Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 09/14/1970 MINUTES September 14, 1970 of the regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission TIME: 8:00 P.M. DATE: September 14, 1970 PLACE: Council Chambers, City Hall South San Francisco, California MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chairman Campredon, Commissioners Boblitt, Gardner, Raffaelli, Rosati, and Zlatunich MEMBERS ABSENT: Lazzari ALSO PRESENT: City Planner and Secretary to the South San Francisco Planning Commission, Daniel M. Pass Assistant Planner William A. Timmons Assistant City Engineer Raymond Maxwell Chief Building Inspector Leonard J. Pittz MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of August 24, 1970. Commissioner Raffaelli moved that the minutes of the regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission of August 24, 1970, be approved; seconded by Commissioner Gardner; passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Campredon, Boblitt, Gardner, Raffaelli, Rosati and Zlatunich NOES: None ABSENT: Lazzari ANNOUNCEMENT CONCERNING TAPE RECORDING OF MEETING V. Chairman Campredon announced that this meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission would be recorded on tape, but that anyone who wished to come before the Commission in order to be heard, but objected to having his voice recorded in this manner, could request the Chairman to order the tape recorder turned "off" for the ffluration of the time that he is speaking or is heard. - 1197 - Continued Hearing UP-163 (Revised) September 14, 1970 UP-163, use-permit request of Texaco, Inc., to redevelop an existing service station at the southeasterly corner of Mission Road and Holly Avenue, in the "u" District. Report and Recommended "Findings" and " Con di tions of Ci ty Planner Daniel M. Pass "FINDINGS: "1. The establishment, maintenance, operation or the use of the building or lands for which the permit is sought will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the area of such proposed use, and will not 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 permi t meets the requirements of Section 6.23 of the Zoning Ordinance. " 3. The proposed redevelopment would improve the land-use order and aesthetic appearance of the southeasterly corner of Mission Road and Holly Avenue. "4. Approximately 20.6% of the redeveloped site would be devoted to landscaping. "CONDITIONS: "The applicant shall comply with the subsequent requirements of the Planning Commission's Architectural Committee." Secretary Pass read the following report, dated September 4, 1970, from Landscape Specialist John E. Hoffman. "The landscape plan, revised Augus t 31, 1970, for subject si te has been reviewed by this office. This plan complies with the City's minimum design standards for landscaping in all respects except where planters are omitted to permit access to rear of existing building. However, additional planting has been pro- vided in the triangular area on Holly Street which compensates for the omi tted planting at rear of building." Mr. Glenn o. Becker, agent of the applicant, was present, and advised the Commission that they had tried to meet the requirements of the City of South San Francisco and he felt it would be an attractive model. There being no comments by the public, either for or against the proposed use permit, Vice Chairman Campredon closed the public hearing thereon and solicited comments from the Corrmrissioners. Commissioner Zlatunich requested additional information on the appearance of the proposed building. City Planner Pass advised the Commission, that the proposed building would be similar in appearance to the Texaco station on Baden Avenue - there would be a mansard roof and the building would have an artificial rock finsish. He further noted, that the applicant is agreeable to changing the color scheme to one that woulGlbe"complementary to the site. - 1198 - UP-163 (Revised) September 14, 1970 There being no further comments by the Commission, vice Chairman Campredon asked the Commission for a motion. Commissioner Raffaelli moved that the Planning Commission adopt the 'Jfind- ings " as set forth in the Preliminary Official Action Report and approve UP-163 upon the condition that the applicant comply with the requirements of the City's reporting department heads; seconded by Commissioner Gardner; passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Campredon, Boblitt, Gardner, Raffaelli, Rosati and Zlatunich NOES: None ABSENT: Lazzari - 1199 - V.... 86 September 14,. 1970 V-86, variance request of Jack Lee to construct a one-story addition to a sing1e+fami1y dwelling in the required rear yard of No. 252 Gardenside Avenue, and to cover 43% of the building site thereof, in the R-1 Dis tri ct . Secretary Pass read the following reports Report and recommended "Findings" arid "Condi tions" of Ci ty Planner Pass "It is respectfully recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the findings listed in the attached, preliminary Official Action Report, and approve the requested variance. FINDINGS: "1. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or condi tions applying to the land or building referred to in the application, which circumstances or conditions do not apply generally to land or buildings in the same district. "2. The granting of the application is necessary for the preserva- tion and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the petitioner. If 3. That the granting of the application will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighbor- hood of the property of the applicant, and will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in said neighborhood. "4. The granting of the requested variance will be in harmony wi th the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. "5. The requested variance is necessary to prevent practical difficulties, unnecessary hardships, and results inconsistent with the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. "6. The requested variance is supported by the substandard depth and square-footage of the subject building site. "7. Similar variances have been granted in Sunshine Gardens. Examples: V-1535, Robert Valencia; V-21, Donald E. Schumacher; & V-24, Herman Sege1ke." CONDIT IONS:, "The applicant shall cause the removal of the illegal tool shed on his premises." - 1200 - - V-86 - September 14, 1970 Mr. Jack Lee, the applicant,was present and advised the Commission that he would be pleased to answer any questions pertaining to V-86. There being no comments by the public either for or against the proposed variance, vice Chairman Campredon closed the public hearing thereon and solicited comments from the Commissioners. In response to a query from Commissioner Boblitt, City Planner Pass advised the Corrmrission that the tool shed would have to be removed in any case. Chief Building Inspector Pittz indicated that the tool shed is in violation of the Building Code and that there would be a citation issued for violation, if it were not removed. There being no further comments by any of the other Commissioners, vice~ Chairman Campredon declared the questining closed and asked for a motion on the matter and roll call vote thereon. Commissioner Gardner moved, seconded by Commissioner Zlatunich, to adopt the findings of the City Planning Office and to approve the application as requested, however, upon compliance wi th the requirements as set forth by the City's reporting department heads. The motion was passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Boblitt, Campredon, Gardner, Raffaelli, Rosati, Zlatunich NOES: None ABSENT: Lazzari - 1201 - - V-87 - September 14, 1970 V-87, variance request of Edward Andrews to construct a one-story addition to an existing single-family dwelling in a required side yard of 156 San Felipe Avenue, in the R-l District. Secretary Pass read the following reports into the record. Report and recommended "Findings" of City Planner Daniel M. Pass. "The Planning Department respectfully recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the "findings" and "action" indicated in the attached, preliminary Official Action Report." FINDINGS: "1. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the land or building referred to in the application, which circumstances or conditions do not apply generally to land or buildings in the same district. "2. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the petitioner. "3. That the granting of the application will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant, and will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in said neighborhood. "4. The granting of the requested variance will be in harmony wi th the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. "5. The requested variance is necessary to prevent practical difficulties, unnecessary hardships, and results inconsistent wi th the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. "6. The requested variance would not establish a new building line, but would merely extend an existing one. "7. Similar variances have been granted in the Serra Highlands subneighborhood.* *Examples: V-67, Robert Plunkett; V-56, Norman L. Snyder; V-33, T. La Grave; V-37, Donald J. Frolli; V-27, Don Fagundes; and V-20, John Tamburini" Mrs. Edward Andrews, the applicant, was present and advised the Commission that she would be pleased to answer any questions pertaining to V-87. There being no comments either for or against the proposed variance, Vice Chairman Campredon closed the public hearing thereon and solicited comments from the Commissioners. - 1202 - - V-87 - September 14, 1970 In response to Commissioner Boblitt's query regarding an easement on the property, City Planner Pass advised the Commission that the P. G. & E. easement covered 25' of the rear of the lot, and an additional 5' P.U.E. easement across the lot extended toward the house. There being no further comments by any of the other Commissioners, vice Chairman Campredon declared the questioning closed and asked for a motion on the matter and roll call vote thereon. Commissioner Rosati moved, seconded by Commissioner Zlatunich, to adopt the findings of the City Planning Office and to approve the application as requested, however, upon compliance with the requirements as set forth by the Ci ty' s reporting department heads. The motion was passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Boblitt, Campredon, Gardner, Raffaelli, Rosati, Zlatunich NOES: None ABSENT: Lazzari - 1203 - PM~66 September 14, 1970 Secretary reread reports of meeting of August 10, 1970 into the record. Report of City Planner Daniel M. Pass "The proposed minor subdivision meets the requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act, and the regulatory standards em- bodied in the Subdivision Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco. Said subdivision would create two, well-designed industrial lots." "The Planning Department respectfully recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the above factors as its findings, and approve the instant tentative parcel map upon the con- dition that the subdivider comply with the submitted require- ments of the Ci ty' s department heads." Report, dated July 14, 1970, of Director of Public Works Goss "P1ease be advised that this office has checked the proposed tentative parcel map of Lands of E. H. Edwards Company at the southeasterly corner of Oyster Point Boulevard and Industrial Way." "We recommend that the parcel map be approved subject to the dedication of a 23'-wide strip of land adjacent to the southerly edge of Butler Road extending from the proposed westerly boundary line of Parcel 2 to the easterly boundary line of Parcel 2. This dedication is necessary to provide for the future widening and improvement of Oyster Point Boulevard to a four-lane divided arterial as shown on the General Plan of the Ci ty of South San Francisco." Report, dated July 16, 1970, of Chief Building Inspector Pittz "I have examined the Tentative Parcel Map PM-66, being a subdi vision of the Lands of E. H. Edwards Co. at the southeast corner of Oyster Point Boulevard and Industrial Way into two parcels, and recommend approval upon the fo11owinificonditions: "1. Recheck the dimensions on the line of 495.47' and 360.12'. map book has these dimensions 368.12' respecti ve1y . " northerly property The County Assessor's shown as 491.47' and Report, dated July 22, 1970, of Director of Public Works Goss "This memorandum supersedes and revises the recommendations submitted in my memorandum dated July 14, 1970." "It is recommended that the parcel map be approved subject to the dedication of an additional 9' wide strip of land for public street purposes extending from the proposed westerly boundary line of Parcel 2 to the easterly boundary line of Parcel 2. The requested additional 9' wide dedication for public street purposes is to be adjacent to the southerly - 1204 - PM-66 September 14, 1970 Hedge of the existing 10' easement for public street or highway. (1052 O.R 98 - 74475-B)" This will provide a total width of R/W of 44' from the existing center line of Oyster Point Boulevard whi ch will provide one'half of the required R/W width for the future widening and improvement of Oyster Point Boulevard to a four-lane divided arterial as shown on the General Plan of the City of South San Francisco." Mr. Louis Arata, C.E. and agent of the applicant was present and stated the applicant was of the opinion that an additional 9' easement for the right-of-way was not justified at this time and it would adversely affect the operation of their business. There being no one to speak either for or against the proposed Parcel Map, Vice Chairman Campredon closed the public hearing thereon and solicited comments from the Commissioners. In reppy to a query by Commissioner Boblitt concerning the easement, City Planner Pass advised the Commission that the widening would not be undertaken until 3 or 4 years from now. There was considerable discussion regarding the necessity for the easement at this time. City Planner Pass advised the Commission of the need to comply with the provision of the Map Act at this time, instead of waiting until the street is eventually widened. City Planner Pass noted that a request was not being made to remove any of the existing building, but that a 9' strip off the front of the proposed new lot, and, if the building were to come down, we would ask for more. He also noted that the action proposed was standard procedure for the Ci ty of South San Francisco and the State of California, if not throughout the Nation. City Planner Pass further noted that this was a very minimum, small requirement and it is not designed to interfere with the operation of the wire plant, nor will it destroy the utility or the purposefulness of the new lot. Mr. Arata noted that Mr. Edwards is willing to grant a reserve for future widening. Mr. Arata further noted that his client was concerned that may gi ve a piece of land away that may never be used Mr. Pass advised the Comrrdssmon that the best time to acquire land is during the subdivision thereof, because the subdivision procedure permits such under the State Map Act. Under the Subdivision Ordinance there is a concrete procedure for acquiring land, Mr. Pass noted. The reserve strip spoken of by Mr. Arata, the City Planner noted, would surtax the public to buy the land, and it would be our recommendation that the standard be followd, and that man be required to do what every other man is required to do. There being no further comments by any other Comrrdssioner, Vice Chairman Campredon declared the questioning closed and asked for a motion on the matter and roll call vote thereon. Comrrdssioner Bobli tt moved, seconded by Commissioner Zlatunich, to adopt the findings of the City Planning Office and to approve the application as requested, upon compliance with the requirements as set forth by the City's reporting department heads. The motion was passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: Boblitt, Campredon, Gardner, Raffaelli, Rosati and Zlatunich None ABSENT: Lazzari 7.,nr: PM-68 September 14, 1970 PM-68, tentative parcel map of B. Fontana & Sons, representing the subdivision of one lot with an aggregate area of 2.901 acres, and located on the northeasterly side of El Camino, and adjoining the northerly property line of the Kaiser Foundation hospital site, (No. 330 El Camino Real), in the "U" District, into two lots. The Secretary read the following reports into the record. Report of City Planner Daniel M. Pass "The proposed subdi vision meets the requirement of the State Sub- division Map Act, and the regulatory standards of the Subdivision Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco. Said subdivision would separate the "Cavalier" motel site from the lands which will be conveyed to the Kaiser Foundation, and used in conjunction with the adjoining hospital-clinic site. "It is therefore respectfully recommended that the Planning Commis- sion approve the instant tentative parcel map upon the condition that the subdivider comply with the submitted requirements of the City's department heads." Report, dated August 27, 1970, of Fire Chief John A. Marchi "I recommend the subdi vision of the above for subdi vision purposes only, however before any improvements or buildings can be approved for this area, hydrants and water mains will have to be installed as there are none in this entire area." "This requirement has been also required of Kaiser. Hospital who plan on developing adjacent area. Kaiser Hospi tal has agreed and it will also be necessary for the owners of the above property to comply as they do not have proper fire protection at the present time to protect their existing motel and property." Report,dated September 4, 1970, of Chief Building Inspector Pittz "I have examined the Tentative Parcel Map, PM-68, being a resub- di vision of the Fontana Property and recommend its approval." "There is a difference on the dimension shown for the property line adjoining the Kaiser Foundation property, than the dimesion as shown on the County Assessors Map. So this sfhould be checked." Report, dated September 4, 1970, of Director of Public Works Goss "This office recommends approval of said map subject to the following recommendations and/or requirements: "1. The grade and alignment of the sewer lateral connection from Parcell and Parcel 2 across Colma Creek and the City and County of San Francisco's easement and p~operty shall be subject to the review and approval of this office. - 1206 - PM-68 September 14, 1970 "2. The nature, extent, and desi gn of the joint sewer project referred to in the notes shall be presented to, revi ewed and approved by this office. "]. The City should be reasonably assured that the sewer project as subsequently submitted will actually be built, i.e., financial arrangements, easement acquisitions, etc., will not prohibit the project feasibility." "Compliance with the above will be necessary prior to our approval of the Final Map." Mr. Edwin H. Smith, C. E., and agent of the applicant, was present and advised the Commission that he would require clarification of Mr. Goss's requirements. Mr. Smith further noted that the sewers are tied in with Kaiser's development plans which have not been submitted and that it is difficult for his client to guarantee something which is beyond his control. Mr. Smith stated that he would make sewer information known as it becomes available and he is willing to talk informally with Mr. Goss However, he did not believe that the final map filing should be held up for this. There being no comments by the public,either for or against the proposed parcel map, Vice Chairman Campredon closed the public hearing thereon and solicited comments from the Commissioners. Upon a query by Vice Chairman Campredon, Assistant City Engineer Maxwell advised the Commission that if for some reason a sewer connectmon cannot be made, to subdivide one parcel into two parcels, would be creating one more parcel that does not have a sewer connection. City Planner Pass, upon a question by Commississmoner Boblitt, advised the Commission that the final map is not reviewed by the Planning Commission, and the City Engineer cannot sign it unless there is a sewer. Mr. Fontana, the applicant, upon a question by Commissioner Rosati, indicated that the Kaiser people are intending to acquire the parcel for additional area to their adjacent land. Mr. Pass advised the Conillrission that it may never occur that this parcel will be transferred and if this goes through f,vi thout sewers, we will be creating two parcels that are not urbanized. Mr. Smith advised the Commission that he could not comply with the first two items of Mr. Goss' s memorandum and could not come up wi th a finished product. City Planner Pass advised the Commission that if they expect to prepare a final map for Mr. Goss's signature within 15 days, they could not do so under these condi tions . The applicant has to arrange wi th the Ci ty Engineer so that there will be a line. Before two lots can be created there has to be proof to Mr. Goss that there will be a sewer line. There will be a delay on the final map pending Engineering Department action. Mr. Pass further noted that as soon as Kaiser is ready, and will bug parcf31 two, the final map can be drawn up within one year, and if complete, can be signed by Mr. Goss. This map is premature and nothingr:::anrbe done to eliminate the fact that this map is premature. PM-68 September 14, 1970 Mr. Fontana noted that can acquire this land. his objection would be that he could submit a Kaiser is basing its project on whether or not they He further noted that Parcel One is no problem and to Parcel 2 as sold to Kaiser, and he did not feel sewer plan at this time. Mr. Pass advised the Commission, that Mr. Goss wants full control to see that these lands are urbanized, and when the Commission approves the use permit, Mr. Goss will be aware that Parcell needs sewers. Mr. Smith advised the Commission that his client would accept the condi- tions of the use permit. There being no further comments by the Commissioners, vice Chairman Campredon asked the Commission for a motion. Con~issioner Raffaelli moved, seconded by Commissioner Zlatunich that the Planning Commission approve the instant tentative parcel map upon the con- dition that the subdivider comply with the requirements as set forth by the City's reporting department heads. The motion was passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Campredon, Boblitt, Gardner, Raffaelli, Rosati, and Zlatunich NOES: None ABSENT: Lazzari - 1208 - SA-18 September 14, 1970 SA-18, tentative map of Cabot, Cabot & Forbes Industrial Park No.3, representing the subdivision of an approximately 79- acre parcel of land, located on Radio Hill - Point San Bruno, in the M-2-H District, into 12 lots and 6 parcels of land. The Secretary read the following report into the record. Report, dated September 4, 1970, of Direc~0r of Public Works Goss "Reference is made to SA-18, Tentative Map of Cabot, Cabot and Forbes Industrial Park Unit No.3, which was referred to this offi ce for review and recommendations. "P1ease be advised that before this office can recommend acceptance of the Tentative Map, it will be necessary to receive engineering calculations from the subdi vider' s engineer to determine whether or not the storm drains and sanitary sewers have been properly sized. It will also be necessary to have an engineering study of the offsite sewer on Grand Avenue to determine whether or not the sewage from this subdivision will overload the capacity of the existing sewers. "It is recommended that this office be granted an addi tiona1 two- week period to complete a detailed engineering study of this subdivision. " Vice Chairman Campredon asked the COmnUssion for a motion. Commissioner Raffaelli moved that SA-18 be continued to the Planning COmnUssion's regular meeting of September 28, 1970, seconded by COmnUssioner Zlatunich and passed by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Campredon, Boblitt, Gardner, Raffaelli, Rosati and Zlatunich Noes: None Absent: Lazzari GOOD AND WELFARE, OTHER AND COMMUNICATIONS There being nothing to be considered under Good and Welfare, and there being no further communications or other matters of interest for the Planning Commission, Vice Chairman Campredon announced that the next regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning COmnUssion would be held on September 28, 1970 at 8:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, South San Francisco, California. The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 P.M. Marcel Campredon, Planning Commission City of South San Francisco Daniel M. Pass, Secretary Planning Commission City of South San Francisco - 1209 - Continued Hearing SA-18 September 14, J:@ '7;1 SA.,-18 , tentative map of Cabot, Cabot and Forbes Indus trial Park Uni t No.3, representing the subdivision of an approximately 79-acre parcel of land, located on the northerly side of East Grand Avenue, and on the westerly side of Point San Bruno Boulevard, in the M-2-H District, into. 12 lots and 6 parcels of land. The Secretary read the following reports into the record. Report, dated September 4, 1970, of City Planner Daniel M. Pass "The Planning Department has perused the proposed plan for the $ubdivision of the Radio Hill area of Point San Bruno, and has performed a field .$urvey of the 79 acreS of land in question. The following analysis and recommendations are founded upon this perusal and survey." "1. While the configuration of lots is of less importance in indU$ trial tracts than i.n 1:"e$idential subdivisions, the employ- ment of orde:r:-lx geometric patterns is prerequisite to the sound J?,la,nningofboth.. Certainly, the .flag. designs of proposed Lots NQ. 5 and 6, and the irregular shapes of proposed Lots No. land 2 are un$upportable.. Since the hillside terrain of Cabot, Cabot & F01:"bes"'"13, and the curvilinear cours.e of Grandview Drive readily SUpport radial lot lines, the correction of the propos- ed subdivision.s geometric problems would not be materially dif- ficult.'" . "2. The subject tentative map indicates that Parcel A, the area of the Cabot, Cabot & FOrbes $culpture, would be offered for ded- ication to the City of South San Francisco. Although the subdi- vidier recogni zes the public. s interest in this recreational en- clave, it fails to propose adequate street access thereto. In lieu of a standard ~treet, the tentative map under consideration indicates that Parcel A and Grandview Drive would be connected by a "non-exclusiveeasement for access and parking." This ease- ment, which for a substantial distance has a width of 20., does not meet the requi1:"ement$ of Section 4.11 of the Subdivision Or- dinance ~f the City of South San Francisco, to wit: "All lots shall abut on a dedicated and improved street". "(It should be noted that Parcels A, B, and C are not official- ly designated 'lots' on the plat in question, even though these usable sites meet the criteria for such, according to Section 2.10 of the Subdivision Ordinance.) "3.. The subdivider has submitted impressive data in support of its proposed road $ystem. This system, which precludes the eventual connection of Oyster Point Boulevard, Forbes Boulevard, and East Grand Avenue bJ( a direct, arterial route, is not re- sponsive to the intense-commercial potential of the remaining lands of Point San Bruno, or the traffic-service demands of South San Francisco's proposed, 250-acre Shoreline Regional Pa:r:-k. -1217- Continued Hearing SA-18 September 14, 1970 The approval of the proposed system should place the subdivider and other developers of Point San Bruno on notice that the territory in question must be limited to low-density projects of restricted building intensity. The Planning Department is of the opinion that the proposed street requires the subdivider's preclusion of the establishment of intense-commercial and residential uses in Cabot, Cabot & Forbes-3. This preclusion would necessi- tate the amendment of the proposed 'Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions." RECOMMENDATION "1. The Planning Department respectfully recommends that the Planning Commission order the instant tentative subdivision map to stand approved upon the applicant's submittal of a revised plat which indicates its com- pliance with the guidelines embodied in the City Planner's analysis of SA-18, and the requirements indicated in the submitted reports of the City's department heads." "2. It is further respectfully recommended that the requested street- width exception for Grandview Drive be granted. Since Grandview Drive will not accommodate on-street parking, the proposed 60' width therefor, in lieu of the required width of 64', meets the conditions of Section 7.02 of Ordinance No. 603. Report, dated September 4, 1970, of Director of Public Works Louis H. Goss. "Reference is made to SA-18 , Tentative Map of Cabot, Cabot and Forbes Industrial Park Unit No.3, which was referred to this office for review and recommendations." "Please be advised that before this office can recommend acceptance of the Tentative Map, it will be necessary to receive engineering calcula- tions from the subdivider's engineer to determine whether or not the storm drains and sanitary sewers have been properly sized. It will also be ne~essary to have an engineering study of the offsite sewer on Grand Avenue to determine whether or not the sewage from this subdivision will overload the capacity of the existing sewers.1I "It is recommended that this office be granted an additional 2-week period to complete a detailed engineering study of this subdivision." - 1218 - Continued Hearing SA-18 September 14, 1970 Eeport, dated September 8 , 1970, of Fire Chief John A. Marchi "Before any approval can be had, Cabot, Cabot & Forbes will have to install fire alarm boxes and system. These boxes will have to be spotted by me.." "Also, I cannot approve any lots that do not abut on a ded- icated and improved street.." Report, dated September 17, 1970, of Director of Public Works Louis H.. Goss This office recommends approval of said tentative map subject to the followi?g +equirements: 1. Drainage should be prevented from flowing directly from Parcel A, and Parcel B onto Lots 3 I 4 and 5 to the south of Grandview Drive. Drainage should be prevented from flowing directly onto Grandview Drive from Lots I, 2, 3 and 4 to the south of Grand- view Drive. 2.. A fire alarm system shall be provided. 3. Storm and sewer manholes shall be placed not more than 300 feet a.part.. The lines between manholes shall be run straight, not curvilinear as shown on the "tentative map.. 4.. Construction shall proceed in accordance with the discussion and +ecommengations embodied in the soil investigation of the Pro- posed Hilltop Development, Cabot, Cabot and Forbes Industrial Park Unit 3, South San Frangisco, dated September 14, 1970, by CoopeX~Clark and Associates (Job #381-BN).. 5.. Grading shall proceed in accordance with Appendix B of said in- vestigation.. 6.. An off-site sewer study shall be performed establishing the ade- quacy of the City system for handling this unit along with other future developments in the area.. Names and Addresses of Proponents and Opponents Proponents: Mr.. Eobert L.. Zeibak, Cabot, Cabot & Forbes Co.., 100 California St.., San Francisco, Ca.., stated that he believed that his plan will help implement the development of the City's future plans for the area.. Opponents; None =1219- Continued Hearing - SA-18 September 14, 1970 Commissioner Boblitt moved that the Planning Commission order SA-18 .to stand approved upon the subdivider's compliance with the submit- ted requirements of the City's reporting department heads; seconded by Commissioner Zlatunich; passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Campraden, Boblitt, Gardner, Haffaelli, Rosati, Zlatunich and Chairman Lazzari. NOES: None ABSENT: None -1220-