HomeMy WebLinkAbout01.07.99 Minutes
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MINUTES
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING
33 ARROYO DRIVE
January 7, 1999
CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL / CHAIR COMMENTS
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia, Commissioner Masuda, Commissioner Romero,
Commissioner Baldocchi, Commissioner Honan, Commissioner Sim
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Chairman Barnett
STAFF PRESENT:
Planning Division:
Jim Harnish, Chief Planner
Steve Carlson
Susy Kalkin
Mike Upston
Mike Lappen
City Attorney:
Engineering:
Police Dept.:
Water Quality:
Adam Lindgren
Richard Harlllon
Sgt. Mike Massoni
Ray Honan
AGENDA REVIEW
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia asked if there were any changes to the agenda and mentioned that item number
2, JMB, was being continued.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
December 3, 1998
Motion-Baldocchi / Second-Sim. Approved by unanimous roll call vote, with Chairman Barnett being absent.
December 17, 1998
Motion-Baldocchi / Second-Sim. Approved by unanimous roll call vote, with Chairman Barnett being absent.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
No one chose to speak.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Westborough Hill Plaza
Clarmil International Corp, Owner
\\CH-PDC\ISHADD\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\OI0799 pc.doc
Page 1 of 19
Arrow Sign Co., Applicant
3569 Callan Boulevard
SC-98-105 and Categorical Exemption Class 11, Section 15311 (a)
Type "C" Sign Permit allowing a directory pylon and monument sign in a Retail Commercial (C-I)
Zone District.
2. JMB Storage Lot
Howard Giard, Dupont Owner
Melissa Steeves and Margaret Burke, JMB Construction, Applicant
160 So. Linden Avenue
UP-98-085 and Categorical Exemption Class, 4, Section 15304
Use Permit to allow storage of constnlction equipment and vehicles and equipment repair in a Light
Industrial (M-I) Zone District. Staff recommends the item be continued to January 21,1999.
Motion-Masuda / Second-Baldocchi. Consent Calendar approved by unanimous roll call vote with
Chairman Barnett being absent.
PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS
3. Oyster Point King Ventures
Owner: City of South San Francisco
Applicant: King Ventures
MND 96-079, SPA 96-079, ZA-96-079, RZ-97-079, PM 96-079 and PP 96-079 (Continuedfrom
Planning Commission Meeting of December 17, 1998)
Oyster Point Marina Specific Plan Amendment allowing shared use of public parking on Parcel 5 and
allowing reduced side and rear setbacks on Parcels 1, 2, and 4, amending the Oyster Point Marina
Specific Plan land use diagram re-designating a portion of Parcel 5 from public park uses to private
restaurant, Zoning Amendment to the Oyster Point Marina Specific Plan Zoning District SSFMC
Chapter 20.59 allowing shared use of public parking on Parcel 5 and allowing reduced side and rear
setbacks on Parcels 1, 2 and 4, and Rezoning the Oyster Point Marina Specific Plan District zoning
map redesignating a portion of Parcel 5 designated for public park uses to commercial uses and
reflecting the widening of Oyster Point Boulevard and Marina Way, Tentative Parcel Map to
reconfigure property boundaries between several parcels including sites (1, 2,4, and 5), and a Precise
Plan for hotel and restaurant facilities on sites (1, 2, and 4), situated on a partially developed site
bounded by Oyster Point Boulevard, Marina Way and San Francisco Bay, in accordance with SSFMC
Titles 19 and 20.
Public Hearing was opened.
Senior Planner Carlson gave the staff report.
Assistant City Attorney Lindgren stated that the applicant had requested a clarification to condition # 7 of
the Planning Division. The applicant had initially requested that the maximum period of stay in the vacation
club unit, and the hotel condominium unit be limited to 29 days p~r year in order to maintain its
characterization as a transient hotel. The applicant has asked that the condition be modified and it was agreed
that staff could support an amendment to condition # 7 to strike the words, from January 1 through
December 30 in any year and replace those words with, in any six month period The effect of the
amendment would be to count the 29 days within a six month period rather than in a one year period
\ \CH - PDC\ISHADD\File Cabinet\Old PC\ working\minutes\1999\0 1 0799 pc. doc
Page 2 of 19
David Watson, representing King Ventures stated they are at the meeting in support of staffs
recommendations. He appreciates the effort and energy that staff has put into the project. He proceeded to
explain a letter that had been given to Senior Planner Steve Carlson, regarding the widening at the comer of
Marina Blvd. and Oyster Point Blvd. and the proposed office building. The widening required the building
to be redesigned. Parking has been such a concern that he asked his designers to find a way to solve it without
modifying the parking areas or driveway access. He also asked them to reconfigure the building to maintain
the architectural design. The 20,000-SF project is a two-story structure identical to the Marina Village office
complex. The redesigned building size is reduced by about 2,300-SF to I7,700-SF net area. He proceeded
to point out the changes on an exhibit that was distributed, and the minor architectural changes have actually
improved the buildings. He asked if the Commission would incorporate the office back into Phase I. This is
very important to Phase I and the viability of the Village operation. With respect to the amendment that was
offered by the Assistant City Attorney, the applicant supports the change. On page 5 of the conditions, sub-
paragraph B, regarding the requirement to fund the traffic signal, he suggested that the possible hotel
development up the hill, as well as other developments in the Marina, share the cost. They request the
opportunity to talk about the subject with the City Engineer. He also referred to a change he wanted on page
3 of 5, of the Mitigation Measures, Mitigation Measure 9 K. This refers to issues relative to vibration and
noise from pile driving anticipated proportions from the foundation of the project. The first half of the
sentence and mitigation is acceptable to them. They would request that the Commission put a period at the
end of at least six weeks prior to pile driving activities; and delete: to balance the mitigation. This
mitigation would require for them to close the restaurant and hotel during those operations. They would advise
patrons and guests that would be coming to the facility of their pile driving activit~es.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia - asked for comments on the new items and on including the office in Phase I,
the cost sharing item, and the change to Mitigation Measure 9 K.
Senior Planner Carlson stated that the office design would improve the appearance of the building and
recommends inclusion of the office building, if that is the decision of the Commission. Relative to Mitigation
Measure 9 K, staff recommends that it be changed to provide ad vance notice to the patrons and guests that
there is pile driving. This revision would still fulfill the intent of the condition to limit the number of
individuals exposed to pile driving. The pile driving activity should not occur for a very long period of time;
Richard Harmon stated the Director of Public Works is managing the Oyster Point widening project. He did
not feel there needed to be any change made in the conditions because the conditions permit the Director of
Public Works to decide how much would be appropriate for the contribution. Those matters have to be
handled by the Director of Public Works and the applicant.
Peter Grennell, General Manager of San Mateo County Harbor District, spoke in support of staff's
recommendation to approve the project, and include the addition into Phase I of the office. The Harbor District
did approve, in concept to the entire project including the office. They have already approved leases for the
two Phase I hotels. That are expected to go on the City Council's, January 27, 1999, agenda for approval of
the joinder. They are prepared to recommend approval of the lease for the office building site. With the
Commission's approval, he would move to put it on the Harbor District's agenda for January 20th, and would
like to put it on the City Council's agenda for the 27th. In regard to the proposal of placing Bay Trail access
along the eastern end of parcel D2, where the 45 unit hotel is going, that access is something for which the City
and Harbor District have applied for a State grant. This access will take the form of a combined pedestrian
bicycle trail class one standard. It will link up with a proposed trail going from the Oyster Point Boulevard
connection along Marina Boulevard, and turns down toward the water. They feel that is a feasible proposition
and have worked it out with City Engineering staff. In the [mal detail designs they would stress the importance
\\CH-PDC\ISHADD\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\010799 pc.doc
Page 3 of 19
of not losing any parking in that area. One last point on shared parking for purpose of a clarification; they are
in concurrence for Phase I. Their concern with shared parking in the past was only with respect to potential
impacts on the parking area needed for the Marina. As far as the proponents are talking about shared parking
within their leased areas, the District does not have any problems with that as long as they comply with City
requirements.
Commissioner Masuda asked Mr. Grennell if the District is going to retain the public shower that is at the
beach or is that going to be King Ventures' .
Mr. Grennell responded by saying that at this time all existing public facilities are supposed to be retained.
In Phases II & III of the King Ventures project, if there is a detailed final proposal for changes, they will deal
with it at the time. It is not their intention to lose any public facilities. The Harbor District would want to
increase them given the expected increase use in the area.
Commissioner Masuda questioned if they would put one down where the beach is, so that the public won't
use the ones in the proposed proj ect area.
Mr. Grennell stated they have portable restrooms there now and they would hope to improve those facilities.
They would have to work with the applicants to see what they will be required to provide. It is their long-term
intention to improve all of the facilities, their restrooms and also the public access that would connect the
existing trails. That is already part of the lease for parcel C at the Rod & Gun Club site. As soon as the City
approves the lease for the Parcel C they will instnlct King Ventures to proceed with the demolition of the Rod
& Gun Club site, given that they have all the necessary approvals.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia mentioned that he echoed Commissioner Masuda's concerns. He would hate to
see this project crowd out the current public uses. The beach gets considerable use during the summer. He
asked if it would be advantages to require some sort of outside facility to accommodate the beach goers.
Mr. Grennell stated that they agree that the beach is an important facility. They have had comments from
beach users about its importance and need for improvement. This project does not and the Harbor District will
not allow any loss of beach. The existing lease requires King Ventures to connect trail access, which will pass
before the proposed hotel. This would be behind the beach with no loss of beach. The King Ventures proposal
links access to the trail through the existing parking lot next to the Rod & Gun Club. It would be a connection
out to Oyster Point.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia questioned if the Harbor District was going to remove the last set of berths.
Mr. Grennell stated that at this time they do not propose to remove those berths. As of this morning they were
at 75% occupancy. When he began with the District a year and a half ago they were at only 60%. They want
to keep every berth they currently have.
Dean Peterson, Deputy Director of San Mateo County's Environmental Health Division, mentioned he
looked forward to working with City staff. His staff was present if the Commission had any questions for
them.
Public Hearing was closed.
Assistant City Attorney Lindgren clarified the language on Mitigation Measure 9 K and suggested that the
measure be revised consistent with Mr. Carlson's comments to state, beginning at the words and advise and
continuing as amended restaurant and hotel guests of any pile driving activities at the time the guests
make reservations.
\ \CH -PDC\ISHAD D\File Cabinet\Old PC\ working\minutes\1999\0 1 0799 pc.doc
Page 4 of 19
Commissioner Romero recommended that the office building be included back into the project. The
revisions they have made are appropriate and it should go forward. The details can be worked out with the
staff.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia thought the change was an improvement to the original design. Motion will be
to recommend with the modification of the office building and the two changes to the Mitigation Measures
and the Conditions.
Motion-Romero / Second-Sim. Approved by unanimous roll call vote with Chairman Barnett being
absent.
Recess called at 8:30
Recalled to order at 8 :40
4. Materials Recovery Facility and Transfer Station (MRF ITS)
South San Francisco Scavengers, Inc. (SSFSC), Owner/Applicant
Vacant Land on East Jamie Court
ZA-98-013, GP-98-013, UP-98-013, EIR-98-013, RZ-98-013
SSFSC desires to consolidate its existing administrative and refuse disposal operations, including
diverting recyclable material from the waste stream, through the construction of a state-of-the-art
MRF/TS. The MRF/TS facility will comprise four buildings totaling 128,704 square feet. The
primary MRF/TS building is approximately 101,800 square feet in size. The project also contains a
2-story administrative office building, a smaller MRF Visitor Center, a maintenance building, and
service building where containers can be welded, painted and repaired.
Public Hearing was opened.
Mike Lappen, Consultant Planner, gave the staff report and recommend that the PC continue the item
without closing the Public Hearing. He pointed out letters that were received after distribution of Staff report
and a memo from Assistant City Attorney Lindgren regarding AB 939
End of tape 1
Recess called at 9:25
Recalled to order at 9: 35
Stephanie Uccelli Menner, representative of South San Francisco Scavenger Co., stated Mike Lappen had
outlined the MRF/Transfer Station project, and the evolution of the process that had led them to the meeting.
The new facility will be a modem state of the art facility that is capable of increasing the City's recycling
component and leading to greater diversion, and the achievement of the State mandated goals as delineated
in AB 939. AB 939 outlines the need to reduce the amount of waste sent to the landfill, 25% by 1995, and
50% by the year 2000. The goals outlined by AB 939 and the need for this project were important enough to
merit recognition in the new City franchise agreement that was signed in 1997. The facility will be a modem
facility benefiting South San Francisco's residential and business community. It will provide greater services,
including a public buy back center, household hazardous waste facility, and an educational center. The facility
is a result of a great deal of planning. It is a modem way of dealing with the City's refuse for the next 25-30
years. It is a Materials Recovery Facility, where materials are collected, sorted, and consolidated. Then
ultimately shipped to a recycling market, with any residue being transported to a landfill. Since application
\\CH-PDC\ISHADD\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\010799 pc. doc
Page 5 of 19
was submitted one year ago, they have made revisions. She wanted to reinforce the fact that the EIR did
evaluate the previous designs of the building. It did incorporate a number of staff's comments or the
comments by Design Review Board. The designs that the Commission will see has incorporated those
comments.
Bob Carn, US Greiner-Project Manager, continued with the presentation. He proceeded to give background
information on the company. Traffic control in the facility is very important to them. They looked very closely
at the separation of commercial vehicles and public vehicles when they enter the site. This has been proven
to be very successful and necessary for efficiency and for safety. They would bring the public into the facility,
they would go over their own scale, and they do all the operations at the west end of the building. When
complete unloading they exit the building. They don't have to go any further onto the site, and they keep their
operations at one end. The commercial vehicles come onto the site, go over a separate scale and they go do
their operations on the other end of the facility. There is a complete separation, it takes up a lot more area on
the site but is very important for efficiency and safety. Another item that was important in the layout of the
facilities, was that there is a IOO-foot shoreline band, which is mandated by BCDC. All the facilities or
structures on this facility are outside of that IOO-foot BCDC shoreline band. This was done for two reasons
1) to get it out of there; 2) it will maximize the ability for open space and for landscaping, which will be
discussed later. It is important that they talk about the size of the Material Recovery Facility building, because
that is the largest on the site. There are several operations going on in this building. They think it is important
to efficiently and safely move vehicles around within the building. That they efficiently move waste within
the building, and they maximize the ability to recover recyclables from the waste stream. This is very critical
in the layout of the building. Another thing that takes up a lot of room is parking. They have provided enough
parking needed to handle a few visitors, the employees and the fleet vehicles. No additional parking has been
provided. A lot went into the planning of the site. It is not as large as it appears to be when you take the 100-
foot BCDC shoreline band, and what is available for development. They do not have any extra on the site with
respect to going lower. Mike addressed different site areas that are possible, but this site as it is, is not more
than it has to be for them. The public would go into the facility through the west end of the building. They
would unload any waste inside the building, which will be moved for top loading and will have a buy back
center to drop the recyclables off and will be taken to the other side of the building for processing. If there is
any green waste it would be taken and moved for processing. The household hazardous waste will be taken
to the same area to be stored in a County operated facility. There are only four different types of waste which
go into the facility, it is not just a transfer station it is a processing facility. They have green waste that go into
the facility, where they are unloaded, reduced in size and loaded on to the trailer to be removed from the site
for further processing. This would all occur inside the building. They also have wet petrucible waste or little
to no recycling in them; dry waste or significant amount of recyclables in them; and curbside collected
recyclables are brought to the facility. This will all be handled in different ways. The vehicles bringing the
wet petrucibles will enter the building, unload and moved directly to top loading area and removal from the
site. That will be done on a daily basis. Dry wastes are placed on floor any recyclables are manually sorted
off the floor that are obvious ones. The remainder is pushed in to an infloor conveyor. This is where the
manual sorting and mechanical separation takes place, recyclables are removed from the waste stream, and
placed into storage bins. With the curb sited facility the exact thing is done. Any residue from the operation
is taken by conveyer and placed into transfer trailers. The recovered recyclables are moved by an infloor
conveyor to a bailor where they are condensed, placed into bails, put into storage, loaded out into trucks, and
sent to markets up and down the west coast or even overseas. A lot is going on inside the building. Planning
for it and the operations of it have been done to maximize efficiency, improve safety and maximize the
recovery of recyclables from the waste stream. He then went on to talk about the noise and odor issues that
have come up. Design of Transfer Stations and design of Materials Recovery Facilities has matured to the
point where there are certain design issues, which have been important and be considered in the design. The
transfer station and processing facility should be completely enclosed. All operations should be done
undercover inside the building. All wet petrucible waste and residue from processing should be removed on
a daily basis. The developer of this facility should be aware of the prevailing winds and the facility should be
\\CH-PDC\ISHADD\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\010799 pc. doc
Page 6 of 19
laid out so that the winds do not come in contact with the major waste processing systems, and have any effects
on those being moved around the building. Inside of the building, the design of a dust control or misting
system with the ability to add a deodorizer to it should be installed to locally control dust and any in station
odors. The tenant should also provide a proper housekeeping system for the control of dust and litter. This is
a completely enclosed facility. The only openings are to allow vehicles to access and egress the building. All
operations will occur inside the building. Waste is unloaded, top loaded, and processed inside the building.
Waste will be removed on a daily basis. There will be a dust control system with a deodorizer built in to the
facility. Prevailing winds come from the south and southwest, some will come from the north and northeast.
The south wall and east wall are solid walls to prevent winds entering the building and causing problems and
moving any odors around. It is also adjacent to the Bay Trail, the users will not see anything but the aesthetic
appearance of the building. Odors will be contained within the building and exhausted. With the design and
what has proven to be successful this is a facility that will not cause impacts on the neighbors and the Bay Trail
users. The consultant had noise measurements taken at the existing Blue Line station and the vacant Haskins
site. The results were that the decibels varied from 64db, up to 74db at the Blue Line station. The larger
measurements were taken at the working compactor and next to the large open area in the small station. At
the Haskins site the noise readings were 68db, from noises of surrounding industries, and from the airport.
There are no compactors or large openings in the new station. Noise readings around the site will be at 66-
67 db. There will be minimal impact from this facility with respect to noise. There has been a lot of thought
into trying to minimize the noise and odor concerns and traffic control in the facility. They have done a lot
in addressing the concerns of Design Review Board, BCDC, and City staff on the aesthetic features of the
building.
Joseph Marshall, Patri-Merker Architects, focused on the Design Review Board and EIR comments, and what
they have done to mitigate their concerns. The DEIR (Draft Environmental Impact Report) was based on
drawings that were done prior to the presentation to the DRB. They wanted to create a unified campus
environment, architectural character and continuity of scale between the buildings. They wanted to relate the
development to its color palette, and provide amenities for the public and employees that will use the facility
and site. Considerable thought went into the integration of the development to the site through landscaping
, and incorporated ecologically sound design principles per the Design Review Board's recommendation. The
project responds to a greater context, as well, that of the Bay, Airport, San Bruno Mountain and the
surrounding hillsides, which are all very attractive amenities. In the vicinity there is the Fuller O'Brien plant
which is directly to the north of the site. As seen from the Genentech campus, the building is large and is
going to screen out their site. The Fuller O'Brien building is quite large, less aIticulate and less landscaping
with what they propose with their development. The form of the processing facility and the structural system
has been the driver in the form of the building. They have taken care and have been diligent in response to
the comments to modulate the fa~ade. They tried to incorporate the elements of the administration building
in the signage mass, into the fa~ade of the processing building. They have also changed some of the coloration
of the processing building to more directly respond to the maintenance building, which is adjacent to it. In
response.to the character of the development the SSF Design Review Board has lauded the Design concepts
for the administration and maintenance buildings. Alterations to the processing buildings have been done in
response to the comments of the DRB, and trying match the design success of those buildings. They have
added additional landscaping to tie the buildings closer. Introduction of striped glazing is a signature that
denotes public entrance, and creates connections between the sorting lines, which occur just behind the fa~ade.
At the MRF public entrance there is additional landscaping. The Design Review Board has encouraged them
to pursue sustainable Ecological Design Principles in the project. Investigating using storm water retention
and filtration for use in irrigation; reusing existing facilities, and day lighting principles are used throughout
the buildings for reduction of energy, they are adding 1,400 linear feet to the Bay Trail for recreational
purposes. They have worked with Planning Staff and the DRB to improve this project and meets the East of
101 design guidelines and establishes a new benchmark for design in the area.
Dan Mower, Landscape Architect on project-Callendar and Associates Landscape Architects, stated that they
\\CH-PDC\ISHADD\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\010799 pc.doc
Page 7 of 19
have increased some of the planting areas to establish more trees and vegetation to soften the entrance to the
site. They also increased landscaping planting islands inside the facility. They have provided a double row
of trees to mitigate some of the winds that will occur from the south, minimizing the impact inside the facility.
They have provided planting beds and islands on the south edge of the project. On the east edge they have
provided these to soften the building fa~ade, and provide a pleasurable entrance into the educational facility
and the office building. Their goal was to bring vegetation close to the building to minimize the sharp angles
on the building, and for it to be a pleasurable experience for the Bay Trail users. The public will access the
Bay Trail from the side until it is connected to the existing trail. They are providing a path that comes from
the public street, which will be monitored by gates during off-hours of the facility. They are proposing a trail
that is within the BCDC jurisdiction, which will terminate at the Northeast comer of the project. They are
currently working with BCDC and looking at future potential crossings where the applicant will be a
participant in providing the Bay Trail connection in a future time. When a trail is established on the other side
of the marshland. The architecture between the buildings is very similar and they are trying to do the same
with the landscaping. They want to keep the landscape consistent throughout the whole project, along the Bay
Trail and on the interior of the project. Providing more campus field, so the public doesn't feel they are in two
different places while they walk along the trail. They have a cross section at the south edge of the project at
the main office building, there is a trail that they are dropping down a little bit, at the end of the processing
plant just to provide a vertical separation. They have 74 feet of public access within the 100 foot BCDC band.
It is a good zone considering the use of the site. In all the landscape plantings on the bays edge they will be
native landscape plants and will be referencing successful plants for SSF guidelines established for plant
material that will thrive in this area.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia questioned if the parking was on the IOO-foot band, which is not allowed or/either
it will take exception to allow that.
Mr. Mower replied that the parking is but the buildings are not.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia asked what size of trees they are proposing to start with, and how many years
down the road does the growth represent.
Mr. Mowar stated that it is varied on the species and the size that is put in. It would probably be a mix of
sizes 15 and 24 inch box trees. They have found that when they are planting native species in the long run it
is a better plant specimen.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia stated that in this particular area with such bad winds, unless a mature tree is put
in it is hard to see a tree mature in that area and asked if that was taken into thought?
Mr. Mowar said it would be in future drawings. He stated that they are proposing a combination of fence
material both solid and open. They are going to break it up in different locations optimizing views in and out
of the facility. There are different break points through the fence that the public can access the Bay Trail.
There will be turnout areas or rest areas with picnic tables, benches, and interpretive signs. Also capturing
some of the views into the site and the Bay Area. They will be providing native material throughout the site
both interior and exterior. On the interior they would take the native vegetation and put it into a formal
arrangement so they have the same texture color and material as the native material on the shores edge. It will
not contrast against the building. They are trying to address the ecological issues of the comments, they
propose to use as many recycle products as possible. They will have panels describing native vegetation, and
description of processing facilities describing the evolution of the/recycling system. There will be an attractive
and friendly environment.
Mrs. Uccelli closed the presentation by saying that numerous changes have been made to the original design.
The design has been improved to reduce the impacts of the project. It has been responsive to the concerns
\\CH-PDC\ISHADD\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\010799 pc.doc
Page 8 of 19
voiced by staff and DRB. They also believe that the design meets with the intent of the East of 101 guidelines.
In working with staff they have enjoyed a cooperative relationship and a positive experience. They appreciate
all the efforts that have been taken by staff. They would like to make SSF a showcase for recycling facilities
on the west coast. She asked the Commission to keep in mind that this is also an educational facility for the
community. It will provide a recreational area for those who live and work in the area. The City has an
opportunity to be forward thinking and to provide the community this essential public service.
James Johnson, 275 Sequoia Ave. Redwood City, stated that Folk Art International, which owns warehouse
facilities at 360 Swift, Unit 47 and 380 Swift, Unit 24, employs him. He stated he was representing the owner,
Mr. Raymond Handley, who also owns Renault and Handley Commercial and Industrial Real Estate. Years
ago Mr. Handley purchased the facilities. These look out across the San Bruno Inlet with its thriving tidal
marshland teeming with birds and fish, with joggers and dog walkers passing by on the bayfront trail. He
purchased the property with the expectation that this would be a pleasant and inspirational location for his
private art collection and commercial warehouse. It was conveniently situated near the airport and freeway
for the delivery of shipments from around the world and located midway between their retail galleries in San
Francisco and Menlo Park, a place they could invite the public for occasional warehouse sales. It is a pleasure
for him to go to work in the morning and gaze out across the bay towards the rising sun through wheeling
flocks of birds or egrets and herons stalk the mud flats and Canada geese and ducks patrol the waters further
out. It has been with satisfaction that they have seen the area transforming from grim, rusted out hulks of old
industrial buildings to pleasantly landscaped commercial facilities and bioengineering research campuses.
South City was becoming a hidden jewel he was proud to show to friends. The lower land use designation
proposed for the tip of this peninsula is troubling to them. . The noise and stench of a garbage transfer and
recycling facility and the huge increase in truck traffic it will bring is inconsistent with the way the area was
developing and contrary to the City's avowed plans for the area. It certainly cannot be good for their business
or for local real estate values. This is just the tip of the iceberg. This week PG&E had been studying the
adjacent land for a commercial power generation facility. These land use changes are fully consistent with the
other proposed major development projects in the area. The constnlction of a two-mile long airport runway,
which would intersect the head of this peninsula closing off San Bruno Bay from the main body of San
Francisco Bay under the airport's preferred option of a one-intersection project. This bay will die. The local
property owners, including Genentech Corporation and his company will have the jumbo jets of the future in
their front yards. They are alarmed because of the nexus of these proposals is troubling and though not
surprising. People enjoy watching planes take off from a comfortable distance. The two-intersection runway
project can be modified to provide greater plane separation and only a single intersection, would put the
proposed runway far enough away that restaurant customers might come to watch the airport traffic.
Commercial and research facilities could still flourish on Jamie Court, and San Bruno Bay would be saved.
If Cargill can be induced to part with their salt flats for the right price as mitigation for the runway bayfill, as
Ralph Nobles proposes, even that huge project might prove environmentally beneficial. Let this area develop
as has been planned and as they have anticipated and let another location in a less developed area be found for
the transfer facility.
Rusty Firenze, 260 Michele Ct. and 35 South Linden, stated they have been a neighbor of South San
Francisco Scavenger for 30 years, and would be a neighbor if they moved to the new location. There were
some issues he wanted to address; one is the traffic issue that was brought up. Anyone who is familiar with
refuge companies knows they don't travel at peak hours. They have operated a retail service station, three
doors from them, and they have never impeded their business once in their most highly trafficked hours, which
are between 7 a.m. and 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. in the evening. This is because they leave at
3 o'clock in the morning and return somewhere between 9 or a little after. The transfer trucks leave once the
garbage is there. The impact on traffic would be minimal on peak hours. They would still have their garbage
trucks traveling those routes anyhow because they service the area all the time. They have done numerous
traffic studies, when they built one of their facilities out there. The only impacted areas on travel are Gateway
Boulevard and East Grand A venue. This occurs about 45 minutes in the morning and in the afternoon. There
\ \CH -PDC\ISHADD\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\O 10799 pc. doc
Page 9 of 19
is little traffic on Forbes, Harbor, and Grand. The real impact areas are on Oyster Point, Forbes where
Genentech is. If you are at Gull at 5 p.m. they all come that direction. Traffic is not an issue and it should not
be addressed as an issue. Something else that we need to be reminded of is that anyone that has worked with
BCDC, cannot do a project without protecting the bay and their IOO-foot band and without making sure you
have insured it. One of the conditions is to mitigate the problems with the contaminated slough. There is
contaminated slough there and with this project it might be cleaned up. No one is going to be responsible for
cleaning up that slough unless someone takes responsibility for that property. It appears to him that 65 % of
all the waste they collect is from the City of South San Francisco on the tonnage routes. The City has to look
at meeting the requirements of AB 939. The City went through and tried to find a better solution than the
present suggested solution. This is the only workable solution for the City and the applicant. Looking at the
design and attempts that the applicant made to meet the recommendation of the Design Review Board, and
staff. What they seemed to have said is just to tell them what to do and they would try to make the project
meet with their means. It is a good project and they would be a good neighbor of theirs
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia stated that the Public Hearing would be continued and not closed.
Commissioner Masuda asked if the benches were made of wood.
Mr. Mower stated that they were recycled plastic
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia mentioned that the last speaker talked about the slough, and cleaning it up. He
questioned the subdivision of that parcel, so that would not have to be cleaned up.
Chief Planner Harnish stated that the issue came up that the slough is currently part of the parcel, the
Scavenger Company has agreed to subdivide the slough off because they are unwilling to take title to a piece
of potentially contaminated property. The City has had concerns about subdividing the parcel, because it
would create an unusable parcel. That no one will have any incentive to clean up. In addition some of the
configuration would leave it without any public street frontage. Even though there would be access through
an easement. The public street frontage issue creates an additional issue. They have had many meetings with
the current property owner, the applicant, and many lawyers including the City's to come up with a workable
solution. The ultimate proposal is that once the site is cleaned up the Scavenger are willing to take title into
it and merge it back into the property and potentially use some of it for expansion of the facility or other facility
related purposes. The bottom line is that the City wants this cleaned up. One of the uncertainties is to what
extent the sewage slough is contaminated. The property owner has retained a consultant; he has attended one
meeting with the Regional Water Quality Control Board staff to discuss the contamination and potential
cleanup. Based on the information he looked at and in talking to the Water Quality Control Board the cleanup
of the slough is not going to present a significant challenge in terms of costs and actually getting it done. It
will take several months to fully characterize the contamination and get a cleanup plan that is proposed. They
are going to propose a set a conditions for the Commission to consider that would require a cleanup plan, a
bond, or security in the amount of the cost of the cleanup. This should be posted prior to the building permits
being issued for the construction of the project. The conditions would also include a requirement that once
the cleanup has occurred the site will be ultimately merged back into the parcel so it would be a single parcel
again. Any subdivision or parcel map that would come to the Commission for approval would be effectively
an interim or temporary step to enable the Scavengers to take title of the property.
Commissioner Masuda questioned what was in the slough.
Chief Harnish answered that lead is in there.
Commissioner Masuda questioned if it was from the paint factory.
\\CH-PDC\ISHADD\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\010799 pc.doc
Page 10 of 19
Chief Planner Harnish stated they felt it was but this has not been fully characterized.
Commissioner Masuda asked if the contaminators were responsible for the cleanup.
Chief Planner Harnish answered yes that the entity that contaminated the site would be responsible for it.
There are several liable contaminators. The property owner for the contamination could each be held
individually responsible. The party that is ultimately responsible for the contamination could have to pay for
it. But it would take litigation to do that. It is expensive and would take many years. If the contamination is
at a level that it seems to be characterized now, the cleanup cost would be in the low $100,000. Expensive
litigation would not be justified with that level of cleanup requirement. If it were a $10 million cleanup plan
obviously a business decision would be that they would go through litigation. The current property owner is
trying to avoid that and get the issue resolved, and move on.
Commissioner Honan asked Ms. Uccelli to expand on the educational facility and what it is going to consist
of.
Ms. Uccelli responded that the education facility is planned to have a visitor observation center, where they
can have a group of second graders go and take a look at the recycling process. They want to have ability to
get them to have hands on opportunity. This has not been fully developed. They are working on various
methods to get them to do some hands on work. It will be something that can be monitored safely. They
anticipate on having a recycle room and give them examples of recycling and what materials could be made
of and the entire recycling process.
Commissioner Honan questioned if the Scavenger's will be working with the school.
Ms. Uccelli stated that once the facility is approved and opened, they anticipate making tours available to
anyone who request them. They need to call, as a safety measure. They are concerned with people getting hurt
if they appear without making an appointment. They can call, make reservations, and as many schools that
want a tour, they would be glad to have them tour the facility.
Commissioner Honan asked if the Scavenger's had given consideration in regm"ds to the cleaning of streets.
When the Commission toured the Sunnyvale facility they mentioned that they had street cleaners and this is
at the end of the street can they be cleaned, and has there been any consideration for this to be done.
Ms. Uccelli stated that between the two facilities they employ a number of sweepers, men that go out and pick-
up trash, sweep the various areas, make sure that there isn't litter flying across the road or trapped in the
greenery. They will have spotters walking around the facility and do nothing more than clean.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia stated that he could think of many scenarios where the City could get into
problems with the slough. It seems very dangerous, and the bottom line is that they want it clean. Subdividing
it takes away a major incentive. No matter what goes in there, having the City get involved in this is
dangerous. Whether it is the landowner or the buyer, you never know what is going to come down the road.
Gull Road is an example where the City didn't know what was there. If we take that incentive and liability
off the City is on the short end of the stick.
Chief Planner Harnish stated they have been looking at it very closely, and have had many meetings in the
last year. He shares Chairman Pro Tem Teglia's concerns and before any permits be given, the City would
need to know what the State is going to require and have a cost estimate. The cost would be posted in a trust
account or the cleanup contract so that someone will take care of the cleanup and money obligation.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia stated that if that would happen there would be no need to stick the City's liability
\ \CH -PDC\ISHADD\File Cabinet\Old PC\ working\rninutes\ 1999\0 10799 pc. doc
Page 11 of 19
in there.
Chief Planner Harnish stated that he has a City limiting liability responsibility in terms of taking title of the
property
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia stated that he is referring to the type of liability that leaves it in limbo with no one
to clean it. There can be a bond but if it is more than that bond is worth, the person walks and forfeits the
bond.
Commissioner Masuda stated that if the cleanup costs a couple hundred thousand dollars, the Scavenger's
would clean it up, instead of spending Y2 million to go to court and having someone clean this.
Chief Planner Harnish stated that the concern has been that if it costs $5 million to clean it up, it is more than
what the property would be worth after the cleanup. So why would anyone spend that amount of money and
end up having property with less value. The cost of cleanup has been a significant point of discussion and it
still has not been resolved yet. He's comfortable that they are getting to a stage that they will have some
certainty about the cleanup cost, and the method and requirements for the clean up. There would be a level
of assurance that will not result in the kind of concerns identified.
Commissioner Romero requested that they get a summary of the BCDC Design Review Board meeting.
Motion-Romero / Second-Baldocchi. Approved by unanimous voice vote with Chairman Barnett
being absent.
5. Enterprise Rent-A-Car
Barbara Kohn, Arco- Kenwood Ltd. Partnership, Owner
James Dixon! Harvey Hacker Architects, Applicant
171 EI Camino Real
UP-98-101 and Categorical Exemption, Class 2, Section 15302 (b)
Use Permit to allow an automotive rental facility in the Retail Commercial (C-I) Zone
District.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia opened the Public Hearing.
Associate Planner Mike Upston gave the Staff report.
James Dixon- architect stated that Enterprise has no objections except with the requirement to
remove all of the signs. Enterprise would prefer to keep the one sign on the comer of EI Camino and
Brentwood. The modification would keep the existing poles but modify the interior to incorporate
Enterprises horizontal sign. The safety issue is that Enterprise would prefer to use internally
illuminated signs for nighttime identification and safety for clients and customers attempting to
identify the site from busy EI Camino Real. An Enterprise client is a first time user, who is
unfamiliar with the site, and can see the illuminated signs from above the sidewalks from the
distance. When approaching the site from San Bruno over the rise, anyone would see the sign.
Coming from the other direction from EI Camino Real there is the Brentwood shopping center, and
it is an indicator that Enterprise is there. It is a small corporate sign. Someone returning a car is
looking for Enterprise and can identify it by the sign, especially at night. The interior improvements
m"e nothing more than paint. They do not want to get into ADA issues. The applicants are not
altering the curb cuts.
\ \CH - PDC\ISHAD D\File Cabinet\Old PC\ working\minutes\1999\0 1 0799 pc. doc
Page 12 of 19
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Masuda recommended that the top portion of the sign be eliminated.
Associated Planner Upston stated this is the reason why they wanted them to come back and apply
for a sign permit. This can be addressed as a separate issue, get something that looks good, is
appropriate for the site, and have the Design Review Bom"d look at it.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia stated that if they kept a sign at that height it would be better if there
would be a new monopole.
Associate Planner Upston stated the two issues are that it was outdated and it does not comply with
the current standards. The second issue is generally what they want to see there
I
Commissioner Baldocchi stated that this is the entrance or exit to our city. She would like to
support staff and see that they have something different for the sign age and work it out with the
applicant.
Commissioner Honan stated that the Staff Report says there would be 50-60 cars allowed and
tonight he said only 50.
Associate Planner Upston stated that he corrected the staff report and somehow missed one. The
conditions state that they are allowed a maximum of 50.
Commissioner Honan asked the applicant if they would not be washing cars onsite, as the staff
report showed, or would they just vacuum the cars and rent them again.
End of tape 2
John Testa, representing Enterprise Rent-a-Car, stated they would take the cars to a car wash on
Spruce. They have personnel who will drive the vehicle there and wash the outside of the vehicle
Commissioner Honan questioned if there would be hosing off of cars and if they will only be
vacuuming on site.
Mr. Testa replied that there would be no hosing off and only vacuuming the cars.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia stated that 50 cars would not be enforceable. He questioned how many
cars are going to be on site at one time, and where the parking is going to be. Has this not been
examined thoroughly yet.
Associate Planner Upston proceeded to read the condition that clarified the question. They have
21 stalls, 8 for employees and visitors and 13 for rental vehicles. They can have up to 13 rental
vehicles on site. When they are returned they will not be returned there, but instead taken to another
site.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia questioned if 8 was enough for employees and all the customers.
Associate Planner Upston stated there were 4 spaces for employees, there is a handicap stall and
three other spaces for visitors.
\\CH-PDC\ISHADD\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\010799 pc.doc
Page 13 of 19
Commissioner Honan questioned if the coke machine would be removed.
Mr. Testa replied that they would not need the coke machine.
Commissioner Honan requested that this be added as a condition.
Motion Masuda / Second Honan. Approved by unanimous roll call vote with Chairman Barnett
being absent.
6. St. Veronica's Church/Fr. Wilton Smith, Applicant
Roman Catholic Welfare Corp, Owner
434 Alida Way
UP-96-015/MODl and Categorical Exemption, Class 14, Section 15314
Use permit modification to allow construction of a multi-purpose building at an existing parochial
school located in a Multi-Family Residential (R-3-L) Zone District.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia opened the Public Hearing.
Senior Planner Kalkin gave the Staff report.
William Starr, Architect, stated they have gone over the conditions, and are acceptable. They have also
incorporated those into the latest plans. They mailed notices to all property owners within 300' of the schools
for a community meeting at the church. They had 20 people attend who were parishioners and in support of
the project. They are trying to schedule construction so it will cause a minimum of disruption with the school.
He mentioned that Father Smith was available if the Commission has any other questions.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia closed the Public Hearing.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia stated that he is excited for the project. This not only benefited St. Veronica's
but also opens up the other basketball facilities in town. It will benefit the whole City. The architecture is
great, the plan is great, but he has some concerns with the position of the building. The first thing that struck
him about locating the building there is that it is aesthetically a 2 story structure being located next to a single
story school. It is also located in the middle of what is the playground for the school. He mentioned that the
teachers have a view of the play area, the positioning of the building will take up the play area, and it will cut
off visibility from the classrooms. A gym can be noisy and he thought it could be moved from the center
between the church and the convent. It will then create a quad in the middle of the school, maintain the close
playground, and would still be located next to the church. It is far away from the one story building, and is
more in keeping with the two-story convent and church. There are a lot of benefits for the church and school
to shift the multi-purpose room over a little. The lowest concern that might be considered for the future is that
St. Veronica's is situated conveniently to possibly expand the school a bit. There are a lot of reasons to rethink
the positioning. He is fully in support of the building.
Senior Planner Kalkin asked the architect to explain why they chose the site due to some constraints on the
site. There are storm drains, sanitary sewer, and water easements on the site.
Mr. Starr stated that there was discussion with the faculty and Principal about the location of the building.
There was some concern about blocking it off which would mean that there would be no visible supervision
in one area. There is a line of site that allows them to the children. In relation with the church it allows people
to come out and have fellowship after mass. This still allows a play area for the younger children. As Senior
Planner Kalkin stated there is a Water Department and sewer easement that runs where Chairman Pro Tem
\\CH-PDC\ISHADD\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\010799 pc.doc
Page 14 of 19
Teglia wanted to move the building.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia questioned if the faculty was concerned about the position of the building.
Mr. Starr stated that the building was sitting tight to the school in the initial plan. After discussion with the
faculty it was rotated out. There are two classrooms that have doors that open into the courtyard. There is a
20 - 25 ft. space in between the two buildings. The school building is 17 feet tall on the side
Commissioner Sim questioned if there was any off street parking, any parking violations, or if there were
concerns in the community. The 20 people that showed up were all in favor, live in the area, and are members
of the church.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia stated that he could assure Commissioner Sim that all the answers were positive.
Commissioner Romero stated that he thinks the placement of the building is fine.
Motion-Romero / Second Sim. Approved by unanimous roll call vote with Chairman Barnett being
absent.
ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS
7. Planning Commission reorganization
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia opened the item for nominations of a Chairperson by the Commission.
Commissioner Romero stated he wanted to thank Vice Chairman Teglia for what he has done for the
Commission and for the City, in stepping into a much larger role than he anticipated when he was appointed
as the Vice Chair. In his opinion he really served the community as more of a Co-Chair rather than a Vice
Chair. He acknowledged that because of the number of absences and the missed meetings by Chairman
Barnett, he appreciated Vice Chair Teglia's work in stepping into the position. When it became necessary for
him to step up to the plate and provide leadership for the Commission, he did that for them. It is really
important that as many members of the Commission be allowed to serve as the Chair or Vice Chair. The
Commission is appointed to four-year terms and it is important to try to rotate that as much as possible. He
then nominated Commissioner Honan as Chairperson of the Planning Commission for 1999.
Motion Romero / Second Masuda to appoint Commissioner Honan as Chairperson of the Planning
Commission.
Commissioner Baldocchi stated that she also felt Commissioner Honan would make a fantastic leader and
she feels that Vice Chairman Teglia has stepped up to the plate. She was wondering if there was some way
they could share the leadership. Vice Chairman Teglia has not been Chairman, if Christopher Barnett has not
shown up to the meetings she does not feel that anyone should be blamed for it. She thinks both Judy and
Mark would make strong leaders. The Commission has had issues throughout the year and she thinks the
Commission has grown from that. Mark should not be held accountable and not be allowed to move up to the
next level just because he's had to step up to the plate.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia stated he understands. Commissioner Romero's rational, and does consider
Commissioner Honan to be a leader on the Commission. He is disappointed for the reason that he has been
Vice Chairman and he has some ideas on how to put his mark on the Chairmanship. He mentioned he has not
had a chance to accomplish that during the year. He has stepped in and filled in and has not had a chance to
put his mark and change things a bit. He would enjoy the opportunity if the Commission thinks that would
\\CH-PDC\ISHADD\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\010799 pc. doc
Page 15 of 19
be worthwhile
Assistant City Attorney Lindgren stated that Section 2.56.040 speaks directly to the issue, providing that
the Commission shall elect a Chairman and a Chairman Pro Tem, and that Chairman Pro Tem shall serve in
the absence of the Chairman. It does not appear to provide for two Co-Chairs but rather to provide a Chairman
and a Chairman Pro Tem.
Motion-Baldocchi to appoint Vice Chairman Teglia as Chairman.
Commissioner Sim questioned how the Commission would vote. He wanted to know if the Commission does
it by secret vote. He asked about the normal procedure for voting.
Chief Planner Harnish stated that it would be like any other motion.
Assistant City Attorney Lindgren stated that there are not specific procedures. Since this is an open public
meeting, the votes on this, like in any other matter, need to be open in public.
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia stated it was a disappointment for him not to be nominated to the Chairman
position.
Second-Sim to appoint Vice Chairman Teglia as Chairman. He also stated that the Commission could look
at this and see where it goes with two nominations.
Commissioner Romero stated that his motion was made first and it was seconded, he would like to see it
voted on.
Assistant City Attorney Lindgren stated that Commissioner was correct his motion was made first and it
should be voted on. He stated that he allowed and supported that the motions be done out of order, because
he thought the Commission was attempting to get nominations on the table, rather than to go through the
regular motion followed by a second. There are now two motions on the table. One was made and seconded
that was Commissioner Romero's motion, and after the Commission considers that the Commission will be
considering the second motion that was made and seconded to nominate Vice Chairman Teglia.
A roll call vote was done on the motion made by Commissioner Romero to appoint Commissioner Honan as
Chairperson.
A YE: Commissioner Honan, Commissioner Romero, Commissioner Sim, and Commissioner
Masuda
NO: Commissioner Baldocchi and Vice Chair Teglia
ABSENT: Chairman Barnett
Chairman Pro Tern Teglia stated that there is a new Chair, and the gavel was given to the new Chairperson
Honan.
Assistant City Attorney Lindgren stated that the record should show that this made the second motion move.
Chief Planner Harnish stated that a Chairman Pro Tem needed to be elected next.
Chairperson Honan opened the floor for nominations of a Vice Chair
\ \CH - PDC\ISHADD\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\0 10799 pc.doc
Page 16 of 19
Commissioner Masuda made a motion to nominate Eugene Sim as Vice Chair
Vice Chair Teglia seconded the motion
A roll call vote was done on the motion to appoint Commissioner Sim as Vice Chairperson.
A YE Commissioner Baldocchi, Commissioner Romero, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner
Masuda, Vice Chairman Teglia and Chairperson Honan
ABSENT: Commissioner Barnett
Items from Staff
Chief Planner Harnish had two items to discuss
. Planning Commission appointments
Chief Planner Harnish stated that the Mayor extended the application deadline to January 15. He spoke to
the Human Resources Director and did not find out how many applications have been received or the specifics
on the selection process. Appointments or reappointments will be done next month. They will have one or
two meetings that they will be down one Commissioner. He is assuming the reappointments will be done like
they have in the past, where the Council interviews potential candidates. He does not know if sitting
Commissioners will be interviewed.
Assistant City Attorney Lindgren reminded the Commission that General Plan Amendments require a
majority of the actual 7 Commissioners. Prudence could dictate if they anticipate a controversial vote on a
General Plan Amendment that the Commission can chose to continue that or not.
. Terrabay
Chief Planner Harnish continued with the second item, which was Terrabay. He stated that he has a meeting
tomorrow morning to discuss the potential of bringing Phase III forward, while Phase II issues continue to be
resolved. It is likely that the Final EIR will be out sometime next month. This means that there may be Public
Hearings on Phase III in February, there is not a specific date yet. He wanted to let the Commission know
about the potential of having a Special Meeting just to deal with Terrabay Phase III project, since they know
it is going to be a lengthy meeting. He asked for direction on that, and when he goes into the meeting
tomorrow with the applicant he can relate to them the decision of the Commission. It would be helpful to
know whether they have the option to schedule a special meeting probably middle to late February.
Commissioner Masuda questioned if this would be a Public Hearing.
Chief Planner Harnish stated that this would be the Public Hearing for the Commission to take action on
Phase III. If the Commission gives him that as an option, he recommends that there be a separate meeting.
Rather than add this to a regular meeting, because there are full agendas at least for the next two or three
meetings.
Assistant City Attorney Lindgren stated that with regard to the timing, he has talked about the new CEQA
guidelines that were adopted last year. They have a 120 day period during which their cities can either adopt
or at the end of which they are in place. There has been a lot of work in processing this EIR, and the new
guidelines will come into affect for any actions they take after the end of February.
\\CH-PDC\ISHADD\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\rninutes\1999\010799 pc.doc
Page 17 of 19
Commissioner Masuda stated that they are busy and that there should be a Special Meeting held.
Commissioner Baldocchi questioned if the time to speak can be brought down from 5 minutes. A lot of this
stuff is being heard over ;:tnd over.
Chairperson Honan stated that Council had a timer.
Chief Planner Harnish stated that it could be mTanged to have the timer.
Assistant City Attorney Lindgren stated that the Commission can limit public testimony. They have to give
the public an opportunity to speak on the noticed item, only on the subject that is noticed and before the
Commission.
Chief Planner Harnish recommended that the meeting prior to the hearing, the Commission could have a
discussion and bring forward and provide a format for the meeting. Staff and the Commission knows it will
be a controversial one, and they can settle on guidelines. These can be announced at the beginning of the
meeting.
Chairperson Honan questioned if there were any specific dates yet.
Chief Planner Harnish stated that there were no set dates.
Chairperson Honan stated that she would appreciate that to be a separate meeting.
Items from Commission
. Panaderia Hernandez
Commissioner Romero wanted to bring up the item of Panaderia Hernandez. He stopped by and noticed that
it had a very tacky appem"ance and was not part of the approval.
Chief Planner Harnish stated that this happens periodically, they have been called and noticed. There
guidelines are coming up and they should be coming to the Commission by the first meeting in February.
Things move out and then they move back. This is an ongoing issue.
Commissioner Masuda stated that they were the clean ones, the other store up the street from them had
tomatoes and lettuce leaves on the sidewalk.
Commissioner Romero stated that is the biggest one, one person sees the other one do it, and they think they
can do it and then everyone is doing it.
Commissioner Baldocchi questioned if the other store was also coming up for review because they had the
same conditions as Panaderia Hernandez.
Commissioner Teglia stated that this was part of the reason why it was so difficult to get those types of
permits. It was permitted but they really had to go through some hoops. Perhaps considering the track record
so far the Commission might want to revisit this some day. There are a couple permits out there and maybe
this should be changed back to be more strict. It will get to be a bigger problem.
Chief Planner Harnish stated that it is also a recurring issue with Code Enforcement.
\\CH-PDC\ISHADD\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\010799 pc.doc
Page 18 of 19
Commissioner Baldocchi questioned if they come up for review, can the permit be pulled. It is a consistent
problem, and she drives by there every morning on weekends.
Associate Planner Upston stated that yes they can pull the permit any time if they are not complying with the
conditions of approval. With regard to the outside produce guidelines that are being created, there is a draft
under staff review and staff is hoping to get all those comments worked into the document. Then staff will
take them to DRB to let another group look at it and bring it to the Planning Commission for review. That is
probably going to happen the second meeting of February. Staff also wants to show the Commission the
proposed fa~ade improvements for that comer.
Commissioner Baldocchi stated that the owner knows that she is not living up to her side of the
bargain.
Commissioner Teglia stated that Commissioner Romero made comments thanking him for the
service during the year and he wanted him to know that it was a pleasure, and he appreciates those
comments.
I
Commissioner Honan stated that she felt the same way also.
Chief Planner Harnish stated that traditionally staff brings back outgoing Commissioners and they
are presented a Resolution by the new Chairperson and it will be done later.
Items from the Public
Noone chose to speak
Adjourn
Motion-Masuda /Second-Romero to adjourn the meeting.
t
The ~ee ing W;1adj~ed at 11:55 p.m.
~~
to thl' I >lanning Commission
uth ~ a 1 Francisco
. stopher Barnett, Chi!iJ
lanning Commission
City of South San Francisco
IH/bh
NEXT MEETING: Regular Meeting January 21, 1999, Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo
Drive, South San Francisco, CA
\\CH-PDC\ISHADD\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\l999\010799 pc.doc
Page 19 of 19