Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04.04.91 Minutes April 4, 1991 regular meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission (Cassette NO.1) CALL TO ORDER: 7:30 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman DeZordo, Vice-Chairman Matteucci, Commissioners Boblitt, Mantegani, Warren, Wendler. ABSENT: Alan Zellmer. ALSO PRESENT: Planning Division Steve Solomon Maureen K. Morton Steve Carlson Judy Martin E. Costello Sandra Carl Ron parini Sgt. R. Petrocchi Lt. R. Moss Fred Lagomarsino Jeff Baca John Lucchesi Econ. & Comm. Dev. Conference Center Dir. Public Works Police Department Fire Department Building Division Design Review Board Member CHAIRMAN COMMENTS commissioner Zellmer arrived at 7:32 P.M. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of February 21, 1991 and March 7, 1991 Motion-Warren/Second-Matteucci: To approve the February 21, 1991 minutes as presented. Commissioners Mantegani and Wendler abstained from voting since they were not present at that meeting. Approved by voice vote. Motion-Mantegani/Second-Boblitt: To approve the March 7, 1991 minutes as presented. Commissioners Warren and Wendler abstained from voting since they were not present at that meeting. Approved by voice vote. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS AGENDA ITEMS - CONSENT ITEMS South San Francisco Joint Venture. 441 victory Avenue. PM-91-283 Tentative Parcel Map to create a single lot to create an office/warehouse condominium project in accordance with provisions of South San Francisco Municipal Code Title 19 and the State Map Act. Motion-Boblitt/Second-Warren: To approve consent item as presented. Approved by voice vote. The following two items were taken off the consent calendar. PAGE 1 OF 8 PAGES PC Meeting of 4/4/91 AGENDA ITEMS - Cont. Art Rise (SSFUSD. Owner). 753 Del Monte Avenue. UP-87-813/Mod 2 Use Permit Modification to allow a community theatre group to increase the number of performances conducted in a school building to 55 in accordance with provisions of South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 20.91. commissioner Wendler questioned whether this modification would increase the number of people attending as she was concerned about the parking. Planning Interim Martin explained that they were only increasing the number of performances per year and did not believe this would cause a parking problem. Motion-Wendler/Second-Mantegani: To approve UP-87-813/Mod 2 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the staff report. Approved by voice vote. Parkinq Company of America. 195 Produce Avenue. UP-91-887 Use Permit to allow a caretaker's unit in an existing airport parking facility and to retain the existing canopy (formerly indicated to be removed) for minor maintenance of vans in accordance with provisions of South San Francisco Municipal Code 20.32.030(a). Commissioner Boblitt asked staff if the UP-88-828/Mod 1 (Parking Company of America) conditions had been met. Planner Morton advised the Commission that she had made a site visit and all planning conditions had been met with the exception of providing for the trash receptacle. The Engineering Division reported that there are still some problems with street lights on Terminal Court but that staff would followup with the applicant. Speaking for the applicant: George Avanessian 400 Oyster Point Boulevard S S Francisco Mr. Avanessian explained that the unit has always been there but that they now wish to house a manager there 24-hours a day. Motion-Boblitt/Second-Warren: To approve UP-91-887 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the staff report. Approved by voice vote. 255 South Airport Boulevard. UP-91-888. Neqative Declaration No. 716. City of South San Francisco Use Permit and environmental determination of same to establish a conference center as a major public service in an existing building with an addition, exterior modifications, parking, landscaping and sign program in the P-C Zone District in accordance with provisions of South San Francisco Municipal Code section 20.24.030. PAGE 2 OF 8 PAGES PC Meeting of 4/4/91 AGENDA ITEMS - Cont. April 4, 1991 staff report presented. Sandra Carl, Executive Director of the Conference Center, advised the Commission that the Conference Center Board has been working on this project for about a year. She also stated that this project is funded by Proposition C which contributes an additional $2.50 per night at hotels in South San Francisco. The Conference Center Board approved the preliminary design on March 14, 1991 and it was approved by City Council March 28, 1991. The Board hired Jeurgen Fehr to prepare a traffic study for the project. The Board has been considering a lot on Gateway Boulevard which would provide 300 extra parking spaces and contracting for a shuttle service between the two sites. The project schedule is as follows: construction to begin in september or October of 1991 with the opening on October 1, 1992. Speaking for the applicant: Charles Ham Group 4 301 Linden Avenue S S Francisco Mr. Ham explained the site which is between the Holiday Inn and the Radisson. The Holiday Inn is a 2 story building and the Radisson an 8 story building so it was decided to make the conference center a 3 or 4 story building in order to blend in with the other two hotels. Mr. Ham showed a drawing of the lobby and explained its features. He then explained how the existing 1964 warehouse building would be renovated. Speaking for the applicant: Juergen Fehr Fehr and Peers Assoc. 3685 Mt. Diablo Blvd. Lafayette Mr. Fehr stated the firm did the traffic study. He advised the Commission that no two conference centers are alike. Traffic will depend on the kind of events held in the center and what associations will be using the facility. He said he was available for any questions the Commission might have. Speaking against the project: Lou Dell'Angela 460 Gardenside Avenue S S Francisco Mr. Dell'Angela stated the major issue was traffic. He also stated that the lot which was being proposed for additional parking was contracted to someone else. He believed that the Design Review Board was being ignored; why couldn't those recommendations be implemented? He questioned the statement that there was a potential for approximately 2,700 people at the center; why was the traffic report based on approximately 1,200 people? He was concerned with the fact that the site had settled 5 to 6 feet in the last ten years and staff had suggested that it would only settle 2 inches in the next twenty years. He reminded the Commission that it was their responsibility to treat this application just like any other application. PAGE 3 OF 8 PAGES PC Meeting of 4/4/91 AGENDA ITEMS - Cont. Commissioner Warren stated that many questions which were not answered. She asked Mr. Fehr about the intersection of Produce and San Mateo. Commissioner Warren stated that conferences start late but they always seemed to end on time which is around 4 or 5 p.m. and that traffic may be very heavy. Commissioner Warren asked that staff find out what conference centers were used for comparison in the traffic study; specific names and places. commissioner Zellmer stated that parking needs analysis was seriously flawed. Figures were based on 50% of the people driving which is extremely optimistic. On-site parking was a real problem and the Commission would need to know exactly where the satellite lot was to be located and how it was going to be managed. Commissioner Boblitt stated that the Commission needs complete packages in order to process an application; if not it should be sent back. She noted that the concerns of the Design Review Board have not been addressed. She saw serious parking problems. Commissioner Boblitt also expressed her desire to know the exact location of the satellite lot. commissioner Matteucci asked if the City had any leases for any satellite lots. The Conference Center Director stated they did not. He also had serious concerns about traffic impact, and especially the parking. Commissioner Mantegani expressed concern about the fact that the site had settled 4 to 5 feet. He assumed that the floor of the building would then be at water level. He asked if anything is going to be done about it. He also had serious concerns about the traffic impact. commissioner Wendler was concerned that no management plan had been submitted. She felt enforcement is an issue that should be addressed; safety and security also had to be addressed. She also asked if other cities are successfully using shuttles to get their people to and from conference centers? She stated that many families would be accompanying their husband or wives to 'conferences during the summer and it would be a good idea to have a shuttle to San :g~ii~il%~iw.il[;ji~ia..;iiijifif.;lllllllItli"I'!!W"!!~'!!t~!'ft'!e 'besIgn...'IfevI'ew....i:k).arcfi..s....sugge.stIo'i1"s....c.oui'd.... be....Inco.rpora ted without undue excessive cost to the City. John Lucchessi, Design Review Boardmember, was asked to comment on the project. He stated there were three issues of discussion: 1) the drum, 2) integration of the new and the existing building, and 3) the lobby. Mr. Lucchessi said the design intent was to distinguish the new addition from the existing building. The back is modestly improved. The distinction between the two should be made very clear. Mr. Ham stated that he was willing to work with the Design Review Board and staff to'work out something.acceptable for everyone. One concern expressed by the Commission was that of the integration PAGE 4 OF 8 PAGES PC Meeting of 4/4/91 AGENDA ITEMS - Cont. of an old building and a new lobby feature. commissioner Matteucci was concerned about the traffic impact, parking availability, funding availability, the satellite parking lot, the landscaping and the upkeep of said landscaping. commissioner Wendler asked Mr. Ham if Item #6 of the Design Review Board recommendations had been addressed. Chairman DeZordo was concerned about pedestrian access; this issue has not been addressed. He also was concerned that the Design Review Board recommendations had not been integrated. It was the consensus of the Commission that, at a maximum capacity of 2700 people, the traffic impact would be significant. Also the pedestrian access and Design Review Board comments should be addressed. A summary of the Commission's concerns in each of these categories follow below: I. Traffic and Parking A. Traffic Study 1. The intersection analysis should be expanded to include Produce/Airport and other key intersections in the Airport Boulevard corridor. 2. Evaluate the worst case scenario of maximum capacity assuming a theatre type seating arrangement. 3. Include concrete mitigation measures. 4. Identify the conference centers that formed the basis for the traffic study. 5. Provide an analysis of each of the conference centers including size, size and frequency of events and other operational characteristics and the type of traffic issues specific to each. 6. Include an analysis of pedestrian circulation and necessary safety improvements. 7. Update the study to reflect the proposed project in its entirety including the satellite lot. 8. Analyze the on-site and off-site traffic impacts of the satellite lot. B. Parking Study 1. Identify a specific location for the satellite lot. PAGE 5 OF 8 PAGES PC Meeting of 4/4/91 AGENDA ITEMS - Cont. 2. Provide a specific parking management plan. 3. Provide a copy of the agreement for parking on the satellite lot. 4. Provide an analysis of the location and adequacy of truck delivery area. 5. Analyze the parking requirements of other conference centers cited above. 6. Provide a parking layout of the satellite lot. C. Shuttle Service 1. Provide confirmation that hotels will provide shuttle service. 2. Provide analysis of the effectiveness of the shuttle service especially at the other conference centers cited above. 3. Provide a specific plan for the shuttle service including a security plan and improvements at the satellite lot to facilitate its use. II. Drainage, Flooding and Soil Settlement A. Drainage 1. Provide an analysis of the apparent drainage problem affecting the site and especially the parking lot. 2. Identify improvements to provide drainage of the parking lot and the conference center site. B. Flooding 1. Provide an analysis of the extent of the site's susceptibility for flooding and past flooding. 2. Identify how the structure will be protected against flooding. 3. Analyze how the potential for flooding will affect the ability to obtain insurance. C. Soils 1. Provide analysis of the site's susceptibility to past and future soil settlement. Define the extent of settlement in the area. PAGE 6 OF 8 PAGES PC Meeting of 4/4/91 AGENDA ITEMS - Cont. III. Building Design A. Design 1. Develop a solution to screen rooftop mounted equipment visible from the street. 2. Improve the size of the access to the lobby and the visibility of the ground level interior of the lobby area from the exterior. 3. Resolve the issue of the exterior design of the elliptical lobby (i.e. curved vs. faceted). 4. Heighten the contrast between the existing building and the addition through exterior color and materials. Motion-Warren/Second-Zellmer: To continue UP-91-888 to the April 18, 1991 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow staff to prepare options to be able to respond to the Commission's concerns. Approved by voice vote. Chairman DeZordo called for a 10-minute recess at 9:35 P.M. The meeting was reconvened at 9:48 P.M. ITEMS FROM STAFF Syufy Theatres. UP-84-688/Mod 4 At the October 15, 1990 Planning Commission meeting the Commission requested a 6-month update on this project. The Police Department had recommended, at that time, to have two guards on the site. Sgt. Petrocchi reported to the Commission that since the two guard requirement was mandated there has been a drop of service calls to the Police Department. Sgt. Petrocchi asked the Commission to request the applicant to maintain the two guards on the site. He advised the Commission that Syufy had dropped the contract with their current security company and is now going to use their own employees as guards. commission Wendler asked for an additional 6-month update. Chief Planner Solomon discussed the upcoming field trip to Genentech on April 11, 1991. Top Gun's request for a temporary banner for a period of 30 days was approved. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION commissioners Boblitt, Matteucci and Wendler discussed the Planning Commissioners Institute they attended in Monterey on March 20-22, 1991. They thanked Elaine Costello, Director of Economic Community and Development for the opportunity to go to this conference. PAGE 7 OF 8 PAGES PC Meeting of 4/4/91 commissioner Warren stated she would not be present at the April 18, 1991 meeting. Chairman DeZordo adjourned the meeting at 110: 1991, 6:00 P.M. at the Genentech Resea~~h' P.M.XO April,'ll, D,v,lo~~en~ Faq~lity. 11\ \i II i ./! if /Y I' \)' II II ., ,I iff ,! '/' ~',' ~ 1,.'.L"irl .,.,,!." :I :.'{. '" Vi /1,1'. I \ H U iln \j ,,.j ~ &I tt ~rJf.~ ~ steve Solomon, Secretary Planning Commission City of South San Francisco Michael DeZordo, Chairman Planning Commission City of South San Francisco MD:SS:ab PAGE 8 OF 8 PAGES PC Meeting of 4/4/91