Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02.02.95 Minutes MINUTES SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting of February 2, 1995 CALL TO ORDER: 7:30 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Mantegani, Vice-Chairman Lucchesi, Commissioners DeZordo, Padreddii, Romero, Warren and Zellmer. MEMBERS ABSENT: ALSO PRESENT: Planning Division Steve Solomon Steve Carlson Steve Padovan Steve Mattas Dennis Chuck Ron Petrocchi F. Lagomarsino City Attorney Engineering Division Police Department Fire Department CHAIRMAN COMMENTS APPROVAL OF MINUTES of November 3, 1995 and November 17, 1995 No action was taken on the minutes of November 3, 1995 due to a lack of quorum. Motion-Warren/Second-DeZordo: To approve the minutes of November 17, 1995 as presented. They were unanimously approved by voice vote. PUBLIC HEARING - AGENDA ITEMS 344 Commercial Avenue. Navarro Residence (R.I. & June Navarro). V-94-323 Variance from SSFMC Section 20.74.120(c) to allow two parking spaces in the required frontyard setback in the R-3 Zone District. Steve Padovan presented the staff report. Chief Planner Solomon advised the Commission that while Commissioner Romero had not been present at the January 19, 1995 meeting when this case was presented~ he had listened to the tape of the meeting and was now eligible to vote on this matter. Page 1 of 5 Pages PC Meeting of 2/2/95 Applicant: R. Navarro 344 Com:rrlercial Avenue SSF Mr. Navarro stated that it would be a financial hardship to change the storage room at the rear of his lot back to a garage. He asked the Commission to help him in this situation and to help the handicapped. Commissioner Warren stated that under the current conditions, there was nothing they could do. She asked Steve Mattas, City Attorney, if they were in conflict with ADA. Steve Mattas answered, "No." Commissioner Warren than asked staff if the Commission denied this application they would like to direct staff to take a look at the mechanism whereby a person with a legitimate disability, confirmed by a physician and an agency like the Motor Vehicle Department, could apply for this type of variance and it could be granted as long as the disabled person lived on the property and when this was no longer the case the property would be restored to its original condition. Chief Planner Solomon advised that it could be done as a special permit or code provision. Commissioner Padreddii asked to make it a special permit for handicapped parking, however, the applicant must have a handicap sticker and the Commission could approve it under handicap regulations. Chairman Lucchesi asked about the current handicap striping. Richard Harmon, Engineering Division, stated that in 1991 the Engineering Division received a request from Councilman Drago to look into the matter. It was decided that it was justifiable to paint the curb. The decision was made by the City Engineer. Steve Mattas said that everyone must abide by the Zoning Ordinance but if staff could make findings for approval then the Commission could approve it. He then asked the Commission that if a change was made to the Zoning Ordinance did the Commission want to review each case or could it be an administrative decision. It was the Commission's consensus that it did not need to come back to the Commission as long as the application met all the criteria. Commissioner Warren asked if this variance was approved and a zoning amendment was adopted at a later date, could this variance be invalidated at that time and require the applicant to come back to the Commission. Chief Planner Solomon advised that staff could condition the variance stating that once the ordinance is changed the applicant must return to the Commission. Commissioner DeZordo stated that this was not a typical planning area in South San Francisco and that the Commission needed to be flexible. Commissioner Romero agreed and said that the Commission needs to be flexible and have a reasonable attitude towards this kind of application. Page 2 of 5 Pages PC Meeting of 2/2/95 Commissioner Lucchesi also agreed about being flexible but said that he thought the findings of approval were skimpy and that he would like to see the policy makers make the policy and that the Commission was not in a position to do this. Chief Planner Solomon said it would take approximately 6 weeks to come back to the Commission with a code amendment. Richard Harmon, Engineering Division, stated that it would cost approximately $2,000.00 to put the driveway in. He was concerned that if the current resident vacated the property what mechanism could the City use to force the new owners to take the driveway out at a cost of about $1,500.00. Mr. Mattas stated that perhaps a lien could be put on the property. Mr. Harmon thought that for all practical purposes the driveway would be in for good. Instead, the applicant could install a handicap ramp where the sidewalk is painted. Motion-DeZordo/Second-Padreddii: To approve V-94-323 based on the findings and subject to conditions of approval. Conditions are as follows: "1. The curb cut shall not exceed 20 feet in width. 2. This application shall be reviewed five (5) years from the date of approval (February 2, 2000). 3. Should Mr. and Mrs. Navarro no longer reside at 344 Commercial Avenue, then the curb and sidewalk shall be reconstructed to its original form." It was approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners DeZordo, Romero and Padreddii: NOES: Chairman Lucchesi and Vice-Chairman Warren. ABSENT: Commissioner Mantegani. Chief Planner Solomon advised that he would put the zoning amendment on the work program and present it to the City Council. The Commission agreed. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS Review of the Draft EIR for the BART -SFO Extension Senior Planner Kalkin presented the staff report. A brief discussion followed regarding the easement for the Boy's Club on Orange Avenue. In answer to Commissioner DeZordo's question about the comments on the station design, Susy Kalkin stated that Larry Kasparowitz' (City's Landscape Architect) comments would be going to the City Council. Steve Mattas discussed the legality of condemning easements or the temporary use of easements (construction easements). In regards to the Commission's concerns regarding the residents whose homes might be in jeopardy, he stated that whatever BART would take from you they would pay the actual market value. Regarding the financing of BART; Susy Kalkin said it was very tentative at this point. Page 3 of 5 Pages PC Meeting of 2/2/95 It was the Commission's consensus that BART be built underground. The Commission then directed staff to notify the property owners of the residences that will be impacted by the construction easements. Mr. Solomon advised that staff could notify,the churches, schools, and other institutions in the Sunshine Gardens area. Commissioner Lucchesi stated that he would submit his written comments on the EIR to staff. Chief Planner Solomon advised that BART had to receive all comments' by March 13, 1995. A concern of the Commission was the parking of non-BART riders in the BART parking lots. Items from Staff- Chief Planner Solomon advised the Commission that BART will be holding a public hearing at the South San Francisco Conference Center on February 15, 1995. fIe then gave an update on the following projects: Kaiser, Sheal'Water and Terrabay. He went on to state that Avis is ready to submit for a use permit, an application for a hotel at Oyster Point might be submitted at a future date and that Genentech has another building coming up which is a 40,000 sq. ft. addition to Building 3. He also said McDonald is looking at a new restaurant east of 101 sometime in the future. Chief Planner Solomon asked the Commission if they were available for a study session with the Kaiser people on February 23, 1995. Both Commissioners Padreddiiand Warren said they would be unable to attend. Commissioner Warren advised Ron Petrocchi, Police Department, that the gate to Terrabay had been cut and was open. Sgt. Petrocchi stated that Engineering could take care of that. Commissioner Warren said she would not be present at the March 2, 1995 Commission meeting. Commissioner DeZordo stated he had gotten a complaint from a homeowner who had appeared before the Design Review Board. A discussion ensured on the merits of the Design Review Board. The Commission thought that there could be a better way to process the applications perhaps meeting on a one-to-one basis instead of an applicant facing five boardmembers. The Commission directed staff to try to change the way the Design Review Board met with the homeowners with perhaps two DRB members meeting with the hnmeowner. Also it was suggested the DRB members introduce themselves to the homeowner and to advise them what the appeal period is and to try a more friendly approach. It was also suggested that perhaps a sUlVey could be given to the applicant asking them to answer questions regarding how they were treated. Senior Planner Kalkin stated that they had done a sUlVey about two years ago. Chief Planner Solomon said he would get a summary of that sUlVey to the Commission. Chief Planner Solomon suggested bringing the Design Review Board guidelines Page 4 of 5 Pages PC Meeting of 2/2/95 to the Commission. Then if staff found that the homeowner conformed with these guidelines staff could approve the application, if not, the applicant could go to the DRB. Motion-Warren/Second-Romero: To adjourn the meeting to February 16, 1995. It was unanimously approved by voice vote. Chairman Lucchesi adjourned the meeting at 9:35 P.M. ~m~tV Planning Commission City of South San Francisco JL:SS:ab Page 5 of 5 Pages PC Meeting of 2/2/95