F. was being con- sidered for an open cut below grade; one of the objectives was to minimize any conflict with cross streets, and a suppressed line would minimize those conflicts; being evaluated was a cut or a full subway as it relates to S.S.F.; that the cost analysis had been made by BART; Committee believes Alternate 6 has something for everybody; Alternate 6 would only help S.S.F. if there is not a station in S.S.F., etc. Mr. Terry stated that the best world of Alternate 6 is that it has easy freeway access near a freeway in S.S.F. He stated that a BART station by virtue of its existence is a traffic impacter, as well as for parking which would be slowed down with Alternate 6; with the Airport marsh land that will be filled in to pro- vide parking for 2,100 cars with the opportunity to expand. He stated that with a Hickey Blvd. or Chestnut station the parking could not be expanded without the City undertaking condemnation pro- ceedings to tear down apartment houses on Mission Road. He stated that this was a bedroom community unlike Market St. in S.F. where parking was not allowed. Mr. Bertetta stated that for an underground station you would have to go down 6' and then you will find water. He felt that the best plan was to go down the Market St. railroad tracks to Millbrae and then put a monorail to the 10/16/91 Page 4 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN " 1. Joint meeting - Continued. Airport. He stated that he had worked at the Airport and knew that the property sinking. Councilwoman Teglia asked how the Committee felt about a preference for Hickey or a Chestnut station if that was the only option offered by BART. Consensus of the majority of BART Committee - preference for a Hickey Blvd. station. Discussion followed: that the distance between the Colma and Hickey stations was 1.3 miles; distance between proposed Hickey and Tanforan stations was about 1.5 miles; question of what the distance was between the Daly City and Colma station. Councilman Penna felt that what was being said was that the Council and the Committee should go in with a single voice so that BART will get a clear ideas of S.S.F.'s position rather then repre- sent conflicting positions. He felt that the distance factor in stations was something to be communicated to the BART staff because whenever you put stations together you cut down time schedules, he stated that the distance between Colma and Tanforan was about three miles, and maybe the City could make a point with BART that by eliminating the BART station in S.S.F. it would be cost effective and that the ridership would be picked up by three other stations. Councilwoman Teglia thought that the eli- mination of a station would further impact Colma and Tanforan stations because of parking. Mayor Drago questioned why Caltrain would not serve the same purpose. councilman Penna stated that it would put pressure on Samtrans to provide bus ser- vice for transportation to and from the stations to relieve traffic and parking 10/16/91 Page 5 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN Joint meeting - Continued. congestion. Mr. Terry recited some history: a group of people decided to have BART go to the Airport and needed deep pockets; after studying Federal law, discovered some premises - that each community has to be served along the line by a station; at the Dec. 13th meeting he had pointed out that the Tanforan station was all con- fined, except for the parking lot, in S.S.F; BART said no, it was not, that it was all in San Bruno; he had then asked if BART could give him any assurance that the station would be build as we approved it when they got the money or would they change their mind; BART said they could not give us any assurance at all; BART did not want input from this Committee and only wanted to prove to Federal offi- ces that they had involved the community; BART would not answer the Committee's questions and played games; rather than having minutes, the meetings are sum- marized in a slanted manner; that the Council and this Committee should be in agreement; if the station was too nice it would make the Sharp Park Rd./Westborough an expressway to the coast. Councilman Penna believed there would not be a Chestnut station because there was not enough room for traffic circulation and parking, and BART would not be able to deliver the amount of passengers fore- casted in that station. City Manger Armas pointed out that the Council had raised concerns over the Chestnut station site and had asked Hickey Blvd. site be pursued, and had authorized communicating with the BART Policy Committee to evaluate that alter- nate. He stated that important right now is a lot of information gathering wherein the EIR is available to satisfy State and Federal law, as well as some technical and fiscal analysis of dif- ferent alternates that will be completed at the end of the year for decision making next spring, etc. 10/16/91 Page 6 AGENDA 1. Joint meeting - Continued. ACTION TAKEN Mr. Keegan did not believe that a Hickey station would solve anyone's problem. Mr. Garbarino referred to the Angus McDonald study: that existing traffic volumes were high at the southern end of the corridor, particularly at E1Camino and Westborough; addition of traffic to and from the BART station would increase traffic control problems for the Police Dept. for more than would be the case at a Hickey station, etc. Mr. Keegan stated that there were BART people suggesting a Chestnut station that did not even know the existing traffic levels. Discussion followed: that there were different traffic levels at various times of the day: Hickey station would have a main thoroughfare coming into that area which would create a very severe traffic problem; that people using the station would park their cars on residential streets; that there would be a parking overflow whether the station was at Hickey or Chestnut; issuing street parking permits as a mitigation measure; that the deadline for further alternates had passed; that the letter mailed to BART on the Hickey alternate had been modified to say that the General Plan has a policy against a station at Chestnut, and this was similar to the letter the Mayor would present on Friday; composition of the BART Policy Committee; utilizing the financial data to point out to BART the cost saving of a Hickey sta- tion over a Chestnut station; what if people going to the Airport park at the S.S.F. station for a two week period so as to not pay the Airport for parking; Mr. Keegan felt that 75-80% would be Federal funds to effect the system, and there should be a cooperative effort of the four cities, County and government representatives right on up to Washington to make sure we get enough money to do Alternate 6; that the Committee only wanted Alternate 6 which did not include 10/16/91 Page 7 e AGENDA Joint meeting - Continued. Joint Meeting with Parking Place Commission. 3. Parking District Capital Improvements. ACTION TAKEN a station in S.S.F.; Mayor Drago felt BART was supposed to be a commuter oriented system, and not a tourist attraction to get tourists from the Airport to S.F.; Councilwoman Teglia wanted updates from staff between now and March; that the voters had voted for BART in 1986 by a 61% margin, and a survey a year ago said 70% go for it; that when voting for Measure K the people did not have information on the traffic and parking impacts; that Measure K did not mention BART going to the Airport which had been brought forward later by Senator Kopp; Mr. Terry suggested making the Committee a Commission to give it sta- ture; Council having a joint meeting with the Committee in Jan. before taking action on the document; there would be a BART public meeting tomorrow night that would provide information; that the policy of Council was an underground station and if there had to be a station there was a preference for Hickey being the location, and that Alternate 6 was out there for consideration. Parking Place Commissioners Present: Maltoni, Tognazzini, and DeTomasi. Chairman DeTomasi stated that the Commission had a joint meeting with the Council on 12/11/90 wherein the Commission recommended that the Council appropriate $99,000 to landscape parking district lots, and the item had been put off until now. City Manager Armas stated that this had been discussed during budget sessions for landscaping, more parking on the 400 block by looking at subterranean parking spaces, and looking to acquire a piece of property as a means of expanding a parking lot. He stated that under the Downtown Redevelopment Project if you remove low income housing you must replace it in kind. Councilman Penna stated that he owned 323 Miller Ave. and if the discussion con- 10/16/91 Page 8 A G E N D A A C T I 0 N T A K E N ~ ~ ~ Joint Meeting - Continued. Parking District - Continued. cerned that property he would have to excuse himself. City Manager Armas stated that when the Commission was advised of the housing obligation it had voted it down, so this was only dealing with the landscaping. Chairman DeTomasi said that seeing that the Council approved the conference center the Commission thought that Grand Ave. should be cleaned up to beautify the City to bring people downtown. He described the landscaping plans for the various lots, and the need to hire a parttime employee to maintain the landscaping or hire an outside firm with District funds. Mayor Drago stated that a meet and con- fer process with City employee units would have to be effected before an out- side service was used. City Manager Armas stated that the budget did include a half-time person for this purpose. Chairman DeTomasi stated that there was $99,000 bid that would expire a few months away in 1992. City Manager Armas stated that that was just an estimate by staff on the costs, and the City had not gone out to bid. Councilwoman Teglia stated that it bothered her that the City was painting public buildings to make them look good, and yet the public parking lots look so Dad. She was concerned that the breezeway leading to a lot was not included. City Manager Armas stated that $100,000 had been allocated in the budget for various lots this year, and if the esti- mate was accurate there was sufficient funds for all the lots or lots could be substituted. 10/16/91 Page 9 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN Joint meeting - Continued. Parking District - Continued. Chairman DeTomasi stated that Lot 5 had lots of rocks, and it had been determined that it would cost too much money to tear that out and redo it from the breezeway. Discussion followed: compiling work hours to maintain the lots; that 20 hours a week was presently allocated; that the employee could be taken away from the District to work in other City areas; that the property between City Hall and the library was not in the District boun- daries; what the District maintenance included; purpose of the District was to acquire lots and maintain the lots. Chairman DeTomasi stated the Commission proposed that Council spend $30,000 to determine if an underground garage bet- ween the library and City was effective, but if this was approved the District b~undaries would have to be changed. City Manager Armas stated that the adopted budget assumed a $30,000 expenditure from District funds contingent upon the Commission coming to the Council for its approval. Councilman Penna suggested looking for Federal or State funds to expand City Hall or the library facilities or dig it out as was done at W. Orange Library and perhaps use retrofit funds. City Manager Armas did not feel that would happen. Councilwoman Teglia stated that the Council was already committed to some hefty capital improvement projects, and given the fact that the well of federal and state monies had gone dry. Mayor Drago questioned if the study showed that we should maximize the parking in the underground garage to open up the outside for other purposes, i.e., expand Council chambers so all meetings are at City Hall. 10/16/91 Page 10 AGENDA Joint meeting - Continued. Parking District - Continued. ACTION TAKEN Commissioner Maltoni stated that there were many complaints now on the lack of parking on the 400 block of Grand Ave. Chairman DeTomasi stated that he had talked to engineers in Burlingame that had decked parking lots very nicely, and thought it would work in this City on lots 3, 5 and 8. He stated that letters had been received from people from across the highway who had received $10.00 parking tickets on Grand Ave. while at E1 Charro Restaurant. Discussion followed: lack of parking on Grand Ave. for patrons; a feasibility study on decking lots, etc. Councilman Penna felt that even though he had a business and owned property on Grand Ave., he did not have a conflict of interest when serving on the Commission and the Council, because this parking lot was for the good of the entire area and asked for the City Attorney's opinion. City Attorney O'Toole related that he had not seen that opinion and given the latest rulings of the FPPC considering the liabilities of attorneys he could not give an opinion at this meeting; but his suggestion would be that if there was going to be a vote taken, which was not the case tonight, that Councilman Penna should abstain if not he would take a look at it before the next vote and would give him advice. Mayor Drago suggested that the commission put aside the City Hall plan and come up with their own 5 or 10 year plan, and establish their priorities. Discussion followed: there is a 50 x 140 lot for sale in the 400 block of Baden that the Commission should pursue; that the Commission had instructed staff to pursue acquisition of that lot; a possi- bility of not having meters on Grand Ave., that people across the freeway are 10/16/91 Page 11 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN Joint meeting - Continued. Parking District - Continued. ADJOURNMENT: going to other cities for lunch because the parking is free; meter maids are trigger happy in issuing parking tickets and should exercise some discretion; City Attorney should investigate adding the Brentwood lot to the District; giving two hours free parking during the lunch hour; Commission should figure out the minimum amount of parking revenue needed before eliminating meters, etc. M/S Maltoni/Tognazzini - To adjourn the meeting. Carried by unanimous voice vote. M/S Penna/Teglia - To adjourn the meeting. Carried by unanimous voice vote. Time of adjournment was 10:17 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, ~ttaya~ City of South San Francisco / Jask Drago,~yo~ ty of South S~ Francisco 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. 10/16/91 Page 12