Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 2009-09-16MINUTE S ~o~zK„S~~~ SPECIAL JOINT MEETING CITY COUNCLI. o AND ~~~zFORl`~~ PLANNII\TG COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, California 94083 MUNICIPAL SERVICES 13tJILDING CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY ROOM 33 ARROYO DRIVE WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 6:30 P.M. 2 Call to Order. 6:35 p.m. Roll Call. Present: Councilmen Garbarino, Gonzalez and Mullin, Vice Mayor Addiego and Mayor Matsumoto. Commissioners Bernardo, Giusti, Gupta Ochserihirt and Zemke, Vice Chairperson Prouty and Chairperson Moore. Absent: -None. 3. Public Comments -comments are limited to items on the Special Meeting Agenda. Mayor Matsumoto explained those who wished to express concerns should present a speaker card to the City Clerk to speak under the Public Comment section. Opportunity to submit a formal letter or speak one-on-one would be available after the study session. Fred Bravo, owner of property located at the corner of El Camino and Chestnut expressed concerns on how the moratorium impacted the property and ownership rights and caused significant hardship. If approved, the moratorium could cost the owners in terms of time. Vice Mayor Addiego noted even though there was a moratorium, an application could still be considered. He asked for clarification as to whether or not a parcel of land could be broken out of the moratorium. Assistant City Manager, Marty Van Duyn replied yes, a parcel. could be broken out as determined by the Planning Commission and Council. He was reluctant to encourage the application because, if it was the use he was aware of, it had already been determined as inconsistent with the General Plan. His best advice was to wait until it gets to the point of land use designation. Councilman Garbarino recalled hearing the term "flexibility" when the moratorium had been previously discussed. Assistant City Manager Van Duyn stated staff could meet with Mr. Bravo and review potential options. Ed Johnson spoke on behalf of 1107 Mission Road Condominiums. He noted there were not enough parking spots provided; 39 single garages for 39 units and 26 extra spaces, leaving 13 homeowners with inadequate parking. He explained how this had affected property values, caused difficulty for resale of properties and suggested ways in which the situation could be improved. As the complex was within the footprint being discussed, he requested the units be considered in future redevelopment plans. 4. Study Session -Presentation and consideration of preliminary land use concepts for Chestnut Avenue/El Camino Real Area Plan. (Approximately 55 acre area between South San Francisco BART Station and A Street near El Camino Real). City Attorney, Steve Mattas noted Councilman Mullin had a property owner interest within 500 feet of the Kaiser property. Being such, he advised Council to hear the staff report but to focus questions on the Kaiser property area initially, allowing the Councilmember to abstain as required under the Fair Political Practices Commission (1~PPC) regulations. After the discussion was concluded, the Councilmember could return to speak on the remainder of the area. Economic Development Coordinator, Mike Lappen presented the staff report. Council was provided a comprehensive report and would be walked through the various projects and concepts presented. Concepts were rough illustrations and not parcel specific proposals. There was no development application assigned. The purpose of the presentation was to think long term strategy for how the area could be developed. The SS acre area encompassed First Street to the BART station and El Camino Real ("ECR") to Mission. The bulk of the property was either owned by the City or the Redevelopment Agency ("RDA"). Kaiser was part of the project area. The area was being looked at in a district-wide approach. Planning context and draft guideline principles had been outlined and incorporated the "Grand Boulevard" project, the South ECR Corridor General Plan Amendment and the Transit Village Plan.. A mission of the project was to protect the existing uses of the neighborhoods while providing urban context and connectivity. Mayor Matsumoto explained the idea was to take advantage of walkable, livable civic areas. Because of the job/housing balance mandated by the state and being that South San Francisco's biotech industry made it an economic engine in San Mateo County, the City was trying to make high density housing on a major thoroughfare centered by major transportation hubs. By having growth. here, neighborhoods were protected. It was hoped that retail would provide general fund money to have public safety, streets and roads happen in the area. The Mayor further explained with the PUC property purchased, the City would still have some control and say over the design once development started. Meetings between the Housing Authority, Planning Commission and staff had been conducted in order to come up with a SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 MINUTES PAGE 2 feasible plan. Input from Council and the Planning Commission would be taken and opportunity for public input would be provided for those who felt strongly. Ken Nilmeier, Principal and Director of Planning for MVE & Partners, presented the preliminary findings for the development area. It was found. through analysis that the area had tremendous opportunities. Already a proven retail area, the introduction of BART and recent history of walkability and sustainability made it even mare of a special property. A series of specific topics were covered in the Opportunity and Constraints memo, including visual analysis, traffic, infrastructure, economic research and environmental issues. Highlights included the integration of the now disjointed area between Mission and ECR, and. a connection between Arroyo and Oak Avenue. The latter had long been on the table in study and proposal, and considered as a starting point. Opportunities to link elsewhere were also being considered, though not as strong of options. Economic analysis conducted by Bay Area Economics (`BAE") had looked at market trends, residential growth, population growth projections and employment projections. BAE concluded there was potential for: between 1500 and 3000 new residential units, an additional 150,000 to 200,000 square feet for retail, including one (1) or two (2) grocery anchors and town. center related uses, and an additional 100,000 to 200,000 square feet for office space or mixed use. There was also an opportunity for civic uses and expansion. Diagrams of different development scenarios for property were presented. Depictions were done on graduated levels of intensity and included additional properties not previously discussed in some of the schemes. Alternative #1 was a total development scenario within the study area, projecting 305,000 additional square feet of retail, 108,000 of office space and 887,000 of residential space. Some areas had been left undeveloped such as the Safeway center and Pacific Market, outside of the potential of medical related uses on the Kaiser property. Efforts had been made to build from those ideas and fnd creative ways to utilize properties largely controlled by the City. A restudy was anticipated, emphasizing the street oriented uses internal to the Antoinette Lane parcel and those fronting ECR. An area adjacent to the library, outside of the study area, was being looked at for the expansion of Orange Park. Part of the idea was to look at parcels in more holistic way. If the parcels were to aggregate and share in parking resources this would. create a more dynamic urban environment. Modest increases in density were anticipated along Mission Avenue. The focus was on developments on properties that were owned by the City. Alternative # 2 was more aggressive and increased retail substantially. It absorbed some of the demand for the future opportunities identified by BAE and allowed the ability to increase retail space up to 407,000 feet, office space to 260,000 feet and a larger overall residential unit count. Although the numbers did not reach the projections of BAE, they were more consistent with the projections. Unlike the first option, this scenario added development to the Safeway Center and Pacific Market. Relocation of City facilities had been contemplated. The library would be a civic component in the area with an intensive mixed use retail and residential space. This helped the area become a destination and created a sense of place. More intense design along Mission and ways of capitalizing on the Kaiser owned property were depicted. The intention was to create a more dynamic mixed use overall plan and create ways to SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 MINUTES PAGE 3 introduce and increase densities along ECR, particularly in the south westerly corner of the site. Civic components, a plaza opening up onto ECR, a library and. retail mixed piece that would support existing civic buildings were also presented. Input from the Council and Commission was requested. City Attorney Mattas reiterated the initial conversation should focus on the Kaiser and adjacent property, allowing Councilman Mullin to be excused. Councilman Mullin recused himself from the discussion and exited the room. Commissioner Rick Ochsenhirt clarified the discussion was on City owned property. It was his understanding that Kaiser had bought adjacent lots on the north that go into the Broadmoor lumber lot. The next adjacent lot was the condominium complex. Was he correct in thinking there were no lots north that would ever be available to the City? Mayor Matsumoto noted Kaiser bought Red Arrow Trailer Park, the motel and Broadmoor and are mandated by seismic retrofit to year 2030. The Subcommittee was trying to develop a working relationship with Kaiser. Their plans and their constituency were different from the City's. While the City was trying to make a walkable area, Kaiser would increase the volume of traffic with their clientele. Staff has been unable to find a common dialogue as of yet. Land swaps could be an area to explore. Commissioner Ochsenhirt noted the City would not have much say in development of the northern part unless there was cooperation through Kaiser. Vice Mayor Addiego stated when he has served on the subcommittee in the past, it had been made clear the hospital would be built adjacent to the existing hospital, which was north. At the time they were able to change, Kaiser would remove the existing hospital. Kaiser had commented there may not always be two facilities in San Mateo County. He wanted to make sure if there was just one, it would be in South San Francisco. He appreciated having the medical resource in our small community and felt it could not be duplicated. Therefore, it should be factored in that Kaiser would move north and leave the City without property in that area. Mayor Matsumoto said Kaiser intended to build in South San Francisco and the subcommittees were trying to come up with something compatible. Councilman Garbarino stated their service area included the southern half of San Francisco, Daly City, Brisbane, Colma, probably through to Millbrae, a very large area. Commissioner Ochsenhirt noted the new facility on Oyster Point. He clarified that his point was that the subcommittee would be working with Kaiser rather than the Planning Commission. Kaiser has the control. Consultant stated while Kaiser had control of the property, it was currently not zoned for medical purposes, so they dial not have complete control. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 MINUTES PAGE 4 Commissioner John Prouty noted a possible opportunity to switch out land use from one end of property to the other, making it more opportunistic for a consistent plan on ECR instead of the road block currently faced. Kaiser must be given the opportunity to build before a talk of a swap could happen, but something maybe able to be put in place that would meet the needs of both Kaiser and the City. Councilman Garbarino didn't recall Kaiser closing the door on land swaps. Mayor Matsumoto stated everything was very open and in discussion. Commissioner Prouty thought the expense of City property may encourage Kaiser to build up rather than expand out. This would be the ideal situation. Councilman Garbarino noted Kaiser built up rather than out in Vacaville and South Sacramento. Mayor Matsumoto made a point of reference and noted as o f 2008 United was the City's largest employer, followed by Genentech and then Kaiser. Councilman Gonzalez stated he had served a few months on the Kaiser subcommittee and during that time, he heard no plans or ideas from them. He hoped the new subcommittee could continue with the dealings. The Councilman also noted a purpose of the general plan was to beautify ECR. He felt the City was behind on that aspect. Mayor Matsumoto stated that Kaiser had worked closely with the City of Oakland and set precedence by doing so. Commissioner Pradeep Gupta felt it was necessary to have Kaiser's cooperation if the ECR Corridor was to be redone and a link between Mission and Arroyo Avenue created. Given the terrain of different grades on either side, there was not much land available on ECR to create the City street walk concept. It was absolutely critical that Kaiser had to be a cooperative partner in this venture. He opined in terms of frontage, other areas of ECR were much worse than the Kaiser frontage and should take precedence. Furthermore, he felt work could start on other projects and perhaps signal other properties around the area to work with the City. Councilman Mullin returned to the meeting as discussian of the Kaiser related property was concluded. In regards to alternative # 1 and the library, Commissioner Ochsenhirt questioned if it was fronting Chestnut. He noted the recent conversion of the Cal Water building into the Historical Museum with Cal water still maintaining the pumps and questioned how that would work. Coordinator Lappen noted the three options were done to look at schematic approaches and not on parcel by parcel area. The library at Orange Park was considered as a concept not as a specific location. Commissioner Ochsenhirt understood them as just concepts but requested to be presented SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 MINUTES PAGE 5 with true possibilities. Vice Mayor Addiego stated the alternatives could be considered a "dream state" and in that state, which alternative could be the maximum option. life questioned what type of ground floor was envisioned as compatible with a library. The Consultant noted any type of commercial retail or office use would be feasible. Mayor Matsumoto asked Assistant City Manager Marty Van Duyn to share his vision of the library they had previously discussed. Assistant Manager Von Duyn suggested the importance of the site was to maximize commercial utility as well as get mixed use. Without minimizing commercial activity and future retailing that had potential on the site, public facilities and civic center uses could be on the upper floors. Retail and nonresidential components could be oriented to Chestnut and ECR. Use the second floor library components with a lat of glass and creative architecture as away to emphasize the relationship to the interior of project. with open spaces and Linear Parkway. Linear Parkway would ultimately have a significant relationship with Orange Park. The City was not finished acquiring land to expand Orange Park all the way up to Chestnut. As the Consultant suggested, mixed use office, residential and retail was the best way to maximize the space. Mayor Matsumoto considered developer fees as a way pay for library construction, as it was estimated to cost upwards of $40 to $60 million. Assistant Manager Von Duyn stated there could be shared development on residential and non residential site. Mayor Matsumoto asked if it was expected of Council to state, as a body, which alternative they wished to support. Assistant Manager Von Duyn stated the attempt was to make sure that these alternatives were in the envelope of consideration. It was not a selection process this evening and basically all opportunities were being vetted. The plan had a long way to go as it went into next phases and put more significance into land use options. Some numbers could change over time, physical constraints could be found and opportunities for land swaps and reuse with Kaiser could become available. Aspects such as the linkages between civic uses and private uses, the ECR and BART system through Linear Parkway, Mission Road access, landscaping and how best to respect existing developments would become more detailed as the plan progressed. What needs did the site have and how could they be met in the form of infrastructure? Mayor Matsumoto felt the most dramatic in comparison was the sizable difference between the residential units in alternatives 1, 2 and 3; 887 units or 30 per acre, 1550 units or 40 per acre, and 1850 units 50 per acre respectively. These differences would have an impact on civic and retail space. A consensus was needed. Doubling the housing units from the first alternative to second is a major difference. Vice Mayor Addiego agreed with the Mayor and felt we could start with housing. Recently, SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 MINUTES PAGE 6 Council had supported an idea where it was 2 acres and 107 units, the upper tier. This was a 55 acre site overall so 50 units per acre wouldn't get to 3000. How was this type of density reached? What types of buildings would you have and where would they be sited? Consultant stated there were 2 types of buildings; Podium construction with basement parking and free standing parking garages in middle with units that wrap around, blocking the view of the garage from the outside. This latter was a little less dense and more affordable to build. Sidetracking from the Vice Mayor's question, the Consultant stated part of the objective was for scheme 1 to back away from using all the properties in the area, scheme 2 was to engage all different properties and by scheme 3 you see the higher densities. This was done in an attempt to glean what type of scheme would best fit the area and get a reaction to the visuals. Tonight's presentation was a 3-D expression of programming but there was still a lot of articulation needed. Design. standards would be gotten into later to make sure a workable solution was found, but in terms of bulk, you could start to see how it felt on site. Vice Mayor Addiego asked if the Consultant could identify these sites within alternative 3. Consultant noted high rise construction in location that currently had the bank facility. On the east side of ECR there were midrise office buildings. Podium construction showed three to four levels of residential space above a large grocery unit. Ambitious concepts were being employed to yield this type of density. City owned property towards the bay spanned the channel and allowed for a parking structure, embraced Mission Road and linked to a realigned Antoinette. This helped increase the yield in different way. Councilman Gonzalez asked if the County would allow them to build on top of the creek. Consultant noted it had happened elsewhere. Spanning across the creek and creating footings would work and had merit. Discussion with the County could continue and expand. Commissioner Prouty noted the 100 year flood issue but agreed that spanning the creek was a great idea. He felt the creek divided the City and saw this as a way to join it back together. He also gave his support to bringing a decent grocery market to the City coupled with mixed use above for additional housing. However, he was worried about too much density as depicted in alternative 3. He cited Redwood City as a good example of how a desolate area was brought back into the fold. He was more inclined to support alternative 2. Councilman Gonzalez mentioned combining alternatives 1 and 2. Councilman Garbarino noted the units on ECR in San Bruno and further down in Millbrae. He felt they were very nice looking. Commissioner Ochsenhirt agreed with the Councilman on the Millbrae development and added it was on the extremely busy intersection of Millbrae Avenue and ECR. Commissioner Prouty stated one of the challenges was topography. If a multistory building was put on Chestnut going north, it could merge part of the City together. Consultant noted the incline at approximately 15 feet from Chestnut to the proposed Arroyo SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 MINUTES PAGE 7 connection. A 15 to 18 foot commercial retail base would work if it opened up on the corner and became a basement on one side as you headed north, though it would be relatively narrow. Mayor Matsumoto thanked representatives from Pacific Market and relayed the Council's appreciation for their cooperation. At 5.4 acres per 1000 residents how did the City compare to others for open space? Would densities go up and not impact the ability to have open spaces or would sacrifices have to be made if any of the alternatives were chosen? Consultant stated this particular location was open space rich. It could be stipulated as to how much each parcel could contribute to a parks fund or how much open space would be provided by each individual parcel or a combination of the two. City Manager Barry Nagel stated 3 acres per 1000 residents was the average, so South San Francisco was in pretty good shape. Councilman Mullin questioned the shared use component spoken of earlier and using the revenue generated to partially fund a library. What kind of discretion would Council have to direct a portion of those development fees to a specific use like library? Assistant Manager Von Duyn stated the Council had the discretion to use tax increment funds from RDA dollars. RDA dollars could be used to invest in infrastructure, underwriting some of the obligations of the developer and using that as value exchange for their participation and assistance with the construction of library or other public improvement items. Council could set the standard on how the parcels were to be used. Long term lease partnerships, lease backs and the like could be looked at later, once the market place could be taken advantage of and projects for investment were identified. To put it broadly, RDA dollars could be used to address the area. Consultant asked if there was a consensus or general feel for alternative 3 in some sense or fashion. If the densities seemed reasonable, terms could be simplified for zoning and land use policies. He wanted to be able to move on to next step, refine a preferred development plan and get into implementing the strategy and then move on to a draft specific plan. He questioned if they were on the right track with the development envelopes and able to move onto the next step. Councilman Garbarino questioned if there was a more recent traffic study than from 10 years ago. Consultant stated as the project moved on into environmental aspects, a more detailed study would be done. A Consultant was onboard to take direction and look more carefully at how to distribute traffic through the area. Mayor Matsumoto referenced a report that stated South San Francisco was ranked 24 out of top 25 places with the highest share of zero vehicle households. The City also had larger families at 3.7, as opposed to the mean of other cities within the county. Given our demographics and aging population we should be aiming to move seniors out of larger homes and into the corridor because it's walkable. Given these statistics, where were we going? SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 MINUTES PAGE 8 Assistant City Manager Von Duyn stated there was a stranger market place for smaller units because it was being driven more towards value, cost and what people could afford. Larger units were less attractive because were more expensive. People were lowering their expectations due to the market place. There were signs that the market place was going to moderate somewhat, allowing more chances for people to share in opportunities that fit their needs. He didn't know if that was a significant component that needed to be vetted right now because when the market turns, we would get to see what our stock and persons per household looked like compared to the rest of the County. The issue was to hit the targeted number of units needed in order to meet growth potential and less on how to design and target the units. Staff would like to hear some acceptance of pushing this all the way out to alternative 3 for the following reasons: 1) the densities were consistent with what's being done with the south ECR corridor, 2) keep in mind when looking at the densities, this was a total area as opposed to bridge site. There was a slight deviation on how you arrive at units per acre once you start counting it out, and 3) if Kaiser expanded, we would lose the units that were projected to go on that site and they would have to be made up elsewhere. This was the general message staff would like to send to the Council and Commission. If the market place convinced us that we shouldn't be at 50 units per acre, then we had the ability to create standards that allowed us to lower the number. Vice Mayor Addiego stated he was not afraid of alternative 3 but needed to understand the high rises along ECR and Westborough. He noted the difference in the footprints between alternative 1 and 3 in regards to the east side of Mission Road and requested an explanation of these differences. Consultant stated alternative 1 was relatively a low density scheme with a projected retail center as potential for being converted housing, a 2 and 3-story on grade facility. Schemes were denser for alternatives 2 and 3, where basement parking was introduced and it was stepped from 4 stories to 3 stories where there was interface with neighborhoods towards east. Vice Mayor Addiego understood that it would be heavy street side then stepped back as it got closer to the neighborhoods, similar to the Mid-peninsula project. Assistant City Manager Von Duyn appreciated the sensitivity to the existing neighborhoods. Mayor Matsumoto also noted how the Mid Peninsula design stepped up and made it more residential. The Vice Mayor stated it was easy to see how density could. be more aggressive on the side that faces the North County courthouse. Assistant City Manager Von Duyn added the plan wasn't to create a blanket of high density across a whole area then run into sensitive sites and have to look at exceptions. It recognized that the exceptions needed to be designed in at the outset. Commissioner Prouty relayed zoning updates and stated that anything over two stories was looking at setbacks from either: site lines, lowering densities and getting pluses or extending densities if design criteria were met. The current plan looked like boxes all over the place and would never be approved. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 MINUTES PAGE 9 Vice Mayor Addiego agreed with the concepts and noted Archstone would have been better if it were pushed back and went up. Commission Prouty continued that the 2"d-4`" levels needed to be set back and articulated. He felt it could be done and should be done tastefully. In his opinion, the positive thing about high density was that it made the land more valuable. Other developments would come in and be penciled. He appreciated a higher density so long as traffic and parking situations were compatible. Councilman Garbarino thought the concept of core parking was an excellent idea and wanted to continue down this path of keeping parking hidden and off of the streets. Commissioner Ochsenhirt cited the Oak Apartments development as a good example of this type of parking. Mayor Matsumoto questioned how traffic would be slowed down on South San Francisco's ECR, considering that we have Costco and Kaiser. Consultant noted this as a next step. Traffic engineers would need to identify provisions for street parking. If it was made a more active boulevard this would slow down the speeds. Preliminary street sections and planting programs would be looked at later to help bring elements together. Councilman Mullin stated while he wouldn't rule out alternative 3, the massing felt heavy to him. A challenge was making the heavily trafficked section a transit oriented area. He understood the need to move in the direction of SB 375 and AB 32 and thought alternative 2 was moving in the right direction without the added shock to the system. However, he felt that any of the alternatives would turn a very oddly shaped area into a vibrant walkable hub of activity for our community and ties into Orange Park created an opportunity for a live or play analysis. To the Mayor's point about senior housing, the City's family oriented community was more of an intergenerational setting, where extended family members lived together but agreed thought needed to be given to the retiring population. He would support a strong housing component which involved anything over 1000 units as we looked out over a 25 year time horizon. Regarding the civic piece, whether it was the Camaritas/Arroyo or ECR/Chestnut area, he was very supportive of a library and found the green space plaza concept and linkages to Orange Park to be very exciting. He thanked the Consultants for moving the City towards this direction and looked forward to refining the plan in the future. Planning Commissioner Bill Zemke felt alternative 3 pushed the envelope but he would not rule it out. He was most concerned about how the plan would affect the fringes. Parking issues needed to be addressed and made certain so that a bigger issue was not created. He also noted the odd shape of some of the parcels may cause some constraints because of utilities. Commissioner Prouty concurred. He wanted to make sure that utilities were underground in the area. Although it would cost more money, he felt it would be worth it as this would be the center of town. He wanted to look at expanding it out to other areas down the road, but this development gave the City the opportunity to start off right. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 MINUTES PAGE 10 Councilman Gonzalez was in support of alternative 2 and again mentioned the idea of combining alternatives 1 and 2. As for alternative 3, the Councilman questioned how many floors down would the parking structure go to support 1850 units. Consultant responded it would be one level below and one at grade. It depended on ground water tables and other things that may affect going down two levels. He continued that they had been little more creative on the use of the channel on alternative 3 and there may be a way to introduce a variation of that of that into alternative 2 that was more palatable. Commissioner Gupta questioned what the financial implications for the City of each alternative would be. Consultant stated BAE was conducting studies and apologized for not having the information available this evening. An initial analysis should be available within the next couple of weeks. Chairperson Wallace Moore was inclined to look at alternative 3 but concurred with Commissioner Prouty on the box style presentation of the parcels being unattractive. He felt whatever was done had to economically benefit the City and be supportive of transit oriented mixes. He appreciated the input from the community and encouraged them to continue to talk because they needed to know what was happening and foremost, the economic implications. Vice Mayor Addiego noted with alternative 3 you would have to build 18 buildings and an equivalent of three more Costcos at 150,000 square feet a piece. That was a lot for a relatively condensed area. Assistant City Manager Von Duyn responded the context was more what the opportunity threshold was for the entire general plan. As descried by Council and the Commission, this site would be the nucleus of the community and was the only site with a regional shopping opportunity. Looking at the entire community's growth, this area would have to service beyond just the reach of the residential component and would need a regional draw. While traffic and density comments were valid, a much larger catch basin of potential residents and customers needed to be considered. However, it may not materialize and it may become a much smaller field of opportunity. Councilman Mullin appreciated the revenue generation conversation and understood the need for sales tax but noted a pending evaluation on state and local tax structures and revenue sharing. There was possibility that the sales tax generated may not always be there and that other considerations took precedence. In terms of revenue generation, the situation 10 to 15 years down the road was unknown. Revenue generation was just one element, not the predominant element of the conversation. Commissioner Prouty reiterated the appeal of spanning the creek in order to pull the community back together from Grand Avenue all the way to ECR and have consistency. He also felt the Oak Avenue crossover was a great idea. The more connectivity the better it was for the City. Using dead space as parking areas and hiding it behind structured areas was another great idea. He hoped some of the aspects of alternative 3 could be incorporated into SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 MINUTES PAGE 11 alternative 2. Commissioner Roberto Bernardo was struck by the market projections which. stated the population of South San Francisco would increase by 24% by year 2035 to 7E,000 plus. According to the studies, we could accommodate between 1500 and 3000 new residential ~~nits. In regards to alternative 3, an addition 1850 units did not seem so scary if you take into ;account the market projections. Mayor Matsumoto asked Coordinator Lappen if he had anything to add as she had mistakenly cut-off his presentation earlier. Coordinator Lappen responded he had nothing further. :5. Adjournment. Chairperson Moore adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 8:32 p.m. :Being of no further business, Mayor Matsumoto adjourned the Council meeting at 8:32 p.m. Submitted by: ._..._w_- -_._ __. 1~e1.1r~arson, City Clerk City o~~South San Francisco Approved: Chairman ~, G ~ . Mark I~. Addiego, Mayor City oi' South San Francisco SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 MINUTES PAGE 12