Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03/24/1983 March 24, 1983 Regular Meeting of South San Francisco Planning Commission PLACE: Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco ~1Et~BERS PRESENT: Chairman Hoyer, Vice-Chairman Getz, Commissioners Bertucell i, Grimes, Martin and Terry MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioner Mangetani ALSO PRESENT: Community Development Staff Louis Dell IAngela Daniel B. Christians Philip Gorny Maureen r~orton City Attorney Bob Rogers Assistant City Attorney Ell adene Katz Director of Public Services Robert Yee Police Department Sgt. Ron Petrocchi Fire Department Dave Parenti Building Division Jake Wittwer PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ORAL COMMUNICATIONS The Director of Communi ty Development introduced Dave Parenti, Deputy Fi re Marshall, to the Commission. AGENDA ITEII/IS Exceptions and Exemptions to Ordinance No. 916-83 - An Interim Ordinance Prohibiting Uses which may Confl ict with Zoning Proposal s Rel ated to General Pl an Amendments. A. Paul Shepard & Associates, Industrial Building, 415 East Grand Avenue Motion-Martin/Second Grimes: To exempt the industrial buildi of Paul Shepard & Associates at 415 East Grand Avenue from Interim Ordinance No. 916-83 based on ndings contained in the Staff Report. Unanimously approved. B. William Palmer, Industrial Building, 471 Kaufman Court Motion-Grimes/Second Bertucelli: To exempt the industrial building of William Palmer at 471 Kaufman Court from Interim Ordinance No. 916-83 based on findings contained in the Staff Report. Unanimously approved. 1228 ~~arch 24, 1983 C. Rich Diodati, Buil dings "0", "Fit, and "WI in the Oyster Point Business Park Motion-Martin/Second Terry: To exempt buildings "Oil, "F", and "H", in the Oyster Point Business Park from Interim Ordinance No. 916-83 based on findings contained in the Staff Report. AYES: Ch rman Hoyer, Commi oners Bertucelli, Grimes, Martin and Terry. ABSTAINED: Vice-Chairman Getz. Stephen Hynding (Avanessian), Case No: UP-82-625, Negative Declaration No. 366 Use Permit to construct two, 2-story office buildings with related parking and landscaping, at the northwest corner of South Spruce Avenue and Myrtle Avenue in the PCM - Planned Commercial and Limited Industrial Zone District. March 24, 1983 Staff Report presented. Applicant's representative present: George Avanessian 914 Linden Avenue Commissioners viewed the colored rendering provided by the applicant's represen- tative.. The Commission also questioned Special Condition No.4 which required II some" 24 inch box specimen trees shall be located along both street frontages. The Special Condition was amended to stipulate that "fifteen percent (15%) of the trees shall be 24" box specimen trees. A question was raised regarding the improvement of Myrtle Avenue Mr. Yee advi sed the Commi ss i on that he saw no prob 1 em in uti 1 i zi ng Myrtl e Avenue as a one way street during the construction period. He added that no building occu- pancy would be allowed before completion of the street work. Motion-Grimes/Second Bertuce1li: To approve UP 82-625 and Negative Declaration No. 366 based on findings and subject to all conditions, including the above amended special condition contained in the Staff Report. Unanimously approved. Development Agreement - T errabay A proposed development agreement between the City of South San Francisco and W. W. Dean & Associates for the Terrabay Project generally located in the unincor- porated area north of and conti nguous to the north Ci ty L imi ts, lyi ng east of Hillsi School and west of Bayshore Boulevard. March 24, 1983 Staff Report presented. The Director of Community Development' led the Commission's attention to the addition of Exhibits "Hl" and "H211 regarding sewer and drainage trunk lines which were recommended by the City Engineer. A Supplemental Memorandum from the City Engineer dated March 22, 1983 was read into the record. Mr. Dell IAngela stated that several meetings had been held on 1229 March 24, 1983 this Agreement since the last Commission meeting. He directed the Commission's attention to pages 216-219 of the final EIR for Terrabay which indicated that the Oyster Point Interchange was required to be constructed at the time the High Technology Center is constructed. Vice-Chairman Getz stated that the EIR indi- cated that the Oyster Point Interchange was to be constructed at the time the High Technology Center is constructed or earlier. Mr. Dell 'Angela also directed the Commission's attention to pages 159-163 of the EIR and a supplemental report from Recht Hausrath & Associates concerning the economic aspects of the project. These documents were distributed to the Commission prior to the meeting. , Applicant Present: w. w. 0 ean San Mateo Applicant's Engineer Present: Bob Eppl er Resources Engineering and Management EIR Economic Consultant Present: Dick Recht Oakl and Speak i in Opposition to the Agreement: Dougl as Butl er 133 Adrian Jane Kemper 1321 Hillside Blvd. Mr. Butler stated that he felt a mistake had been made in approving the Terrabay project. He felt that a second mistake would be made in approving the Development Agreement in its present form. He was concerned wi th traffi c and congestion on Highway 101. Ms.. Kemper stated that major changes had been made to the Agreement. She questioned if the approved Specific Plan could be changed now. asked if another geol ogi cal survey had been done on the property.. Commissioner Getz stated that he was 99% in favor of the project but disagreed with the phasing of the Oyster Point Interchange Project. He t that Interchange should be constructed at the time the hotel is constructed and urged the Development Agreement contain this stipulation. The Di rector of Communi ty Development agreed that thi s was an extremel y impor- tant project but referred the Traffic Consultant's study which indicated that the full I nterchange was not requi red at the hotel construct; on stage.. He cauti oned the Comm; ss; on that a del ay in the construct; on of the Interchange Proj ect woul d unnecessari ly del ay the 'constructi on of the hotel whi ch is a significant revenue producer for the project.. Commissioner ~lartin asked about the maintenance of drainage basins above the project. He was concerned about the potential for slipage and water runoff from March 24, 1983 the County property" The Ci ty Attorney responded that as the proj ect ; s bui 1 t out in phases this upper land will be deeded to the County" This area will not be annexed the City" He further advised the Commission that the maintenance of the uphill slopes is the responsibility of the County. With regard to the proposed catchment basins, Mr" Rogers advised the Commission that the City is currentl y in negoti ati on wi th the County, and that annexati on woul d not proceed until an agreement regarding maintenance of the basins is reached" Motion-Grimes/Second Bertucelli: To recommend to the City Council that, subject 'to annexati on of the Terrabay area to the Ci ty, the Ordi nance approvi ng the Development Agreement be adopted based on findings contained in the Staff Report" Motion-Getz/Second Martin: To amend the motion and recommend to the City Council that, subject to annexation of the Terrabay area to the City, the Ordinance approvi ng the Development Agreement be adopted based on fi ndi ngs conta; ned in the Staff Report subj to following change: That paragraph E (3) of the Terrabay Building Improvement Schedule (Exhibit IIFII to the Development Agreement) which states: IIConstruction to the sfaction of the City Engineer of the new Oyster Point Boulevard Interchange, connecting, by means of four (4) lane bridge, Oyster Point Boulevard with Airport Boulevard, or with the consent of the City Council, an acceptabl e al ternative to the Oyster Point Boul evard Interchange be provi dedl' be 1 i sted as paragraph (3) (C) so that sai d construct; on wi 11 occur in conjunction with the building of the four hundred (400) room hotel" Amended motion was disapproved by a 4-2 vote of AYES: Vice-Chairman Getz and Commissioner Martin.. NOES: Commissioners Bertucelli, Grimes and Terry. the Comm; on G Chai rman Hoyer, Or; ginal unamended Mati on-Grimes/Second Bertucell i : AYES: Chai rman Hoyer, Commissioners Bertucelli, Grimes, Martin and Terry. NOES: Vice-Chairman Getz. Michael Cal1an/Geortom, Inc., UP-83-644, Negative Declaration No. 391 Use Permit application for a proposed 132 unit residential condominium project with related parking and landscaping located on two 51 along Carter Drive in the PC-R3-Planned Community Multiple Family Residential Zone Distri March 24, 1983 Staff Report presented" Applicant's Rpresentat1ve Present: Tom Vlasic William Spangel & Associates Commissioner ask \f~hat buil ding density was stipul on sting 1231 March 24, 1983 General Plan for these sites. The response was medium-high density at a maximum of 15 un; ts per acre. Commi ssi oner Getz commented that the proposed General Plan would accommodate the density proposed on this application but that the proposed General Pl an has not yet been adopted by the Ci ty Counci 1 . He asked the Assistant City Attorney if it was proper for the Commission to consider this application prior to the adoption of the new General Plan. Mrs. Katz responded that State Law requi res that a development proj ect be consi stent wi th the existing General Plan. The Director of Community Development responded that there are instances where the existing General Plan is not consistent with existing zoning. He advised the Commission that the existing zoning of the property would allow this proposed project. Commi ssi oner Getz commented that the appli cant shoul d request a General Pl an amendment. Thi s amendment coul d be pl aced on the April 14, 1983 Agenda and be heard wi th the Use Permi t. He fel t that the Use Permi t appl i cati on shoul d not be heard until a complete application, inclulding a General Plan Amendment, was presented to the Commission. Mr. Vlasic advised that it was his opinion that the existing General Plan pro- vides for the density being requested, since the current General Plan speaks in terms of IIgrossll density. Chairman Hoyer commented that a legal issue was being presented to the Commission and that it was not proper for the Commission to judge such an issue. He requested that Mr. Call an and hi s Attorney meet with the City Attorney and Di rector of Communi ty Development to deci de the 1 egal issue. The Commi ssi on requested that the City Attorney's office respond expeditiously to the question as to whether or not thi s apppl icati on is consi stent with the current General Plan. If it is determined to be not consistent, the Commission further requested the Assistant City Attorney advise them whether it is proper to con- sider the application as presented or first require a General Plan Amendment. Motion-Getz/Second Bertucelli: To continue this item to the meeting of April 14, 1983 and request that the City Attorney's Office respond to the legal questions raised on or before April 14, 1983. Unanimously approved. ITEMS FROM STAFF The Director of Community Development directed the Commission's attention to a Memorandum from the City Attorney, dated March 21, 1983 which recommends wording changes to Pol ici es 37, 38, 1-8, 8-5, 9-10, and D-18 in the General Pl an per- taining to off-site commercial advertising signs. Motion-Terry/Second Martin: To approve, in the interest of clarification, the wording changes recommended by the City Attorney in his March 21, 1983. Unanimously approved by voice vote. The Commi ssi on was advi sed that May 11, 1983 has been tentati vely set for a joint City Council/Planning Commission study session. Issues for discussion were requested by the Director. 1232 March 24, 1983 ITEMS FROM THE COMMISSION Chairman Hoyer noted that he will be absent from the April 14, 1983 t~eeting.. Vice-Chairman Getz will preside. Adjournment: 11:00 P.M. Herman Hoyer Chairman, Planning Commission Ci ty of South San Franc; sco Louis Dell Angela Secretary, Planning Commission City of South San Francisco 1233