Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 04/18/2002 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 33 ARROYO DRIVE April 18, 2002 CALL TO ORDER 1 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL 1 CHAIR COMMENTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioner D'Angelo, Commissioner Honan, Commissioner Ochsenhirt, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Teglia, Vice Chairperson Romero and Chairperson Meloni MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Planning Division: Thomas C. Sparks, Chief Planner Susy Kalkin, Principal Planner Steve Carlson, Senior Planner Allison Knapp, Consultant Planner Kimberly Johnson Richard Harmon S gt. Mike Newell City Attorney: Engineering: Police Dept.: AGENDA REVIEW No Changes ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of Special Meeting Minutes of March 20, 2002 and Regular Meeting Minutes of April 4, 2002. Approved 2. Spiros Kakoniktis-owner Antonio M. Brandi-applicant 90 Oak Ave. RZ-OI-054, DR-OI-054 and ND-OI-054 Continued (Recommend continuance to May 2, 2002) Mitigated Negative Declaration assessing environmental impacts of a new IS-unit apartment building, in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act. Rezoning from Medium Density Residential District (R-2-H) to High Density Residential District (R-3- L), in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.87. Density Bonus of 25% allowing 3 dwelling units to be restricted as affordable housing in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.130. Housing Agreement between the applicant and the City of South San Francisco restricting three of the dwellings as affordable housing units in accordance with SSFMC 20.125. Design Review allowing for the construction a three-story IS-unit apartment building, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.85. S :\Minutes\finalized\04-18-02 RPC.doc Approved on May 2, 2002 Page 1 of 7 Motion Meloni I Second Sim to approve the Consent Calendar. Commissioner Teglia abstained from approving the minutes of March 20,2002. Approved by unanimous voice vote. PUBLIC HEARING - AGENDA ITEMS 3. New England Lobster Approved David Collinsl Marc W orrall-owner-applicant 170 Mitchell Avenue POI-0005 and Categorical Exemption Class 1 Section l530l(e) Addition to Existing Structures Parcel Map to add a portion of Union Pacific Railroad ROW to the existing industrial site at 170 Mitchell Avenue, and to merge the three existing properties to create a single building site. Design Review for a 1,160 square foot addition to an existing warehouse building. Variance to allow parking to encroach into the required twenty-foot front yard setback. Staff report presented by Principal Planner Kalkin. Una Kinsella and Louis Arata presented the project to the Commission. Public Hearing opened. Public Hearing closed. The Commission noted that this was an improvement on the property and the landscaping is going to enhance the area. Vice Chairperson Ochsenhirt asked if the Design Review Board's issues regarding the angle of parking spaces near a roll up door had been addressed. Principal Planner Kalkin noted that handicap parking has been shifted towards Mitchell and it has been pulled away from the roll up door. Motion D' An2:elo I Second Te2:lia to approve PO 1-0005. Approved by unanimous voice vote. 4. Sand Hill Property Co., 345 East Grand, LP-owner/appl. Dowler-Gruman Arcbitects 345 East Grand Ave. (APN 015-051-160 & 015-051-170) UP-OI-034 and ND-OI-034 Approved (Continued from April 18, 2002) Mitigated Negative Declaration assessing the impacts of converting a one-story warehouse facility to a two-story 210,560 square foot building containing office or research and development uses and a garage and open parking areas containing 543 parking spaces with 24 hour/7 day operation, with outside storage, generating in excess of 100 average daily vehicle trips. Use Permit allowing the conversion of a one-story warehouse facility to a two-story 210,560 square foot building containing office or research and development uses and a garage and open parking areas containing 543 parking spaces with 24 hourl7 day operation, with outside storage, generating in excess of 100 average daily vehicle trips. Variance allowing a parking rate of2.58 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area instead of2.58 per 1,000 square feet to encourage alternative commute modes of travel. Preliminary Transportation Demand Management Plan to encourage alternative commute modes of travel and to reduce traffic during peak commute hours for a use generating in excess of 100 average daily trips and with a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.84. fu the Planned fudustrial (P-I) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Sections 20.32.060 and 20.32.070(a) and Chapter 20.81. S:\Minutes\finalized\04-18-02 RPC.doc Approved on May 2, 2002 Page 2 of 7 Recess called at 7:50 p.m. Recalled to order at 7:57 p.m. John Tze presented Tim Gruman and Marina Chow of Dowler-Gruman Architects who made a PowerPoint presentation of the project with the existing conditions and the final proposal for the Commission to review. Commission comments with applicant's response: · Commissioner Sim asked for a detailed description on the pedestrian walkway in the front of the building. Mr. Gruman noted that there is a 4-foot natural elevation due to loading docks that exists. This required that they have some stairs leading to the 2 glass entry doors. The plaza is an open area that will allow employees an area to go to on their breaks. · Commissioner Teglia noted that the arcade stops halfway through the building and asked why it was not continuous. Mr. Gruman noted that this was not done because they wanted to draw the attention to the parking structure. They extended the arcade over to provide a balance to the fac;ade. Commissioner Sim noted that the architect is trying to bring the attention to the entryway. · Commissioner Sim suggested that the architect articulate the walkway more. · Vice Chairperson Ochsenhirt asked how the traffic flow would be coming in and going out of the garage. Mr. Gruman noted that there are 2 entries to the garage. The ground level entry is around the garage to the right hand side. The second entry was a suggestion by the traffic engineer to be able to enter the second level of the parking structure. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the intersection at East Grand and Grandview will be signalized and this will lessen the traffic on Grandview. · Chairperson Romero asked if the outdoor seating area had been eliminated. Ms. Chow pointed that within the arcade there are concrete rectangular forms that serve as benches. Chairperson Romero noted that there needs to be an outdoor area. Public Hearing opened. Public Hearing closed. Commission and staff discussion: · Commissioner D'Angelo stated that he would have liked to see the side and rear elevations in more detail. He was concerned with the Grandview Avenue exit. Senior Planner Carlson pointed out that Engineering and Planning were concerned with access to the site due to the traffic in the area. Staff did not want East Grand Avenue to be the exclusive entry point. The preference was to have vehicles entering on Grandview Drive into the main supply of parking. · Commissioner D'Angelo asked that staff discuss the exiting from the site. Senior Planner Carlson noted that it is safe to make left turns on Grandview Drive, even though the traffic consultant observed that cars were traveling above the posted speed limit. There appeared to be adequate sight line even with the existing vegetation, but it is safer to remove the landscaping and improve visibility. Noes: Abstain: Absent: Abstain: Motion Meloni I Second Sim to approve UP-O 1-034. Approved by unanimous roll call vote. Ayes: Commissioner D'Angelo, Commissioner Honan, Commissioner Meloni, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Teglia, Vice Chairperson Ochsenhirt, and Chairperson Romero None None None None S:\Minutes\finalized\04-18-02 RPC.doc Page 3 of 7 Approved on May 2, 2002 Recess called at 9:03 p.m. Recalled to order at 9: 15 p.m. 5. Study Session Maoe Tjoe, Lila Tjoe & Rudy Sastra-owner/applicant 111 Chestnut Avenue P02-0020 (RZ, SA, PUD, DR & MND02-0020) Rezoning of the property at 111 Chestnut Avenue from Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R- 2-H) to Multi-Family Residential Zoning District (R-3-L) in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.87. Tentative Subdivision Map allowing the subdivision creating ten parcels (10) in accordance with SSFMC Title 19. Exceptions from the SSFMC Title 19 allowing lots sizes less than 5,000 square feet in accordance the SSFMC Title 19. Planned Unit Development allowing lot sizes smaller than the minimum requirement of 5,000 square feet and reduced setbacks, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.78. Housing Agreement restricting twenty percent (20%) of the nine units as affordable dwellings in accordance with SFMC Chapter 20.125. Design Review allowing for the construction a two-story nine (9) unit condominium development, situated at 111 Chestnut Avenue (APN 011-312-090) in the Medium Density (R-2-H) Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.85. Staff Report presented by Senior Planner Carlson. He noted that the project architect has redesigned the development to incorporate the Design Review Board cormnents. Simon K wan pointed out that one unit has been removed and landscape has been upgraded as a response to the Design Review Board's comments. Robert La Rocca, La Rocca Architects, noted that the central driveway is to be the courtyard where activities can take place. They have developed canopy with shrubbery, lawn and ground covering at the ground entrance. The main entrance is a trellis that connects the two elevations together and will have vines. Public comments: Betty Ann Robinson Michael Winslow 105 Chestnut Avenue 908 Commercial · The neighbors were concerned with their views being altered. · They were concerned with traffic issues along Chestnut Avenue. fu the past years it has been difficult to back out of driveways because this has become a hectic street. · With the Chestnut widening there will not be parking allowed on the rested and wants to be taken care. Is concerned as to what is going in the area. The project does not look attractive. Is concerned about pnvacy Issues. . They felt that there was a privacy issue because of 3 story buildings looming over a one story home. · This project will not look aesthetically pleasing because it does not fit into the neighborhood. Public input session closed. Commission, staff and applicant discussion: · Chairperson Meloni noted that there are no floor plans for the units. He asked how many bedrooms the units would have. There are only three guest parking spaces being provided and this will become an issue. He added that there is a privacy issue because the plans do not show the relation between the buildings and the adjoining properties. He questioned the height of the metal and redwood trellises on either side of the entryway as well as the height of the trees. He pointed out that the drawing shows the trellis is going all the way to the end of the building. He concluded that the design presented is not S:\Minutes\finalized\04-18-02 RPC.doc Page 4 of 7 Approved on May 2,2002 consistent with the neighborhood. Mr. Kwan noted that the units would be 3-4 bedrooms. The building is 35 feet high, the metal trellis is high enough to allow truck access and the redwood trellis is 9 feet high. The trees will be limited to grow to 8 feet depending on the species. · Vice Chairperson Romero stated that the district is R-l or R-2. The staff report indicates that it is an R-2 area. Vice Chairperson Romero pointed that the Commission has the flexibility to determine if it is appropriate with each project. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the zoning is currently R-2-H and is being changed to an R-3-L, high- density district. The project does not max out the potential number of units. The General Plan intends that the high density and the area will be rezoned to an R-3 area. Chief Planner Sparks noted that the zoning area will be rezoned to R-3-L. · Commissioner Teglia noted that the Planning Commission envisioned medium density on Chestnut Avenue and high density in the Oak Farms area. He asked that access behind the site be explored. He urged the Commission not to allow the properties facing Chestnut to go higher than their current zoning. Commissioner Teglia also pointed out that the Planned Unit Development permit application should not be used to throw out all the standards. He asked why the lot is being subdivided into 10 lots and not being kept as one lot with condominiums, and if the applicant had taken into consideration the difficulty in accessing the site from Chestnut. Mr. Kwan noted that planning staff had advised them to keep lot 10 as a common space. The complex will have a Homeowners Association and they units will be sold individually. He added that there is access to the site from at the end of one of the adjacent properties. He did not see that there was any difficulty in getting into the site. He spoke to the Engineering Division and the Fire / Prevention Building Division regarding access to the site and they saw that there was no difficulty in access. He noted that this is the only scheme that can be done for the lot dimension and they had to delete one unit in order to allow more the common grounds. · Commissioner Honan asked what the driveway apron is? She pointed that there will be two parking spaces per unit but there will not be room to park in front of the unit. Mr. Kwan noted that the garage door is 3 feet from the curb in addition to the 25 feet driveway. · Commissioner Meloni asked how the two cars going opposite ways would be able to enter or exit the site. Chairperson Meloni suggested that the applicant work on widening the entryway to the site. Mr. Kwan noted that there is 30 feet from the curb to the face of the building and it will be tight but can be done. · Commissioner Honan questioned if there would be a problem with emergency vehicles backing out of the property. She asked if there will be fencing around the play area. She suggested that a fence be put around the play area. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the Fire Department will not need to turn around on the site and the paramedic vehicle will be the only one that will be able to go into the site. There will be fire hydrants at units 3 or 7 to allow the Fire Department to put our a potential fire. Mr. K wan noted that there will not be fencing around the play area and there will be a hedge that will act as a fence from the guest parking. S :\Minutes\finalized\04-18-02 RPC.doc Page 5 of 7 Approved on May 2, 2002 · Chairperson Meloni asked how high the retaining wall on the back of the property is. Mr. Kwan replied that it is about 3-4 feet high. · Commissioner Sim asked if the General Plan had envisioned this area to become an urban corridor. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the vision was to take advantage of the vacant 10ts in the area to provide an opportunity for more housing units. · Commissioner D'Angelo stated that the pictures are a false representation of what is out on Chestnut because it is on a slope and the plans reflect a flat surface. He added that he is against high density in South San Francisco and noted that not accepting the rezoning or PUD keeps the City as it should be. The neighbors are unhappy and the zoning should be kept the way it is and does not have to be changed. Three parking spaces in the area will not satisfy the parking needs. He added that he is not in support of the proj ect. · Vice Chairperson Ochsenhirt agreed that the project is putting pressure on Chestnut and the immediate neighborhood when there are goals that need to be met, such as meeting the Housing Element and keeping the quality of life that the City has. He is not opposed at looking at a rezone of the areas and the Commission needs to be open to that idea. · Chairperson Romero pointed out that this type of architecture and design would be appropriate near the BART station, but it does not fit on Chestnut Avenue. The lot is half an acre and 10 parcels with 9 units are being put into it. He suggested that the applicant go back and lighten the project to fit an R-2 zone, which would be 6 units. He also asked the applicant to have a meeting with the surrounding neighbors before returning to the Commission to get their feedback. · Commissioner Teglia agreed with Commission comments. He suggested that the applicant look at the project in context with the area, putting low density in front and high density in the rear. He asked that the applicant try to access the site from the back of the lot and return with an appropriate project for the neighborhood. Recess called at 10:08 p.m. Recalled to order at 10: 17 p.m. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 6. Items from Staff · Chief Planner Sparks noted that project 101 would be returning to the Commission after some environmental issues are cleared up. He added that the Commission would have an informational overview on the zoning code update in the upcoming months. 7. Items from Commission · Commissioner D'Angelo asked for information on 300 units being proposed near BART. Chief Planner Sparks noted that the TOD calls for 300-350 units on the remainder parcels and mixed use. Commissioner D'Angelo asked what the number of units going in around the courthouse will be? Chief Planner Sparks noted that that area is still under review and final recommendations have not been made with regard to the number of units being proposed for development. Commissioner D'Angelo was S :\Minutes\finalized\04-18-02 RPC.doc Page 6 of 7 Approved on May 2, 2002 concerned with all these new units concentrating in one are of the City and the impact it is going to have in that neighborhood. · Chairperson Romero stated that the Engineering Division would be conducting a community meeting on traffic issues. Chief Planner Sparks noted that Street Maintenance would hold the meeting on May 6, 2002 at the MSB. · Commissioner Meloni asked what the status on the Hillside-Mission extension was. Development Review Coordinator Harmon noted that the project is out to bid at the moment and is opened for bidding until next week. · Commissioner Teglia noted that impacts and the need to mitigate them kept coming up during the TOD sessions. He was concerned that staff makes commitments before the policy making bodies take action on the item. He added that Costco needs some of the property to make some of their mitigations. 8. Items from the Public None 9. Adjournment 10:30 p.m. Motion Sim I Second Honan to adjourn the meeting. ~M(~~ Secretary to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco ~;>~~~~ llham Romero, ChaIrperson Planning Commission City of South San Francisco NEXT MEETING: Regular Meeting May 2,2002, Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA. TCS/blh S:\Minutes\finalized\04-18-02 RPC.doc Page 7 of 7 Approved on May 2, 2002