Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 04/28/1969 - 1 - Apr 28., 1969 ]\I[ N T of the Commiss meet of the South San Francisco Planning TIME: 8:00 P.M.. DATE: April 28, 1969 PLACE: Council Chambers, City Hall South San Francisco, California MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chairman Zlatunich, Commissioners Gardner, , Raffaelli, Rosati, Campredon, and Chairman Boblitt MEMBERS ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: City Planner and Secretary to the South San Francisco Planning Commissi.on, Daniel M.. Pass Planning Assistant Franc G.. I.. VanSteen Building Inspectors Austin Lynch and Rex Green MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING Minutes of the sion Meeting of , 1969 Commissioner Campredon moved, seconded by Commissioner Zlatunich, to approve the minutes of the South San Francisco Commission meeting of April 14, 1969 ,cun<l'i:elF,stood , however, that sections 5 & 6 of Mr. Jack C.. Meserve's testimony, as found on pages 771 and 772 the minutes, be deleted due to lack certainty and recognition that said sections were true thereof. The motion was passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Zlatunich, , Lazzari, Raffaelli, Rosati, Campredon, Boblitt NOES: None ANNOUNCEM~NT CONCERNING TAPE RECORDING Chairman co anyone, to be heard, manner, recorder turned she speaking announced that this meeting the Commiss recorded on to come before the Commiss objected to have his or request the Chairman to "off" for the durat of the or or - 7 - 2 - UP-ll6 28, 1969 Request of Caesar-Callan Homes, Inc. to establish Planned Unit Development No. C, a commercial planned unit, in the Westborough- West Park No.3 Planne.d Community District, consisting of a service station, quick-stop food market and office building on a parcel of land located at the northeasterly corner of Westborough and Callan Boulevards,described in City Ordinance No. 575 as Parcel B, in the P-C District. City Planner Daniel M. Pass read the following Findings as made by his office, to wit: "1. The establishment, maintenance, operation or the use of the building or lands for which the permit is sought will under the circumstances the particihlar case, be detri- mental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the area of such proposed use, and will be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the city. 2. The approval of the requested use permit;/ meet.s the requirements of Section 6.23 of the Zoning'~Ordinance.. 3. The proposed commercial planned unit would be located within approximately 100' of an existing service station.. 4. There is no evidence that persons residing or working in the Westborough Community clearly and presently need the proposed, oommercial planned unit on Westborough Blvd. 5. The instant request fails to meet the requirements of Section VI (b) (1) of Ordinance #575.. Mr. Pass then read an interoffice memorandum, dated April 14, 1969, from his office, to wit: tta. Westborough-West Park #3 Planned Community was created under Ordinance #575.. This ordinance,. under Section VI ) (l)~ provides that the Planning Commission shall make the following findings prior to its approval of any planned unit development in the said Westborough-West Park #3 Planned Community'. (a) The proposed uses are planned and gauged primarily for service and convenience to. the residents and people working therein or people who reside or work within the Planned Community District.. (b) The proposed uses will provide such local services and facilities which are (1) not available in a reasonably proximate location or (2) needed and desirable as supplements to existing local service and shopping facilities.. - 782 - 6 28, 69 It is your City Planner's understanding of the pro- vis that the Planning Commission is not authorized to permit the creat of a commercial development on subject lands the absence of their finding that the proposed commercial use is nota,lzisilable in the immediate area,' or i,8 needed by the residents of Westborough to supplement a commercial use existi.ng therein.. b. There are now three service stations domi.ciled the Westborough Community.. The fourth station has been approved for establishment at the southeasterly corner of King Drive and Callan Boulevard. While there is only one food market, a second is under construction Westborough Square.. Under , a third market, which will be constructed at the said southeasterly corner of andCa1lan, was approved.. The approved plans of the Westborough Shopping Center, located at the northeasterly corner ofiWestborough and Callan Boulevards, indicate that 10,000 square feet office space will eventually be developed therein.. Accord- ing to Mr. Les Cohn, owner of the said.Westborough Shopping Center, offices will soon be constructed in his building.. c.. The proposed service station is opposed by the South San Francisco School t and the West Park Homeowners soc ion.. This ition is based upon the proposed station's leged incompatibility with the adjoining and adjacent high school and planned residential complex.. d.. According to the tenets and precepts sound planning, Westboroughts 4500 persons could be adequately served by one super market, two service stations, and 10,000 square feet office space.. these or similar standards are applied to the s 's employment of Sect VI (b) (1) of Ordinance No.. S75, requested use is untenable",ff Mr.. Pass further read an int ice memorandum, dated 16, 1969, from ice Chief John Fabbri, to wit: department concurs by the City Planner. the recommendat recommendations are not accepted and the approveq, th Department would recommend be luded ingress and s driveways be restricted to turn movements H <II Mr.. Pass then read an interoff memorandum, dated ApI" 69 from Director Works H.. s, to : has ishment proposed to Westborou~h an.d Use t>erml_t ... 2B - 6 il 28, 19 denied accordance with the City Planner's recommenda- t ." In event that the Use Permit is approved, it recommended that a detailed grading and drainage plan be submitted to this office for approval prior to the grant the building permit: Mr. s further read a letter dated September 20, 1968, from Superintendent of Schools Paul Nielsen of the South San Fran- cisco School District, as follows: UAt regular meeting of September! 16, 1968, the Board of Trustees expressed its concern over the proposed use of the commercial property at the northeast corner Callan and Westborough Boulevards. This parcel abut our Westborough High School site.. particular, the Trustees were concerned that the use be compatible with the new school.. It is our understanding that it has been informally proposed that this site be used as a service station locat We would at this time, in advance of any formal use application, wish to state that we are opposed to the use of this parcel for a service station site.. is our opinion that this use is incompatible with the already approved adjacent school use. We will be available to you and your staff and will be happy to discuss this matter in more detail at your request. We would at this time also request immediate formal not ication if subject e application is filed..H Mr.. Pass further read a letter dated April 21, 1969, from Dr. Nielsen, to wit: rtWe are in of the Use permit.#l16 Application. This is to restate our opposition to the development a gas station on subject site.. In a letter dated September 20, 1968, (a copy is attached herewith), the Trustees stated that the proposed use is incompatible with the already approved adjacent school use. We shall be present at the meeting to answer questions pert to the case at hand..tt Mr. Pass further read a signature of Michael C." 1969, to wit: from the applicant, over , President, dated Apr f'We respectfully submit Planned Unit iiC" the established by your under considerat borough .. Ordinance No.. P..C. an applicat Planned Community as inanceNo..575.. The area northeast corner is This area - 7 Apr 28, 69 6 that proposed lopment be a asset to the City South San Francisco and we look forward to its early commencement. We shall be happy to answer any questions or clarify any that may arise." Present the applicant were Mr. Ichiro Sasaki, Architect and Mr. Thomas Callan Jr.., both of Caesar Callan Homes Inc", of 2790 Junipero Serra Boulevard, Daly City. Further were Mr. Dave Wallace of Texaco Oil Company of San Francisco; Mr. Charles MUrphy, real estate agent for the 7 stores of San Francisco; Mr.. Stanley Haney, District Engineer for the South San Francisco Unified School District, and others named with their testimony. Mr. Sasaki took the stand and stated that: 1. The Commission must be well aware that the application at hand was not one for rezoning, but one for a use permit. 2. When July, 1966 the actual rezoning had been approved by the Planning Commission a service station had been luded the intended developmental plan for this site", Mr. Sasaki further discussed extensively the history of the rezoning of West Park III of which this site was an integral part. He cited further from Ordinance No.. 575 which estab- lished on May l3, 1968 the P C di.strict for said West Park area several portions of sections thereof and had found some contrasts with the City Planner's quotations. He presented copies of his findings to each member of the Planning Commission. Mr. Pass, in response, stated that under Section l' sub B was clearly stated that the Planning Commission had to establish findings as to certain needs on behalf of those within the planned community, and when those findings were unfavorable to the proposed use,as well formulated his report, no recommendation for approval could be made. Mr. Dave Wallace stated that Texaco Oil COOl had findings after due research the market and that there was a need and the establishment of such a service stat was economically justified and s was not so much the 1 company which makes a sta- t a success, but it was the peopole holding the franchise. Texaco had been successful the past in meeting real demands and saw also one here. Mr. Pass, , further stated: 1. found applicant and that immaterial matter the picture. the. - 7 - 2D - 28, 1969 true that the Commiss recommended West Community. They had es also certain commercial s commercial uses would be a use permit. d or commercial, minimum standards had to proven a certain quality b(~fore use permit could be 3.. The Counc ,act upon Ptanning Commission, enacted nance No.5, establishing such f:~ndings sett guidelines This ordinance was a very delicate s~lid Planned Community and protect ion t disharmonious ions as City , naming the performance.. establ 4" Even with 450 newl1hous fl~ture, was impossible to within a one radius. the near stat Mr. Charles MUrphy, real estate agent stores s l. 7 stores were husband and wife days of the year, everyday from 7 ions, open 365 to ll:OO P.M.. 2. They were a convenience store, not They catered to the 10% need that exis to closing times of supermarkets. major supplier. everywhere due 3 e were not compet there as a supplement, often same shopping center of , but were even with There being no one else to speak man Boblitt asked if there were any part the request, Chair- who wanted to . Mr. Stanley Haney of the South San Francis t stated: Unified 1.. At the time they reviewed the first the final plan, they had been aware acreage had been set as the certain next to s 2. But they had not for a service stat s ies. been des commerc 3~ The s board to a s had ample proof that service stat environment of schools with high s uses.. stat the immed s - 786 - 28, 1969 UP-116 Mr.. Bruce Rose.ngren, of 2684 Duhallow Way, South San Francisco, ident the West Park Homeowners Associat stated: 1. Within one mile radius there were already five gas pumping stations operati.on, one was coming up, and another had been closed, but was still there.. , 6. Their community was a community of homes, not one of general commercial.. Mr.. Thomas Fee, of 2501 Donegal Avenue, South San Francisco, speaking only as a resident of this area, stated: 1.. He counted, including the present applicatiGn, eight stations, and no one could ever justify enough support for this number by the area involved in order to prevent commer- ci.al blight.. 2.. He agreed with Mr.. Rosengren statements", ly a 11 his 3.. Westborough-W'est Park was not a commercial one.. The comme.rcial to support the needs this community a residential area, es were only meant 4.. Schools and service stations don't mix.. 5.. He did not want to see any of the inesses in area go out of iness due to lack of support, creating thereby a vacant problem site for both the businessman the environment. 6. one service station had ness for some reason and still new the <I> gone were Mr.. Edward Toby, stat : 2570 Bantry San Franc co 1.. The people of Westborough through their Associat si.nce they did not see a found that such stations~were traff was never the the beginning ed service stat , the area and always non - 7 28, 1969 6 2.. The chain link fence that will be median of Westborough Boulevard new high s would force the s use the very intersect where app1 service station.. Such a use womld walk the utmost danger by the ingress and egressing service stat tructed the the height the s of Westborough to proposes another said future cross- presence traff 3... He wondered how long the American vacant and if so, that while hazard and open to vandalism.. Suppose a while met the same fate.. The s a troublesome neighbor.. tat ion would remain it would be a fire proposed station 1 would then have There being no one Chairman Boblitt rebuttals.. t the request, an ty Mr.. Callan, hereupon went extensively Commission adopted Resolution had recommended to Ci.ty Council to Communi ty Dis presentat at this corner si.te would be the Planning Commiss objected to such at that time.. had contained such indications.. stat And, as a need stated tha.t changes been this case, stated to estab Council had review of the presentat and an ordinance which was intended to guide community.. The Counc had not but had only added a legal requ as Planning Commission not make a f ing . was re obsolete t legal showed a recom- trict, but by , and after careful ion, had des the orderly led out a to ld not prove such of such a use... Mr.. Haney stated be neighbor to a ion aware they wou no - 788 - 28, 6 the Mr.. s "Au '" 1 B was to been on West- , was creat scrutiny was not stated that s at the time. might even School Board had neve.r relinquished sider such a use when the request for a as was done now.. 1966 a proposed.. May 9 68 the Counc ordinance, but now the specific the school made s findings that with a school as comments by declare.d matter and a - 7 6 28, sioner the findi.ngs department heads Homes .. stat ,quick-stop market northeasterly corner i, a service ing on a site at tborough Boulevards. motion was pas lowing Raffaelli, 1 vote: .. .. i, NOES: ABSENT: , C~mpredon announced that part an 3 .... 28, dwe ing on building on a ide of Avenue, (No. 341 Planner Daniel M. Pass read the iC'f : as made HIt is respectfully recommended that s adopt the find contained preliminary Official ion Report, instant use-permit request upon comply with the subsequent Commiss fS Architectu.al Planning attached, approve the ion that the the Mr<l> further read mne as .. Go .. The establishment, building or lands will not, under c detrimental to the , safety, res or will not improvements the city. or the use is s particular , comfort working in area rimental or in the neighborhood such injurious or the 2. approval the requested use requirements of Section 6",23 of the 3. proposed apartment would be well-designed building. 4. 'rhe proposed dwelling units would suffic ....street parking. a ne;;v'l served by 5.. The proposed the removal a dilapidated s from the subject premises. would resu dwell Mr. Pass further read the ions .. .. tfThe applicant shall of the Archit with the Committee." equent Mr.. Pass further read an 16, 1969: ice from , "Reference above tions to make at this H has no .... 7 28, 69 Mr. Pass further read an interoffice memorandum , 1969, from Public Works Goss: "Please be advised that office has checked the preliminary plans for construct of four dwel units on the second floor of exist retail store building located on Lot 16, Block ,.at 341 Baden Avenue and recommends that the Use Permit be granted accordance with the CityPlannerfs recommendations subject to a further condit that a detailed grad and drainage plan be submitted to this for to the build permit.," Present was the applicant, Mr", NatLucchesi 439 Baden Avenue, South San Francisco. Mr. L'u.cchesi stated he would be happy to answer any and all questions the Commission might have. There being no one else further to speak for or against the request, Chairman Boblitt declared the public hearing on this matter closed, and solicited comments from the Commissioners. There being no further comments by any of the other Commissioners, Chairman Boblitt declared the questioning closed and asked for a motion on the matter and a roll Commissioner Lazzari moved, seconded Commissioner Campredon, to adopt the findings of the City Planning Office and to approve the application of Mr", Nat Lucchesi, under UP-ll7, to establish four dwelling uniBs on the second floor of an existing commercial building as requested, hO'tvever, upon compliance with the requirements as set forth by the C Planner, the Director of Public Works, the Chief Building Inspector, the Fire Chief, and all other.agencies having authority this matter, and those as set by the Archi- tectural Committee. The motion was passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Zlatunich, Lazzari, Raffaelli, Rosati, Carnpredon, Boblitt NOES: None ABSENT: Gardner - 4 .- v-68 28, 1969 a family . located s Donegal '" M. Pas , to read the recommendat .. .. s liminary variance",H respectfully recommended that the findings contained in ial Action Report, and Planning Commis- attached, pre- the requested Mr.. further read the as by his ice: are except applying ication, circumstances or ing to or conditions do in the same d 2.. granting preservat of the pet 3.. That the graBting the circumstances of affect adversely the or working the applicant, and will not, under particular case, be materially WQ&fare or injurious to property or neighborhood", the application is necessary for the enjoyment substant property will not, under , materially ons residing the tances of the to the in said 4", The granting the requested harmony with the general purpose 5.. The requested variance diff ies, unnecessary hardships, tent the general purpose of the will be Zoning Ordinance", to prevent results incons Ordinance", , 8.. The' to \1-68 28, 69 Mr. Pass further read 1969, memorandum, dated Louis H.. Goss: 15, "Please be advised that this office has checked the preliminary plans the. construction of a one-story to an existing two story single family dwelling on 23, Block 22, Westborough Unit No.. 2 and recommends that the Variance be granted in accordance with the City Planner's recommendations subject to a further condition that a detailed grading and drainage plan be submitted to this office for approval prior to the granting of the building permit",U Present for the applicant was Mr. Thomas Fee of 250l Donegal Avenue, South San Francisco.. Mr... Fee stated he would be happy to answer any and all questions the Commission might have.. There being no one else further to speak for or against the request, Chairman Boblitt declared the pUblic hearing on this matter closed and sited comments from the Commissioners.. Commissioner Zlatunich asked Mr.. Fee if he had approval from the Architectural Committee of his Homeowners Associat .. Mr. Fee stated that when the variance request would not be approved there would be no sense in going to his Association.. The presentation made here tonight was in such a manner that approval by his association in case of approval of the variance. would be most likely... The. variance was the necessity... Commissioner Campredon asked Mr. Pass if there were any ele- vations, while Commissioner Zlatunich stated that lately the Commission had made some kind of a policy.. Mr.. Pass stated that this policy was in regard to two-story addititions to one-story dwellings.. The case at hand was one of a one-story addition to a two-story building.. This addition could not be seen from the street, while the Architectural Committee of the Association would guard against disharmonious architectural design.. There being no further comments by any of the other Commissioners, Chairman Boblitt declared the questioning dosed and asked for a motion on the matter and a roll call vote thereon. Commissioner Raffaelli moved, seconded by Commissioner Gardner to adopt the findings of the City Planning Office and to approve the cation of Thomas Fee under V-68, a one-story addition to a two-story existing home as requested, however upon compliance with the requirements of the City Planner, Director of Pub Works, Chief Building Inspector and the Architectural Committee of the Westborough Homeowners Association.. The motion was passed by the following ro call vote: AYES: Zlatunich, Gardner, Lazzari, Raffaelli,Rosati, Boblitt NOES:: None ABSENT: None - 794 - - 5 - 28,1 1969 SURVEY OF PHYSICAL CONDITION OF LOCAL HOUSING City Planner Daniel Me Pass read the following spec as prepared by his office, dated April 21, 1969 report "The. Building Department, the Planning Office, and Planning Cons*ltant Neal Martin have jointly surveyed the physical condition of local housing. The results of this survey are contained in the following chart and geographical locator. This survey, which was confined to the external character- tics of local housing, produced gratifying results.. While South San Francisco has some. definite environmental and planning problems, its residential structures are pre- dominant sound.. The small percen~age of dilapidated and deteriorating dwellings herein is primarily due to this municipalityis comparat ly large post bellum growth and development...* South San Francisco's population increase from 19,351 1950 to about 50,000 in 1969 has been paced by the creation of new residential areas, and the establish- ment of higher planning and developmental standards City Council and the Planning Commission.. The Planning Department respectfully recommends that the Planning Commission accept the instant survey, and recom- mend that the City Council approve for inclus the appendices of the City's developing Housing Element of the General Plan.. Dilapidated Dwellings: by irremediable. often dangerous Deterior~lting by substantial, Residential structures decay. (Dilapidated dwel to and limb..) lings: Resident structures characterized but remediable disrepair.. CHART NO., OF LAND USE 1.. 1 dwelling ** 2.. Sound dwelling units 3. Deteriorating dwelling units 4.. Dilapidated dwelling units ** Res ia1 hotels, mote ,residences-above-stores, parks, and similar land uses were not evaluated in . These i uses ire special study.. GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION OF DETERIORATING & DILAPIDATED RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES DWLLG.. UNITS 13,017 ,867 93 % 100..00 98..85 0..71 0.44 survey. . DETERIORATING STRUCTURES NO. AREA 1:. 2", 3.. 4$ 5.. 4 1 1 6 o o 2 21 "'7f"1d= 28, 69 OF HOUS AREA NO. DETERIORATING STRUCTURES 38 II 2 6 e Urban 7 .. Grand 8 .. ley 7 6 93 57 Mr. Pass explained the matter to Commission, stat that report was self explanatory. The matter would a mot as to re.commend to the City Council of the City South San Francisco to accept the tant survey and to approve for ion in the appendices of the !s Developing Housing Element the General Plan.. There being no one else to speak for or against the request, Chairman Boblitt declared public hearing on this matter ed and solicited comme.nts from the Commissioners.. Commissioner Campredon asked Mr. Pa.ss if there were. remedies deteriorating structures.. Mr.. Pass stated that such struc- tures could be saved more or less extensive work to bring them up to Code.. Dilapidated structures were those which could not be saved, but they were slowly disappearing as a result of due process for all kinds of improvement permits. During the following discussion the matter of a Board of Condemnation came up and was considered. There. being no further comments by any of the other Commissioners, Chairman Boblitt declared the questioning closed and asked a motion on the matter and a roll call vote thereon... Commiss Lazzari moU'ed, seconded by Commissioner Campredon to adopt the findings of the City Planning office, and to recommend to the City Council of the of South San Francisco to accept instant survey and to approve it for inclusion the appendices of the City!s 4eveloping Housing Element of the General Plan... The motion was passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Zlatunich, Gardner, Lazzari, Raffaelli, Rosati, Campredon, Boblitt NOES: None ABSENT: None Chairman Boblitt tructed Secretary to with the Commission!s recommendation to the - 796 - - 6 - 28, GOOD AND WELFARE, OTHER AND COMMONICATIONS. Mr.. Thomas Fee of 2501 Donegal A~enue, South San Francisco, stated that connection with UP-ll6 especially and with West Park - Westborough in general, he had always been of the understanding that this area would be primarily residen- tial and that any commercial would be incidental and for the needs of the Community alone. He agreed with Mr. Pass that the village type of development should be preserved and there could be no place for gener~l commercial to serve the passerby. That is what they all hadiunderstood when they bought and past actions by both homeowners associations had clearly borne this out.. There being nothing further to be considered under Good and welfare, and there being no further communications or other matters interest for the Planning Comtniss 'I Chairman Boblitt announced that the next regtllar meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission would be held on May 12, 1969 at 8:00 P..M. the Council Caambers of City Hall, South co, California. The meeting was adjourned at 9:46 M", Planning Commission Commission . - 7