Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 12/13/1971 December 13, 1971 MINUTES of the regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission TIME: 8:00 p.m. DATE: December 13, 1971 PLACE: Council Chambers, City Hall South San Francisco, California MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Boblitt, Botieff, Gardner, Lazzari, Zlatunich, and Chairman Campredon MEMBERS ABSENT: None 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 Assistant City Engineer Raymond Maxwell Chief Bldg. Inspector Leonard J. Pittz MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of November 22, 1971 Vice Chairman Raffaelli moved that the minutes of the regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission of November 22, 1971 be approved; seconded by Commissioner Gardner; passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Boblitt, Botieff, Gardner, Lazzari, Zlatunich, and Chairman Campredon NOES: None ABSENT: None ANNOUNCEMENT CONCERNING TAPE RECORDING OF MEETING Chairman Campredon announ ced 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. - 30 33 - December 13, 1971 UP - 80 UP-80, use-permit request of Charterhouse Investment Co., to establish a neighborhood shopping center at the northeasterly corner of Chestnut Avenue and Antoinette Lane, in the C-l District. Secretary Pass read the following reports 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 embodied in the attaahed, preliminary Official Action Report and "Schedule of Additional Conditions. " 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 proposed commercial precinct would be characterized by sound site planning, and a strong emphasis upon aesthetic design. Said precinct would be serv ed by sufficient off- street parking, and approximately 17,600 square feet of land- scaping. 4. The applicant has dedicated sufficient right-of-way to accommo- date the extension of the Westborough Expressway along the subject parcel of land's full abutment thereon. 5. The applicant is co-operating with the City of South San Francisco in the latter's successful condemnation of the right- of-way of Antoinette Lane, and has agreed to participate in the improvement of this street through the assessment-district process." CONDITIONS: 1. 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 aggregate permanent ,temporary, and promotional sign area of the proposed shopping center and its several uses, includ- ing the proposed commercial bank, shall not exceed 500 square feet. 3. See attached "Schedule of Additional Conditions." - 3034 - UP- 80 December 13, 1971 SCHEDULE OF ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS "1. Sign permits shall be secured by the applicant, or its assignees, but not by tenants. 2. The applicant, or its assignees, shall maintain the buildings, parking and maneuvering areas, and the landscaping of the subject center, and shall not transfer this obligation to a tenants' or merchants' as s ociat ion. 3. No single sign in the proposed shopping center shall exceed 100 sq. ft. 4. The employees of Barclays Bank shall not be denied the use of the proposed shopping center's parking lot." Report, dated November 30, 1971, from Fire Chief John A. Marchi and Assistant Fire Chief Alwin R. Brauns "Size of mains and fire hydrants have already been agreed upon with a representative of Lou, Arata, Civil Engineer, and they are to be installed as per agreement. Isl John A. Marchi, Fire Chief" "Tn relation to the above, the fire alarm wires that run over the property at the present time will have to be moved to the west side of Antoinette Lane, as has been discussed previously. This to be at the expense of the subdivider. Isl Alwin R. Brauns, Assistant Chief" Report dated November 30, 1971, from Acting Chief of Police A. Terragno "No left turn shall be permitted from Chestnut Avenue into parking lot. Ingress and egress movements shall be right turns only. Signs shall be installed by contractor." Report, dated December 1, 1971 from Director of Public Works Louis H. Goss "It is recommended that approval of this permit be subject to the review and approval by this office of the complete improvement plans. Said plans should contain, but not be limited to, plot and grade plans showing drainage, sanitary sewers, and all other necessary utility connections. No building constructed in said center shall have a finished floor elevation less than elevation 35.0 feet when referred to the City of South San Francisco datum." - 3035 - December 13, 1971 UP-80 Report, dated December 1, 1971 from Landscape Specialist John Hoffman "The preliminary landscape plan submitted appears to be adequate for granting the use permit. My recommendations are as follows: 1. Landscaping working drawings to be prepared for review by Architectural Committee at a later date. 2. Working drawings to comply with City "Minimum Design Standards for Landscaping". 3. Improvement of Antoinette Lane to the requirements of the Director of Public Works. Improvement to include landscaping the southwest side of Antoinette Lane with ice plant ~round cover and Monterey pine trees and installing a sprinkler system. Existing pines to be retained where possible.* 4. Occupancy of the buildings in the proposed shopping center to be allowed only upon satisfactory completion of the lands caping . 5. Maintenance of all landscaping in the shopping center and on both sides of Antoinette Lane to be the responsibility of the applicant. Maintenance to be done professionally to the standards of good horticultural practice. Isl John E. Hoffman *The applicant's obligations under this requirement shall be discharged under the assessment-district project for the improvement of Antoinette Lane.1I Names and addresses of Proponents and Opponents: Proponents: Thomas N. Foris, AlA, Vice President and General Manager, Robert B. Liles, Inc., 840 Battery St., San Francisco, Ca., Agent of the applicant. None Opponents: Commissioner Lazzari moved that the Planning Commission adopt the findings and conditions, as set forth in the preliminary Official Action Report, and approve UP-80 upon the condition that the applicant comply with the submitted requirements of the City's reporting department heads; seconded by Commissioner Zlatunich; passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Boblitt, Botieff, Gardner, Lazzari, Zlatunich> and Chairman Campredon None None NOES: ABSENT: - 3036 - December 13, 1971 UP-206 UP-206, use~permit request of Oroweat Baking Company to construct an addition to a wholesale bakery building a~ No. 264 South Spruce Avenue, in the P-C-M District. Secretary Pass read the following reports into the record. Report and recommendation of City Planner Daniel M. Pass liThe Planning Department respectfully recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the "findingsll 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 not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimen- tal 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 proposed addition would enable the applicant to improve the subject plant's sanitary operation. 4. The proposed addition would improve the aesthetic quality of the front elevation of the subject bakery. II 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." Report, dated December 3, 1971 from Inspector G. Castro and Fire Chief John A. Marchi "Sprinklers shall extend to new addition. If distance goes beyond extension of present hose racks, additional hose racks shall be installed in new addition. Screens permissable if readily removable. Isl G. Castro, Inspector Bureau of Fire Prevention" liThe abo\\Te requirements will have to be compl ied with. Fire Chief Marchi" Names and Addresses of Proponents and Opponents: Proponents: Tom Larkin, Proj ect Engineer, Oroweat Baking Co. 264 So. Spruce Avenue, South San Francisco, Ca., and Agent of the Applicant Opponents: None - 3037 - UP-206 December 13, 1971 Commissioner Botieff moved that the Planning Commission adopt the findings and conditions, as set forth in the preliminary Official Action Report, and approve UP-206 upon the condition that the applicant comply with the submitted requirements of the City's reporting, department heads; seconded by Commissioner Gardner; passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Boblitt, Botieff, Gardner, Lazzari, Zlatunich, and Chairman Campredon NOES: None ABSENT: None UP-207 UP-207, use-permit request of Tile Fair to establish a retail store (tile shop) on the southwesterly side of El Camino Real, about 490' northerly of Hazelwood Drive, in the "U," Unclassified District. Secretary Pass read the following reports into the record. Report and recommendation of City Planner Daniel M. Pass liThe Planning Department respectfully recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the "findings" arid "action" indicated 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 not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimen- tal 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 proposed use would be characterized by effective site planning, and a strong emphasis upon aesthetic design. 4. Approximately 12% of the subject building site would be devoted to landscaping. 5. The proposed use would be served; by ample off-street parking." - 3038 HP-207 December 13, 1971 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 aggregate permanent, temporary, and promotional, appurtenant sign area on the subject premises shall not exceed 150 square feet." Report, dated December 2, 1971, from Landscape Specialist John E. Hoffman "Plot plan submitted with use permit application shows adequate area devoted to landscaping for purposes of granting use permit. However, the arrangement and the configuration of the landscaped areas needs some improvement. I recommend that further study be devoted by the applicant to pro- vide a better landscape plan at the time the working drawings are prepared. Working drawings are to comply to the requirements of the City's "Minimum Landscape Standards" and to the subsequent requirements of the Architectural Committee." Names and Addresses of Proponents and Opponents: BpPPOflen"t.s: Mr. G. A. Ledford, 2736 Delta Drive, Colorado Springs, Colorado, agent of the applicant. Opponents: None Commissioner Lazzari moved that the Planning Commission adopt the findings and conditions, as set forth in the preliminary Official Action Report, and approve UP-207 upon the condition that the appli- cant comply with the submitted requirements of the City's reporting department heads; seconded by Commissioner Boblitt; passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Boblitt, Lazzari, Zlatunich, and Chairman Campredon NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTENTIONS: Botieff, Gardner - 3039 - V-114 December 13, 1971 V-114, variance request of Edward P. Lucett to construct a two-story addition to a two-story, single-family dwelling in the required "level" rear yard of No. 305 Valverde Drive, in the R-l District. Secretary Pass read the following reports 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" embodied in the attached, preliminary Official Action Report, and grant the requested variance." FINDINGS: "I. 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 preserva8 tion and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the petitioner. 3. That the granting of the application will not, under the cir- cumstances of the particular case, materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or work- ing 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 with the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. 5. The requested variance is necessary to prevent practical difficul ties, unnecessary hardships~. and results inconsis- tent with the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. 6. The applicant's terracing of his rear yard to a 5% grade would serve no substantial purpose, and could create a soil-erosion problem. 7. The Planning Commission has recommended that the City Council repeal the "level rear yard requirements" of this municipality. 8. The Planning Commission has granted similar variances. Examples: M. E. Mattice (V-53; September 10, 1968); R. C. Colombe (V-36; September 25, 1967).11 Names amd Addresses of Proponents and Opponents: Proponents: Edward P. Lucett, 305 Valverde Drive, South San Francisco, Ca., 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-114 upon the condition that the applicant comply with the submitted requirements of the City's reporting department heads; seconded by Commissioner Lazzari; passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Boblitt, Botieff, Gardner, Lazzari, Zlanunich, and Chairman Campredon NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE -3040- V-119 December 13, 1971 V-119, variance request of Fred Young to construct a two-story addi- tion to a one-story, single-family dwelling in a required side yard of No. 633 Serra Drive, in the R-l District. The enlarged single- family dwelling would cover 43% of its building site. Secretary Pass read the following reports into the record. Report and recommendation of City Planner Daniel M. Pass liThe Planning Department respectfully recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the "findings" and action listed in the attached, preliminary Official Action Report." FINDINGS: "I. 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 preserva- tion and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the petitioner. 3. That the granting of the application will not, under the cir- cumstances of the particular case, materially affect adversely 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 with the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. 5. 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 side yard variances would not establish a new building line, but would merely extend an existing one. 7. Similar side yard variances have been granted in the Serra Highlands subneighborhood. Examples: V-67, Robert Plunkett; V-56, Norman L. Snyder; V-33, T. La Grave; V-37, Donald J. Frolli; V-27, Don Fagundes; V-20, John Tamburini; V-38, Edward Andrews; and, V-112, James A. Pellegrino. 8. The requested lot-coverage variance is supported by the sub- standard depth and square footage of the applicant's building site. 9. Similar lot coverage variances have been granted by the Planning COlnmission. Examples: V-30, James Triggas; V-59, Rodney C. Prisk; V-98, Barry D. Simpson." Names and Addresses of Proponents and Opponents: Proponents: Fred Young, 633 Serra Drive, South San Francisco, Ca., the Applicant. Opponents: None - 3041 - V-119 December 13, 1971 Commissioner Lazzari moved that the Planning Commission adopt the findings and conditions, as set forth in the preliminary Official Action Report, and approve V-119 upon the condition that the applicant comply with the submitted requirements of the City's reporting department heads; seconded by Commissioner Gardner; passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Boblitt, Botieff, Gardner, Lazzari, Zlatunich, and Chairman Campredon NOES: None ABSENT: None PM-86 PM-86, tentative parcel map of the Roman Catholic Archbishop of San Francisco, representing the subdivision of 8.2 acres of land, located at the southeasterly corner of Alida Way and Ponderosa Road, in the R-l Districtof the County of San Mateo and the "U" District in the City of San Francisco. Secretary Pass read the following report and letters into the record. liThe proposed subdivision meets the requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act, and the regulations and standards em- bodied in the Subdivision Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco. Under the said proposed subdivision, 1.9 acres of land within the City of South San Francisco, and 6.3 acres of Unincorporated territory of the County of San Mateo would be subdivided into three parcels of land--a rectory site, a church-school-convent site, and a site of commercial potential. The Planning Department respectfully recommends that the Planning Commission approve the instant tentative parcel map upon the condition that the subdivider cause the unincorporated lands within the proposed subdivision to be annexed within one year, and upon further condition that the said subdivider comply with the submitted requirements of the City's department heads. Report dated December 3, 1971 from Director of Public Works Louis H. Goss lilt is recommended that approval of said map be subj ect to the following requirements: -3042 - PM-86 December 13, 1971 "I. There appears to be some ambiguity in the wording of the existing easement within Parcel B. This should be corrected by a new instrument. 2. There is no easement for the 36" storm line within Parcel B. An easement should be granted prior to recordation of the parcel map. 3. The 10' drainage easement which is to be granted to the City of South San Francisco should also be a sanitary sewer easement." Report dated December 3, 1971 from Chief Building Inspector Leonard J. Pittz "I have examined the Tentative Parcel Map PM- 86 and recommend its approval subj ect to the City Planner's recommendation regard- ing annexation; however, the Title Country Club Plaza should be eliminated on the final map as there has been no such legal sub- division." Report dated December 13, 1971 from Chief Building Inspector Leonard J. Pittz "I have discussed with Mr. Louis A. Arata, the title, Country Club Plaza which is a new name they wish to use for this subdivi- sion and I have no objections." Names and Addresses of Proponents and Opponents: Proponents: Lpmms A. Arata, Civil Engineer, 180 El Camino Real, Millbrae, Ca., Agent of the Subdivider Opponents: None With the concurrence of the Commission and Mr. Louis A. Arata, Agent of the applicant, the Chairman ordered the hearing on PM-86 held over to the Planning Commission's regular meeting of March 13, 1972. - 3043 - December 13, 1971 San Mateo County Regional Planning Committee's Referral of the County of San Mateo's Initial Housing Plan Secretary Pass read the following letter into the record. Letter, dated October 19, 1971 from Planning Director, San Mateo County Regional Planning Committee, to Chief Administrative Officers ana Planning D,irectors "Enclosed is a draft copy of the Initial Housing Element for San Mateo County. The Regional Planning Committee has referred this to all City Councils and Planning Commissions for their review and comment (see attached letter). After review by the cities, the RPC hopes to transmit the proposed plan element to the County Board of Supervisors for their consideration. To aid in any review of the Initial Housing Element that maybe by your respective Councils and Planning Commissions, we have sent a copy of the State's "Housing Element Guidelines" to the Chief Administrative Officer of each city. We have only a limited number of copies and will pass the rest out as they are requested. If you have any questions about the draft Housing Element, please contact Lew Diplock or Don Newmark of the County Planning staff." Findings and Recommendation of City Planner Daniel M. Pass "The Office of the City Planner has reviewed the "Draft" of the County of San Mateo's Initia.l Housing Plan, and respectfully rec- ommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following findings, and instruct its secretary to transmit the following recommendation to the Honorable Mayor and City Council. Findings: "I. The Initial Housing Plan embodies effective and viable guide- lines for the solution of San Mateo County's long-range and short-term housing problems. 2. The Initial Housing Plan provides the basic machinery for the solution of this subregion's housing problems without contra- vening the political and social principles of American democracy. 3. The Initial Housing Element is congruous and consonant with the adopted General Plan and Housing Element of the City of South San Francis co." Recommendation: "The South San Francisco Planning Commission recommends that the City Council recommend that the San Mateo County Regional Planning Committee approve the Initial Housing Plan as an element of the County General Plan. The Commission further recommends that the Council recommend that the Committee add the following goals to the subj ect plan, in order to r,einforce the element's continuity with other county-wide and ci~y general plans. - 3044 - December 13, 1971 "Goal 6: The Housing Element shall guide the unified growth, development, and conservation of the County of San Mateo and its several cities. The Element's primary objective shall be the provision of a decent home and a suitable living environment for every family in San Mateo County. Goal 7: The Housing Element shall constitute the co-ordinating housing plan of the County of San Mateo and its several munici- palites." At the conclusion of its review, the Planning Commission found that the Housing Element of the General Plan of the City of South San Francisco was superior to the County's Initial Housing Plan. Commissioner Botieff moved that the Honorable City Council not endorse the latter's adoption by the Regional Planning Committee. The motion was adopted by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Boblitt, Botieff, Gardner, Zlatunich, and Chairman Campredon NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTENTIONS: Vice Chairman Raffaelli and Commissioner Lazzari This motion rescinded a prior action that failed to carry. - 3045 - Request of the Oyster Point Yacht Club for General Plan Approval of a Proposed Club House at the Oyster Point Marina Secretary Pass read the following report into the record. Analysis and Recommendation of City Planner Daniel M. Pass "1. The proposed club house would be situated on lands owned and managed by the City of South San Francisco, and therefore would be quasi-public in character. These factors bring the proposed edifice within the general-plan purview of the South San Francisco Planning Commission. 2. According to Section 65402 (b) of the State Planning and Zoning Law, the planning agency must review each public building or structure proposed for location within its jurisdiction, and report to the local legislative body on the said building's or structure's conformity with the adopted General Plan. 3. The proposed ~lub house's location at the Oyster Point Marina has been approved by the South San Francisco Recrea- tion Commission, and would substantially improve the Oyster Point yacht club's physical plant. The construc- tion of the proposed club house would resultantly cause the removal of the yacht club's scruffy looking barge facility. 4. Since the proposed yacht-club facility would be an integral part of the Oyster Point Marina, and would serve the needs of yachtsmen and sailors, its construction would tend to effectuate the Public Facilities Element of the adopted General Plan. 5. The proposed building would be of prefabricated construction, and could be easily relocated in the event that the imple- mentation of the Shoreline Regional Park plan requires such." RECOMMENDATION "The Office of the City Planner respectfully recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the above analyses as its findings, and advise the Honorable City Council that the proposed club house conforms to the adopted General Plan of the City of South San Francisco, entitled "Orderly Growth"." At the conclusion of its consideration of the proposed club house at the Oyster Point Marina, Chairman Campredon asked the Commission for a motion. Vice-Chairman Raffaelli moved, that the Planning Commission adopt the analysis embodied in the City Planner's Urban Planming Analysis- 71, and instruct its Secretary to transmit the following report to the City Council. REPORT The proposed club house conforms to the Public Facilities Element of South San Francisco's General Plan of 1969, entitled "Orderly Growth". - 3046 - December 13, 1971 The motion was seconded by Commissioner Lazzari and passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Raffaelli, Commissioners Botieff, Lazzari, Zlatunich, and Chairman C~predon NOES: Commissioners Boblitt, Gardner ABSENT : None GOOD AND WELFARE, OTHER AND COMMUNICATIONS After considerable discussion and with the concurrance of the Commission, Chairman Campredon instructed the Secretary to send the following communication. "Mr. Harvey, Vice President and Manager Bank of America, South San Francisco, Ca. 94080 Pursuant to Planning Commission instructions of Monday, December 13, 1971, the undersigned cordially invites you to discuss the Bank of America's off-street parking policy at the Commission's regular meeting of Monday, January 10, 1972. The Commission is especially interested in the said bank's parking policy with respect to its new facility at the north- easterly corner of Llnden and Lux Avenues. The Commission's meeting of January 10, 1972, will be con- vened in the Council Chambers of the City of South San Fran- cisco at 8:00 o'clock p.m. Please notify the undersigned if he can be of further assistance. VEry truly yours, Daniel M. Pass,AIP City Planner" "NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Notice is hereby respectfully given that the South San Francisco Planning Commission will not meet in regular study session on Monday, December 20, 1971, or in regular session on Monday, December 27, 1971. The Commission will next meet in study session on Monday, January 3, 1972, and will next convene in regular session on Monday, January 10, 1972. This notice is given pursuant to instructions of Mr. Marcel Campredon, Chairman of the South San Francisco Planning Commission. Daniel M. Pass Secretary to the Planning Commission" - 3047 - December 13, 1971 Chairman Campredon, and the entire Commission, expressed the wish that everyone would have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. 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 January 10, 1972 at 8:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, South San Francisco, California. The meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m. Marcel Campredon, Planning Commission City of South San Francisco , Planning Commission City of South San Francisco sna - 3048 -