Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12.02.99 Minutes CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 33 ARROYO DRIVE December 2, 1999 TAPE 1 CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The meeting was called to order at 7: 30 p.m. ROLL CALL / CHAIR COMMENTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioner Baldocchi, Commissioner Meloni, Commissioner Romero, Vice Chairperson Sim and Chairperson Honan MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioner D'Angelo and *Commissioner Teglia STAFF PRESENT: Planning Division: Chief Planner Sparks Steve Carlson Mike Upston City Attorney: Police Dept.: Water Quality: Adam Lindgren Sgt. Mike Massoni Ray Honan AGENDA REVIEW Chief Planner Sparks noted that there were no changes to the agenda. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of July 15, 1999 Regular Meeting, August 5, 1999 Special Meeting and August 12, 1999 Regular Meeting Minutes. 2. Ongpin- Ramon Palencia for Bamara, Inc.-owner Julio Donati-applicant 73-75 Camaritas Ave. UP-96-119/MODl 6 month review of Use Permit Modification to allow expansion of existing restaurant into adjacent space. 3. Oyster Point Business Park-Shelton Investments International/owner AMB Investment Management, LP/applicant 375-389 Oyster Point Blvd. UP-99-093 and Categorical Exemption Class 1 Section 15301 Use Permit allowing off-site parking at a multi-parcel industrial park at 375-389 Oyster Point Boulevard, in the Planned fudustrial (P-I) and Planned Commercial (P-C) zone districts, in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.24,20.32 and 20.74. (Recommend continuance to December 16,1999) APPROVED BY THE PlANNING COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 3,2000. Motion Sim / Second Meloni to approve the Consent Calendar. Approved by unanimous voice vote with Commissioners D'Angelo and Teglia being absent. Commissioner Romero abstained from the August 5,1999, minutes and Chairperson Honan abstained from the August 12, 1999, minutes. PUBLIC HEARING - AGENDA ITEMS 4. Jalisco Produce Market, Jose Ayar, Owner Roberto & Jose Ayar, Applicant 441 Grand Ave. UP-98-019 and Categorical Exemption: Class 11, Section 15311(c) Evidentiary Hearing to consider modifying or revoking Use Permit 98-019 which allows outside display of fresh produce. Senior Planner Upston presented the staff report. Chairperson Honan asked if the gate was weather resistant. Mr. Susa noted that the area where the proposed gate is going is an existing dock which was closed up per the request of his old tenants. He mentioned that the gate would go across the area and the forklift will put things onto the platform and it will be taken to the front of the store for display. He added that the gate would be closed when not in use. He mentioned that the gate is similar to security gates and it meets all gates. *Commissioner Teglia arrived at 7:45 p.m and noted that it was difficult to be in two places at once because of the City Council reorganization. Vice Chairperson Sim was inclined to modify the permit. Commissioner Romero agreed with Vice Chairperson Sim and noted that he was confused with the display cases and the construction of the units. He noted that he has reviewed the plans closely and is satisfied with the appearance. He added that the improvements that are proposed are also satisfactory and that the permit should be modified as suggested by staff. Motion Romero / Second Sim to modify the permit including the Police Department's memo in regard to delivery time constraints and that the conditions in the staff report be included into the conditions of approval for the permit. Commissioner Meloni asked if the signage was part of the modification. Senior Planner Upston replied that the applicant has signed a contract with the City and that the signage modifications are part of the approval. Commissioner Baldocchi asked if the 20 minute unloading limit was enough for the applicant due to the fact that time was the problem on Grand A venue. Commissioner Teglia noted that the problem was that the boxes were unloaded on the sidewalk and were blocking pedestrian access. He mentioned that the truck can leave after it is unloaded and the boxes can be loaded onto the forklift and taken into the building. Senior Planner Upston stated that the intent is that the forklift will cut the unloading time in half. Use Permit modified with additional conditions by unanimous voice vote with Commissioner D'Angelo being absent. 5. Taco Bell/Tricon Global Restaurants, Inc.-owner/applicant 465 EI Camino Real UP-99-024 & ND-99-024 APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 3,2000. Use Permit allowing a new fast food restaurant with a drive-through window and hours of operation until 2:00 a.m. and within 200 feet of a residential zoning district in accordance with SSFMC chapter 20.22.030 & 20.22.070. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. Hue Murphy, Vincent Murphy Incorporated, mentioned that they have been working on the circulation issues and they will be replacing existing building. He added that the new building will allow Taco Bell to operate the drive-through faster because of the new kitchen. He noted that the facility will have a prepay window that will help facilitate the movement of vehicles around the building. He proceeded to explain in detail the color of the building and the materials that would be used. He added that they are satisfied with the conditions of approval. He wanted to have a clear understanding of the traffic studies, because the staff report stated that one is not required and the conditions ask for a traffic study. He also asked if staff could give some additional information in regard to what exactly the wall should look like and how high it should be. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the condition should not be in the document because the site plan was revised. He added that staff recommends a fence of 8 feet or higher to provide a landscape screen to shield views of the drive-thTough lane from the neighboring residences. Public Hearing opened. Public Hearing closed. Commissioner Meloni asked if there were other redwood trees in the area since the applicant is proposing these trees on the site. He mentioned that these trees are fast growing and get substantially large. Senior Planner Carlson noted that it is not a preferred tree in the area and the applicant should get a different tree for the site. Commissioner Teglia noted that the trees in the area are pine trees. Commissioner Teglia asked if there was a specific condition restricting deliveries to certain hours. Senior Planner Carlson noted that there wasn't but that the deliveries would only be in the mOluing. He also mentioned that this could be added as a condition. Commissioner Teglia noted that it should say that deliveries be made before noon. Commissioner Teglia asked if the clear aluminum would be for all the window frames and the door frame. Mr. Murphy noted that this was correct. Commissioner Teglia suggested that the applicant go with a darker color for the window shading. Commissioner Teglia noted that the drive-through has been a problem and maximizing speed is going to improve the entire circulation problem. He questioned if the kitchen was large enough and advanced enough to handle the demand coming from the drive-through. Steve Wolshen, Taco Bell construction manager, noted that the dining area has been reduced from 46 seats to 30 seats which gives some more square footage. He added that there is a new kitchen that will reduce the amount of staff but they will be more efficient. Commissioner Teglia asked if the kitchen can reduce the drive-through line up to 2-3 cars and if the new kitchen can handle the large amount of orders that come from the drive-through window. Mr. Wolshen noted that it is capable of handling a large volume of orders and the purpose of the prepay window is to speed up the movement of vehicles around the building. He added that the building can handle twice the sales than it is anticipated to do. Chairperson Honan asked what the number of cars that are currently being serviced and what the projected number is. David Chu, Taco Bell restaurant support manager, noted that the pay window is to speed up the process. He proceeded to explain the process that the customer goes through. He mentioned that comparing this store to a Palo Alto store there is a minute and a half difference in service. Commissioner Teglia asked if the backlogging was due to the kitchen capacity. Mr. Chu noted that the new equipment is very efficient and speeds up the process. Mr. Wolshen stated that there is better equipment and the prepay window make everything move more smoothly. APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 3, 2000. Commissioner Romero noted that there was a conflict with the queuing lane and the parking lot. He mentioned that the drive-through line goes out to EI Camino Real and there is a problem for those that are parked because they won't be able to get out of their stall. He asked why the building was not redesigned in such a way that it would eliminate that conflict. Senior Planner Carlson noted that staff tried to get it to 7 stall spaces for a queue lane and the building could be moved forward further to extend the queue line. He added that the City has a drain line that runs near the front of the building and part of the requirement is that the applicant provide an easement for the storm drain line. Commissioner Meloni suggested that the building be shifted north with a queuing lane and a driveway lane and the parking would be on the southern side. Mr. Wolshen noted that all the options have been explored and what the Commission has before them is the best layout that they could come up with. Commissioner Romero noted that the Commission has an opportunity to fix the existing problem and it seems as though the same problem will be created. He added that the cars parked in the back of the building that are toward the shed will be blocked if there is queuing behind them. Senior Planner Carlson noted that in some jurisdictions managers have directed traffic and taken orders. He added that they have required it as a condition of approval and it has shown to be very successful. Commissioner Romero noted that this is not a reasonable solution. Commissioner Teglia added that it is not enforceable. Chairperson Honan asked if there were any accident reports for that site. Sergeant Massoni replied that he is not aware of any accident reports in the area. Commissioner Teglia suggested that it be referred back to the Design Review Board with the Commission's concerns. Commissioner Romero noted that this was more of a staff and applicant issue. Mr. Murphy noted that they have been working on the project for months. He added that there are parking requirements, setbacks, easements and the slope at the rear of the site that restricts them from other options. He mentioned that they tried perpendicular parking but there was not enough width on the site to accommodate this. Chairperson Honan asked why there are extra 4 parking spaces. Senior Planner Carlson noted that this has been done to meet current standards which caused the building size to be reduced. Chairperson Honan asked what the parking requirements were for the site. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the requirement is 1 stall space per 50 square feet. Commissioner Meloni noted that if queuing is a concern of the Commission then the parking stalls can be reduced to make this more efficient. Commissioner Teglia suggested requiring that the two windows be operating at all times to help speed up the movement of the queuing lane. Commissioner Romero asked if the parking stall angle could be changed so they do not back up directly into the queuing lane or maybe having some compact parking spaces. Senior Planner Carlson noted that those would require variances and compact parking spaces are not allowed. He mentioned that the City merged the compact and the standard parking spaces and came up with the current regulations which is a compromise between the two. Commissioner Teglia suggested eliminating parking in the rear and extending out the parking in the center. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the Commission can designate employee parking the stalls that they are most concerned with. He added that if the Commission was going to reduce the parking the case would have to be continued to add a variance to it. Assistant City Attorney Lindgren noted that staff would have to see if the property could satisfy the requirements for a variance. Commissioner Teglia supported conditioning the project with the employee parking designation. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the Commission can identify the stalls that they are concerned with and label them as employee parking. He suggested that the Commission can revisit the item in one year to see how the drive-through lane is working with the parking. Chairperson Honan liked the suggestion of designating some stalls employee parking. APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 3,2000. Commissioner Romero noted that EI Faro is going to do some remodeling and suggested that they get together to work something out with regard to having a shared access between them. Mr. Murphy noted that the condominium driveway separates the two parcels so this cannot be done. Motion Teglia / Second Sim to approve the use permit with additional conditions: 1. Changing the bright aluminum window mullions and door to a dark anodized or painted finish subject to staff approval 2. Deliveries are to be restricted prior to 11 :00 a.m. 3. Appropriate staffing to keep both drive-through windows open 4. Rear most parking stalls next to garbage shall be designated employee parking. 5. One year review of the Use Permit Approved by unanimous voice vote. Recess taken at 8:45 p.m. Recalled to order at 8:52 p.m. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 6. Items from Staff - None 7. Items from Commission a. Subcommittee Report Discussion of Planning Commission Bylaws, Rules & Procedures. Commissioner Meloni stated that the City Council wanted to review the bylaws and make a determination on them. Chairperson Honan noted that the Council did not make a determination on it but did see it. Chairperson Honan noted that City Attorney Mattas mentioned that the noticing requirement with regard to special meetings be changed to make it consistent with the Brown Act. She added that she agreed with the proposed change by the attorney. Assistant City Attorney Lindgren noted that the language would be changed in S2 and the first line would be revised to state that the Commission would get a 24 hour notice if a special meeting is called. He suggested that the language would be consistent with the CUlTent requirement under S2.56.050 that would make it identical to the provision. Commissioner Teglia noted that he had a number of comments and suggestions. He mentioned that study sessions and extra Commission meetings have been confusing in the last few years with meetings being scheduled by staff without Commission approval. He suggested that all special meetings should be agreed upon at a regular Planning Commission meeting and be made on a consensus of the Commission. Commissioner Romero disagreed with Commissioner Teglia because special meetings may be called by the Chairperson. He suggested that the bylaw be left as is because if the Commission tries to agree upon a date there may not be a special meeting. Commissioner Teglia noted that this was the point because the Commissioners have individual responsibilities and any special meeting should be scheduled with at least the majority of the Commission agreeing upon it. He added that it also be made at a convenient time for all the Commission and the only way to do this is if it is discussed at a regular meeting. Commissioner Baldocchi would prefer to be part of the decision making of when the meetings would be held. Vice Chairperson Sim asked Assistant City Attorney Lindgren to clarify some of the issues in regard to the Chairperson scheduling a meeting. he also asked if decisions could be made at Planning Commission meetings. Assistant City Attorney Lindgren noted that the Commission has used special meetings for informational purposes and added that there is not a prohibition against making decisions at special meetings. Vice Chairperson APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 3,2000. Sim noted that the Chairperson needs to have the flexibility of scheduling a meeting if necessary. Commissioner Meloni noted that there may be an emergency when a special meeting is needed and the Commission might be prohibited from doing such a thing. The Commission did not achieve consensus to change the language regarding svecial meetings. Commissioner Teglia noted that under S 1, Rules of Conduct, states that Commissioners are discouraged from suggesting any changes to the applicant of staff before the Commission has considered the project as a whole. He mentioned that one thing he was told by staff when he was first appointed was to raise the concerns to staff. Commissioner Meloni noted that the subject was not changing the actual design and if the context of the project is the concern then that is acceptable. Commissioner Teglia noted that a Commissioner should be able to tell staff to explore a specific idea. Commissioner Romero noted that the suggestions should be made at the meeting and they should have a consensus of the Commission. Commissioner Baldocchi questioned if a Commissioner is meeting with an applicant, can the Commissioner let ideas flow. Commissioner Romero noted that ideas are encouraged, not discouraged, but they should not go to staff without the rest of the Commissioners hearing it. Commissioner Teglia pointed out that S 1, page 4 of 5 refers to speaking to the press and that the spokesperson for the Commission is the Chairperson. He mentioned that he did not see the phrase referring to the Chairperson being the spokesperson in the copy of the bylaws that went to Council. He asked if anyone had a copy of what went to Council. Assistant City Attorney Lindgren noted that their office has the electronic copy of the bylaws and the only copy that would have been reproduced for the Council would have been the same set that is before the Commission. He added that this can be researched. Commissioner Teglia noted that everyone speaks for themselves and the Chairperson represents the Commission. He added that if a reporter asks what happened at the meeting a Commissioner can speak the for themselves of the facts of the public record. He noted that if there is a spokesperson there is always a majority and a minority opinion. He added that he has a problem with that phrase. He related that the press is part of the team and they should be allowed some access to other Commissioners. Commissioner Romero added that he does not see a problem with the Chairperson being the spokesperson for the Commission. Commissioner Meloni pointed out that if the press comes out and wants to ask a personal question it is fine, but if they want to know information of what happened with the Commission, then the Chairperson should be given that information. He noted that if the press asks what the Commission's position was on an item then it is up to the Chairperson to relate that position to the press. Commissioner Teglia noted that everyone has the right to speak because of the first amendment. Vice Chairperson Sim agreed with Commissioner Meloni's perspective because some type of formality needs to exist that has order to the body. He added that needs to be a formal order as to how things are done and the Chairperson has an important role in the Commission. Commissioner Teglia pointed out that it is a rule that is unenforceable and wrong. Commissioner Baldocchi mentioned that the bylaws came about as a reaction to some comments made by the press. She added that she is a strong believer in the first amendment and this does not take away anyone's freedom to speak. She believes that the intentions of the subcommittee were good and that they were doing what they felt was best for the Commission. She thought that the rules of conduct are not necessary and many of the revisions and updates that were made are good. She added that she wants to be able to speak for herself and not have someone else speak for her. She added that she does not have a problem with the Chairperson speaking for the Commission but she also wants to have the option of speaking to the press. Chairperson Honan noted that she concurred with the sub-committees recommendation and everyone does have the right to speak. Commissioner Teglia asked if the Chairperson's being responsible for relating the decisions of the Commission as a whole precludes any members from talking to the press and answering any questions they have. Assistant City Attorney Lindgren stated that the drafted provision does not prohibit Commissioners from speaking to the press APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 3,2000. and representing that they are expressing their own views. Commissioner Teglia asked if a Commissioner is prohibited, if asked by the press, to relate what happened at the meeting. Assistant City Attorney Lindgren stated that the provision does not specifically speak to that but it does suggest that the Chairperson shall be the spokesperson for the decisions as a whole. Commissioner Teglia asked how this is reconciled with the first amendment. Assistant City Attorney Lindgren stated that there is not a [lIst amendment problem because it is not prohibiting any Commissioner as an individual from expressing their personal views. He pointed out that it is simply directing that when repOliing on the conduct of a body it be defened to the Chairperson. He added that the Commissioners have the ability to express their views, to communicate with the press, and also to answer questions of the press. He added that the Commission has debated minutes when they summarize the actions that the Commission has taken, which has resulted in dozens of hours of discussion on how things were summarized. Vice Chairperson Sim stated that this is like a gentlemen's agreement where everyone should be honoring one another, and this should not be full of legalistic jargon. Commissioner Romero noted that the Chairperson is elected by the Commission as a leader and should convey the concerns and decisions of the Commission. He added that the Chairperson has the responsibility of conveying the decisions of the Commission and not their own personal opinions even if they did not agree with the Commission's decision. Commissioner Teglia agreed with this and wanted to get that clarified. Commissioner Teglia pointed out that S 1, under conduct, that refers to Commissioners raising issues at meetings only. He asked that staff respond to this because staff has asked Commissioners to go to them first so they can be prepared with a response. Commissioner Romero noted that it was discussed so that any potential agenda items that would require action by the Commission would be raised at a Commission meeting for discussion by the whole body. Commissioner Teglia added that if that is what the provision means it is o.k. but wanted it clarified if it had to do with a current item already on an agenda. Commissioner Baldocchi asked if an individual Commissioner has an item that they would like discussed, can the Commissioner request that the Commission hear it. Chief Planner Sparks replied that the Commissioners can do that. Commissioner Baldocchi asked if she agrees with this part of the bylaws, does forfeit the right that she has as a Commissioner. Commissioner Teglia added that when Council wants something agendised they refer it to the City Manager and then it is put on an agenda. Chief Planner Sparks stated that staff sets the agenda but it is in terms of applications and items that the Commission is aware of. Commissioner Baldocchi noted that it was her understanding based on conversations with public officials from other jurisdictions that every individual Commissioner has the privilege of putting an issue on an agenda. Assistant City Attorney Lindgren noted that the agendas are set by current planning applications, long term planning efforts and items that the Commission would like to have discussed. He clarified that under article VIII Commissioners are not prohibited to bring items to the attention of staff and fellow Commissioners. He noted that the issue was if an item can be placed on the agenda for action without the consensus of the colleagues. He pointed out that Items from Staff is specifically used for the Commissioners to bring up issues that they want to discuss in future agendas. Commissioner Teglia mentioned that a majority of the special meeting on April 19, 1999, that started the bylaws was discussion on communication and minutes. He noted that there was a lengthy discussion on how the minutes should be handled. He suggested that under the secretalies duties there should be something to the effect of having the minutes completed one week after the meeting, and available for approval at the next regular Planning Commission meeting. He added that the minutes are the Commission's work product and wanted to have the minutes under control. Commissioner Romero noted that it is addressed under article V that speaks to the Secretary keeping a record of all meetings. Commissioner Teglia suggested that performance guidelines be added to the article. He pointed out that staff has responsibilities and minutes have been set aside. He wanted to have the minutes approved by the APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 3, 2000. next Commission meeting. Chairperson Honan did not feel that the Commission knows, and does not need to know what the inter-workings of the Planning Division are. She added that the Commission can make staff have the minutes by a certain time. Commissioner Meloni noted that with the Board at his jurisdiction the minutes have to be done by the next meeting. He added that it might have to take an additional fee to be able to have the minutes at said meeting then it is done. Commissioner Baldocchi and Chairperson Honan asked if it was in the bylaws for that City. Commissioner Meloni noted that it was not and it was part of the procedure. He added that the staffing of the Planning Division is not an issue of the Commission but the minutes being available in a timely manner is very important. Chairperson Honan asked if a time limitation belong in the Commission bylaws. Assistant City Attorney Lindgren noted that the Commission has a concern in regard to the minutes and noted that it is not properly placed in the bylaws. He gave an example of the duties of the City Manager who is responsible of the City Council for administration of all affairs of the City. He added that it is within the power of the Commission to request and inform the City Manager and City Council, that in order for the Commission to do their job the minutes need to be done promptly. He added that the selection of the staff resources is within the authority of the City Manager. Commissioner Meloni asked if City Council minutes are done before the next meeting. Assistant City Attorney Lindgren noted that he would check into that question. Commissioner Teglia noted that it is a fine line that the Commission is dealing with and it is not the jurisdiction of the Commission to see how Planning staff is manned or how they conduct. He disagreed with Assistant City Attorney Lindgren in regard to minutes not being the Commission's jurisdiction and did not see anything wrong with adding a requirement of the Commission in the bylaws. He noted that the request can be accomplished in different ways and it is up to staff how they do that. He added that the bylaws would be going to Council and if they disagree then the additional language can be removed. Assistant City Attorney Lindgren noted that the Council did not make a final determination if they will take action on the bylaws. Commissioner Teglia noted that if staff does not like this, and it goes to Council then Council has the option of taking it out of the bylaws. Vice Chairperson Sim asked if the words in a timely manner be added onto the article. Chairperson Honan noted that if the Commission has a problem with the minutes then they should direct go to the City Manager and it does not belong in the Commission's bylaws. Commissioner Romero noted that this was an employer/employee issue that does not belong in the bylaws of the Commission. He added that if the Commission has an issue with the minutes and that should be addressed at the Council level who will then direct it to the City Manager. He added that it is not the responsibility of the Commission to dictate job duties to staff. He added that this should be recommended to Council and go from there. He added that the bylaws have to do with the Commission not with staff. Commissioner Teglia noted that staff is given direction all the time. Commissioner Romero noted that the direction given to staff is not employment related and this is because it is a job function. Assistant City Attorney Lindgren noted that the Commission might make a request might conflict with any other request that comes through the chain or command. Commissioner Teglia noted that the Commission is codifying the guidelines and telling Council that what is in the bylaws is what they want. Commissioner Romero asked if the bylaws would be adopted by Councilor only by the Commission. Assistant City Attorney Lindgren noted that he has no indication that this is going to be considered by the Council. He added that the Commission is not required to do bylaws and the Council is not required to approve of reject them. Commissioner Romero asked Commissioner Meloni if the direction in his jurisdiction was given by Commissioners or by staff. Commissioner Meloni noted that the direction is from the Commission to staff that they want the minutes at the next meeting. Assistant City Attorney Lindgren noted that there is no problem with that direction and request. Commissioner Romero noted that he would put it in as a request and not as a job duty because he would not want to direct staff APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 3, 2000. that they must do something. Commissioner Meloni was concerned that Council mayor may not look at the bylaws when the direction was that the Mayor wanted them done. Assistant City Attorney Lindgren stated that the Council has not specifically said that they want to take the bylaws up. Commissioner Romero noted that Council did not ask the Commission to revise the bylaws and it came up as a recommendation to the Commission by the Chairperson to review them. Commissioner Baldocchi noted that it all had to do with a reaction to the press. Chief Planner Sparks stated that he can't disagree with what he has heard from the Commissioners because it is important to have minutes out in a timely fashion. He added that staff is trying to catch up and in the last couple of meetings the Commission has had 3 sets of minutes before them for approval. He added that in the summer there were weekly meetings and there was a staffing problem due to carpal tunnel syndrome, and with trying to find someone to prepare minutes competently. He mentioned that if the Commission feels it necessary to set a goal they can do so but did not promise that it could be met. He mentioned that staff is striving to have minutes available at the next regular meeting but does not guarantee that it can be done. Commissioner Teglia noted that the problem has existed from several directors in the past, and it is a guideline for the future. He asked that it be put on the bylaws, as a requirement, and then it would get communicated to the Council and how it is accomplished will be their decision not ours. Commissioner Romero asked how the provision would be worded. Commissioner Teglia stated that this would be added to the last paragraph under 94 and it would say: Minutes should be prepared and available by the creation of the next packet, which is a week. Vice Chairperson Sim wanted to be a more generic in the language. Commissioner Teglia noted that the Commission is stating their performance objective and it can be changed if there is a problem. Chairperson Honan disagreed with this being included into the bylaws because it is well known that it would be nice to have the minutes in a timely fashion, and questioned if it belongs in the Commission's bylaws. She added that the a Commissioner can ask staff under Items from Staff to have minutes drafted by the next regular meeting. Commissioner Meloni noted that not every Commission has bylaws and noted that there should be something stating what the function of the Commission is. He added that the rules of conduct should be included into the bylaws because all Commission's will not be as professional as this one and they should be there for future reference. Commissioner Baldocchi thanked Commissioner Meloni for that clarification. Vice Chairperson Sim wanted the language to say in a timely manner. Commissioner Meloni noted that priorities will come up and staff can try to get them to the Commission by the next packet. Commissioner Romero suggested that the next Chairperson make the request to Council. The Commission was in consensus to add under .93. Duties. the additionallan1!ua1!e in re1!ard to minutes bein1! available with the next Plannin1! Commission packet. Commissioner Baldocchi asked why the Council was struck out from Article V, in regard to employing the Director or Economic & Community Development. Commissioner Teglia noted that City Council used to hire all department heads but that responsibility is now shifted over to the City Manager. Commissioner Baldocchi asked why in Article vm the language in regard to the Secretary reading the consent items was deleted. Commissioner Teglia noted that the Chairperson used to read the items but the new Chairperson has had the clerk read the items. Motion Sim / Second Teglia to approve the bylaws with additional changes discussed and adding the 24 hour special meeting notice change suggested by the City Attorney. Roll call vote: Ayes: Commissioner Baldocchi, Commissioner Meloni Commissioner Romero, Commissioner Teglia, Vice Chairperson Sim and Chairperson Honan Noes: None Absent: Commissioner D'Angelo APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 3, 2000. Chairperson Honan thanked the Commissioners for being present because of the new Mayor being sworn in. Vice Chairperson Sim thanked the subcommittee for working on the bylaws. 8. Items from the Public - None 9. Adjourn Motion Teglia / Second Meloni to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. L[~ /b~ Thomas C. Sparks / Secretary to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco ~~~ Amth Honan, ChaIrperson L/Planning Commission City of South San Francisco NEXT MEETING: Regular Meeting December 16, 1999, Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA. TCS/bh APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 3,2000.