Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11.02.95 Minutes MINUTES SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING COMMISSION November 2, 1995 CALL TO ORDER: 7:30 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Lucchesi, Vice-Chairman Warren, Commissioners Barnett, DeZordo, Masuda, Padreddii and Romero. MEMBERS ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: Planning Division: Steve Solomon Larry Kasparowitz Larrisa Seto Jim Fitzpatrick Richard Harmon Ron Petrocchi Assistant City Attorney Fire Department Engineering Division Police Department CHAIRMAN COMMENTS CONSENT CALENDAR - PUBLIC HEARING - AGENDA ITEMS 24 Summit Court, Cadiz Residence, PUD-95-48 Planned Unit Development to allow a 350 sq. ft. family room addition onto the rear of a residence located in an existing PUD in accordance with the provisions of SSFMC Section 20.84.030. 229 Littlefield, Simeon Properties, UP-94-972/Mod 2 Use Permit Modification to allow signage over truck docks at multi-tenant building in accordance with the provisions of SSFMC Chapter 20.91. 176-180 Gateway Blvd., Olympian Oil Company, UP-95-997/Mod 1 Use Permit Modification to allow phased construction of UP-95-997/Mod 1 in accordance with the provisions of SSFMC Chapter 20.91. (Continuance requested to December 7, 1995) Chairman Lucchesi asked if the Commission wanted to review any items on Consent Calendar. Commissioner DeZordo asked to review Item 1. PUD-95-48. Motion-Warren/Second-Barnett: Motion to approve consent calendar; UP-94-972/Mod 2 was approved and UP-95-997/Mod 1 was continued to December 7, 1995 PC meeting. 24 Summit Court, Cadiz Residence, PUD-95-48 Planned Unit Development to allow a 350 sq. ft. family room addition onto the rear of a residence located in an existing PUD in accordance with the provisions of SSFMC Section 20.84.030. Chairman Lucchesi open the public hearing. Chief Planner Solomon presented the staff report. Commission and staff discussed ways to streamline single familylsmall amount of square footage additions and only bring to Planning Commission large scale of additions. Commission agreed to continue to bring small items on consent calendar. Commissioner Masuda asked why there were no windows. Applicant responded they have 14% ventilation now and 15 % is only permitted due to Title 24 State law. Chairman suggested that applicant and owner should consider a window. Motion-Warren/Second-Barnett: Motion to approve PUD-95-48 based on the findings contained in the staff report and subject to the conditions of approval. It was unanimously approved by voice vote. PUBLIC HEARING - AGENDA ITEMS 2211 Gellert Blvd., Ling Nam Noodle House, UP-93-939/Mod 1 Considering a recommendation to City Council regarding the of Revocation of a Use Permit Modification (allowing for operation of a restaurant during the hours between midnight and 6 a.m.) in accordance with SSFMC Section 20.91.030. Chairman Lucchesi opened the public hearing. Interim Planner Kasparowitz presented the staff report. Assistant City Attorney Seto outlined the process of the evidentiary hearing. She noted that information will be given by Staff, applicant, and others; the Commission can ask questions to clarify information, and take any information as long as it is relevant; the Planning Commission will then decide in open session whether or not to revoke or modify the permit. Sgt. Petrocchi presented a revised report from the Police Department and reviewed the history of incidents that had occurred since March 1995. He had spoken with neighborhood community representatives, and applicant's attorney; the property owner has written a letter in favor of the business closing between the hours of midnight to 6 am. The Police Department recommends revocation of the use permit to operate after midnight, due to recent and past violent incidents and the potential of future violent activities. He noted that the majority of incidents occur after midnight. Page 2 of 6 Pages PC Meeting of 11/2/95 Representing the Applicant, and Speaking against revocation: Mr. John Mangini, Attorney 333 Gellert Blvd. #200 Daly City, CA 94015 Representing the Owner: Manton Wong Gellert Square Speaking against revocation: Belinda Nacilla, Business Owner 994 Gellert Blvd.,Daly City, CA 94015 Annando Gonzales Co-Owner of Security Co. 713 W. Orange Ave., SSF Isidro Protasio 3 Pisa Court, SSF Mr. Gennan Palabyab Editor in Chief of Manila Bulletin USA 363 E. Grand Ave., SSP Bette Mesina 305 Serano, SSF Mr. Mangini addressed a correction in the findings for revocation, and noted that a new security service company had been obtained in the past month and that steps had been taken to prevent any further incidents. Mr. Wong expressed concern with the public safety and supports recommendation from the Police Department. Ms. Nacilla reported on the affects on the business if hours are shorten. She felt they are not the cause, but also the victim of this problem. They felt confident that the new security guards hired improved the safety of the family restaurant, and asked that they be allowed to keep the existing hours of business. Mr. Gonzales described the services provided by their company, which is listed with the SSF Police Dept. They have metal detectors and radio communication and have 3 persons & a supervisor on duty from 10:00 pm thru 5:00 am. The Police Dept. is called immediately when necessary. Mr. Protasio commented on his concerns and noted that with improved security this business will improve. He stated there are 24-hour businesses in the area and closing this business is not a solution to the problem. Mr. Palabyab, presented his concern and felt this could be considered as a business management problem and asked the Commission to put them on a probationary period with the new security service, rather than closing the business for those hours. Ms. Mesina, a client of the restaurant and financial advisor to business owner, suggested that the property owner place better lighting in the parking lot and noted that the owners were victims not the cause of the problem. Interim Planner Kasparowitz corrected Finding 2 to read: "That at least three weapon incidents had been reported, one of which involved the discharge of a firearm. " Chainnan Lucchesi closed the public hearing. Page 3 of 6 Pages PC Meeting of 11/2/95 Vice-Chairman Warren asked Sgt. Petrocchi of the signage and he responded that it had been taken care of. She asked if there were any decreases in incidents since the security guards were employed. Sgt. Petrocchi responded that the night shift Police Officers had indicated the new guard service has made a positive presence in the area; they had reported no significant incidents but he felt it was too early to say for sure, since the new service had only been there four weeks. She asked how the Police Department would feel of continuing operation with a probationary period. Sgt. Petrocchi noted the Police Chief recommended that the Planning Commission grant the Police Department authority to cause an immediate abatement should a significant incident occur; they would be closed after midnight effective immediately until they came back to a public hearing. Discussion continued on closing down the business for a specified period of hours as a solution. Applicant's attorney noted the applicant was willing to work with Planning Division and Police Department's staff in hope to keep the business open. Vice-Chairman Warren explained that the Planning Commission is a land use body and because of the surrounding residential area this business' problems are of great concern. Discussion continued by the Commission and Sgt. Petrocchi on the amount of guards and hours of operation when the incidents occurred, and possible City's liability should another incident occur. Chairman Lucchesi asked if the Commission could impose a new condition for a probationary period. Assistant City Attorney Seto explained that this was an evidentiary hearing and if the Commission wished to modify the use permit they would need to continue this item, and notice the meeting as a modification to the use permit. Chairman Lucchesi clarified that the Commission's action would be a recommendation to the City Council. Commissioner Romero reviewed the history of the use, as it first came to the Planning Commission as an illegal use (business hours opened from midnight to 6:00 am) and how the modification then came before the Commission for approval, and even at that time there were problems. There were additional problems that occurred after the modification was approved and the guards were then hired. Commissioner Romero understands that the business owners are the victims, but the people out in the parking lot need to behave themselves. Mr. Gonzales noted that the new security service has a good record of keeping problems under control, and his guards call the Police Department immediately when needed. Commissioner Romero's initial concern is the environment harmful to the residents and businesses nearby. Chairman Lucchesi also reviewed the history of the use, and noted that this is a good business and he is optimistic because of the evidence of a turning point due to the new security guard service. Chairman Lucchesi noted that if the Commission does not recommend revocation to Council, they will not see this issue. Commissioner Barnett suggests that they continue this and hold a special meeting with City Council; he felt the problems are of a serious nature to the public health and welfare, and a potential dangerous situation to innocent people. Chairman Lucchesi explained that by recommending revocation they are moving ahead with the issue of notifying the City's elected officials of a problem that they should deal with. Commissioners agreed. Vice-Chairman Warren recommended that in forwarding the revocation recommendation to the City Council, that it be clearly pointed out that there is a new guard company. She emphasized that the Council needs to know the alternatives, not just closing down the business during those hours; but that the Planning Page 4 of 6 Pages PC Meeting of 11/2/95 Commission is recommending that specific conditions, "allowing the Police Department to act quickly", be attached should continued operation be granted. Vice-Chairman Warren noted that these meeting minutes should be complete when they go before City Council. Chairman Lucchesi noted that the way the use permit was granted there were certain steps given should problems occur and they are at a point where the recommendation of revocation to Council with list of concerns and possible alternatives needs to go ahead. The Commission agreed that if the Council did not wish to revoke the use permit, that the Planning Commission strongly recommends that the Police Department be given the ability to immediately shut down the business between the hours of midnight and 6:00 am until the Planning Commission holds a public hearing. Assistant City Attorney Seto advised that a consensus of a recommendation to Council with the stipulations is needed. Chief Planner Solomon advised that the motion would cite testimony heard, and the staff report, and based on those the Commission makes findings as attached to staff report and then makes the recolnmendation to Council. Motion-Warren/Second-Romero: Motion that Planning Commission recommends to the City Council revocation of Use Permit UP-93-939/Modification 1 allowing for the operation of the restaurant during the hours of midnight to 6:00 a.m., based on the testimony heard this evening, the information and facts contained in the staff report, the findings, as corrected, attached to the staff report. If the City Council does not revoke the permit, the Commission further recommends the Council modify the permit conditions such that continued operation between midnight and 6:00 a.m. be contingent upon the successful service of the guards company, and that the Police Chief be given the authority to enforce immediate closure between midnight and 6:00 a.m. should another significantly major incident occur and the application return to the Planning Commission for a subsequent revocation hearing. Motion approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: Chairman Lucchesi, Vice-Chairman Warren, Commissioners Barnett, DeZordo, Masuda, Padreddii and Romero. NOES: none ABSENT: none ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS Items from Staff: Chief Planner Solomon reported that an Standard Builders filed an application for the Silver Terrace Subdivision and PUD off of Chestnut. He also reported meeting with a real estate consultant looking for a five acre site for a super grocery store in northern part of SSFIColma area. Lastly, Planning staff and City Attorney's office, at the City Manager's direction, had been preparing a study of zoning changes to increase zoning flexibility in the Old Town area, particularly for existing properties. Items from Commission: Chairman Lucchesi asked what became of the Lucky's store? Chief Planner Solomon responded that they had looked at the Shearwater site, Terrabay site, and CalWater property on Chestnut near El Camino Real, also a property in Colma off of Hillside Blvd. near SSF. Page 5 of 6 Pages PC Meeting of 11/2/95 Commissioner DeZordo asked to clarify the specifics in the study being done of the Old Town area? Chief Planner Solomon responded that the basis of the list compiled was to note various concerns causing problems in the neighborhood; such as fences higher than 3' in height in front yards, parking on & off street, accessory units at rear yards particularly those on Lanes. Chief Planner Solomon explains that the information would be background material for Council to discuss complaints about zoning requirements. Chainnan Lucchesi asked if these changes will alleviate the use of the PUD for some of the difficult items in the Old Town area. Adjournment Motion-Lucchesi/Second-Barnett: To adjourn the meeting at 9: 10 PM to November 16, 1995. It was unanimously approved by voice vote. Steve Solomon, Secretary Planning Commission City of South San Francisco JL:SS:rp Page 6 of 6 Pages PC Meeting of 11/2/95