Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 07/10/1972 MINUTES July 10, 1972 of the regular meeting of the South San Francis Planning Commission TIME: 8:00 p.m. DATE: July 10, 1972 PLACE: Council Chambers, City Hall South San Francisco, California ME~ffiERS PRESENT: Vice Chairman Botieff, Commissioners Campredon, Gardner, Lazzari, Zlatunich, and Chairman Raffaelli MEMBERS ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: City Planner and Secretary to the South San Francisco Planning Commission, Daniel M. Pass Assistant Planner Planning Aide Building Inspector William A. Timmons Surendra N. Amin Roy Ghilardi MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of June 26, 1972. Commissioner Lazzari moved that the minutes of the regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission of June 26, 1972 be approved; seconded by Vice-Chairman Botieff, passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Botieff, Commissioners Campredon, Gardner, Lazzari, Zlatunich,and Chairman Raffaelli NOES: None ABSENT : None ANNOUNCEMENT CONCERNING TAPE RECORDING OF MEETING Chairman Raffaelli 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 duration of the time that he is speak- ing or is heard. - 3180 - UP-218 July 10, 1972 UP-2l8, use-permit request of the Beverly-Glenwood Corporation to establish Residential Planned Unit Development "G" on the easterly side of Carter Drive, and at the westerly terminus of Farnee Court, in the Westborough-West Park No. I Planned Community District. (continued from meeting of May 8, 1972.) Secretary Pass read the following report and letters into the record. Joint Report of the City's Department Heads dated April IS, 1972 "The undersigned department heads have individually and jointly studied the subject Planned Unit Development. "G", and recommend that the Commission adopt the following findings and approve the instant use permit upon the condition that the applicant comply with the following requirementso FINDINGS: I. The establishment, maintenance, operation or the use of the buildings and lands for which the use permit is sought will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, becili,etr;imental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, and will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood, or to the general welfare of the city. 2. The applicant has filed the verified petition, site plans, floor plans, building elevations (architectural plans) and landscaping plans required by Section S.7l(a) of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The proposed residential planned unit development conforms to the'provisions of Sections S.72 and S.73 of the Zoning Ordinance. 4. The said proposed planned-unit development is designed to produce an orderly, stable and desirable environment. S. The proposed development includes provision for those recreation areas specified in the approved General Development Plan and Schedule of the planned community. 6. An enforceable, adequate method and program for the construction, installation, and maintenance of the landscaped open areas has been developed and presented in documentary form as part of the use permit application. 7. The planned unit development under consideration would comply with the terms of Ordinances 490 and Sll, under which the Westborough-West Park No.2 Planned Community was established, and to the general development plan of the Westborough-West Park No.1 Planned Community, where the latter is not in conflict with the former. ... 3181 - UP-2l8 (continued) July 10 -' 1972 8. The planned unit development would conform to the General Development Schedule of the Westborough-West Park No. 1 Planned Community. 9. The approval of the said planned unit development would tend to effectuate the City's adopted Gen eral Plan. 10. The townhouses developed in accordance with the planned unit development would harmoniously blend with the existing townhouses in Westborogh-West Park Units No. I, No.2, and No.3. 11. The proposed townhouses are designed to mlnlmlze the adverse effects of local seismic activity. 12. The Planning Commission, on June 9, 1969, conditionally granted UP-122, and thereby permitted the establishment of a planned unit development of residential couplets. This use permit expired due to nonuse. The said lands, under SA-IO, were subdivided for the purpose of effectuat- ing UP-122. The instant development would contain town- houses, not couplets. REQUIREMENTS: I. The applicant shall submit amended plans', specifications, and drawings which reflect the applicant's compliance with the requirements of the Planning Commission. 2. The applicant and developer shall convey the common greens in the subject planned-unit development to the City of South San Francisco. Said applicant and developer shall, at the time of the conveyance of the common greens, submit to ~he City Attorney a title insurance policy which assures the said City Attorney that title to the said common greens vests in the City of South San Francisco, and that said title is free and clear of all liens, taxes and encumbrances. 3. The applicant and developer shall annex the subject planned- unit development to the West Park Parks and Parkways Maintenance District, or similar municipal district. 4. The applicant shall file with the City Planner the necessary documents providing for the construction, installation, and maintenance of the subj ect common greens in accordance with the approved plans and specifications thereof. S. The applicant and developer shall file with the said City Planner a corporate surety bond guaranteeing the construction and installation of the said common greens in accordance with the related plans and specifications, and pursuant to City Resolution No. 4S83. - 3182 - UP-2l8 (continued) July 10, 1972 6. The applicant and the developer shall file with the City Planner an agreement under which they undertake the maintenance of the subject common greens, from the time of their development to the time of their acceptance for maintenrolce by the City. This agreement shall be secured by a corporate surety bond in the principal sum approved by the City Landscape Specialist and City Attorney. 7. All garages shall have mlnlmum depths of 22'. Where swinging, overhead garage doors are employed, the distance between the face of the door and the inner edge of the sidewalk shall be a minimum of 22'. Where sliding or roll-type doors are used, the said distance shall be a minimum of 19'. 8. Street and common-green lights shall meet the design and location requirements of the Director of Public Works and the Chief of Police. 9. Traffic-control markings, signs, and devices shall be provided by the subdivider, and shall meet the standards and specifications of the Director of Public Works and the Chief of Police. 10. The applicant shall locate minimum 4"-high, . illuminated house numbers on each townhouse. These numbers shall have a minimum ground clearance of i', and be clearly visible from adjacent travelways. 11. The applicant shall provide at least one stre~tree for each lot, but not less than one street tree per 2S' of street abutment, in Planned Unit Development "G". The applicant's street-tree selection and planting program shall comply with the standards and specifications of the Recreation and Parks Director, and the Landscape Specialist. 12. The submi tted common-green plans shall be considered "preliminary". Prior to the issuance of the use permit, the applicant shall sub- mit revised common-green plans which reflect its compliance with the requirements of the City's department heads. These plans shall include, but not be limited to the following: a. Drainage patterns, including storm drains and catch basins. b. Common-green furniture, including lighting, benches, fencing, kiosks, gates, and recreation faci Ii ties. 13. Detailed rear-yard drainage plans shall be prepared and submitted for the approval of the Director of Public Works prior to issuance of the use permit. 14. No townhouse in Planned Unit Development "G" shall be occupied prior to the Landscape Specialist's issuance of a certificate which indicates that the adjoining common green has been constructed and planted to the City's standards. - 3183 - UP-218 (Continued) July 10, 1972 IS. All fences, partitions, and walls shall conform to the standards and specifications of the City of South San Francisco. 16. Cable TV lines are to be installed to the front of each townhouse prior to the installation of any landscaping. 17. The applicant shall comply with the subsequent requirements of the Planning Commission's Architectural Committee. 18. All surface-mounted transformers and other public-utility struc- tures shall be screen-planted to the requirements of the Landscape Specialist. 19. The applicant shall comply with the standards recommended by the City's Geologist. The applicant's plans must be certified by the said City Geologist prior to the commencement of construction of the proposed townhouses. 20. The applicant shall rectify any damage to the common green, municipal park, or fire-fighting facilities adjacent to Planned Uni t Development "G", where such damage is the direct or con- sequential result of the development thereof. '.' /s/ Louis H. Goss, Director of Public Works /s/ John Marchi, Fire Chief /s/ Salvatore Rosano, Chief of Police/ per pro A. Terragno /s/ John Hoffman, Landscape Specialist Is! Leonard J. Pitt~) Chief Building Inspector /s/ Daniel M. Pas' City Planner" Names and addresses of Proponents and Opponents Proponents: Henry L. Richman, Beverly Glenwood Corp. 36SS Georgetown Court, South San Francisco, the applicant. Philip V. Burkland, Engineering Geologist 333 Fairchild Drive, Mountain View Michael Callan, 2790 Junipero Serra, Daly City Opponents: None Mr. Henry L. Richman explained the history from the beginning. Considerable discussion ensued regarding the establishment of Residen- tial Planned Unit Development "G" in the Westborough-West Park No. I Planned Community District. At the conclusion of its consideration, Chairman Raffaelli asked for a motion. ~ommissioner Zlatunich moved that the Planning Commission adopt the findings and conditions, as set forth in the preliminary Official Action Report, and approve UP-218 upon the condition that the applicant - 3184 ... UP-2l8 (continued) July 10~ 1972 comply with the recommendations as set forth in the letter dated June 23, 1972, from the Director of Public Works that 6S' corridor be kept and widened where minoT', fault traces are found. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Campredon, and passed unanimously. UP-228 UP-228, use-permit request of Randall T. Shannon to establish a second- hand retail store at No. 3S9 Grand Avenue, in the C-2 District. Secretary Pass read the following report and letters into the record. Report and recommendation of City Planner Daniel M. Pass. "The Planning Division respectfully recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the "findings" and action embodied in the attached, preliminary Official Action Report. FINDINGS: 1. 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, 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 improve- ments in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the city. 2. The approval of the requested use permit would not meet the requirements of Section 6.23 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The location of additional second-hand stores in this munlcl- pality's urban core would have a deleterious effect thereon, and would tend to spread the decline and blight infestation extant therein. 4. According to General Objective No.8 of the General Plan of 1969, the urban core "should be the civic, commercial, financial, recreational, social, and cultural focus of South San Francis co." The establishment of the proposed second-hand store would be incompatible with this objective. S. The Planning Commission, on November 9, 1970, denied approval of the South San Francisco Equipment and Merchandise Mart's application to establish a second-hand store at No. 4lS Grand Avenue. II - 318S - UP-228 (continued) July 10, 1972 Interoffice Memorandum, dated June 21, 1972, from Fred Hull, Director of Ecological Development "Please be advised I have reviewed UP-228 on the location of a second-hand store on Grand Avenue and agree with your recommenda- tions and comments with regard to the denial of this Use Permit. I have also reviewed V-141 and am in agreement with the conditions and recommendations in that Variance. II The signed petition, dated June 28, 1972, was received and was signed by 3S persons. The petion reads as follows: "We, the undersigned residents, merchants and property owners of the City of South San Francisco, hereby petition the Honorable Planning Commission for the denial of UP-228~ use-permit of Mr. Randall T. Shannon to establish a second-hand store in the J. C. Penney building. We believe in the future and destiny of our city and our downtown. We feel that downtown can better serve the people of the City of South San Francisco if it is composed of first-rate retailing and servicing establishments. We further believe that the location of additional second-hand stores on Grand Avenue would cause the decline and eventual blighting of this city's core area. Please help us make South San Francisco the best city on the Peninsula." Letter dated July 6, 1972 from Leslie S. Davis, Executive Vice President of the South San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, address ed to the City Planner. "At its regular meeting of July 6, 1972, the Executive Committee of the above-named Chamber, acting on behalf of the Board of Directors, unanimously opposed the establishment of second-hand retail stores in South San Francisco, and specifically, in respect to the permit now pending for establishment of same at 3S9 Grand Avenue, South San Francisco. The Board agrees with the Planning Commission's oplnlon that estab- lishment of such an operation would tend to spread the decline and blight infestation of that area." Names and addresses of Proponents and Opponents Proponents: Richard P. Lyons, Attorney-at-Law 367 El Camino Real, South San Francisco Jerry Bartholow, Esq., Attorney-at-Law 122 Saratoga Ave., Santa Clara, CA. A. J. Fourcans, Retired Banker, Vice President Crocker Citizens Bank, South San Francisco, CA. - 3186 - UP-228 (continued) July 10, 1972 D. W. Ratto, Realtor Grand Avenue, South San Francisco Gilbert N. Davis, Pres. of the United Cerebral Palsy Assoc. 1290 Howard Avenue, Burlingame, Ca. (San Mateo) Opponents: Nello Sciandri, Businessman 306 Grand Avenue, South San Francis co Edward Rodondi, Realtor 336 Grand Avenue, South San Francisco R. D. Santini, Businessman 701 Cottonwood Avenue, South San Francisco Considerable discussion ensued on the subject. Secretary Pass answered the Commission that there are already four secondhand stores on Grand Avenue. An secondhand store would be incompatible with the General Plan for the downtown area and would help spread the decline of the urban core area. The proposed secondhand store is neat and clean, but it is not suitable for the proposed location. Chairman Raffaelli asked the Commission for a motion. Commissioner Lazzari moved that the Planning Commission adopt the findings as set forth in the preliminary Official Action Report, and recommenda- tions as submitted by the City's reporting department heads and deny the requested UP-228; seconded by Commissioner Gardner. The motion was passed unanimous ly Chairman Raffaelli declared the motion for denial of the request passed and informed the applicant of his right to appeal the decision of the Planning Commission if he wished to do so, within 10 days hereafter. His appeal should then be filed with the City Clerk in order to have a second hearing set before the City Council. V-142 V-142, variance request of the Superior Aluminum Body Corp. to construct an industrial building in the required, rear setback of the building site located on the easterly side of Starli te Street, about 230' southerly of South Canal Street, in the M-l-H District. Secretary Pass read the following letter into the record. Letter dated June 30, 1972 from George S. Avanessian, Architect, SSF, CA. - 3187 - V-142 July 10, 1972 "On behalf of my client, Superior Aluminum, I would like to withdraw the application for Variance, V-142. We shall resubmit a new propos al at a later date." The Commissioners concurred in the request to withdraw the application. V-143 V-143, variance request of Mateo Investment Company to construct an industrial building within the required rear-yard setback of a build- ing site located on the easterly side of San Mateo Avenue, opposite Scott Street, in the M-2-H District. Secretary Pass read the following report and letters into the record. Report and recommendation of City Planner, Daniel M. Pass. "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 rear-yard requirements of the M-2-H District are designed to promote the establishment of alleys, where such establishment would be desirab Ie and practicable. In the instant case, the establishment of an alley would not serve a substantial purpose. - 3188 - V-143 (continued) July 10, 1972 7. The South San Francisco Planning Commission, under its proposed Comprehensive Revampment to the Zoning Ordinance, has recom- mended that the rear-setback requirements in this municipality's industrial districts be deleted from the regulations thereof. 8. Many similar variances have been granted. CONDITIONS: The applicant shall comply with the submitted requirements of the reporting city officials, and the subsequent requirements of the Planning Commission's Architectural Committee. Names and addresses of Proponents and Opponents Proponents: Neil Vannucci, Registered Building Designer 301 South Spruce Ave., South San Francisco, agent of the applicant Opponents: None Commissioner Campredon moved that the Planning Commission adopt the findings and conditions, as set forth in the preliminary Official Action Report, and approve V-143 upon the condition that the applicant comply with the submitted requirements of the City's reporting department heads; seconded by Commission Lazzari. The motion was passed unanimously. PM- 92 July 10, 1972 PM-92, tentative parcel map of Norman C. Hynding, representing the re- arrangement of 7 lots, with an aggregate area of 1.78 acres+, and located at the southeasterly corner of South Spruce Avenue and Starlite Street, in the "M_l_H" and "C-3" Districts, into 5 lots. Secretary Pass read the following reports into the record. Report and recommendation of the City Planner Daniel M. Pass "The proposed submultiplication meets the requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act, and the regulations and standards of the Sub- division and Zoning Ordinances of the City of South San Francisco. Said submultiplication would create S well-designed, small industrial and heavy commercial building sites, and would enable the submulti- plier to enlarge the industrial facility on proposed Lot 20. In light of the above factors, the Office of the City Planner respect- fully recommends that the Planning Commission approve the instant tentative parcel map upon the condition that the submultiplier comply with the submitted requirements of the officials of the City of South San Francis co. " - 3189 - PM-92 (continued) July 1 D., 1972 Interoffice Memorandum dated June 27, 1972 from William A Fox, Fire Marshall "Before we can approve this subdivision a fire alarm box will have to be provided. Fire alarm box to be located by the Fire Chief and connected to the City's fire alarm circuit. II Names and addresses of Proponents and Opponents: Proponents: Louis A. Arata, Civil Engineer 180 El Camino Real, Millbrae, Agent of the applicant Oppoil ent s : None Commissioner Gardner moved that the Planning Commission approve the instant tentative parcel map upon the condition that the subdivider comply with the requirements as set forth by the City's reporting department heads; seconded by Commissioner Lazzari. The motion was passed unanimously. GOOD AND WELFARE, OTHER AND COM~IDNICATIONS. Secretary Pass made an announcement regarding the Leage of California Cities' Annual Conference to be held October 15-18, 1972 at Anaheim, California, and asked for the names of those Planning Commissioners who are interested in attending the conference. 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 Raffaelli announced that the next regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission would be held on July 24, 1972 at 8:00 P.M in the Council Chambers of City Hall, South San Francisco, California. The meeting was adjourned at 10:13 P.M. ~~~~ Daniel M. Pass, Secretary Planning Commission City of South San Francisco sna *Oral presentations, arguments and comments are recorded on tape. The tape is on file in the Office of the City Planner. - 3190