Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 06/11/1973 M I NUT E S June 11, 1973 of the regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission TIME: 8:00 p.m. DATE: June 11, 1973 PLACE: Counci 1 Chambers, City Hall South San Francisco, CA. MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chairman Mullin, Commissioners Hale, Mathewson, Raffaelli, Slade, and Chairman Gamma MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioner Lazzari 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 MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of May 29, 1973 Commissioner Mathewson moved that the minutes of the regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission of May 29, 1973 be approved. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hale, and was passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Mullin, Commissioners Hale, Mathewson, Raffaelli, Slade and Chairman Gamma NOES: None ABSENT: COmmiiS$IDOner Lazzari ANNOUNCEMENT CONCERNING TAPE RECORDING OF MEETING Chairman Gamma 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 or her voice recorded in this manner, could request the Chairman to order the tape recorder turned "off" for the duration of the time that he or she is speaking or is heard. -' 3146 -, UP-243 June 11" 1973 UP-243, use-permit request of the West Park Parks & Parkway Maintenance District No.3 to construct a common-greens maintenance building on the southerly side of King Drive, about 110 v westerly of the northerly terminus of Haussmann Court, in the Westborough-West Park No 3 Planned Community District. The instant use-permit request constitutes a pro- posed amendment to Planned Unit Development I, which was conditionally granted by the Planning Commission on February 8, 1971 Secretary Pass read the following report into the record. Report and recommendation of City Planner, Daniel M. Pass "The Office of the City Planner respectfully recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the "findings" and action embodied in the attached, tentative Official Action Report." FINDINGS: "1. The establishment j 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 requested use permit meets the requirements of Section 6.23 of the Zoning Ordinance 3. The proposed building is essential to the effective and economic maintenance of the common greens of the Westborough-West Park Planned Community Districts 4. The proposed building would be architecturally designed, and would be congruous, design wise, with the townhouses and condominium units of Westborough-West Park #3." CONDITION: liThe applicant shall comply with the submitted requirements of the City's officials, the standards and specifications of the Department of Ecological Development, and the subsequent requirements of the Planning Commission's Architectural Committee." Names and addresses of Proponents and Opponents Proponents: Ronald Belcher, Landscape Administrator City of South San Francisco" CA. Opponents: None Bob Anderson stated that the maintenance building is of good design, well located and will be beneficial In reply to Chairman Gamma's query, Ron Belcher informed the Commission that $3,450 is allocated for this purpose. - 3147 UP-243 Contd. June 11, 1973 Commissioner Raffaelli moved that the Planning Commission adopt the find- ings and conditions, as set forth in the preliminary Official Action Report, and approve UP-243 upon the condition that the applicant comply with the submitted requirements of the City's reporting department heads. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hale and was passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Mullin, Commissioners Hale, Mathewson, Raffaelli, Slade, and Chairman Gamma NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Lazzari PM-108 PM-l08, tentative parcel map of Cabot, Cabot & Forbes, representing the resubdivision of 34.33 acres of land, located at the southeasterly corner of Forbes Boulevard and Kauffmann Court, and on the westerly side of Point San Bruno Boulevard, in the M-2-H District, into eleven lots. (Continued from May 29, 1973) Secretary Pass read the following report into the record. Report and recommendation of City Planner Daniel M. . Pass "The proposed resubdivision meets the requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act, and the regulatory standards of the Sub- division Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco. The said resubdivision would improve the functional design of several of the involved, partent lots, in Units No.2 & 3 of the Cabot, Cabot & Forbes Industrial Park, as well as create two additional, well-designed building sites therein. The proposed resubdivision would also reduce the cost of the force-main sewer which the City of South San Francisco is currently constructing across Point San Bruno In light of the above factors, the Office of the City Planner respectfully recommends that the Planning Commission approve the instant tentative parcel map upon the condition that the sub- divider comply with the requirements submitted by the City's Officials, and the standards and specifications administered by the Director of Ecological Development." Names and addresses of Proponents and Opponents: Proponents: Don Bruzzone, Cabot, Cabot & Forbes 100 California St., SF 94111 Opponents: None - 3148 - PM-l08 Contd. June 11, 1973 Vice Chairman Mullin 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. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Slade and was passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Mullin, Commissioners Hale, Mathewson, Raffaelli, Slade and Chairman Gamma NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Lazzari RZ-25 RZ-25, petition of Joseph P. Haggarty to rezone a 1.28-acre parcel of land, located at the northeasterly corner of Westborough and Callan Boulevards, from Planned Community Duplex Family District (PC-DF) to Planned Community Commercial District (PC-C). Secretary Pass read the following report and letters into the record. Report and recommendation of City Planner Daniel M . Pass Letter dated April 13,1973 from Joseph P. Haggarty ito Mr. Daniel M Pass "Enclosed please find an application for amendment to "Zoning Map Westborough-West Park #3 Ordinance #575" relative to parcels of land totaling approximately 1.283 acres more or less located at the northeasterly corner of Westborough and Callan Boulevards as indicated on the Location Map attached hereto. We wish to respectfully request that the subject site be amended from IIp.C. Duplex Family" to "P.C. Commercial." If a change in the General Plan, as it applies to the specific site outlined herein is necessary in order to accomplish the requested amendment, it is hereby requested that a request for such a change in the General Plan be made an integral part of this application. It would be very much appreciated if you could arrange for this matter to be on the May 14th agends of the regular meeting of the Planning Commission." "VERIFIED PETITION Name of Petitioner: Address: City: Date: April 13" 1973 Joseph P. Haggarty 1891 Donner Avenue San Bruno, CA. 583-7001 The undersigned hereby petitions to the South San Francisco Planning Commission to allow an Amendment to Planned Community Ordinances #511 and #575 in accordance with Section 4.26 of Ordinance No. 490. - 3149 - RZ-25 Contd. June 11, 1973 "I. Owner of parcels proposed for amendment Joseph P. and Claire C. Haggarty First City National Bank of Houston, Texas American Land Exchange and Robert R. Largomarsino 2. Legal descriptions and acreages. Attached hereto. 3. Title Reports. Attached hereto. 4. Title and other data. Amendment to Planned Community Ordinance #575 identified as "Westborough-West Park Unit No.3". See drawings and data attached. 5. Landscaped and open areas Each record owner of a commercial parcel, at his expense, shall establish all landscaped and open areas within his parcel to plans approved by the City of South San Francisco Maintenance of these areas shall be by conditions to be established under use permit procedure. 6. Ownership and control The areas shall be divided into parcels as shown and developed by individual investors. Control shall be by applicable ordinances, codes and regulations. 7. Proposed deed restrictions and covenants. No additional restrictions and covenants are contemplated g. Statement of proposed association. No association is contemplated. 11 "GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STATEMENT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO WESTBOROUGH-WEST PARK UNIT #3 (Ordinance #575) SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA AREA AND LOCATION 1.283 acres N.E. corner, Callan & Westborough Boulevards PROPOSED AMENDMENTS From lip C. DUPLEX FAMILY" to "P.C. COMMERCIAL" PROPOSED LAND USES Medical-Dental, Financial and/or office Proposed Land Usebata Bldg. Coverage Coverage @Ground Level % + Building "A" 4,000 18 Building liB" 3,400 21 Building "C" 3,800 16 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS Streets" sidewalks, street lighting " fire alarm systems and fire hydrants are already essentially completed. Street trees in public righ-t--of-ways will be installed in accord- ance with the requirements of the City of South San Francisco. Water mains, storm and sanitary sewers are presently existing adjacent to the subject areas. Any additional services required will be constructed through an agreement with the Westborough County Water District. Gas service and underground electrical service will be provided by Pacific Gas and Electirc Company. Underground telephone service will be provided by Pacific Telephone Co. 3lL5Q) - RZ-25 Contd. June 11, 1973 "GENERAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE It is expected that a Use Permit Application will be submitted for con.... sideration approximately one year after approval of Subject Amendment. Development will be completed in phases with cpnstruction scheduled to start approximately one year after approval of the Use Permi t." Report and Recommendation of City Plffi1ner Daniel M. Pass "Urban Planning Analysis No. 90., dated May 21, 1973 1. The subj ect lands were rezoned from "PC-Commercial" to "PC-Duplex Family" under RZ-18, on June 7, 1971. This redistricting enabled the petitioner's predecessor in interest to procure commercial zoning for a 1.28-acre parcel of land located at the southwesterly corner of Callan Boulevard and King Drive 2. The granting of the instant petition would contravene the commercial-zoning "exchange" established under RZ-18. 3 The granting of the instant petition would contravene the Working- Living Areas Element of the General Plan. 4. The Westborough Community has more than 35 acres of undeveloped commercial territory, and does not require additional commercial acreage. RECO~$lliNDATION: The above factors require the Planning Office to respectfully recommend that the Planning Commission adopt the attached, preliminary resolution, and thereby recommend that the City Council deny the enactment of the proposed zoning amendment into ordinance." Interoffice Memorandum dated April 27" 1973 from Fire Marshall William A. Fox "Due to the city hydrants being on the other s ide of the street, and this being a divided street, a Rich 960 hydrant will have to be placed on the northeast corner of Westborough Boulevard and Callan Boulevard before we can approve this rezoning permit." EIR Negative Declaration"and Dissent from Fred W. Hull, and Dani~1.M6 Pa~~, respectively, dated May 18, 1973 "NEGATIVE DECLARATION':' "The above described proj ect has been reviewed by the Environmental Review Board at the City of South San Francisco, and it has been determined that the development and construction of this project will not have a significant effect on the total environment of this municipal corporation. II "DISSENT OF DANIEL M. PASS, AlP, CITY PLANNER & CHAIRMAN OF THE EIR REVIEW BOARD "I dissent. The proposed project would contravene the General Plan of the City of South San Francisco, and would adversely affect the delicate zoning balance of this municipality's westerly borough. 3151 - RZ-25 Contd. June 11, 1973 "The subj ect lands are situated within or near the San Andreas Fault Zone, and might be traversed by splinter faults. It should also be noted that the said lands have been filled to a depth of about 70'. The above city-planning and geological factors indicate that the proposed project might have a significant effect upon the environment of South San Francisco, and therefore should be supported by a draft Environmental Impact Report. An "EIR" would evoke public and governmental-agency input, and thereby tend to protect this munici- pality." Letter dated May 31, 1973 from Leslie B. Cohn, President, Greater Capital Corp., 1255 Post Street, Suite 828, San Francisco, 94109, addressed to Mr. Daniel M. Pass "We are in receipt of a notice from your department wherein you informed us that on June 11, 1973, there will be a hearing in the council chambers of the City Hall on a proposal to rezone approxi- mately 1.2 acres of land from PC-DF to PC-C. As owners of the Westborough Shopping Center located directly across the street from the site which is the subject of the hearing, we most strongly oppose this request for rezoning It is our contention that the City of South San Francisco to be fair and equitable must give first consideration to those persons who have purchased properties with existing commercial zoning to anyone acquiring a property for the primary purpose of increasing its value through rezoning. Our experience has indicated that excessive amount of commercial zoning creates a definite hardship on both the tenants and the owners of the property as well. You will remember, Mr. Pass, that I personally spoke to you in the early part of 1969 relative to our further developing the Westborough Shopping Center at such time as the population of the area indicated that it would be an economically feasible and purposeful project. At the time of our first discussion and at subsequent times that we had conversations relating to the matter I advised you that we intended, at the appropriate time, to construct a medical-professional building to be located on a portion of the excess land located within our center. I stated to you and you agreed that inasmuch as we had~ . an over abundance of parking spaces to meet the regulations estab- lished by the City, it would be reasonable for us to build such a facility. We now feel that the time has come when the area indeed has a necessity for such additional construction. The proposed rezoning across the street would, however, again create more commercial zoning that at this time can reasonably be absorbed. Further, we feel that this rezoning would be most unfair to us as during the period when we were holding this land for future development, it was necessary for us to pay real estate taxes, landscaping and various other expenses that normally involve commercially zoned real estate. 3152 - RZ-25 Contd. June 11, 1973 "In summation., it is our contention that no additional land should be rezoned from residential to commercial until the existing land that was originally intended for commercial development has been utilized In all probability I will not personally attend the rezoning hearing as my present plans call for my being out of state; however, this letter is intended" to be our formal protest to the rezoning requested. On that basis, I would expect that, due to its rel evancy., you would' present this letter or the facts contained therein to the council at the time of the June 11, 1973, hearing." Letter dated June 5, 1973 from Charles S. Syers, 2624 Farnee Court, South San Francisco, CA., to Daniel M Pass Il I have res ided in South San Francis co since 1969 and have enj oyed my home in Westborough because of the planned community atmosphere and community environment control. In addition, I am currently a general partner in the creation of a beautiful medical-dental building to be built on land adjacent to Westborough Square Shopping Center. This land is zoned commercial and my partners and I have negotiated fairly for the purchase of a parcel large enough for our building. It now comes to my attention that Mr. Haggarty, a realtor whose sons manage Westborough realty, is trying to rezone the northeast corner of Callan and Westborough Blvd. for the purpose of erecting a medical-dental building. I hope his proposal will be defeated. As a resident of Westborough I dunot believe it is imperative nor necessary nor desirable to rezone residential areas to commercial. This is not within the planned nature of our community and I am sure you gentlemen will not allow promiscuous rezoning to occur. In addition, as a proposer of a medical-dental building within view of Mr. Haggarty's property, I ask the question - how many medical-dental buildings does Westborough need? Isn't it unfair for Mr. Haggarty to rezone specifically to build a medical-dental building? I t rus t Francisco, property. you will not allow over-commercialization of South San Westborough and will defeat the rezoning of Mr Haggarty's Thank you," A signed petition having 102 signatures was handed to the Commission by Dr. Charles S. Syers. It read as follows: "WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE RESIDENTS OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, AND FEEL THAT REZONING RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL INA PLANNED COMMUNITY SUCH AS OURS IS WRONG! TO BE SPECIFIC, THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF CALLAN BLVD. AND WESTBORUGH SHOULD NOT BE REZONED COMMERCIAL IN ORDER TO PROFIT LAND SPECULATION AT THE EXPENSE OF OUR COMMUNITY. II Names and addresses of Proponents and Opponents Proponents: Joseph P. Haggarty 2288 Westborough Blvd., SSF, the applicant Opponents: - 3153 - RZ-25 Contd. June 11, 1973 Speakers: Dr. Charles S. Syers Dr. Charles Syers stated that he and his partners have negotiated for the purchase of a parcel of land for a medical-dental building. He further stated that it would be unfair to approve Mr. Haggarty's rezoning request. Mr. Joseph P. Haggarty stated that he contacted many people and did some surveying and nobody opposed his rezoning proposal. The school principal was very happy as he does not want any residential development there. After considerable discussion, Commissioner Hale moved that the Planning Commission reject the findings and conditions as set forth in Urban Planning Analysis No. 90 and not approve RZ-25. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Slade. The roll call was as follows: AYES: Commissioner Hale, Slade and Chairman Gamma NOES: Commissioner Mathewson, Raffaelli and Vice Chairman Mullin ABSENT: Commissioner Lazzari Since there was a 3-3 vote Commissioner Slade moved that the Planning Com- mission study further RZ-25 and continue the hearing to its next regular meeting on June 25, 1973. Commissioner Hale seconded the motion and it was passed unanimously. GOOD AND WELFARE, OTHER N~D CO~~4UNICATIONS Mr. William S. Severini, of 2607 Cashlea Court, South San Francisco, indicated his concern regarding the area opposite his house which is being used as a storage yard by the J. H. Snyder Co. Secretary Pass stated that he contacted Mr. Ghilardi in this regard and was informed that this is the only area left undeveloped by the J H. Snyder Co. Mr. Pass stated further that he would pursue the matter further, There being nothing further to be considered under Good and Welfare, and t.here being no further communications or other matters of interest for the Planning Commission, Chairman Gamma announced that the next regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission would be held on June 25, 1973 at 8:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, South San Francisco, California. The meeting was adjourned at 9:36 p.m. Donald Gamma, Chairman Planning Commission City of South San Francisco Daniel M. Pass, Secretary Planning Commission City of South San Francisco sna NOTE: Oral presentations, arguments and comments are recorded on tape, The tape is on file in the Office of the City Planner - 3154 -