Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 02/10/1976 February 10, 1976 M I NUT E S of the regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission T I ME : 8: lOP . ~~ . DATE: FEBRUARY 10, 1976 PLACE: EV CAMINO.H IGH SCHOOL., LITTLE..;THEATER MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Bertucellit Goldberg, Mullin, Mathewson, Teglia and Chairman Hale MEMBERS ABSENT: Vice-Chairman Slade ALSO PRESENT: City Planner Director of Public Services David C. Hale Frank J. Addiego Zoning Administrator City Engineer William Costanzo Robert Yee MINUTES OF Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of January 27, 1976 Commissioner Goldberg moved that the minutes of the regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission of January 27, 1976, be approved. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Bertucelli and was passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commi s s i oners Bertucgiml i, Go 1 dberg, Mathewson, Mu 11 in, Teglia and Chairman Hale NOES: None ABSENT: Vice-Chairman Slade ABSTAINED: None ANNOUNCEMENT CONCERNING TAPE RECORDING OF MEETING Chairman Hale 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 to be heard, but who objected to having his or her voice recorded in this manner, could request the Chairman to order the tape recorder turned lIoffll for the duration of the time that he or she is speaking or is heard. - 3521 - February 10, 1976 UP-75-334 RESOLUTION NO. 2185 UP-75-334t a request of Earl S. Kuhns to establish a newsstand, bookstore, and coin operated film projection machines at 107 Grand Avenue in the C-3 Zone. Chairman Hale opened the public hearing and explained that the hearing had been continued from January 13, 1976, due to the large number of people in attendance then exceeding the capacity of the Orange Avenue Library which would have violated the Fire Code. Secretary Hale presented the staff report and read into the record Inter- Office Memorandums to the Planning Commission from the Building Division and from the Fire Marshall. Secretary Hale then introduced Ms. Verle Jordan who would be the official court reporter for the Kuhns hearing. Proponent: Mr. Peter G. Keane, attorney representing Mr. Kuhns San Francisco, CA Opponents: Mrs. Cecilia Murphy Lillian Burdett 253 Oakcrest Avenue 419 Hazelwood Drive South San Francisco South San Francisco Mrs. Barbara Schonig James Burdett 786 Alta Loma Drive 419 Hazelwood Drive South San Francisco South San Francisco Mrs. Connie Luke Joseph Haggarty 52 Calvert Avenue 1891 Donnor South San Francisco San Bruno R. E. Luke James Rozzi 52 Calvert Avenue 320 Armour Avenue South San Francisco South San Francisco Douglas Butler Reverend R. E. Linamen 133 Adrian 832 Larch Avenue South San Francisco South San Francisco Joe Rousso Fred Olson 337 Grand Avenue 21 Graystone Drive South San Francisco South San Francisco John J. Petrovitz Milt Bronstein 443 Gardenside Avenue 608 Lassen South San Francisco South San Francisco Evelyn Williams William Henderson 205 ~~osswood Way 387 Dolores Way South San Francisco South San Francisco - 3522 - UP-75-334, contld February 10, 1976 Mr. Keane addressed the Commission noting that there is a door in the particular position mentioned in the Fire Marshall IS Inter-Office Memorandum. He stated that he did not know if the door meets all the codes, but that they would provide any door that staff required. Mr. Keane stated that they did not expect to win before the Planning Commission and also expected to lose before the City Council but that he knew they would win in the courts. Commissioner Teglia asked Mr. Keane if the proposed activity was a typical adult bookstore. Mr. Keane noted that the phy!ical set up would be racks of books displaying explicit materials and "pe;~p show;""'machines. There would also be sales of still photos of subject matter. Secretary Hale presented several exhibits as follows: Exhibit II A" II "BII II IICII II "D" II II E" II "FII II IIGII II IIH" II 111" II "JII - Staff Report dated February 10, 1976 - Application for the Use Permit - Plot Plan showing the layout of the proposed use - Inter-Office Memorandum from Building Division - Inter-Office Memorandum from Fire Marshall - Photograph illustrating a typ.ical land use for this type of bookstore on Kearny Street - Photograph illustrating a typical land use for this type of bookstore at 506 Broadway - Newspaper ad illustrating typical products sold by similar establishments - Fictitious name statement - Map illustrating areas of rejuvenation activities from 1970-1976 in the immediate vicinity of the subject site "K" - A larger scale map of the downtown area showing recent refurbishing of nearby establishments Secretary Hale introduced Dr. Claude Gruen, principal economist with Gruen, Gruen & Associates. Dr. Gruen stated that land uses tend to cluster together, and that uses in a given area should compliment one another or be compatible with the uses that presently exist. He noted that a use such as proposed by Mr. Kuhns would not be compatible with the existing uses and since land uses tend to cluster tog;.~)ther, the proposed use would draw more similar uses to the area. He noted that it would also have a visual impact on the area because Grand Avenue is the first area seen upon entering South San Francisco. If the proposed use were to be in another area of the City, the visual impact would not be as great. He further noted that the more different a use is, the more chance of creating a change which would affect the strength of the uses in existence. II Secretary Hale introduced Mr. Neal Martin, listing his qualifications and expertise in this area. Mr. Martin addressed the Commission noting that the proposed use is automobile oriented, i.e. people would be driving to the store, rather than walking. Mr. Martin noted that staff must prepare findings based on the City's Zoning Ordinance and that these findings should include: - 3523 - UP-75-334. cont'd Februa ry 10!l 1976 1. That the use shall not be detrimental to the persons working or residing in the area; 2. That the use shall not be injurious to property or surround- ing neighborhood; 3. That the use shall not be contrary to the City's general welfare; 4. That it shall be consistent with the City's General Plan. Mr. Martin stated that this use would not be a support use for the Urban Core area which is pedestrian oriented. He stated that this proposed use could cause an upset in traffic patterns in the area. He stated that the kinds of people this use would generate should be considered. He further stated that uses should not be allowed which would make it impossible to implement the City's General Plan. Mrs. Cecilia Murphy expressed her opposition to the proposed use stating that she had a petition against this application with over 4,700 signatures on it. She further expressed that the City must be concenned with senior citizens and children who would be walking in that area because of the types of people this use would generate. Mrs. Schonig expressed her opposition to the application stating that Mr. Keane noted they would win in court but she would be fighting them tae whole way and that they would not win in court. Commissioner Goldberg asked Mrs. Schonig if she would utilize the other downtown facilities if this permit were granted. She stated that she would be very hesitant to do so. Mrs. Luke in expressing opposition to the application stated that this community did not need the type of use being proposed and that it would in no way be helpful to the community. In response to Commissioner Goldberg's question of whether she would shop on Grand Avenue if this use were allowed, she stated that she would be hesitant to go down to Grand Avenue if this use were approved, especially if she feared for herself or her children's safety. Mr. R. E. Luke in expressing his opposition to the application stated that the use would be counterproductive to the rejuvenation of the Grand Avenue area. Douglas Butler expressed his opposition to the application noting that he felt Mr. Keane was questioning the rights of the City to have Zoning Ordin- ances and a General Plan. He asked that this application be denied because the use would have an adverse effect on Grand Avenue, as the existing uses are family oriented, find would result in a declif:]fer;nthe businesses along Grand Avenue. Mr. Rousso expressed his opposition to the proposed use stating that the use would generate more undesirable elements into the community. Mr. Petrovitz read into the record a letter he had written to the Commission opposing the proposed use stating that it would prevent any other businesses from establishing themselves along Grand Avenue, as well as generating other undesirable uses in that area which would result in undesirable people UP-75-334, cont'd February 10, 1976 in the area. He further stated that according to the San Francisco Examiner the State had finally defined "obscenity," although he did not give the definition. Evelyn Williams noted her opposition to the application stating that she was very concerned about the youth on Grand Avenue because they were at a very impressionable age and could be easily corrupted. Slge noted that she saw San Francisco go downhill because of similar types of land uses and that she did not want to see the same thing happen to South San Francisco. Lillian Burdett concurred with what had already been said by concerned citizens and stated that she also opposed the proposed use. James Burdett noted his opposition to the application. Mr. Joseph Haggarty expressed hi s oppos i ti on to the app::lii cati on and re- quested the name of the property owner. Secretary Hale said the owner is Mr. Ratto. Mr. Rozzi noted his opposition to the application, stating that he represented Good News Chapel. He noted that if it would do any good, he would move his business to another location to take a stand against this use. Reverend Linamen noted his opposition to the application, stating that he is very excited about the things happening at the public hearing, i.e. citizens expressing their concerns and fighting the application. Mr. Olson expressed his opposition to the application. Mr. Bronstein noted his opposition to the proposed use, stating that it is the worst th.eat to South San Francisco during his 30 years in business. Mr. Henderson opposed the application noting that the Zoning Ordinance states that a use must not be detrimental to the morals of the community. He felt that the people at the public hearing were setting the moral standards of the community that evening. John Matt Dillon, member of the South San Francisco Unified School Board, expressed his opposition to the proposed use. Secretary Hale read into the record three letters stating opposition to the proposed use. These letters were from Mrs. R. L. Morgan, South San Francisco Women's Club; Reverend William Knapp, Mater Dolorosa Church; and Leslie Davis, South San Francisco Chamber of Commerce. The Commissioners discussed among themselves the merits of the proposed Use Permit. Commissioner Mathewson moved that the staff report be adopted and that UP-75-334 be denied. Commissioner Teglia seconded the motion and it was passed unanimously. Commissioner ~1athewson introduced Resolution No. 2185, denying the application of Eay'l S. Kuhns for a Use Permit, for the estab- lishment of a newsstand, with 25~ coin operated machines (fifteen movie and fifteen game machines) in the C-3 Commercial Zone District. The Commission voted unanimously to approve the resolttion. February lOt 1976 UP-75-326 UP-75-326, City Engineer's report describing the status of engineering studies and development standards for Mission Road. (Continued from January 27, 1976) Secretary Hale noted that the application was approved on January 27, 1976, contingent upon the results of the traffic study. City Engineer Yee presented the findings of that study. Chairman Hale requested to know how many accidents had occurred on Mission Road over the past four years. City Engineer Yee stated there had been 80 accidents. Commissioner Mathewson requested to know what Mr. Cuneo's response was concerning dedicating that amount of footage. Mr. Lou Arata, civil engineer representing Mr. Cuneo, stated that Mr. Cuneo does not want to dedicate any land. Mr. Cuneo had given land to the City several years ago and that was supppsed to be the 80 feet but that it actually falls short of the 80 feet in several places along Mission Road. Commissioner Teglia asked Mr. Arata if his client would be adverse to dedicating the land if he use changed to a more permanent nature. Mr. Arata noted that Mr. Cuneo would not be adverse to considering dedicating the land in front but he will not commit himself at this point and would leave it open for that possibility. Commissioner Teglia asked if Mr. Cuneo was aware that his setbacks are going to start at that 80 foot right-of-way. Mr. Arata noted that Mr. Cuneo would position his buildings so that the City can still get an 80 foot right-of-way. Some discussion ensued regarding the motion of the approval of the Use Permit on January 27. Secretary Hale stated that the motion had included adoption of the staff report which stated that the dedication of land would be made by Mr. Cuneo. The Commission did not feel that this ~ad been the motion but that the dedication part of the staff report conditions had been left open until after the traffic study. Secretary Hale stated that he would have to go back and listen to the tapes to be certain of the actual motion. There was some discussion on whether this land should be dedicated now by Mr. Cuneo or if it wouldn't be better to wait until Mr. Cuneo had a permanent use at that location. City Engineer Yee stated that he felt the dedication of land should be done now rather than later. However, he did feel there would not be any benefits in putting in the improve- ments now but maybe sometime in the future. Commissioner Mathewson asked about Mr. Cuneo recelvlng an exception to the City's roadway standards. Secretary Hale stated that this was done at the last meeting by making the right-of-way 80 feet instead of the 88 feet. City Engineer Yee stated that Mr. Cuneo had dedicated seven feet in 1965 in conjunction with the Assessment District, but that he must now dedicate to the 80 foot right-of-way. Commissioner Mullin noted that he dedicated and paid for curb and gutter. City Engineer Yee stated that there are no sidewalks there so the curb does not appear to be permanent. - 3526 - February 10, 1 Mr. Marvin Schecktman, representing the dental building, brought up several points, i.e. if Mission Road even needed to be 80 feet; how the improvements or changes would be paid for; and the fact that his building would have difficulties if the proposed improvements were effectuated because the development is so close to the existing road. Commissioner Mullin moved that UP-75-326 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 24 to give staff and the applicant time to clear up some of the above differences. Commissioner Goldberg seconded the motion and it was passed unanimously. GOOD AND WELFARE -- ~ Secretary Hale noted that a portion of Mission Road would have to be renamed when the realignment takes place, as part of the flood control project, and the cul-de-sac was put in. He stated it was desirable to hold a public hearing and to have input from affected residents and owners. The Co~mis~i()n authorized staff to schedule a public hearing to consider the renamirrgof Mission Road from Oak Avenue to Chestnut Avenue. There being nothing further to be considered under Good and Welfare and no communications or other matters of interest for the Commission, Chairman Hale announced that the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission would be held on February 24, 1976, at 8:00 p.m. in West Orange Library Auditorium. The meeting was adjourned at 12:00 p.m. Homer V. Hale, Chairman Planning Commission City of South San Francisco ~c, ..--\., A David C. Hale, Secretary Planning Commission City of South San Francisco NOTE: The entries of this Planning Commission meeting indi the action taken by the Pl anni ng Commi ss(1j,on to di spose of each item. Ora 1 presentations, arguments. and documents are recorded on tape. The tapes are available in the Office of the City Planner. Documents related to the items dis- cussed are on file in the Office of the City Planner and are available for public inspection. - 3527 -