Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 08/22/1978 M I NUT E S of the regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission TIME: 7:30 p.m. DATE: August 22, 1978 PLACE: WEST ORANGE LIBRARY AUDITORIUM MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Campredon, Vice~Chairman Mullin, Commissioners Bertucelli, Grimes, Mantegani and Mathewson ~1EMBERS ABSENT: Commiss i oner Sl ade ALSO PRESENT: City Planner William Costanzo Senior Planner Daniel Christians Assistant Planner Mark Wheeler City Engineer Robert Yee MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of August 8, 1978 Vice-Chairman Mullin moved that the minutes of the regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission of August 8, 1978, be approved. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Bertucelli, and was passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Chairman Campredon, Vice-Chairman Mullin, Commissioners Bertucelli, Grimes, Mantegani and Mathewson NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Commissioner Slade ANNOUNCEMENT CONCERNING TAPE RECORDING OF MEETING Chairman Campredon announced that this meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission would be recorded on tape, and that anyone who wished to come before the Commi ssion to be heard is requested to come to the front mi crophone so that his or her comments become part of the official record. -3986- August 22, 1978 SUBDIVISION AND PARCEL MAPS PM-78-159 and Negative Declaration No. 152 An application by Hans R. Mulberg, Inc. for a Final Parcel Map to create 4 parcels from 1 on property located on the south side of the terminus of East Grand Avenue and east of Haskins Way in the M-2 Zone District. Secretary Costanzo presented the staff report. Vice-Chairman Mullin questioned the BCDC control regarding the shoreline ac- cess controls. Commissioner Mathewson queried the reference on the map to O'Brian Corporation as leasee. Mr. Hans Mulberg answered by saying the signature was necessary to secure a lease-option agreement for a future water access if needed. Secretary Costanzo assured the Commission that the shoreline access agreement was in the making with meetings with BCDC and the City. Mr. Bob Yee, City Engineer, responded to Commissioner Mathewson's question re- garding the linear park improvements. That, if so desired, they would be pre- sented at the next meeting with the specific plan for implementation. Vice-Chairman Mullin moved that PM-78-l59 and Negative Declaration No. 152 be approved with all of staff's recommendations and conditions. Commissioner Mathewson seconded the motion and it was passed by a unanimous roll call vote of all Commissioners present. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS UP~77-399 and Certified Negative Declaration No. 122 Peremptory Writ of Mandate for Bocci, Modena, Fulvio & Royce (Funk Application) continued from August 8, 1978, Planning Commission Meeting, to determine whether, based on substantial evidence, the proposed removal and rebuilding of the ad- vertising structure at 264 South Airport Boulevard would be detrimental to the general health, safety and welfare of the community. Secretary Costanzo presented the staff report. -3987- August 22, 1978 By means of an exhibit received from Cal Trans, the Secretary showed the Commission the designated landscape areas of the Bayshore Freeway including the area where the proposed Funk Sign is to be located. Secretary Costanzo also presented the Commission, for their review, copies of photographs traveling southbound and northbound on Highway 101. He indicated the photographs were taken and submitted to cleqrlyillustrate the visual ef- efects of the proposed sign in relationship to surrounding on-site identifica- tion signs. Mr. Neal Martin, former City Planner, City of South San Francisco, presented the Commission with a prepared statement and related comments relating to the general goals of the General Plqn and its statements regarding the advantages of landscaped freeways to motorists and the surrounding community. Mr. Martin concluded by saying lilt is my opinion asa major participant in the preparation and adoption process of the current General Plan, that approval of the applicant's request would be contrary to the objectives, principles and standards of the General Plan. Further, iT' the proposal is contrary to the pro- vision of the General Plan, then it is logically contrary to the general welfare of the community since it can be presumed that the City Council has expressed the community's general welfare in drafting and adoption of the plan document." Mr. John Wade, Conservation Chairman of Sierra Club for San Francisco Peninsula, related the Sierra Club's objection to any additional signs along this highway. General Plan Elements include safety and nuisance passages. Mr. Wade's comments centered around three points: Safety, nuisance and conflict areas which have received support in the courts. Mr. John Williams, Shell Oil Co., indicated objection because his Shell sign woul d be blocked if this new bi 11 boa rd were approved at the proposed size. He further stated that his company would submit a request for a higher sign if this new billboard were installed as proposed. Mr. Edward Simpson, Attorney for Ken Funk, Los Angeles firm, presented the Com- mission with the response from the presiding judge regarding the Planning Com- mission and City Council actions on this Use Permit. He read parts of the court I s deci sion that pertained to the request for further heari ngs on thi s matter to determine justification basis for this permit denial. Mr. Simpson presented the Commission with a letter dated 1967 from the then City Planner Dan Pass. Mr. Simpson read Mr. Passes' recommendation that a different sign ordinance be initiated that would better address the problems with signs along the freeways, especially billboards. Mr. Simpson indicated that the only outcome of the former City Planner's recom- mendation was the City Council adopted a minimum spacing distance of 1000 feet and chose not to redo the sign ordinance at that time. Mr. Simpson relayed information regarding similar situations where permits were issued in conflict with the staff report presented tonight. Mr. Simpson presented the Commission with photographs illustrating the view as seen from the freeway. -3988- August 22, 1978 Mr. Simpson, in reference to the map from Cal Trans, questioned the validity of the proposed landscape designations until such improvements are completed~ In response to Mr. Wade's comments regarding the safety of motorists pertain- ing to creating a traffic hazard, Mr. Simpson disputed this claim reading from a magazine article on the subject based on specific case studies. Mr. Simpson responded to Mr. Williams by saying that Mr. K. Funk would agree not to exceed the height existing so as not to block the Shell sign. Secreta ry Cos tanzo offered the fo 11 owi ng exp 1 a ina ti ons regarding the proponents s ta tements : 1. Certain pictures not taken from proper angles or distances to clearly judge visual effect. 2. Permits for Park tN Fly signs were strictly for rebuilding two deteriorated signs in approximately the same location. 3. Signs on Highway 101 and Foster & Kleiser signs - all signs were on undeveloped property and in accordance with all past policies. 4. Mr. Gary Bush, Cal Trans, was contacted personally by staff and he indicated contracts have been let and construction commenced within 30 days as shown on the plan presented by staff tonight. 5. Section of sign ordinance that applies to landscape freeways as well as definition of landscape freeways as code require- ments in this case. 6. ~larified City controls over standard improvements to mitigate possible adverse impacts of a proposed request. 7. Architectural Committee (Design Review Board) is in effect and the Design Criteria is being legally enforced by this committee. 8. Applications to Cal Trans indicates full compliance with all Zoning Ordinance requirements with regard to Outdoor Advertising Structures in dedicated or proposed landscape freeways. Secretary Costanzo stated that Cal Trans possibly could have been in error for issuing a permit for a sign in a landscape area. Mr. Wade responded that preparation of evidence by Mr. E. Jackson Faulstman of the Consulting Traffic Engineering Firm was done in a simulated example and the courts have upheld this evidence i.n two separate cases. He further stated that the results indicated that freeways without billboards have been proven to be three times safer than freeways with billboards. Mr~ John Noonan, City Attorney, advised the Commission with respect to the court order and the action that is requested. -3989- August 22, 1978 Mr. Noonan stated that the decision may be based on general welfare under certain substantial evidence situations. Mr. Noonan further stated that a claim of compliance with the sign ordinance technicalities is not enough to guarantee an approval~ Final decision in this case may be based on substan- tial evidence based on the possiQle effects on the general health, safety and general welfare. Mr. Noonan continued by saying in his opinion additional information should be received from Cal Trans regarding the validity of the landscape freeway claim presented tonight. Vi.ce-Chairman Mullin questioned Mr. Dan Passes' recommendation regarding the use of a Use Permit in this case. Mr. Noonan responded that this recommenda- tion carries no weight because of the non-professional background of the speaker in a legal sense. Vice-Chairman Mullin confirmed the fact that Mr. Martinis comments were made as part of his duties and under direction of the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco and did not reflect his personal feelings per see Vice-Chairman Mullin requested a copy of the magazine article from "Signs of the Times" from which Mr. Simpson read. Commissioner Mathewson indicated, for the record, that on-site inspections have been conducted by the Commissioners and questioned the validity in a court of law. Mr. .Noonan stated that in a court of law any evidence would have to be more substantial. Secretary Costanzo read into the record an article from an American Sign and Indicator Corporation publication regarding cases in court that validate the danger of signs along a freeway. Mr. Martin responded to Vice-Chairman Mullinls questions that impacts on the surrounding properties are addressed and identified in the current General Pl an of the City. Secretary Costanzo reiterated the special condition of approval and further clarified the requirements being requested as being standard in all cases throughout the City under the Use Permit process. Commissioner Grimes stated his desire to continue t is matter until further' clarification regarding the designation of the land cape freeway and because of his questions of why the permit was issued under the circumstances. Commissioner Mathewson indicated his opposition to ny continuance stating that the evidence submitted tonight seemed adequate to indicate the future of the freeway. The Commission concurred that this matter be contin ed until the regular Planning Commission Meeting of September 12, 1978, 0 that staff can contact Cal Trans to verify the status of this freeway. -3990- Augus t 22, 1978 RZ-78-48 and Negative Declaration No. 179 An application by the City of South San Francisco to rezone the property situ- ated between Hillside Boulevard and Randolph Avenue known as Hillside Terrace Subdivision from R-3 Multi-Family Residential to RPD, Residential Planned De- velopment Zone District. Secretary Costanzo presented' the staff report. Commissioner Mathewson moved that RZ-78-48 and Negative Declaration No. 179 be approved with all recommendations and conditions. Commissioner Bertucelli seconded the motion and it was passed by a unanimous roll call vote of the six Commissioners present. RZ-78-49 and Negative Declaration No. 178 An application by the City of South San Francisco to rezone the property lo- cated east of Gellert Boulevard and westof State Highway 280, from R-3 Multi- Family Residential to RPD, Residential PJanned Development Zone District. Secretary Costanzo presented the staff report. Commissioner Mathewson moved that RZ-78-49 and Negative Declaration No. 178 be approved with all recommendations and conditions. Commissioner Mantegani seconded the motion and it was passed by a unanimous roll call vote of the six Commissioners present. The Commission, in unanimous agreement, requested that Items No.5 and 6 on tonight's agenda be continued. The applicants concurred. Item No.5 - Continued to regular Planning Commission Meeting of September 12, 1 978. RZ-78-50 and Negative Declaration No. 177 - An application by the City of South San Francisco to rezone the property located on the northwest corner of the in- tersection of Grand and Chestnut Avenues from R-l Single-Family and R-3 Multi- Family Residential to RPD-40, Residential Planned Development Zone District. Item No.6 - Continued to regular Planning Commission Meeting of September 12, 1978. RZ-78-5l and Negative Declaration No. 176 - An application by Robert Mantegani to rezone the property located on Chestnut Avenue approximately 350' north of Grand Avenue, from R-l Single-Family Residential to RPD, Residential Planned Development Zone District. -3991- August 22, 1978 COMMUNICATIONS Design Cross Sections, Hillside Boulevard Extension Mr. Ron Grudinzski, Project Manager, Visitacion Associates, indicated his ob- jective here tonight was to receive City approval of the crass-sections for completion of the road in joint venture with the County at no expense to the City prior to any City approvals pertaining to any proposed development of the South Slope. ' Mr. Jim Keegan, 1244 Crestwood Drive, South San Francisco, questioned the status of the fiscal feasibility study as previously promised. Secretary Costanzo indicated the study has commenced and will be forthcoming during this fiscal year. He stated that this study is primary before any de- velopment and that a formal plan will be submitted and will greatly assist in compiling the necessary study~ Mr. Keegan further commented that construction of the road through City ap- provals would possibly prejudge any proposed project. Secretary Costanzo indicated public hearings have been held extensively con- sidering future development. Secretary Costanzo continued by saying that the road, at no cost to the City, could be installed as proposed by Visitacion Associates and the County and have no effect on development of the South Slope. The Commission agreed that the cross-sections as proposed are acceptable and di,rected staff to accordingly notify the City Council. City Engineer Robert Yee concurred, as noted in the staff report. Vice-Chairman Mullin moved that the cross-section as proposed be approved and addressed to the City Council. Commissioner Bertucelli seconded the motion; the motion was so carried unanimously. Amendment to Zoning Ordinance - ZA-77-10 Commission agreed to hearing of this item at the regular Planning Commission Meeting of September 26, 1978. Carriage House Sign Vice-Chairman Mullin questioned the action being taken regarding the broken sign at the Carriage House and requested that it be replaced as soon as possible. It was so noted. ~3992- Augus t 22, 1 978 GOOD AND WELFARE There being nothing to discuss under Good and Welfare of matters of interest for the Commission, Chairman Campredon announced that the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission would be held on September 12, 1978, at 7:30 p.m. in the West Orange Library Auditorium. The meeting was adjourned at 12:15 a.m. . liam Costanzo, Secretary Planning Commission City of South San Francisco Marcel Campredon, Chairman Planning Commission City of South San Francisco NOTE: The entries of this Planning Commission meeting indicate the action taken to dispose of each item. Oral presentations, arguments and documents are recorded on tape. The tapes are available in the Office of the City Planner. Documents related to the items discussed are on file in the Office of the City Planner, and are available for public discussion. -3993-