HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03/13/1972
MINUTES
March 13, 1972
of the regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission
TIME:
8:00 p.m.
DATE
March 13, 1972
PLACE:
City Hall
South San Francisco, California
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Vice Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Botieff,
Gardner, Lazzari, Zlatunich, and Chairman
Campredon
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Commissioner Boblitt
ALSO PRESENT:
City Planner and Secretary to the South San
Francisco Planning Commission, Daniel M. Pass
Assistant Planner
William A. Timmons
Planning Aide
Surendra N. Amin
Building Inspector
Roy Ghi lardi
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of February 28, 1972
Vice-Chairman Raffaelli moved that the minutes of the regular meeting
of the South San Francisco Planning Commission of February 28, 1972
be approved; seconded by Commissioner Lazzari, passed by the following
roll call vote:
AYES:
Vice Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Botieff,
Gardner, Lazzari, Zlatunich, and Chairman Campredon
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Commissioner Boblitt
ANNOUNCEMENT CONCERNING TAPE RECORDING OF r~ETING
Chairman Campredon 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.
- 3091 -
V-12S
March 13, 1972
V-12S, variance request of Patrick Canavan to construct a one-story
addition to a one-story, single-family dwelling in a required side
yard of No. 141 April Avenue, in the R-l District.
Secretary Pass read the following' report into the record.
Report and recommendation of City Planner, Daniel M. Pass.
"The Planning Office respectfully recommends that the Planning Commission
adopt the "findings" embodied in the attached, preliminary Official
Action Report, and grant the requested bulk variance.
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 preserva-
tion and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the petitioner.
3. That the granting of the application will not, under the circum-
stances 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 with
the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance.
S. The requested variance is necessary to prevent practical diffi-
culties, unnecessary hardships, and results inconsistent with
the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance.
6. The requested variance would not estab lish a new building line.,
but would merely extend an existing one.
7. Similar variances have been granted in the Serra Highlands sub-
neighborhood.w
*Examples: V-67, Robert Plunkett;V-S6, Norman L. Snyder; V-33,
T. La Grave; V-37, Donald J. Frolli; V-27 Don Fagundes; V-20,
John Tamburini; and V-87, Edward Andrews.
Names and addresses of Proponents and Opponents:
Proponents:
Patrick Canavan, 141 April Avenue,
South San Francisco, Cal., the applicant
Opponents:
None
- 3092 -
V-12S Cont'd.
March 13, 1972
Mr. Patrick Canavan, the applicant, advised the Commission that he had
two small girls and wishes to use the addition as a Family Room and
would be pleased if they granted his request.
Commissioner Lazzari moved that the Planning Commission adopt the
findings and conditions as set forth in the preliminary Official
Action Report, and approve V-12S upon the condition that the
applicant comply with the submitted requirements of the City's
reporting department heads; seconded by Vice-Chairman Raffaelli;
The motion was passed by the following rolll vote:
AYES:
Vice-Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Botieff,
Gardner, Lazzari, Zlatunich, and Chairman
Campredon
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Commissioner Boblitt
V-126
V-126, variance request of William T. Mitchell to cover 44% of the
building site at No. lIS Sherwood Way, and to encroach upon the
required rear yard thereof, in the R-I District, with an enlarged
one-story, single-family dwelling.
Secretary Pass read the following report into the record.
Report and recommendation of City Planner, Daniel M. Pass
"The Planning Office respectfully recommends that the Planning Com-
mission 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 pres-
ervation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of
the petitioner.
-- 3093 --
V-126 cont'd
March 13, 1972
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 appli-
cant, 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
with the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance.
S. The requested variance is necessary to prevent practical
difficulties, unnecessary hardships, and results incon-
sistent with the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance.
6. The requested bulk variances are supported by the substan-
dard size and depth of the subject building site.
7. The Planning Commission has granted many similar variances
to freeholders in Brentwood.
Names and addresses of Proponents and Opponents.
Proponents:
William T. Michell, lIS Sherwood Way,
South San Francisco, Cal., the applicant
Opponents:
None
Vice-Chairman Raffaelli moved that the Planning Commission adopt
the findings and conditions, as set forth in the preliminary
Official Action Report, and approve V-126 upon the condition that
the applicant comply with the submitted requirements of the City's
reporting department heads; seconded by Commissioner Gardner;
The motion was passed by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
Vice-Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Botieff,
Gardner, Lazzari, Zlatunich, and Chairman
Campredon.
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Commissioner Boblitt
-- 3094 -
UP- 212
March 13, 1972
UP-212, use-permit request of Nat Lucchesi to construct a sixth
dwelling unit in a dwelling group-commercial store complex at
No. 341 Baden Avenue, in the C-2 District.
Secretary Pass read the following report 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 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 permit meets the requirements
of Section 6.23 of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The expanded dwelling group would be served by sufficient
off-street parking.
4. The expanded urban-core complex would substantially meet
the City's minimum landscaping requirements.
CONDITIONS:
The applicant shall comply with the submitted requirements of
the City's department heads, and the subsequent requirements
of the Planning Commission's Architectural Committee.
Memorandum dated February 24, 1972 from Chief of Police Salvatore
Rosano
"Reference noted subject, this Department recommends for
security purpose that garage doors be installed.
Interoffice Memorandum dated March 3, 1972 from Landscape Specialist
John Hoffman
"Plans reviewed in this office for subject Use Permit 212. Our
comments are as follows:
1. Working drawings shall comply with City of South San
Francisco Minimum Landscape Standards, including
irrigation for all landscaped areas.
- 309 S -
UP-212 cont'd.
March 13, 1972
"2. Juniperus Chinensis "Pfitzeriana" is not suitable
for use in shady locations. The use of other plant
material is recommended.
3. Minor discrepancies are noted in listed dimensions and
actual scaled lengths. These are to be corrected in
the working drawings.
Names and addresses of Proponents and Opponents.
Proponents:
Fred R. Strathdee, 3606 Reposa Way
Belmont, Ca., the agent of the applicant
Opponents:
None
Considerable discussion ensued among the Commission regarding the
recommendation from the Chief of Police that garage doors and
internal partitions be installed and enclose each garage completely
for security purposes. Commissioner Lazzari moved that the Planning
Commission adopt the findings and conditions, as set forth in the
preliminary Official Action Report, and approve UP-212 upon the
condi tion that the applicant comply with the recommendation of the
Chief of Police and the submitted requirements of the City's report-
ing department heads; seconded by Commissioner Gardner; The motion
was passed by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
Vice-Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Botieff,
Gardner, Lazzari, Zlatunich, and Chairman
Campredon
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Commissioner Boblitt
UP-2l3
UP-213, use-permit request of the Blue Line Transfer, Inc., to
establish a solid-waste transfer station on the southerly side
of Oyster Point Blvd., approximately 1270' easterly of Industrial
Way, in the M-2-H District.
Secretary Pass read the following report and letters into the record.
Report and recommendation of City Planner, Daniell M. Pass.
"
"It is respectfully recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the
"findings" listed in the attached, preliminary Official Action Report,
and approve the requested use permit upon the condition that the
applicant comply with the submitted requirements of the City's depart-
ment heads, and the subsequent requirements of the Planning Commission's
Architectural Committee.
UP-213 contd.
March 13, 1972
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
ci ty .
2. The approval of the requested use permit meets the requirements
of Section 6.23 of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The proposed use would be characterized by sound site planning.
4. On November 23, 1970 the Planning Commission conditionally
granted UP-168, a use-permit request similar to the instant
one. UP-168 expired on November 23, 1971, due to nonuse.
CONDITIONS:
I. The applicant shall comply with the submitted requirements of
the City's department heads, and the subsequent requirements of
the Planning Commission's Architectural Committee.
2. The Commission's conditional approval of the requested use
permit does not constitute its approval of the submitted
building elevations of the proposed station. The Architectural
Committee is instructed to hold the proposed building to the
Architectural standards of the newer facilities in the Cabot-
Utah Industrial Neighborhood."
Interoffice Memorandum dated March I, 1972 from Fire Marshall,
William A. Fox
"The plans for the above named subject are not acceptable to
this department for the following reason:
Underground gasoline and diesel tanks located in front of
building. They shall be moved to rear of property as
shown in original drawing UP-168, dated November 23, 1970.
PI eas e resubmit new drawings."
Memorandum dated March 2, 1972 from Chief of Police, Salvatore Rosano
"Reference noted subject, please be advised that this
Department has no objection."
- 3097 -
tJP-213 Contd.
March 13, 1972
Interoffice Memorandum dated March 3, 1972 from Landscape Specialist,
John Hoffman
"Plans for subj ect proj ect have been reviewed by this office. Our
recommendations are:
I. Additional Screen planting and mounding in the front of the site.
2. Where the plan indicates "weed treated soil", planting to be used
instead. If this area is desired to be used for future develop-
ment, ice plant would be an acceptable temporary ground cover
planting. "
Subsequent Interoffice Memorandum dated March 13, .1972 from Fire Chief
John A. Marchi
"We approve relocation of the underground tanks from prior location,
front of building, to new location west side of building."
Names and addresses of Proponents and Opponents.
Proponents:
George Avanessian, AIA, Avanessian & Associates,
Archi tects
914 Linden Avenue, South San Francisco, Calif.,
Agent of the applicant
Opponents:
None
Commissioner Botieff moved that the Planning Commission adopt the
findings and conditions, as set forth in the preliminary Official
Action Report, and approve UP-213 upon the condition that the appli-
cant comply with the submitted requirements of the City's reporting
department heads, with the exception of Item No.2 of Landscape
Specialist John Hoffman's report. The motion was seconded by Commis-
sioner Zlatunich and passed by the following roll call vote.
AYES:
Vice-Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Botieff,
Gardner, Lazzari, Zlatunich, and Chairman
Campredon.
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Commissioner Boblitt
- 3098 ...
Preliminary Seismic Safety Element of the General Plan
March 13, 1972
Secretary Pass read the following report into the record.
"SEISMIC SAFETY ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
INTRODUCTION
The Rift Zone of the San Andreas Fault, the principal fracture in the
crust of the North American continent, and several auxiliary faults
traverse the Westborough Community of the City of South San Francisco.
The ground trace of the 1906 earthquake bisects the West Park Neighbor-
hood, and provides grim evidence of this municipality's geological hazards.
The South San Francisco areas' seismic problems are not confined to the
Westborough Community, Sign Hill, San Bruno Mountain, and other physical
features of recognized diastrophic activity, but extend to the very tide
lots of San Francisco Bay. The shoreline, marshlands, and mudflats are
primarily situated upon unstable, new Bay mud, and could, during a major
earthquake, lose much of its bearing strength. This loss oill bearing
capacity could result in the subsidence of structures, or even the sub-
mergence of those heavy buildings which have been erected on poorly-
engineered fill.
While ground shaking and failures, surface rupturing, and liquefaction
would probably be the main agents of destruction of any major dias-
trophic movement in the South San Francisco area, the danger from seiches
should also be mentioned. Seiches, or the oscillations of inland bodies
of water, could, in the event of a major seismic shock, occur in the
Bay. These seiches could destroy marinas, boats, wharves, and littoral
buildings, dykes, and earthworks.
Although few examples of damage caused by seismically induced tsunamis
are available in San Francisco Bay, the potential does exist. The rapid
rising of Bay waters could cause considerable damage to adjacent land
uses and structures located in the water or founded on wetlands.
GENERAL OBJECTIVES, GOALS, POLICY, AND STANDARDS
I. ~he City of South San Francisco will continue to participate with
the County of San Mateo, the San Mateo Regional Planning Committee,
the Association of Bay Area Governments, the Bay Conservation and
Development Commission, the State of California, the United States
Geological Survey and other agencies in the study of geological
hazards, and the enactment of legislation which is oriented towards
the safety of the people, property, and wildlife of this subregion.
2. Ordinance No. 603, the Subdivision Ordinance of the City of South
San Francisco provides:
"Section 9.04 Statements
o. A geological report shall be required in any area, so
determin ed by the City Engineer, where there are known
geological hazards."
The above provision has been rigorously applied to the subdivision
and parcel-mapping of this municipality since said provision's
adoption in February, 1970. The Planning Commission, upon the
recommendation of the City Engineer, has extended and will continue
to extend the requirement embodied in Section 9.04 to all city-
planning and zoning matters.
3099 --
Preliminary Seismic Safety Element of the General Plan contd.
3. This Seismic Safety Element of the General Plan should be con-
sidered a tentative plan. As the city's seismic knowledge
increases, new general and specific plans should be prepared
and adopted. Notwithstanding the tentative nature of this plan,
the Seismic Safety Element shall be construed as the City of
South San Francisco's restatement of its seismic policy, to wit:
"No lands shall be subdivided, developed, or filled
in the absence of unequivocal, professional evidence
that the proposed subdivision, development, or
filling would be geologically safe."
Letter dated March ,3, 1972 from Dr. Jon C. Cummings Ph.D., Geologist,
Department of Earth Sciences, California State College, Hayward, Calif.
"At your request I have reviewed the draft of the proposed
Seismic Safety Element of the General Plan for the City of South
San Francisco. Your draft outlines the principal problems and
sets forth a reasonable basic policy for the city wi th respect
to seismic hazards.
I suggest that the Introduction be expanded somewhat to include
both a brief statement about the cause and certainty of future
earthqua~es in the Bay Area and a more specific outline of the
principal seismic hazards in the city, as follows:
INTRODUCTION
The San Francisco Peninsula was the site of a great earthquake
in 1906 caused by as much as twenty feet of sudden horizontal
displacement between two segments of the earth's crust along
the San Andreas Fault. Numerous other earthquakes in California
as well as many geologic features demonstrate that the San
Andreas Fault System forms the boundary between two plates of
the earth's crust that have been moving lr'elentless ly past one
another for millions of years. Geologic evidence indicates
clearly that this crustal motion will continue to occur and
will be expressed as sporadic earthquakes along the length of
the San Andreas Fault. Geodetic measurements show that suffi-
cient crustal strain has accumulated in the area of the San
Fnd.'Fl:cfusco Peninsula since 1906 to cause another great earth-
quake at any time. With this knowledge, it becomes the
responsibility of communities in the Bay Area, and elsewhere
in California, to take reasonable steps to protect the public
from earthquake hazards.
The Rift Zone of the San Andreas Fault traverses the Westborough
Community of the City of South San Francisco. The ground trace
of the break which produced the 1906 earthquake bisects the
West Park Neighborhood, and provides a grim reminder of this
municipality's geological hazards. Other, historically active
but potentially hazardous " faults define the valley of Colma
Creek and the southwestern boundary of San Bruno Mountain.
-- 3100 -
Preliminary Seismic Safety Element
March 13, 1972
"Seismic problems in the South San Francisco area are not confined
to the Westborough Community, Sign Hill, San Bruno Mountain, and
other physical features of recognized diastrophic activity, but
extend to the very tidelands of San Francisco Bay. The lowlands
adjoining the bay including the shoreline, marshlands, and mud-
flats are underlain chiefly by unstable, recently deposited Bay
mud and man-made fill. These materials could, during a major
earthquake, lose much of their coherence and bearing strength,
resulting in the subsidence of the ground surface, settlement of
structures, and possibly permanent submergence of much of the area.
Thus, potential seismic hazards in the South San Francisco area
include, but are not restricted to:
1. Permanent displacement of the ground by rupturing along
known and unknown fault lines as well as by lurching of
blocks of ground within and adjacent to the faults.
2. Landsliding and slumping, particularly on steep slopes
and artificial fill.
3. Tremor or ground shaking caused by passage of seismic
waves through the ground. Ground shaking can be antici-
pated in all parts of South San Francisco in the event of
a large earthquake, but with greater intensity in the low-
land areas underlain by saturated and unconsolidated
sediments and fill.
4. Ground subsidence due to both compaction and liquifaction
of unconsolidated and often saturated fine-grained sedi-
ments, particularly those in the lowlands bordering San
Francisco Bay, with the possibility of permanent submerg-
ence of these lands.
S. Temporary flooding along the bay margin as a result of:
a. Seismic sea waves or tsunami generated within or
entering the bay.
b. Seiches or oscillation of the water in the bay in
response to seismic shaking.
Under the heading of GENERAL OBJECTIVES, etc., I find no need to
modify item I or 2. However, under item 3, I suggest changing the
second sentence to read - "As the city's knowledge of seismic
hazards increases, new general and specific plans should be prepared
and adopted." Furthermore, I believe it would be more realistic to
change the statement of seismic policy to read --
"No lands shall be subdivided, developed, or filled in
the absence of sound, professional evidence that the
proposed subdivision, development, or filling would be
reasonably safe from geological hazards."
-- 3101 -
Preliminary Seismic Safety Element
March 13, 1972
"With inclusion of the modifications suggested above, I believe that
this document would constitute an excellent addition to the city's
General Plan and recommend that it be adopted as the Seismic Safety
Element for the City of South San Francisco.
It has been my pleasure to serve you in this matter."
Names and addresses of Proponents and Opponents:
Proponents:
I. Jon C. Cummings Ph. D., Geologist
Department of Earth Sciences,
California State College, Hayward, Calif.
2. Thomas H. Hughes, Attorney-at-Law
777 North First Street, San Jose, Calif.
A member of the Joint Committee on Seismic
Safety for the State of California, advised
the Commission that he was in favor of
seismic safety element's adoption at this time.
3. Michael Callan
2790 Junipero Serra, Daly City, Calif.
stated that he was in favor of action being
taken on the Seismic Safety Element, in order
that he might proceed with his projects in
the affected area.
Opponents:
I. Henry L. Richman,
36SS Georgetown Court, So. San Francisco, Calif.
spoke at length against adopting the Seismic
Safety Element at the present time.
2. Arthur Haskins
289S Summit Drive, Hillsborough, Calif.
stated th~t(the Seismic Safety Element was
adopted the entire growth of the community
would stop.
3. Philip V. Burkland, Engineering Geologist
333 Fairchild Drive, Mountain View, Calif.
stated that many of the geologic 'i,questions
were philosophical in nature and are difficult
to assess as to precise areas of special
geological hazards.
After considerable discussion the Planning Commission suggested the matter
be continued to the meeting of April 10, 1972 for further discussion.
Commissioner Lazzari moved that the Seismic Safety Element be continued
to the Planning Commission's regular meeting of April 10, 1972. The
motion was seconded by Commissioner Zlatunich and passed by the following
roll call vote:
-- 3102 -
Preliminary Seismic Safety Element cont.
March 13, 1972
AYES:
Vice-Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Botieff,
Gardner, Lazzari, Zlatunichand Chairman Campredon
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Commissioner Bobblitt
GOOD AND WELFARE, OTHER AND CO~1MUNICATIONS
Upon a query from the Chairman, Secretary Pass advised the Commission
that Mr. Leonard Chew, Housing Sanitarian, County of San Mateo, Depart-
ment of Public Health and Welfare, would attend the Planning Commission
study session of March 20, 1972 to resolve the matter of the untidy
condition of Damien House.
There being nothing further to be considered under Good and Welfare,
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 March 27, 1972 at 8:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers of City Hall,
South San Francisco, California.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 P.M.
Planning Commission
South San Francisco
DaniellM. Pass, Secretary
Planning Commission
South San Francisco
sna
- 3103 --