Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10.17.91 Minutes MINUTES SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting of October 17, 1991 CALL TO ORDER: 8:05 P.M. (The meeting started at a later time due to a BART presentation,) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman DeZordo, Commissioners Boblitt, Mantegani, Warren, Wendler and Zellmer. ABSENT: Vice- Chairman Matteucci Building Division Police Department Fire Department Steve Solomon Maureen K. Morton Steve Carlson Susy Kalkin Ray V onDohren Richard Harmon Jeff Baca Ron Petrocchi J. Fitzpatrick ALSO PRESENT: Planning Division Engineering Division CHAIRMAN COMMENTS APPROVAL OF MINUTES of September 19, 1991 and October 3, 1991 Motion-Zellmer/Second-Mantegani: To approve the minutes of September 19, 1991 as presented. Unanimously approved by voice vote. Commissioners Warren and Wendler abstained from voting since they were not present at the September 19, 1991 meeting. ABSENT: Vice-Chairman Matteucci. Motion-Mantegani/Second- Warren: To approve the minutes of October 3, 1991 as presented. Unanimously approved by voice vote. Commissioner Boblitt abstained from voting since she was not present at the October 3, 1991 meeting. ABSENT: Vice-Chairman Matteucci. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS AGENDA ITEMS - PUBLIC HEARINGS 2298 Gellert Boulevard. McDonald's Corp.. UP-91-895. Negative Declaration No. 721 Use Permit, design review approval and environmental determination of same to allow the modification of the Use Permit to permit addition of a drive-through window to an existing Page 1 of 9 Pages PC Meeting of 10/17/91 fast food restaurant with related changes to the landscaping, circulation and parking areas in the C-1 Zone District in accordance with provisions of SSFMC Section 20.22,040( c) and 20.91.07-0. October 17, 1991 staff report presented by Associate Planner Kalkin. Applicant: Diana Byers 2298 Gellert Blvd. SSF Mrs. Byers gave a brief description of the project. She stated that the staff report gave an accurate history of the case and agreed with all of staff's recommendations and conditions. Chairman DeZordo read a letter into the record objecting to this project from Mrs. Margaret Sherman, #1 Appian Way, South San Francisco. The following people spoke in favor of the project: Robert C. Stevens 2435 Tipperary Avenue SSF PattiJ. Shelley 2435 Tipperary Avenue SSF Charles A. Theiss 2601 Donegal Avenue SSF Eloise Kee 2342 Greendale Drive SSF Albert N. Waters 2266 Shannon Drive SSF Annie Garry 2455 Unwin Court SSF Warren Colbert 3770 Callan Blvd SSF Kurt Hausworth 156 Santa Clara Brisbane Al Dehm 330 Arbor Drive SSF Commissioner Zellmer stated he was in favor of the project and that the community was also in favor of approving this project. Commissioner Warren, also in favor of the project, stated she was impressed with community involvement and input and also appreciated the willingness of the applicant to work with the Design Review Board and staff to bring this project to this point. Commissioner Wendler explained she was a strong neighborhood advocate but this project did not conform with the Zoning Ordinance since there were 14 parking spaces less than required. She was concerned about setting a precedent in the Westborough area. Because of the lack of 14 parking spaces and the fact that the Westborough area might end up with quite a few fast food places with no means of saying "no", Commissioner Wendler opposed the project stating that this was a professional land use decision and not a personal one. Commissioner Mantegani, at the onset opposed this project, felt that all his concerns had Page 2 of 9 Pages PC Meeting of 10/17/91 been addressed and now favored approving this project. Commissioner Boblitt stated that when McDonald's first was proposed the people in the Westborough area opposed having fast food restaurants in this area. It was approved but without a drive-through window. Why was the community now in favor of a drive-through window? Commissioner Boblitt stated that the City should not bend to special interest groups and that she could not support this project in clear conscience. Chairman DeZordo was satisfied with the staff report and happy with the project. Motion- Warren/Seconded-Zellmer: To approve Negative Declaration No. 721. Approved by the following roll call vote. AYES: Chairman DeZordo, Commissioners Warren, Mantegani and Zellmer. NOES: Commissioners Boblitt and Wendler, ABSENT: Vice- Chairman Matteucci. Motion- Warren/Seconded-Zellmer: To approve UP-91-895 and the design review based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the staff report. Approved by the following roll call vote. AYES: Chairman DeZordo, Commissioners Warren, Mantegani and Zellmer. NOES: Commissioners Boblitt and Wendler. ABSENT: Vice-Chairman Matteucci. 300 South Airport Boulevard, Chevron USA, Inc., UP-90-879/Mod 1 Use Permit Modification and design review approval to allow the replacement of a canopy at an existing gasoline service station in the P-C Zone District in accordance with provisions of SSFMC Sections 20.24.030(c) and 20.91.020. October 17, 1991 staff report presented by Senior Planner Carlson. Representing the applicant: Robert Reed Robert Lee & Assoc. 1137 No. McDowell Petaluma Mr. Reed stated the applicant agreed with all conditions and he was available for any questions the Commission might have. Motion-Zellmer/Seconded-Mantegani: To approve UP-90-879/Mod 1 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the staff report. Unanimously approved by voice vote. ABSENT: Vice-Chairman Matteucci. 26 Estate Court Ronald and Lilia Herrera, UP-91-902 Use Permit and design review approval to allow the addition of a patio enclosure which exceeds standards to an existing single-family home in the R-1 Zone District in accordance Page 3 of 9 Pages PC Meeting of 10/17/91 with provisions of SSFMC 20.71.030(m). Motion-Zellmer/Seconded- Warren: To continue this project to November 7, 1991. Unanimously approved by voice vote. ABSENT: Vice-Chairman Matteucci. 300 Point San Bruno Boulevard. Pacific Bell (Genentech. Owner). UP-91-905 Use Permit and design review approval to allow the installation of a utility building with related landscaping in the P- I Zone District in accordance with provisions of SSFMC Section 20.32.030(b), October 17, 1991 staff report presented by Senior Planner Carlson. Senior Planner Carlson read into record a letter from Isabel Sewell, 333 Pt. San Bruno Boulevard, opposing the project. Representing the applicant: Jose Albaro Project Mgr for Pacific Bell 2600 Camino Ramon San Ramon Mr. Albaro thanked staff for a favorable recommendation. He stated that this state of the art project will advance data communications services to the Point San Bruno area. He further stated that the building would be on Genentech property and would not only serve Genentech but other businesses in the area. Representing the applicant: Mr. Hock, Architect 25 Kearny St., Ste. 100 San Francisco Mr. Hock spoke briefly about the selection of the building and the location of the condenser and generator and also about the noise factor. Commissioner Boblitt excused herself from voting on this case because of a conflict of interest. Chairman DeZordo questioned staff about Genentech having a master plan. Senior Planner Carlson stated that staff was not aware of a master plan. He further stated that there are about 24 buildings and that now would be a good idea to entertain the idea of a master plan. Planner Carlson explained that the Design Review Board regarded this building as an accessory building. Pacific Bell did not have much choice in the selection since Genentech wanted it to be closer to the street. Motion-Mantegani/Seconded-Zelhner: To approve UP-91-905 based on the findings and subject to the conditions as contained in the staff report. Unanimously approved by voice Page 4 of 9 Pages PC Meeting of 10/17/91 vote. ABSTAINED: Commissioner Boblitt. ABSENT: Vice-Chairman Matteucci. 672 Spruce Avenue. Carlos T. Delfino Appeal of the Chief Planner's decision not to allow conversion of a legal-sized garage into living area with the retention of a substandard-sized garage with insufficient backup distance for an existing single-family home in accordance with provisions of SSFMC Section 20.90.020(b ), October 17, 1991 staff report presented by Senior Planner Morton. Senior Planner Morton stated that staff had received one letter that agreed with the decision of the Chief Planner and further indicated that if the Commission approved this appeal, staff should be directed to prepare a Zoning Amendment. Applicant: Carlos Delfino 672 Spruce Avenue SSF Mr. Delfino explained why he was appealing the decision of the Chief Planner. He stated that it was a relatively simple maneuver to get a vehicle into the garage and that he thought there was sufficient depth. Mr. Delfino stated he had discussed this with the Engineering staff which found no objection to this parking arrangement. He stated that flexibility should be given to single-family homes and that this was an improvement to this site. When asked by Chairman DeZordo what the purpose of the addition was, Mr. Delfino answered that this was only for his family and that he had no plans to rent it. Chief Planner Solomon clarified the difference between the case being discussed and a variance. He further stated there would be no conditions on this project; the Commission either agreed or disagreed with the interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance. Speaking for the project: Steve Sowa 664 Spruce Avenue SSF Mr. Sowa stated that he had had some concerns about the possibility of a second unit but Mr. Delfino had improved the property and saw no reason why this should not be approved. He further stated that Spruce Avenue has a parking problem. Chief Solomon eXplained to the Commission that if they felt this resolution to the parking issue should be permitted, staff should be directed to change the code to permit. Commissioner Boblitt stated this project did not meet the requirements and that she did not want to reduce the size of garages. Page 5 of 9 Pages PC Meeting of 10/17/91 Commissioner Mantegani's concern was that if this appeal was approved to allow a 17-foot garage, then another applicant might request the Commission to allow a 16-foot garage and then we would be turning garages into storage areas. Commissioner Wendler agreed with this theory and further stated that the City should be upgrading neighborhoods and not lowering standards. She further explained that someone might buy this home at a later date and convert it to two units. Commissioner Wendler stated there have been many complaints about second units. She said she would vote to uphold the decision of the Chief Planner, Commissioner Wendler adTyised staff that she '.Tlould like to discuss the 900 angle and consider amending the code at a later date. Commissioner Warren asked the applicant why he could not keep the legal garage and convert the substandard garage to living area. The applicant answered that this would not allow the required second legal parking space, Commissioner Warren stated that unless the requirements were changed there was nothing the Commission could do. She further stated that she did believe that the Zoning Ordinance should be changed even though she did sympathize with the applicant. Commissioner Zellmer says there is a certain amount of interpretation for the backup distance and angle but that there is none required for the required size of 18 feet. Chairman DeZordo asked the applicant if he could add a foot to the garage in order to be in conformance. Senior Planner Morton answered that if the applicant could provide 25 feet backup distance and 18 feet interior, although based on the language of the Code, any change to the garage may require the full 20" depth. Mr. Delfino stated that this would probably be more costly. Motion-Boblitt/Seconded-Zellmer: To deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Chief Planner. Unanimously approved by voice vote. ABSENT: Vice-Chairman Matteucci. Chairman DeZordo called for a 10-minute break at 9:32 P.M. Chairman DeZordo reconvened at 9:40 P.M. Study Session - Review and discussion of decks. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. He further explained detached and attached accessory structures/decks. Commissioner Warren stated that she was in favor of a major code amendment and was concerned with protecting people's privacy, She wanted to stress that whether they were single-family homes or multi-unit developments, that open space areas not infringe on their Page 6 of 9 Pages PC Meeting of 10/17/91 neighbors. Chairman DeZordo questioned whether this issue could be handled by the Design Review Board. Senior Planner Carlson answered that the City guidelines do not address decks. Commissioner Wendler asked that the input of the Design Review Board be included before returning to the Commission. She further stated that decks are one of the fastest growing home improvements in the country today. Chairman DeZordo stated that if had to prioritize time for staff, he would like to see staff work on open space. Commissioner Boblitt stated that she would like to see this study incorporate greenhouses. Senior Planner Carlson explained to the Commission that staff proposed addressing only single-family homes and duplexes. He further stated that it could be put into next year's work program if the Commission so desired to include all areas and/or a broader study scope. Commissioner Warren stated that the Commission should take a look at green houses also, The City needs standards to make sure that they do not turn into living areas. The Commission should look at both decks and green houses. In answer to Chairman DeZordo's question about identifying problems with greenhouses, Senior Planner Carlson stated that one case would be coming up which is the Herrera project. He also eXplained that given the adopted work program, staff is pressed for time and that greenhouses should be treated as a separate matter. Commissioner Wendler explained that her house was on a slope and that her deck was higher than the fence and for privacy of her neighbors a wall was placed on the back. Commissioner Mantegani proposed that if the deck is less than 2 feet in height there should be no problem, but if it is attached to a second floor, it should go before the Design Review Board. Also, if the Commission does adopt standards, then those projects should not have to come before the Comlnission. Chief Planner Solomon reiterated the 6 issues concerning decks: aesthetics, encroachment, invasion of privacy, provision of useable open space and using landscaping area. Speaker: Ernst Strehle 321 Valverde SSF Page 7 of 9 Pages PC Meeting of 10/17/91 Mr. Strehle stated that he had built a deck on his property. About two months ago he was told that he could built this deck without a permit. He would like to finish the deck one way or another. Chief Planner Solomon advised the Commission that there was a red tag on this project; it does not meet the code today. Items from Commission Commissioner Mantegani said he had been approached in the atrium by Mr. Warren Colbert, 3769 Gellert Boulevard. Mr. Colbert advised him that PG&E had put a meter box on Gellert Boulevard and when they did the work they did not fasten the cover tightly so when cars go by the box it rattles. Commissioner Wendler advised staff that there are two fish tanks on the outside of the Westborough Produce Market. She asked Senior Planner Morton if they intended to keep the tanks outside overnight. Planner Morton answered in the affirmative, Commissioner Wendler stated that they were not only unattractive but that young people could break into the tanks; that they definitely should be brought in at night. Planner Morton stated that City Council did agree to display cases and that staff could not make distinctions. She advised that the Commission could bring this case up for review. Chief Planner Solomon also advised the Commission that they could interpret the conditions and say that this did not meet the conditions. Also the owner could be advised of the upcoming situation and leave it up to the owner to correct the condition. Commissioner Wendler then stated that this was not an offense towards staff but they made a big deal over one foot (the Delfino case) and the McDonalds project was 14 parking spaces short and yet it was approved. Chief Planner Solomon eXplained that the added 56 square feet to the building floor area was not sufficient to trigger changing their parking requirements and they technically conformed to the code. Commissioner Wendler went on to say that she resented being put in this position as a Commissioner; that the ordinance should be interpreted the same for all cases and that the City should not pick and choose. Commissioner Warren asked staff to check an illegal unit to the right of 672 Spruce Avenue. She stated that she was not aware of any pressure on staff to have the McDonald's project passed. The Commission then discussed as to whether staff had been subject to pressure in the McDonald's case. Page 8 of 9 Pages PC Meeting of 10/17/91 Chairman DeZordo adjourned the meeting at 10:22 P.M. to November 7, 1991 at 7:30 P,M, I ,~ f. Steve Solomon, Secretary Planning Commission City of South San Francisco Michael DeZordo, C airman Planning Commission City of South San Francisco MD:SS:ab Page 9 of 9 Pages PC Meeting of 10/17/91