HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03/02/1989
(Cassette No.1)
March 2, 1989 special meeting of the South San Francisco Planning
Commission
CALL TO ORDER: 7:34
ROLL CALL:
Members Present:
Chairman Zellmer, Vice-Chairman Mantegani,
Commissioners Boblitt, Matteucci, Terry, Warren
and Wendler.
Also Present:
Planning Division
Deputy city Attorney
Acting DCM/City Engineer
Recreation Director
Engineering Division
Police Department
Fire Department
Jean T. smith
Robert Ewing
Arthur Wong
Terry Jewell
Richard Harmon
Ron Petrocchi
Fred Lagomarsino
CHAIRMAN COMMENTS
AGENDA ITEMS
Terrabay Development. southern slope of San Bruno Mountain
(Administrative Parcel Nos. 2-04 and 2-06)
Continued from the February 23, 1989 Planning Commission meeting.
a) Public compliance hearing, San Bruno Mountain-Habitat
Conservation Plan and Agreement
b) Terrabay Precise Plan, PP-88-18
c) Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map, SA-88-104
Precise Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map to allow construction of
Phase I of the Terrabay project including 168 townhome units
(Terrabay Village) and 125 single family homes (Terrabay Park)
located on the southerly slopes of San Bruno Mountain, northerly of
Hillside Boulevard, easterly of Hillside Elementary School.
Chairman Zellmer reminded the public that Bay Area Mountain Watch
would be given 30 minutes for presentation, equal to the time used
for the developer's presentation on February 23.
Speakers:
Lorraine Burtzloff
3306 Shelter Creek
San Bruno
Don Mahoney
747 Ellis #8
San Francisco
Adrian Scaletti
114 Franklin
Dave Schmidt
address unknown
3/2/89 Special Mtg.
Page 1 of 4 Pages
Mrs. Burtzloff, president of Bay Area Mountain Watch, stated that the
organization came to the meeting with an optimistic attitude and in
hope that the Commission had not yet made up its mind about approving
the development.
Mr. Mahoney presented slides of the mountain's various plants/
vegetation, views and people. He stated that his figures regarding
the mission blue butterfly count were significantly different than
those given by Thomas Reid. There were other differences of opinions
regarding rare grasses, plants, revegetation and restoration. He
stated that because of the drought dirt disturbed by the development
would also endanger the butterflies. In conclusion Mr. Mahoney felt
there was insufficient funding for the HCP to work and it would
eventually need to be subsidized by the County.
Mr. Scaletti had several areas of concern. He questioned the storm
drains disposing of water into the bay, catch basins that would need
maintenance, the south slope wetlands, water hook-ups, overcrowded
schools, and building over sacred Indian grounds.
Mr. Schmidt stated the HCP is flawed and the massiveness of the
project is a 1950's way of thinking. He offered several suggestions
as alternatives to the project: 1) build affordable housing on the
other side of the Bayshore FreewaYi 2) South San Francisco and San
Mateo County purchase the Dean property for open space purposes; 3)
declare a five year moratorium so an independent specialist can
monitor the success of the HCPi or 4) work with Bay Area Mountain
Watch to secure Proposition 70 money to acquire property.
Chairman Zellmer announced that staff and the City's consultants
would respond to questions raised by the public and the Commission.
County representative:
Bill Rozar, Planner
San Mateo County
Consultants:
Thomas Reid, consultant
505 Hamilton, suite 201
Palo Alto
Robert Yee, consultant
City of South San Francisco
Roger Foote, consultant
94 Natoma Street
San Francisco
Ron Calhoun, consultant
Wilsey & Ham
1035 East Hillsdale Blvd.
Foster city
Ray Walsh
(applicant's consultant)
413 N. Harvard Ave, suite G
Claremont
3/2/89 Special Mtg.
Page 2 of 4 Pages
Mr. Reid clarified that he works as a consultant for the County which
is the designated plan operator and habitat manager. He answered
questions concerning the habitat plan's funding, the permit monitoring
process, penalties for violating the permit, constraints of using only
native plants for restoration, and dust control. In conclusion he
stated that the Bay Area Mountain Watch organization raises legitimate
questions that are necessary and they should be recognized as vigilant
monitors of the plan.
(Cassette NO.2)
In response to Commissioner Warren, Mr. Reid stated that he finds the
HCP substantially in compliance and is not aware of any areas that are
not in compliance.
Mr. Rozar responded to questions concerning the HCP's Technical
Advisory Committee (TAC), homeowner assessments, and maintenance funds.
The Commission asked why a biologist has never been appointed to the
committee. He responded that it has been difficult for the agencies
involved (County of San Mateo, and the cities of South San Francisco,
Brisbane and Daly city) to agree on the hiring process and finding an
independent biologist who is without preconceived prejudices. He also
stated that sufficient expertise is already involved on the committee
and the lack of a biologist has not been a crucial problem.
Mr. Foott discussed earthquake faults and mentioned this was addressed
in the EIR which concluded that the faults are inactive. He also
stated that no new evidence has been received since the EIR was
certified to reopen this issue. He further discussed monitoring the
grading through the use of instruments and other safeguards. He
mentioned that the homeowners will be responsible, through their
association, to pay for slope corrective work. In conclusion, Mr.
Foott stated that he was not aware of any untested technology being
used or programs being experimented on the project.
Mr. Calhoun discussed the catchment basin system, and the Joint Powers
Authority (which is responsible for design and maintenance of the
facilities). He thoroughly reviewed the filtering and storage
functions of the catch basins. He stated that the filter system would
be a vast improvement over what is draining into the bay now.
(Cassette NO.3)
Mr. Yee addressed the issues concerning sewer capacity and water
availability. He stated that effluent water could be used for dust
control. California Water Service will provide water to the
developmenti that company, not the City, would be responsible for
delcaring a moratorium if it felt this and other new projects could not
be served because of the drought.
Recreation Director Jewell answered questions regarding hiking and
bicycle trails and the availability of the new facilities to all city
residents.
Fire Marshal Lagomarsino responded to concerns regarding the fire
breaks and their maintenance. He stated the California Division of
Forestry has jurisdiction over fires on the mountain. with reference
to loud blasts or sirens from the new fire station, he stated that the
noise level of the new fire station would be consistent with those in
other residential neighborhoods.
3/2/89 Special Mtg.
Page 3 of 4 Pages
Deputy City Attorney Ewing addressed issues concerning deannexation,
school facilities, the 1981 Terrabay ballot measure, and landslide
liabilities.
Director smith stated that Phase I of the Terrabay development does
not affect the Indian midden, and explained that what was being
referred to as a burial ground was actually a garbage dump. She
further explained that the EIR called for further study which is
underway by Mr. Miley Holman, an archaeologist.
At the request of the Commission, Mr. Foott further explained where
the four areas of benching would occur and the location of the
retaining wall.
The Commission discussed with Mr. Yee dirt hauling which will be done
on site.
In response to the Commission, Mr. Walsh indicated it would take two
to three years for the revegatation on the slopes to take hold.
The Commission concluded that items that still need further
discussion were architecture and other on-site project details.
Motion-Mantegani/Second Terry: To continue the HCP compliance,
Terrabay Precise Plan PP-88-18, and SA-88-104 to the March 9, 1989
Planning Commission meeting. Unanimously approved voice vote.
ITEMS FROM STAFF:
Director smith reminded the Commission to let staff know if anyone
was interested in attending the League of California cities Planning
Commissioners Institute conference in April. She also announced that
the "Residential Design Guidelines" booklet was selected by the Bay
Area Planning Directors' Association as the best example of its kind.
ITEMS FROM THE COMMISSION:
Chairman Zellmer suggested a discussion of the timeline be scheduled
as an agenda item at a future meeting.
Regarding Terrabay, Chairman Zellmer announced that the public may
submit written questions to staff at this time for response at the
next meeting. Questions should be of matters not yet addressed.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Zellmer adjourned the meeting at 11:40 p.m. to March 9,
1989, 7:00 p.m.
n T. Smith, Secretary
anning Commission
City of South San Francisco
/~?\~
-,...""..,.J.V f'
~ M-d
l'~l -
t V ~ '1
A~an Ze,'~mer, Chairman
plann}#g Commission
City &f South San Francisco
AZ:JTS:sp
3/2/89 Special Mtg.
Page 4 of 4 Pages