Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 04/17/1978 M I NUT E S of a special meeting to the South San Francisco Planning Commission TH1E: DATE: P LA C E : 7:30 p.m. April 17,1978 WEST ORANGE LIBRARY AUDITORIUM MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Campredon, Vice-Chariman Mullin, Commissioners Bertucelli, Mathewson, and Slade. MEMBERS ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: City Planner William Costanzo Assistant Planner Mark A. Wheeler Senior Planner Daniel B. Christians City Engineer Chief Building Inspector Robert Yee Roy G h i 1 a rd i ANNOUNCEMENT CONCERNING TAPE RECORDING OF MEETING Chairman Campredon announced that this meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission would be recorded on tape, and that anyone who wished to come before the Commission to be heard is requested to come to the front microphone so that his or her comments become part of the official record. EIR-78-1, G.P.-77-8, ZA-77-9, & UP-77-416 A request by Goldrich-Kest and Associates for a General Plan Amendment to Neigh- borhood Commercial and High Density Residential; a zone change from IIUII Unclassi- fied to R-3 Restricted Multiple Family and C-l Neighborhood Commercial and a Use Permit to construct a 74 unit senior citizen apartment building; a 66 unit senior board and care facility; 21 condominium townhouses and 13,500 square feet of commercial office; 13,900 square feet of retail commercial floor area and related landscaping and parking. Secretary Costanzo presented the Staff Report. Secretary Costanzo indicated that the main item of concern herein tonight is to review and take comments on the Draft E.I.R. Secretary Costanzo further indicated that all comments discussed tonight should be addressed and responded to in the final E.I.R. to be submitted for certifica- tion. - 3921 - April 17, 1978 Representative: Steve Rothert Sutter Hill Ltd. 3000 El Camino Real Palo Alto, CA Mr. Rothert indicated that this project is the last H.U.D. Federally funded pro- ject available for this area. He further indicated that Sutter Hill Ltd. did have the capacity to develop commercial/office uses. Representative: Steve Notaro Goldrich-Kest Associates 15233 Ventura Boulevard Sherman Oaks, CA Mr. Notaro, as the residential specialist of Goldrich-Kest Associates, discussed the financing, housing breakdown, prior experience and site layout. He further addressed concerns regarding the Staff Report and Dtvision and Department Recom- mendations of the City. Mr. Notaro introduced Mr. Edward Pack from Santa Clara, an Acoustical Engineer with thirty years experience. Mr. Pack indicated his concerns in regard to where noise level information was obtained. He indicated his firm has also taken noise level readings which do not agree wi tho those in the Draft E. I. R. Mr. Pack went on to say that the proper noise rating should be taken with the acoustical value of the walls and thickness of windows taken into consideration to arrive at the proper composite readings that should have been used in the Draft E.I.R. Mr. Pack indicated that the area proposed for housing, both now and in the future, is capable of being soundproofed within acceptable levels for residential uses. Mr. Pack further stated that windows that do not operate are illegal in accordance with the Uniform Building Code. In reference to traffic and circulation, Mr. Renanto Martinez, Traffic Consultant with RGM Associates, indicated that office traffic would tend to effect traffic flow more because it would coincide with regular traffic use during evening hours. Mr. Steve Rothert continued to speak regarding previous preliminary plans that have been discussed with the Planning Staff over the past several months. A to- tal of three plans have been proposed before arriving at the final plan as seen tonight. Mr. Rothert indicated that the commercial area will be geared toward the capti- vated user, i.e.; the senior citizens located to the rear of the development. Mr. Rothert also remarked that according to his calculations, additional competi- tion in the Office/Professional area would not be suitable because of location and access to the freeway. Mr. Rothert then showed graphically the surrounding - 3922 - April 17, 1978 Bay Area user for similar Office/Professional uses and the problems and vacancy factors being experienced by them. He stated that traffic problems during peak hours woul d crea te .a very bad problem. Mr. Martinez, traffic consultant, indicated that certain traffic counts were reported inaccurately. In his opinion he feels that the traffic would be approxi- mately the same regardless of the type of use. Secretary Costanzo indicated that certain areas of statistics in questions of noise were reported as part of the General Plan of the City by the City Consul- tant, Mr. Garbel. Secretary Costanzo further went on to say that the peak hour traffic would be increased considerably. Secretary Costanzo also remarked that the office spaces would not be intended for large "Dow Chemicalll type users, but rather by smaller attorney, local real estate type uses. PUBLIC COMMENT Mrs. Helen Hoopes 825 West Orange Avenue South San Francisco, CA Mrs. Hoopes indicated that according to the City's General Plan, this area is to be dedicated to Medium-High Density Residentlal uses only and this use should not be arbitrarily changed to suit individual developer's desires. Mrs. Hoopes continued by saying that the Draft E.I.R. did not properly address either the traffic and noise increases on West Orange AvenueDr the local residents. Mrs. Hoopes stated that the cul-de-sac mitigation measures along West Orange Avenue at the Library would not solve any problems. Users of the Library would never find their way there which would severely effect the amount of library use, and might possibly result in the loss of the Library. Mrs. Hoopes concluded by saying she wished the Commission to deny this application. Mr. Henry Koerner 849 West Orange Avenue South San Francisco, CA Mr. Koerner remarked that the density is far too high and further that the General Plan should not be amended for this high density. He agreed with Secretary Cos- tanzo's report. Mary Louise Whitehead 5 Sonora Avenue South San Francisco? CA Mrs. Whitehead spoke for the project with some reservations. She indicated that the City, in her professional experience, lacked much needed senior citizen housing. -3923- Apri 1 17, 1978 James T. Robinson, Civil Engineer 205 Westview Drive South San Francisco, CA Mr. Robinson spoke against the application. As a resident of ten years, and a retired engineer, he commended staff on this report as written as well as the recommendations 'as stated. As a member and representative of Our Redeemers of Luthern Church, Mr. Robinson indicated the proposed commercial uses would be incompatible with the adjacent Church property users. Joyce Montgomery 849 West Orange Avenue South San Francisco, CA Ms. Montgomery objected to this development by eluding to the excess of com- mercial uses already. She went on to examine the Senior Citizens Development. Her redesign suggestions included additional livable area for the senior housing as well as considerably more open space for use by the surrounding citizens. Martin Lehrberger 849 West Orange Avenue South San Francisco, CA Mr. Lehrberger, age 75, spoke for the senior citizens. He stated that parking facilities are not adequate for the amount of residents as well as the number of commercial users. He went on to say that the increase in auto traffic would greatly adversely effect the surrounding environment for the senior citizens with regard to air pollution. He indicated that increasing this hazard would effect the respira- tory problems already prevalent in older people. He further commented that the mixture of low cost townhouses and senior citizens could create problems related to crime that might result. He cited examples of other low cost housing projects and the problems experienced with a high density similar to this project being presented tonight. He concluded by saying that both low-cost and senior housing are definitely needed in this City, but should definitely be separated. Paul Davis, Spokesman/Chairman for Southwood Citizen Group 849 West Orange Avenue South San Francisco, CA Mr. Davis spoke to oppose the amendment to the General Plan. Mr. Davis further commended staff on a fine presentation and staff report. Mr. Fred DeJarlais 721 West Orange Avenue South San Francisco~ CA Mr. DeJarlais, an urban planner, commended staff on the completeness of the staff report,including the presentation of alternatives. In his opinion the question April 17, 1978 tonight is a land use and not an economic one as indicated in the staff report. Mr.' DeJarlais went on to say that noise is a very great problem already. Cul- de-sac mitigation measures as well as Commercial/Office should be further explored. Mr. Steve Notaro responded to citizen's comments regarding commercial uses. His comments centered around the fact that El Camino Real is commercial already. Mr. Notaro went on to say that the deadline for this project is this September and after this time, the project will be lost to the City. Mr. Steve Rothert responded to traffic concerns of speakers. His comment was that the traffic generated by a Commercial/Office complex would be greater than what they had proposed. Mr. Rothert went on to say that no fast food or other restaurants would be a part of this proposal. Responding to questions regarding redesign, Mr. Rothert stated that redesign for all senior citizen housing would not be acceptable along El Camino Real. He went on to say that senior ci ti zens woul d not have to cross the highway to do their shopping with the proposed plan. Mr. Lehrberger responded that additional traffic will be increased drastically and that the use should be limited to only senior housing. Secretary Costanzo summarized by saying the difficulty isin the retail areas, which have already been discussed at previous hearings and in conversations with s ta ff . Secretary Costanzo indicated that the inconsistency with the General Plan and the noise problems are the main issues tonight. Secretary Costanzo reiterated the fact that the gas station and the Southern Restaurant uses are inconsistent with the General Plan and are subject to re- moval permanently if destroyed by fire or other disaster. Secretary Costanzo requested the consultant to address in the final E.I.R. the Professional/Office possibilities and the effects of such a development. Secretary Costanzo went on to make clear that the presentation staff has made it only an alternative in concept, but in concept it is felt that the uses as shown should be considered as the best alternative for future potential uses. Secretary Costanzo read into the record the staff recommendations in their en- tirety for clarity to all present. He concluded by stating the five procedures outlined in the staff report in an effort to resolve this matter. They are as follows: 1 . Certification of the E.I.R. 2. Adoption of a Specific Site Development Plan. 3. Adoption of a final General Plan designation. 4. Adoption of a Zone District. -3925- Apri 1 17, 1978 5. Approval of a Use Permit to implement the provisions of the above. Mrs. Hoopes continued that the Draft E.I.R. does not properly address the traffic and noise increases on West Orange Avenue and the possible adverse effect on re- sidents in this area. There being no further public speakers, Chairman Campredon closed the public portion of this meeting. Staff indicated concerns regarding the possible effects of Professional/Office de- velopment on this site which should be addressed in the E.I.R. The following is a representation of concerns and questions of the Commission re- garding the Draft E.l.R.: 1. Commissioner Mathewson - Corrections to all discrepancies to be made in the final E. I. R.. as discussed. 2. Commissioner Mathewson - Location of nearest train depot? 3. Commissioner Mathewson - Parking situation on Westborough Boulevard. 4. Commissioner Mathewson - Estimate of sales tax revenues based on expected uses? (Page C-63) 5. Vice-Chairman Mullin - Do traffic projections include effects of proposed widening of El Camino Real? (C-21) 6. Vice-Chairman Mullin - Address impacts on proposed Public Safety Facility to be located at Value Giant with regard to traffic prob- lems. (Page C-27) 7. Vice-Chairman Mullin - Update data regarding rainfall. (Page C-38) 8. Vice-Chairman Mullin - Analysis of effects, during construction phase, on air quality. (Page C-47) 9. Vice-Chairman Mullin Change to read pre-school center. (Page C-54) 10. Vice-Chairman Mullin - Assessed values should be updated if possible. (Page C-60) 11. Vice-Chairman Mullin - Paragraph regarding final generation of school children should be deleted. (Page C-64) 12. Basis for assumption regarding increase in Paramedic needs. (Page C-64) 13. Basis for assumption that senior citizen immigration would result from this project. 14. Location of Valley Park as referred to on Page C-65? -3926- Apri 1 17, 1978 15. Serious consideration should be given to use of energy conservation measures. Solar designs should be specifically addressed. Question to be: Is the use of solar energy feasible for the proposed senior citizen and related commer- cial facilities? 16. Discuss the cost factor involved between developed and undeveloped land. Specifically loss of land value due to loss of open space. 17. Comments, evaluations with regard to failures of similar facilities. Specifically study inadequate treatment exposed at these locations. 18. Question arbitration of development to limit occupancy to seniors; specifically laws related to same. 19. Why have no final drainage plans been submitted? (Page C-2) 20. Inadequate explanation with regard to increase in population as a result of this center. 21. Generate figure with respect to requirement for employee parking. 22. Discuss relationship between cumulative effects between long and short term. (Page G-l) Vice-Chairman Mullin questioned deletion of townhouse portion of project. Steve Notaro indicated that townhouses could be eliminated in lieu of adding more offices. Vice-Chairman Mullin brought up possible problems associated with condominium ownership. Secretary Costanzo indicated that problems may be experienced with the State Sub- division Map Act and the City Subdivision Ordinance. Commissioner Slade questioned staff objection to three story construction and Secretary Costanzo responded that three story structures are not permitted in the C-O Zone. Also it was further pointed out that institution type looks would be objectionable in relation to surrounding residential areas. Commissioner Mathewson requested that revised plans be submitted. He questioned the amount of employee parking. Steve Rothert stated that City parking require- ments had to be met. Mr. Rothert further commented that access for pedestrian walkways would be provided for senior utilization. Vice-Chairman Mullin discussed the need for senior citizen housing in this City. He also expressed a desire to meet in two weeks so that design matters could be re- solved as soon as possible. Secretary Costanzo indicated that three weeks would be the earliest date this matter could be brought back to the Commission~ The Secretary requested a consensus of opinion to the ten staff recommendations in the staff report and received the follow- ing response: -3927- April 17, 1978 Recommendation: 1. No structure should exceed two stories. Consensus: Height limit subject to design. Recommendation: 2. Density in any senior residential or board and care facility should not exceed 30 units to the acre. Consensus: Comparable to similar units in City - not to exceed 1.9 per unit typical. Recommendation: 3. Townhouse condominiums should not be a part of the plan concept. Consensus: Should delete. Recommendation: 4. Office building should be designed to buffer the residen- tial area and the residential structure should buffer open recreation area. Consensus: Should be reviewed at public session. Recommendation: 5. Access on to Orange Avenue should be limited to senior residential and board and care land uses only. Consensus: Resolved. Recommendation: 6. Consideration of a double cul-de-sac on Orange Avenue to eliminate use of the Southwood neighborhood for through traffic generated to or from this facility. Consensus: Should delete. Recommendation: 7. Preservation of as many mature trees on the site as possible with each tree specifically plotted and located in itsl re- lationship to proposed structures and as related to future grade changes. Consensus: Agreed Recommendation: 8. Outline the specifics of the proposed development in a de- tailed written text. This document should contain a detailed outline of the proposal including square footage, parking, landscaping, tree maintenance program, building features and treatments, heights and roof types. Include open spaces, recreation, laundry and other specific building uses. Include percentage and square foot calculation for each proposed land use including landscaping, buildings, parking. Consensus: Agreed. Recommendation: 9. Design the facility to the existing grades to maximum site use without major grading and to mitigate building height impacts. Consensus: Agreed. -3928- April 17, 1978 Recommendation: 10. Locate the residential uses away from streets and detailed measures proposed to mitigate noise impacts. Consensus: Agreed. This item to be considered first on the May 9th Agenda when the E.I.R. Consultant will hopefully be prepared. Marvin Berman, Architect 8170 Beverly Court South San Francisco, CA 94080 Mr. Berman indicated that sound screening can be accomplished through proper amounts of landscaping and mounding to buffer noise and views. There being no further discussion at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 12:30 a.m. ,.j..- ,- I ~ illiam Costanzo, Secretary Planning Commission City of South San Francisco Marcel Campredon, Chairman Planning Commission City of South San Francisco NOTE: The entries of this Planning Commission meeting indicate the action taken to dispose of each item. Oral presentation, arguments and documents are recorded on tape. The tapes are available in the Office of the City Planner. Documents related to the items discussed are on file in the Office of the City Planner, and are avaflabl~ forpublitinspectfon. - 3929 -