Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrd 1269-2000ORDINANCE NO. 1269-2000 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND HANSEN PSC RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT OF A 33-UNIT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, AND A 10- ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF OAKMONT DRIVE AND WESTBOROUGH BOULEVARD IN THE R-1-E-P SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICT. RECITALS WHEREAS, the South San Francisco Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on November 18, 1999 and December 16, 1999 to consider approval of a proposed residential subdivision and mini-storage facility at the above location; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission by a 3-2 vote, constituting a majority of the quorum that voted on this matter, supported a motion to approve all of the elements of the application including the General Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, California Government Code section 65354 provides that a recommendation for approval of a general plan amendment shall be made by the affirmative vote of not less than a majority of the total membership of the commission; and WHEREAS, the effect of the vote therefore was to recommend approval of the single family subdivision portion of the application and to simultaneously fail to recommend approval of the requested mini-storage facility, which was dependent on the General Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment and Rezoning and Use Permit to create a new Zone District, C-FZ, Commercial B Fault Zone District, and to rezone the northerly five acres of the subject Oakmont/Westborough property due to the unique site constraints existing on the property related to existence of active earthquake fault traces and allow for mini-storage use. However, since the Planning Commission failed to recommend approval of the General Plan amendment, the Zoning Ordinance Amendment, Rezoning and Use Permit for the mini-storage could not be recommended because a Zoning Ordinance Amendment, Rezone and Use Permit would create zoning inconsiStent with the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission made findings and recommended that the City Council approve a 33-unit single family residential subdivision and vesting tentative map with private streets, including requested exceptions for lot size, setbacks, and driveway apron lengths, I I on a vacant 5 acre site located at the westerly terminus of Shannon Drive, near the comer of Oakmont Drive and Westborough Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission made findings and recommended that the City Council approve the Tentative Parcel Map to create three separate parcels from the existing 10 acre parcel; and WHEREAS, on January 26, 2000, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing to consider the recommendations of the Planning Commission and take action on the requested approvals; and WHEREAS, on January 26, 2000, the City Council denied a General Plan Amendment, Zoning Amendment, Rezoning and Use Permit relating to the proposed mini-storage facility on 4.9 acres of the subject property, and continued action on the 33-unit single family subdivision and. 173 acre single family lot. While the Council was supportive of the residential project, it was reluctant to approve any portion of the project, particularly the Parcel Map, without having some assurance as to the disposition of the remaining 4.9 acres (Parcel 1). Consequently, Council directed staff to work with the applicant to address this issue; and WHEREAS, the City Council based its decision in part on the evidence in the record that the remaining 4.9 acres (Parcel) has historically had maintenance problems in potential violation of the City's nuisance laws; and WHEREAS, staff has been working with the applicant over the past few months to devise a Development Agreement which would allow the residential portion of the project to proceed as planned and which would also provide adequate assurance that the remaining property would be maintained in a fashion acceptable to the City until such time as the applicant might receive development entitlements for this parcel; and WHEREAS, the applicant is in support of the Development Agreement because it would vest development fights for the Oakmont Vistas subdivision (Parcel 2) subject to the Conditions of Approval outlined in the January 26, 2000 staff report to the City Council, and would allow future development proposals for Parcel 1 as described in the Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the draft Development Agreement attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A and has found the Agreement to be consistent with the City's General Plan. WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration (No. 98-054) was prepared for the project and a Notice of Completion filed with the State Clearinghouse. The Negative Declaration analyzes all the potential environmental effects associated with implementation of the Agreement; and WHEREAS, on May 18, 2000, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on the proposed Development Agreement and made the findings required by Municipal Code section 19.060.100 and recommended that the City Council adopt said Agreement. I I NOW THEREFORE, The City Council of the City of South San Francisco does ordain as follows: Section 1. Findings The following findings are made based upon the independent review of the City Council of the entire record for this project, including without limitation staff reports, minutes, public testimony, the Municipal Code, the General Plan and the proposed Development Agreement itself: Ao The proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan as amended and adopted in that it will maintain the site in an attractive, nuisance-free condition consistent with the low density residential designation. Bo The proposed Development Agreement complies with all applicable zoning, subdivision, and building regulations and with the general and relevant specific plan. It is consistent with the R-1 oE-P zoning designation and other applicable sections of Title 15 of the Municipal Code. C. The proposed Development Agreement states its specific duration of ten years. Do Sections 3, 5 and other sections of the proposed Development Agreement describe the permitted uses of the property subject thereto. Eo Sections 3, 5 and other sections of the proposed Development Agreement describe the permitted density and intensity of use of the property subject thereto. Fo The proposed Development Agreement states the maximum permitted height and size of proposed buildings on the property subject thereto in that it vest entitlements described therein which provide these requirements. Section 2. Approval of Agreement. The City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby approves the proposed Development Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. Section 3. Severability. In the event any section or portion of this Ordinance shall be determined invalid or unconstitutional, such section or portion shall be deemed severable and all other sections or portions hereof shall remain in full force and effect. I I II Section 4. Publication and Effective Date. Pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 36933, a summary of this Ordinance shall be prepared by the City Attorney. At least five (5) days prior to the Council meeting at which this Ordinance is scheduled to be adopted, the City Clerk shall (1) publish the Summary, and (2) post in the City Clerk's Office a certified copy of this Ordinance. Within fifteen (15) days after the adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall (1) publish the summary, and (2) post in the City Clerk's Office a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance along with the names of those City Council members voting for and against this Ordinance or otherwise voting. This ordinance shall become effective thirty days from and after its adoption. Introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of South San Francisco, held on the 14th day of June , 2000. Adopted as an Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of South San Francisco, held on the 28~h day of June , 2000 by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers Pedro Gonzalez, Eugene R. Mullin and John R. Penna, Mayor Pro Tem Joseph A. Fernekes and Mayor Karyl Matsumoto NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. ATTEST: erk As Mayor of the City of South San Francisco, I do hereby approve the foregoing Ordinance this 28th day of June, 2000. J:\WPDhMNRSWX405\001 \ORD~2000LMay\Oakmont.dopt.doc Created on 5/17/00 10:43 AM Kimberly Johnson Page 4 June 30, 2000 I [1[