CC MIN 1970 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

130 but how soon. He added that Staff had indicated it is addressing itself to the traffic problem. He had no objection to delaying consideration of the resolution for one week. Mayor Bury responded he was aware the commitment has been made, but his concern was not only ability of Staff to resolve the traffic matter, but also for the residents of the areas where traffic will be passing through. He felt there was a question of obligation to these citizens, and their willingness to accept the college. Councilman Henderson stated that the resolution addressed itself to the trustees and funding, and felt that the discussion gave the implication that the City had not already committed itself, and that the matter before Council was to support the State Board of Trustees in its request, and to urge support of such funding as to facilitate early construction. (Copy of the resolution is requested to be submitted to Council) Councilman Keckley noted that additional considerations would be storm drain facilities and sewers. Mayor Bury added that with the pressure of increasing population, the people who live along the route should be involved so that they know they have made the commitment along with the Council. It was agreed to consider the matter on the March 16 agenda. Discussion of Community Facility Project (HUD) by Planning Director, Planning Director, noting that Council has received copy of a memorandum stating the progress of the Community Facility Project, therefore felt that his verbal report should cover other aspects. He quoted from the memorandum a brief descrip- tion of the general area to be included, as well as the activities and goals en- visioned. He then provided a brief history of the proposed facility, which had its beginnings about mid -1969, and as interest increased, meetings were held with the Fair Oaks Neighborhood Committee, City and San Mateo County. He presented a slide of the area to be served, bounded by Bay Road, 5th Avenue, El Camino Real, and including some of the "5 -points" area. The area was felt to qualify for a Federal grant to assist in development of a community facility. In a meeting in December it was determined that for eligibility it would have to be established that 172% of the householders were living on $3,000 or less. It was the unhappy finding that poverty did exist, and the area did qualify under the test. The studies carried out were submitted to the San Francisco HUD office, and the Welfare Department was asked to locate generally the families receiving welfare, or old age assistance, aid to the blind, aid to dependent children, etc., and the percentage then determined of persons receiving welfare assistance. It was learned that 33% of the target area families received incomes of $3,000 or less. While that percentage could be inaccurate, HUD was satisfied, since the figure was well over 17-1/2% to allow a good margin. Planning Director indicated on the map the approximate proposed location for the facility, as well as an out- line of the "service area" approximately one mile in radius, which encompassed 19,000 people. The "target area" covered 11,000. He noted also that the majority of those in the target area live outside the City limits, while the