Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMintues 05/24/1971 MINUTES May 24, 1971 of the regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission TIME: 8:00 P.M. DATE: May 24, 1971 PLACE: Council Chambers, City Hall South San Francisco, California MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Boblitt, Botieff, Zlatunich, and Chairman Campredon MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioners Gardner and 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 Building Inspector Ray Ghilardi MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of May 10, 1971 Vice Chairman Raffaelli moved that the minutes of the regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission of May 10, 1971 be approved; seconded by Commissioner Boblitt; passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Bobli tt, Botieff, Zlatunich, and Chairman Campredon NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Gardner and Lazzari ANNOUNCEMENT CONCERNING TAPE RECORDING OF MEETING Chairman Ca~pT~don announced that this meeting of the South San Fran- cisco 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 duration of the time that he is speaking or is heard. -2382- May 24, 1971 Planning Enforcement Board Minutes of the Planning Enforcement Boardls Meeting of May 20, 1971 (Next Meeting: June 17, 1971 at 10:00 A.M.) Chairman Campredon ordered the Planning Enforcement Board's minutes accepted and placed on file. UP - 189 UP-189, use permit request of Foster and Kleiser to relocate a bill- board on the easterly side of Shaw Road, about 120' northerly of the City Limits of San Bruno, in the right-of-way of the Interstate 380- US 101 Interchange, in the M-2-H District. Secretary Pass read the following reports into the record. Report and Recommendation 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: "i. The establishment, maintenance, operation or the use of the building or lands for which the permit is sought will, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, mQrals, 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 improve- ments in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the ci ty. 2. The approval of the requested use permit does not meet the requirements of Section 6.23 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The granting of the instant request would countervene the Planning Commission's continuing effort to improve the en- vironmental and aesthetic qualities of the South San Francisco area. 4. Interstate Highways belong to the public-at-large, and should serve the best interests of the municipalities they traverse. The public's lands should not be temporarily or permanently devoted to billboard use. 5. The applicant's argument for the establishment of billboards under UP-154 and UP-155 was partially based upon its pending "lossH of the subject billboard. fI -2383- UP -189 May 24, 1971 Report, dated May 11, 1971, of Landscape Specialist John E. Hoffman. "The Planning Commission, by denying applications for billboards in the past, has demonstrated its desire to improve the environ- ment of this city. It is my hope that the Commission will con- tinue this policy of environmental improvement by denying any and all billboard construction. Mrs. Reynolds, President of the California Raadside Council, stated the case very well in her letter to the City Planner, July 27, 1970, when she stated, "This is a problem not ex- clusive to South San Francisco, but for your city it has a special importance. This importance stems from the fact that motorists enroute between San Francisco and Peninsula destin- ations or beyond get their impressions of your city almost exclusively from what they see along Bayshore Freeway, whereas most other Penin~ala communities are as frequently seen from other routes. "True, South San Francisco is an industrial city. However, you are doubtless well aware that present day industrial developers are recognizing more and more the value of good appearance. Bi12boards and untidy or unattractive land uses in conspicuous industrial areas are gi ving way to orderly, well designed buildings, trees, shrubbery and other planting. The effect, it is found, is favorable to the attraction of more industry of a high-financial rating. "We sincerely believe that you will be wise to maintain the standards your city has already adopted and to resist the pressures to grant further permits perpetuating billboardls along the freeway. Perpetuation of Bayshore as a "billboard alley" will surely create the impression that South San Fran- cisco has little concern for its appearance - an impression which we know is not a true represenbation of your true civic spirit and standards." Report, dated May 13, 1971, of Chief of Police Salvatore Rosano. "Reference subject, this Department concurs in the Planning Department's recommendation that said Use Permit be denied." Names and Addresses of Proponents and Opponents: Proponents: Oral presentation by Mr. Walter J. Moreno, Public Relations Representative, Foster and Kleiser, l60J Maritime Street, Oakland, California 94623. Opponents: A 42 name signed petition, opposing the granting of UP-189, was read into the minutes by the Secretary. -2384- UP - 189 May 24, 1971 Considerable discussion ensued amongst the Commission, the Secretary and Mr. Moreno regarding the findings of the City Planner. After the discussion, Chairman Campredon asked the Commission for a motion. Commissioner Zlatunich moved, that the Planning Commission not adopt the findings and conditions, as set forth in the preliminary Official Action Report, and approve UP-189, upon the following conditions; CONDITIONS: "1. Prior to the commencement of the construction of the pro- posed, relocated billboard, the applicant shall submit a letter to the Secretary of the Planning Commission under which Foster and Kleiser agrees to cause the removal of the said billboard within five (5) years, or by the date of the comple- tion of the U.S. 101-Interstate 380 Interchange, if the latter occurs prior to May 24, 1976. " 2. The applicant shall cause the removal of the billboards on the subject site prior to the commencement of the construc- tion of the billboard proposed under the instant use-permit application. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Botieff; and passed by the following roll call vote: AYES; Commissioners Botieff, Zlatunich and Chairman Campredon. NOES: Vice Chairman Raffaelli and Commissioner Boblitt. ABSENT: Commissioners Gardner and Lazzari. This action rescinded a prior action, which failed to carry, to deny the instant-use permit. -2385- v - 100 May 24, 1971 V-100, variance request of Leo Zappettini to construct an addition to a one-story, single-family dwelling, and to resultantly cover a maximum of 44.4% of the building site located at 104 South Magnolia Avenue, in the R-l District. Secretary Pass read the following reports into the record. Report and Recommendation of City Planner Daniel M. Pass. "The Planning Department respectfully recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the findings embodied in the attached, preliminary Official Action Report, and grant the refjuested 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 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 ad- versely 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 zoJiJ.ffJJ!i!.g 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 is supported by the substandard depth and square-footage of the subject building site, and the similar requests granted to free-holders in Mayfair Village. References: V-1157, Eldwin L. Mc Cunei V-1960, William F. Emmerling; V-1355, Sam Sappingfield; and, V-1552, William De Savigny." Names and Addresses of Proponents and Opponents: Proponents: Mr. Leo Zappettini, 104 South Magnolia Avenue, South San Francisco, California, the Applicant. Opponents: None -2386- V-100 May 24, 1971 Commissioner Zlatunich moved that the Planning Commission adopt the findings and conditions, as set forth in the preliminary Official Action Report, and approve V-100 upon the condition that the applicant comply with the requirements of the City's department heads; seconded by vi ce Chairman Raffaelli; passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Bobli tt, Botieff, Zlatunich, and Chairman Campredon NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Gardner and Lazzari -2387- PM"'" 77 May 24, 1971 PM-77, parcel map of the J. H. Snyder Company, representing the resubdivision of an approximately O. 492-acre parcel of land, located at the southeasterly corner of Greendale Drive and Geddes Court, in the "PC-DF" zone of the Westborough-West Park No. 3 Planned Community District, into a l6-unit condo- minium project. Secretary Pass read the following reports into the record. REPORT OF CITY PLANNER DANIEL M. PASS "The proposed condominium project, a resubdi vision of 8 lots in Block 10 of Westborough-West Park, Uni t No. 3C (SA-17), meets the requirements of the State Subdi vision Map Act, and the regulatory standards of the Subdivision Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco. The said project would be consonant with the adopted General Devel- opment Plan of the Westborough-West Park No. 3 Planned Community District (RZ-3). "The Planning Department therefore respectfully recommends that the Planning Commission approve the instant tentative parcel map upon the condi tion that the subdi vider comply with the submitted requirements of the City's department heads. (The Planned unit development pertaining to the proposed condominium project and the balance of Westborough-West Park Unit No. 3C will be filed in the near future under the use- permi t procedure.)" Report, dated May 12,1971, of Director of Public Works Louis H. Goss. "This office recommends approval of the tentative map provided the parcel map is reviewed by this department and certified correct prior to recordation." Report, dated May 17, 1971, of Chief Building Inspector Leonard J. Pittz "I have examined the Tentative Parcel Map PM-77 being a resub- division of Lots 103 through 110, Block 10, Westborough-West Park Unit No. 3C and recommend its approval with the following corrections to be made before recording the final map: 1. the resubdiviswonsshall be identified The entire area of as Lot No. 166. The final map recorded pri or of Westborough-West Park Unit No. 3C shall to recording this Parcel Map." 2. be Names and Addresses of Proponents and Opponents: Proponents: Henry L. Richman, Vice President, J. H. Snyder Company, 3655 Georgetown Court, South San Francisco, California, 873-1844 Opponents: None -2388- PM - 77 May 24, 1971 Commissioner Boblitt moved, seconded by Commissioner Zlatunich that the Planning Commission approve the instant tentative parcel map upon the condition that the subdivider comply with the re- quirements as set forth by the City's reporting department heads. The motion was passed by the following roll call vote. AYES: Vi ce Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Bobli tt, Botieff, Zlatunich, and Chairman Campredon NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Gardner and Lazzari -2389- May 24, 1971 AMENDMENT Petition of the City Planner to amend Ordinance No. 603 to in- clude proposed Section 4.25, and thereby provide the Planning Commission with the authority to regulate the design and location of airspaces and buildings in condominium and community-apartment projects. Inter-Office Memorandum, dated May 7, 1971, of City Planner Daniel M. Pass TO: The Chairman and Members of the South San Francisco Planning Commission SUBJECT: Proposed Addendum of Section 4.25 to the Subdi vision Ordinance of the Ci ty of South San Franci sco FROM: Daniel M. Pass, City Planner "The Planning Department respectfully recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached, preliminary resolution, and thereby recommend that the Honorable City Council amend Ordinance No. 603, the Subdivision Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco, by the enactment of proposed Section 4.25 as an addendum thereto. "The proposed addendum would enable the Planning Commission to regulate the design and location of airspaces and buildings in con- dominium and community-apartment projects under the tentative-map process and procedure." Names and Addresses of Proponents and Opponents: Proponents: None Opponents: None Vice Chairman Raffaelli moved that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2116, and recommend to the City Council that the petitioned amendment be enacted into ordinance. The resol ution was seconded by Commissioner Boblitt. -2390- RESOLUTION NO. 2116 May 24, 1971 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND ORDINANCE NO. 603, THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, BY THE INCLUSION OF PROPOSED SECTION 4.25 THERETO, AND THEREBY PROVIDE THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THE AUTHORITY TO REGULATE THE DESIGN AND LOCATION OF AIRSPACES AND BUILDINGS IN CON- IJtJMINIUM AND COMMUNITY-APARTMENT PROJECTS. WHEREAS, the South San Francisco Planning Commission, meeting in regular session on May 24, 1971, conducted a public hearing on the following proposed amendment to the Subdi vision Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco; CHAPTER 4 GENERAL DESIGN AND TNPROVEMENT STANDARDS Section 4.25 Design and Location of Ai~$paces and Buildings in COndOnLll1i um and Commt,7ni "ty.-Apa.l:tment Projects The Planning Commission, upon the recommendation of the City Engineer and the City Planner, shall regulate the design and location of airspaces and buildings in condominium and community- apartment projects, in order to promote the public safety, health, comfort ,eonvenience, and general welfare, and to effectuate the General Plan, and the standards and provisions of the Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances. Appeals from the actions of the Planning Commission on airspaces and buildings in condominium and community- apartment projects shall be governed by Section 9.13 of this ordinance. Addenda and, WHEREAS, notice of the said hearing was published in the Enter- prise-Journal at least 10 days prior thereto; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission made the following findings (1) The State Subdivison Map Act, under Section 11535.1, provides that condominium projects and community-apartment projects are to be regulated as subdivisions. (2) Said Section 11535.1, however, expressly denies local govern- ment the right to control the design and location of airspaces and buildings in these projects unless such control is by, or pursuant to local ordinance. (3) The control of the design and location of airspaces and buildings in condominium and community-apartm~nt projects by the Planning Com- mission of the City of South San Francisco is essential to the orderly growth and progress thereof. - 2391- RESOLUTION NO. 2116 May 24, 1971 (4) The proposed amendment is similar to Section 1.3 of Ordinance No. 297, as amended. The supersession of Ordinance 297, as amended, by Ordinance No. 603, the current subdivision ordinance of the City of South San Francisco, established the need for the proposed amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco recommend to the City Council thereof that Ordinance No. 603, the Subdivision Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco, be amended to include proposed Sec- ti on 4. 25 . * * * * * * * I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regulariy introduced and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting held on the 24th day of May, 1971, by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Bobli tt, Botieff, Zlatunich, and Chairman Campredon NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Gardner and Lazzari GOOD AND WELFARE, OTHER AND COMMUNICATIONS. Mr. Henry L. Richman, Vice President of J. H. Snyder Company, extended an invitation to the Planning Commission, to take an extensive tour in late June, of the Westborough Greens develop- ment, in order that the members could better aquaint themselves with the housing and common greens located therein. There being nothing further to be considered under Good and Wel- fare, and there being no further communications or other matters of interest for the Planning Commission, Chairman Campredon announced that the next regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission would be held on JU~e 14, 1971 at 8:00 P.M. in the Council Chamb ers of City Hall, South San Francisco, California. The meeting was adjourned at 9:08 P.M. Planning Commission City of SouthSan Francisco Daniel M. Pass, Secretary Planning Commission City of South San Francisco WAT -2892-