Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 06/21/2001 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES ___--MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING '\ 33 ARROYO DRIVE June 21, 2001 CALL TO ORDER I PLEDG~ 0 ALLEGIANCE The meeting was called to order at :30 p.m. ROLL CALL / CHAIR COMMENTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioner D'Angelo, Commissioner Honan, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Teglia, Vice Chairperson Romero and Chairperson Meloni MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioner Ochsenhirt STAFF PRESENT: Planning Division: Thomas C. Sparks, Chief Planner Steve Carlson, Senior Planner Mike Lappen, Senior Planner Kimberly Johnson Richard Harmon Sgt. Mike Newell Asst. City Attorney: Engineering: Police Dept.: AGENDA REVIEW ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes of May 17, 2001. Chief Planner Sparks No consent items PUBLIC HEARING - AGENDA ITEMS 2. P.G. & E.-owner Sprint PCS/The Alaris Group/Kelly Pepper-applicant E. Grand & Gateway Blvds. UP-OI-025 and Categorical Exemption Class 32 Section 15332 In-Fill Development Project Use Permit allowing the co-location of a second wireless communication facility on a portion of a P.G.&E. site situated southerly of the corner of East Grand A venue and Gateway Boulevard near the Union Pacific railroad main spur line in the Planned Commercial (P-C) zoning district. Senior Planner Carlson Pointed out a couple of errors in the staff report. The project will consist of a total of 6- panel antennas. Three will be installed now and three will be reserved for future. They will be installed on the same P. G. & E power transmission tower that the cunent vendor has their 3-panel antenna. If you noticed, a small fenced-in area which is their enclosure. Did explore with the Design Review Board alternate methods of screening. Apparently, P.G. & E does not prefer metal enclosures such as chainlink. We thought it would be a better solution. P. G. & E wants something with a non-conductive material. Wood appears to be the only solution. It is subject to a 100 year storm, the industrial channel portion of the old Calma Creek. It does flood there so vaulting is not the most opportune at that particular location for either of those vendors. Will be reliant on more so to help screen them is landscaping. Pac Bell is a little behind the power curve. They have a change of staff members. I've contacted them recently. They will be installing the landscaping. They will be using shrubs placed in a natural way to look more fitting with the area. The current project will also do something similar. What you will see, within the next few months, once they construct their project, is a wood fence. You won't see S :\Minutes\0621 0 1 RPC.doc Page 1 of 12 the equipment cabinets. You'll see landscaping around which should grow to match the height of those fences. As the other Sprint facility, this facility will also have a recepticle for a generator. They anticipate that the generator will only be used during power outages that last 6 hours or more. The generator will not be housed on site. Will be removed after that power event. The noise of the generator is similar to that of a diesel motor in automobiles or trucks. Given the location of the facility from the road it shouldn't affect any other land owners in the area. Parking will be provided for service technicians. As paIi of the Pac Bell proposal, we asked them to create a parking are parallel to Gateway in the setback area. They did by moving the gates and rework the fence. A radio frequency study wasn't prepared for this project, but they will be using similar wave bands as other Sprint facilities. They all have the same type of radio waves. The studies that we've reviewed, given the location of the antennas, they shouldn't produce any harmful radio waves. We still recommend that a sign be posted on the facilities to identify the workers that they shouldn't be within 81/2 feet of the antenna for a long period of time. That will be in the Conditions of Approval. The Design Review Board did review the facility at its March 20th meeting. They found favor with the project and suggested landscaping that the staff suggested to the applicant to mask the height of the fence. This has also been made a Condition of Approval. In conclusion because we think the project complies with the City's development standards and is compatible with existing businesses, we recommend that the Planning Commission approve the use permit allowing the facility consisting of 6 panel antennas with 10 ground mount equipment cabinet with a landscaped enclosure. Kelly Pepper, Sprint PCS/Alaris Group, As described, we plan to install 6 antennas, one per sector and to install our cabinets in an enclosed fenced area adjacent to the tower. All cable will be underground and not visible. The site is a co-location site with Pac Bell. We have designed that our facility be compatible with their facility and the surrounding area. It is consistent with the City's preference for co-location of wireless facilities. The staff report stated that no radio frequency report was done. In fact, we have had one done. Predicts that the levels will be approximately 50 times below the FCC's. Jackie Williams, 242 Longford Drive, Can you just tell me how big the generator is going to be? How many megawatts? Commissioner Teglia I still want to hear from the applicant, but it is important to know there is no on-site generator on site. If there is a need for a generator, it will be trucked in only for that amount of time that is required for a long term black -out. Chairperson Meloni Is this similar to the one you are proposing for the Spruce Avenue location? Kelly Pepper Yes. Chairperson Meloni That's a fairly small generator. It's a 25 kilowatt. Did that answer your question, Jackie? Jackie Williams, 242 Longford Drive, Yes. Commissioner Teglia Basically, I have no problems with this application. It meets the spirit of the Telecommunications Ordinance encouraging co-location. Question to staff, this application shows owner is P. G. & E. The only suggestion is a possible opportunity to improve that corridor. I think wood fence fits just fine. Landscaping back there, I could take it or leave it. The City improved Jack Drago park, the frontage on Grand. Come around the corner and immediately have an open non-vegetated chainlink fence that runs the length of the P. G. & E. property. The rest of Gateway has a hedge 6 feet tall that screens out the rest of the properties. If it is a possibility, delete the landscaping from this site and get a straight hedge along the chainlink fence, bordering the P. G. & E. power transmission facility. That might be a benefit to the City. Commissioner Sim I agree with that. Chairperson Meloni On the staff report it talks about the generator being used on power outages for more than 6 hours. Senior Planner Carlson Yes. Chairperson Meloni If that is what they are saying, we should make that one of the Conditions of Approval. Senior Planner Carlson Sure we can make that a condition to that effect. It will be number 8. Chairperson Meloni If you could talk to the applicant about what Commissioner Teglia brought up, that would be a good idea. Chief Planner Sparks For the record, please note that a number of the Conditions of Approval will need to be changed to reflect the 6-panel antenna. Senior Planner Carlson On the issue of trying to put the hedge along the chainlink fence, we have tried to deal with P. G. & E. As they were upgrading their yard without benefit of City review, the attorney's office was involve with this as well, it went back and forth between us. What we were seeking was the very same thing that you are requesting. P. G. & E. basically said it is not going to happen. We didn't complete our review. They S:\Minutes\0621 0 lRPC.doc Page 2 of 12 didn't get what they wanted and we didn't get what we wanted. We will go back to them and ask them the same question. We will attempt to do that again. Chairperson Meloni Maybe not P. G. & E., but maybe the telecommunications people might want to think about that. Commissioner Teglia. I'm assuming that P. G. & E will be receiving some monetary incentive for this site? I'd like to suggest a continuance of this until staff has had a chance to talk with P. G. & E. and consider this a one of the Conditions of Approval. I can guarantee you the amount of money involved in the rental of one of these sites is large enough that a hedge is a minor requirement. Chairperson Meloni Before we do that, ask the applicant. Do you have a problem with installing the hedge in lieu of the planting around the other facilities. Kelly Pepper, Sprint PCS/Alaris Group, IfP. G. & E will allow it, we have no problem with that. Commissioner Honan Steve, you mentioned that P. G. & E. said they would not do it. Did they give you any reasons why? Senior Planner Carlson They don't want to be responsible for maintaining it and they thought it was unnecessary. Chairperson Meloni They have the right to put it in if we request it as part of our Conditions of Approval. Don't we have some say on the landscaping on the frontage along that street? Senior Planner Carlson Yes. Certainly if they are willing to do it. Commissioner Teglia Would be happy to approve up-o 1-025 wireless communication facility consisting of the 6-panels with the condition of approval that the landscaping along Gateway along the fence be made a condition of approval. Assistant City Attorney Johnson On the condition of approval, the landscaping along Gateway may not be entirely within the control of the applicant before you. The property is not owned by them. Commissioner Teglia That's true, but the application is both P. G. & E. and this applicant. They both seek the benefit. Suggesting that we put the condition of approval and they have the option of going ahead with this approved application. Should they reject it they can always come back to us. Assistant City Attorney Johnson The concern here is that if they are unable to install the landscaping on Gateway due to P. G. & E., who is not before the Commission tonight, we would not be able to enforce that as a condition of approval. Chairperson Meloni If P. G. & E. doesn't grant permission or approve of that can we have this item brought back to us for a revision of the condition of approval. Assistant City Attorney Johnson The item may be brought back, but the condition of approval will be unsatisfied. Chairperson Meloni If it is unable to be satisfied, which will not allow the use permit to go through, they could then come back to us and ask for a modification of the condition of approval. Assistant City Attorney Johnson COlTect. Chief Planner Sparks Rather than impose that as a condition of approval, go with Commissioner Teglia's initial suggestion to try and get that out of P. G. & E and continue it until the next meeting. Always leary of bringing back modifications, not a major problem, but easier to avoid that. Will make a good faith effort to try and talk P. G. & E into this. It would improve their property. Commissioner Honan The only thing that worries me is that the next meeting is cancelled and the one after that is quite heavy. Chief Planner Sparks The one after that is heavy, but to report back on this item is going to take a significant amount of time. Chairperson Meloni You can put it on Consent Calendar. Commissioner Teglia In an effort to make this easier, if we approve it now with that condition, the approval conditioned on the hedge, if you are able to negotiate they can go ahead. If not, it is not approved and they will have to come back to us in the future and we can revisit it. Vice Chairperson Romero Would be a lot cleaner if we just continue the item. Allow staff to negotiate with P. G. & E and the applicant and have it come back. Senior Planner Carlson If P. G. & E isn't open-minded about the landscaping, do you have another thought as to an alternative solution for landscaping? Did you want to consider other actions? You could draft a condition such that the priority is that we get the hedge and if you can't get that we can go back to some alternative landscape plan. Perhaps what they suggested here unless you are thinking you would like to simply revisit the whole issue. S:\Minutes\0621 0 1 RPC.doc Page 3 of 12 Motion Teglia /Second Romero to continue. Voice vote/Unanimous 3. Sprint PCS/The Alaris Group/Kelly Pepper-applicant So. S. F. Health Center/So. San Francisco Redevelopment. Agency-owner 306 Spruce Ave. UP-OI-035 and Categorical Exemption Class 32 Section 15332 In-Fill Development Project Use Permit allowing a wireless communication facility within 300 feet of a residential zoning district, situated in the Downtown Commercial (D-C) zoning district. (Colltilluedfrom 05/03/01) Senior Planner Carlson stated that this had been reviewed by the Commission on the May 3, 2001 meeting and continued to a date uncertain. The Commission expressed a number of concerns including the equipment cabinet enclosure and use of the proposed emergency generator. The applicant has explored a vault on that site and their solution is to enclose it in a room that was review this week by the Design Review Board. The Board found the addition favorable and recommend approval of that design. Relative the emergency generator, the operator of the facility is considering not putting the generator in. Other than that the project hasn't changed. Hope you give this favorable consideration. Kelly Pepper, Sprint PCS/Alaris Group, gave brief run down of concenlS that were taken care of. Chairperson Meloni Would like to see the 6 hour time limit in the Conditions of Approval. Senior Planner Carlson That will be condition number 7. Vice Chairperson Romero I appreciate the enclosure of the equipment. Concerned with the accessibility by the children in the school. Motion Sim /Second Teglia to approve. Voice vote/Unanimous 4. GPA-99-061/MOD2, DSEIR-99-061/MODl & ZA-OI-021 Project Proposal: The City of South San Francisco is proposing to establish the East of 101 Area Transportation Improvement Plan, which includes specific infrastructure improvements, a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance and program, and traffic fees. The program will include: Changes to the Transportation Element. Specifically, the Supplemental EIR and Amendment to the Transportation Element will list specific transportation and roadway improvements. The Element and Supplemental EIR will also increase focus on alternative transportation modes (for example, shuttles) and transportation demand management. Changes to the other elements for consistency. For example, the Planning Sub-areas Element needs to be amended. Changes to the East of 101 Area Plan. The East of 101 Area Plan will updated to reflect the General Plan policy direction. TDM Program and Ordinance. The document includes a comprehensive and enforceable TDM Program. Traffic Fee. The City is currently preparing a nexus analysis to support the implementation of a traffic fee. (Recommending continuance to July 19, 2001) Motion to continue to July 19,2001 Motion Honan /Second Meloni Voice vote/Unanimous ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 5. Items from Staff a. STUDY SESSION So. San Francisco Bart Station Transit Oriented Development Plan & Ordinance City Of South San Francisco-owner/applicant GPA-OI-041, ZA-OI-041, RZ-OI-041and Negative Declaration ND-OI-041 Proposed Project: The City of South San Francisco is requesting approval of a Negative Declaration and adoption of a Zoning Amendment and Rezone to create the Transit Oriented Development Plan and Zoning District for the 1/4 mile area adjacent to the SSF BART Station. The Plan and District will include specific development and design standards. Chairperson Meloni announced the study session was to look at the project, make comments and give the applicant direction. Commission sat in the audience to see presentation due to technical difficulties. S:\Minutes\062101RPC.doc Page 4. of 12 Senior Planner Lappen gave staff report for study session to review what has been done over the last 5 months in creating a Transit Village plan for the area adjacent to the new South San Francisco. Rick Williams, TOD Consultant, gave presentation. Emphasis is to give more finesse to the General Plan at a more detailed level, implement policies of the General Plan which were to establish a Transit Village in this particular area around the BART station, set minimum development intensities and insure quality development include childcare, develop some of the paI'cels as mixed use, key component of a Transit Village, that McLellan Road to be a pedestrian oriented street and public improvements to focus on streetscape and pedestrian oriented design as a key component to a Transit Village. Other elements included working with BART to improve the pedestrian connections to the school and develop an overall linear park and open space next to the BART station for biking and walking. Can also be a recreational amenity for the neighborhood and the community at large. P. T. Delander, 38 San Felipe Ave., read from page 8 of the fat book that was out there earlier regarding stairway to El Camino. Currently there is a P. G. & E access gate at bottom of the first street behind San Felipe Avenue that has been locked for the last six weeks. Before they always left the gate open so people from Promenade could walk down the stairs and catch the bus or cross El Camino. Might want to look into having P. G. & E. take the lock off unless it's Promenade's ground keeping people responsibility. Also on page 9 of the same book, it states that currently residents don't use the pedestrian stairway from Buri Buri neighborhood because they are crossing El Camino Real and it is unsignalized and unsafe. It is used. My daughter goes to El Camino and I stood halfway up the stairs to see how many students actually used it. It is about 20 students that use it in the morning and afternoon not catching a bus. It is also used by residents that catch the "M" bus to go south or north on El Camino. Also currently that sidewalk is invisible because it is not lined or posted. There is a warning sign electric light system southbound about 100 feet north on the curb for drivers to let them know that there might be someone crossing, but it is not posted in the usual triangle or yellow-green sign saying "Caution pedestrians crossing". Neither sign north nor south bound are there signs telling drivers that there is a possibility that there might be a crosswalk of pedestrians and the crosswalk is not lined. On page 50, my little problem with this is the replacing of cyclone fencing from around the flood channel with well-designed sculptural metal fencing. Looking at the picture, it looks like another 6 foot fence. I would say just knock down that fence and replace with a 3 foot fence to keep little kids from falling in the creek and let the bigger kids did about 40 years. Would love a pedestrian bridge from the cliff at Buri Buri Promenade across to the BART garage so not to worry about pedestrians crossing El Camino. BART is going to have the bus rerouted into its process so there will be no more bus stops at the bottom of the stairs. It will be in the BART complex. It will be much safer for bicyclists and pedestrians to build that bridge across that bluff and into the station's garage. Elevators can be used for wheelchairs or bicycle problems. Marie Polkinghorne, 454 Evergreen, I have not heard anything that reassures me about the traffic problem that we expect at Evergreen. Slowing it with some of the measures I saw is one thing, but that does not take care of the increase that I would expect to use my street from Hillside to BART. At one of the previous meetings, one of the suggestions was not permitting left turns off of Hillside onto Evergreen. I have not heard anything about this. The other problem it causes is there is an increase in traffic on Hillside coming down. There is no access to Hillside Blvd from Sunshine Gardens that has any traffic control. From Serramonte Boulevard until you hit Chestnut, nothing slows the traffic. Telling me there will be a signal at McLellan or Hickey Extension that would hopefully give us a break. But try to get out of Sunshine Gardens onto Hillside Boulevard in the mornings and you want to go left, you take your life in your hands. Concerned with increase in traffic on my street. Jackie Williams, 242 Longford Drive, A Transit Village we want a Transit Village. I think about before Costco went in we wanted a Transit Village. The Transit Village was proposed by a lot of us. We did not get a Transit Village because they told us there would be a parking problem with high-density housing. Now there is no parking problem? We just cut out the parking. We put out the high density and forego the parking so that people can get BART. Incredible how things change. Now we have Costco, one of the things that Mason, who lives on Arlington Drive, asked for me to put on the record was that he is very concerned about the traffic impacts. He can not get out of Arlington quite a few times because the traffic is backed up, as it was last Saturday right up to Arlington because of the traffic signals. To put more traffic into the area without parking has to be addressed. Transit Village was a terrific idea as well as the Planning Commission. But when it got to Council, they didn't think it was such a good idea and the people were given a lot of bad facts. So they passed Costco. We have to live with that. Transit Village is S :\Minutes\0621 0 1 RPC.doc Page 5 of 12 a good idea, but we have to address the residents concerns of not just giving up the parking and putting up high density. Because there will be a real problem in the area and somehow that has got to be addressed. Also it says that Evergreen there's going to be a traffic light. In talking to the people planning this right now, that they were not in charge of the traffic light, BART was. I never heard from BART that there was going to be a traffic light at Evergreen. It is something we wanted but we were told we couldn't have a traffic light at Evergreen. Must have missed the BART Transit Village Plan because if there is one should look up and see if Evergreen is on that plan. We had a meeting about permit parking. Didn't realize they were going to talk about the Transit Village. It was mainly about permit parking until the next meeting with 20 to 30 people there. Not very many people showed up and suddenly this Transit Village came up. Was a surprise to me and I was quite interested in seeing the diagrams. At the meeting where there were 100 to 150 people, we didn't even talk about the Transit Village. We talked about permit talking and ask about Evergreen. Eventhough the pictures have been out in the lobby, I don't think the people really know this is about to happen. My understanding is that this is just a vision. But if it is a vision, the one who is going to get the most from this is Costco because they own the 7 acres. So if you put a road through their property, it is going to improve their property. Obviously, the value of their property is going to go up. So is this really a concept for Costco or for the rest of us who live in the area? We have to balance what is going on here and do a lot more looking at fine details and realize that this just a vision. If we pass it now and find that we are tied into it and Costco makes a lot of money or is it something for the rest of us to enjoy. Like have restaurants and a nice area to walk. We need more public input. Art Jensen, 3 Emerald Court, the question is on page 12 concerns the studies of the shopping center at Holly and Mission. Are there any plans in the future to change this and renovate this shopping center? Chairperson Meloni Think what the plan is addressing is if and when that area is redeveloped it will be redeveloped to specifications that are in this document. There is no intention of the City going in there and kicking anybody out. That is not the idea of this. The idea is when redevelopment does occur at that time there will be a set of standards that have to be redeveloped and those standards are outlined basically in the document that was presented to the public this evening. It has been available to the public. Louise Crackbon, 288 Evergreen Dr., wanted to know if they are going to repair the sidewalks on Evergreen. In front of my house it's all broken up. We have a lot of foot traffic from the school. We have a lot of joggers that come down Evergreen and a lot of people that walk in the mornings. There are disabled people in wheelchairs. I think if someone falls there is going to be a lawsuit. Wondering since they are going to beautify Evergreen that they are going to repair the sidewalks. Chairperson Meloni explained that if you have a problem with the sidewalk to contact Public Works and ask someone to come out and look at your sidewalk and will probably be put on a list to be repaired. Louise Crackbon, 288 Evergreen Dr., stated that her husband has gone down to City Hall twice and requested that someone come to look at the sidewalk and has called the office twice and nobody has come to the house to ring the doorbell or send a letter. Chairperson Meloni asked for the address. Louise Crackbon, 288 Evergreen Dr", stated that most of the streets and Grand A venue have a lot of little cutoffs at the comers so that you can go down easily with a wheelchair or a cane if you are elderly. Are they going to do that in Sunshine Gardens because that is one of the only places that do not have these? It would be appreciated. Chairperson Meloni that's a State requirement normally when the sidewalks a put in or replaced these are put in at that time. 1'11 tell you now that the staff will contact Public Works and somebody will be at your house to talk about your sidewalk. Louise Crackbon, 288 Evergreen Dr., Thank you very much. Miguel Nunez, 285 Village Way, would like to know about the sidewalk between Baden and Linden. They have constructed one building and the sidewalk is only 2 feet. Chairperson Meloni told Mr. Nunez before you go any further that is not on the agenda tonight. Later in the meeting there is a time when you can speak about that. Right now we are speaking about a certain element called the BART Transit Village, so if you like we will take your comment later on in the meeting. Commissioner Honan I know there was a subcommittee on this. Were we ever brought back a report from the subcommittee? Chairperson Meloni No, actually the subcommittee was just there to listen to the presentations and give some S :\Minutes\0621 0 1 RPC.doc Page 6 of 12 comment and the idea was to come back in a study session to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Honan I thought that the subcommittee would have given us a report. Chairperson Meloni the problem with that is that it has to be agendized otherwise it's in violation of the Brown Act. So we wanted a study session on this. Commissioner Sim would like to commend the consultant team for a wonderful job. Those examples depicted in the report are very nice examples, particularly Emeryville, Oakland and all that. Those are very insightful for myself as I was reading through it. Interested in the implementation portion also. You have looked at all the opportunities and articulated the potential vision that is there for that area. Once again reiterate the implementation portion for us, please. Rick Williams There is a number of implementation features depending on which type of project. Talked about being as explicit about the implementation elements and processes relative to each of these projects as we were with the regulations and design guidelines. Although it may be lacking a little bit in the documentation currently what we intend to do and bring for you at the next meeting was relative to each of the concepts illustrated in the document. We would actually have an outline of the specific implementation procedure that would occur. Some of them would be linked to private development improvements, the street frontage directly in front of the development, the widening of the sidewalks in front of El Camino Real, landscaping etc. Some of them take a larger implementation effort relative to streetscape improvements, road improvements, McLellan road improvements partially done by BART and partially by the City. There are now new grant programs to improve streetscapes, linear park and bikeway improvements, and enhancements adjacent to Transit. The MTC has a livable communities program to enhance the area around transit stations, improving pedestrian access and accessibility as well as overall character of the design of elements. Developers and the City go in together in a separate NTC program that allows for enhancements to private development that they can get on a per unit basis a certain number of dollars to provide special amenities related to transit oriented development. So that private sector can take advantage of some NTC funding to improve the pedestrian elements associated with their particular development. We will go as far as such elements as Mission Road traffic calming issues and then streetscape enhancements to lighting, landscaping, crosswalks, wider sidewalks, urban gutter. Those elements can also be obtained partially with some joint funding by cities and also be used to enhance streetscape projects through Public Works and other elements. We have all of those implementations elements outlined in the Implementation Plan but feel it should be organized by a project to project basis because San Mateo County also has other programs for bikeway enhancements. So through a balance of city investment, BART's investment and under funding sources of such elements we feel are critical, linear park above the BART tracks, it's also a key feature of the plan which we think can be realized progressively over time. But the first phase of that should be looked at immediately upon approval of a plan to move forward with funding for the initial phases of improvements so that they are in conjunction with opening of BART rather than after the fact. Commissioner Sim When you talk about catalyst project, you mention some just now. You mean those elements as a catalyst? Rick Williams Those elements, yes. It needs to be looked at the staff level to prioritize which projects that the City feels are most important and maybe they need to do a study session with Planning Commission and City Council to get some input on which projects would be of the highest priority for the City and Community. A Community meeting associated with that should also be done to get other public input. Setting up of priorities will really focus the implementation. Vice Chairperson Romero One of the things the subcommittee looked at was how to protect the area on Evergreen from the impacts from the BART station and this development. One of the key components of this protection is the completion of Hickey Boulevard Extension, which is actually a County project, but it does impact South San Francisco as well as completion of the connection between El Camino Real and Mission Road (McLellan Drive extension). This extension has been talked about for many years it goes back to the time the property was owned by Macy's and really has nothing to do with Costco. Something the City has really wanted to see for a long time. Have another connection between El Camino and Mission Road. Something that is going to be a key component to take a lot of the traffic going down Evergreen and to move it to the Hickey Boulevard extension side. It has to be done as a number one priority. It can't be done after BART opens. It needs to be put at the top of the list. Needs to be a collaborative effort between the City Of South San Francisco, the school district and the County. Everybody has to get together and get this thing moving. Don't know where staff is at with it but maybe we could get some type of update. Would hate to see the BART station open and have all that traffic impact on Evergreen and not have this road completed S :\Minutes\0621 0 1 RPC.doc Page 7 of 12 before the BART station opens. It has to move right now. Can't wait any longer. This is a concern the neighborhood should be concerned about. They should be contacting the school district and the County to try to get them a little more cooperative with the City. It is going to cause a real problem in Sunshine Gardens area if that Hickey Boulevard extension doesn't get moving right away. Rick Williams I wish I had this instant and really great answer for you but I can say we definitely concur with that position. We think that it needs to push forward quickly. We know that they are working on the project. The City has asked for a project schedule update to ensure that it is on schedule. Chief Planner Sparks The section from El Camino to Mission is scheduled to open Pall 2002. Out somewhat from the original proposal. That gives a year and a half to get the section from Hillside down completed. See no reason why it shouldn't be done in that time. The environmental documentation has been completed and is in design now, but it is difficult to get a clear answer of what the schedule is. Vice Chairperson Romero The County is the primary lead agency in this. One of the things that is very important is the fact the buildings and school site are on that side of what will be the Hickey Boulevard extension. The buildings aren't really on the side that is on Evergreen and if there is a way to get the students on the Hickey Boulevard side rather than Evergreen side that would move a lot of the impacts away from the neighborhood and put it where it belongs on a road that is going to be created. Chief Planner Sparks Part of this effort that has emerged is to try to focus a lot of that onto Mission not so much to get it on the new road which is expected to be more of an expressway. There are no access points between Hillside and Mission. The idea is to move the traffic in that stretch. If we can get a good turnout design for both buses and drop-offs on Mission where there is going to a lot of traffic there and get it properly accommodated that will move focus around the corner from where it is now. Should help a lot. Rick Williams The school district is also undergoing an evaluation in preliminary design for the parking lot at the high school. They are looking at being able to accommodate vehicles on sight more efficiently than they do now so there will be fewer problems with parking the school on the residential streets. It is an ongoing process. They have begun and we have been in contact with their consultant and have shared our documentation with them while waiting to receive their initial preliminary concept. We are attempting to coordinate this effort and the circulation issues regarding this plan with improvements that will be made to the high school. Vice Chairperson Romero I agree with the drop-off on Mission Road for the school, but I also think there should be a secondary drop-off at the upper level of the campus. If students are being dropped off and they have to go to gym, they have to go all the way through the school site to get there. Rick Williams The school district did agree that they would like to have another drop-off and we can forward that information to the design team. The City can work with them on this. Vice Chairperson Romero If we could get periodical updates from staff on this 1'd appreciate it. Commissioner Honan Originally stated McLellan was going to be 6 lanes now you say 4 lanes. Is McLellan going to be 4 or 6 lanes? Rick Williams McLellan is going to be 4 lanes; 2 in each direction is our recommended design and we are going through some additional detail evaluation of traffic that will be ongoing for the next few weeks so we can get back to you at the next hearing. Currently, it's really 2 lanes in each direction for a portion of it right now and at a couple of intersections it widens out but it is still a 2 lane in each direction with few extra left and right turn lanes in different portions of it. We must also have a right turn lane on EI Camino Real and we have a left turn lane, but we don't have a couple of additional elements that part of the existing plan. We also have parking along McLellan, which allows for the retail development adjacent to it to help support that. Maybe a little more in character with Grand A venue although it will have an additional center lane to allows for through-traffic as well as diagonal parking. Maintaining the emphasis of allowing preferred circulation within that area while making the edges of it more pedestrian friendly and more supportive of the development activity adjacent to it. Commissioner Honan So this is not going to be 2 lanes straight in both direction as shown in this diagram? Rick Williams In a few areas it will have an additional right turn lane where parking would only be allowed for a certain portion of time during the peak hours when a right turn is necessary. There would be an additional right turn area. Commissioner Honan To the staff is that what is currently being designed? Rick Williams Currently Hickey Boulevard above Mission Road is really 1 lane in each direction. According to page 27, McLellan existing from EI Camino Real up to Mission is 2 lanes in each direction with a left turn pocket. Prom Mission Road heading toward McLellan there is 2 lanes in the first segment from Mission S :\Minutes\0621 0 1 RPC.doc Page 8 of 12 Road to the drainage easement and the bike path. Beyond that there is 2 through lanes and a left turn pocket that goes onto EI Camino and a right turn lane that allows you to go north on El Camino. Our recommendation with the appropriate signalization is that 2 left turn lanes on El Camino and right turn pocket when required during peak periods of time is sufficient for the volumes this road is anticipated to carry. We've had some meetings with Public Works department recently as this afternoon to go over some of the details of it and they requested some further evaluation by our traffic engineer to ensure that this the appropriate design for this segment of roadway and we will bring that to you at the next Planning Commission meeting if there are any modifications to it. Commissioner Teglia As the other commissioners are concerned, with implementation concerned deeper with the full implementation. Transit Village is great but we have a big box retail, BART and the existing traffic impacts that the EIR has already identified as being below acceptable and have overridden to the benefits of the current developments. We need some policies recognizing the real world traffic impacts. Specifically, since you already have an unmitigatable traffic impact from Costco and BART development without adding high density residential in the middle. We've taken this whole study which shows a lot of improvements to the residential area, streetscapes. If you were to tell me today that we were going to build this as one package, I would love it and say go for it because the high density would pay for some of the other improvements. The reality is we have the whole grand scheme yet the first advocation is the Costco development on McLellan Drive. It will be your highest density core for this entire area. That will go up probably before any of the other improvements. Can't see the benefit of that development without the other improvements first. There needs to be some policies that recognize that in order to get that kind of development you have these other improvements to the residential areas in order to justify it. It needs to be recognized that the EIR already identifies you have impacts that won't be mitigated in order to allow development on these properties. We'll have to realize the overriding benefit, but there will be no overriding benefit unless you have the other improvements in first. I don't see that here. The other missing part to this in your circulation studies I believe is the current Costco site. Costco owns that entire property. What Costco has done is develop the north part with what I believe is substandard parking. Which is creating the existing problem. Right now their parking is maxed and because they have such a narrow entrance and one turn lane already you have traffic backing up from Costco down to Hickey. When that light turns green everybody fills into the parking lot, but because it is already maxed out and not a lot of maneuvering room you are queuing up through EI Camino back out towards Hickey. So when the light goes red everybody is now blocking the intersection because they can't get into the Costco parking lot and you have all lanes on El Camino blocked. You are going to add development on top of this. Since Costco owns the entire site, before we put policies in that going to entitle them to develop it one of the focuses has to be on getting customers in and out of the Costco facility and taking that burden off of El Camino so you can support the high density development. Part of that will include chopping off some of the area of their property tagged for high- density development to maybe widen their Costco drive. Maybe add a little additional parking in their lot so that as cars come off of EI Camino they can queue in quickly and get off El Camino. Notice that the Costco parking lot is within the 1A mile radius yet it hasn't been addressed. That needs to be addressed before we go onto the high-density core. Bottom line is the wrapping looks good but 1'd hate to see the core come without the wrapping. Commissioner Sim To Mr. Williams-One of the things that needs to be placed in diagrams in the future is the linear park. Diagrams are very clear, but looking for a diagram also talks about articulating that whole piece of the spine. Place in diagrams and show some of the sensitives, densities and how you are going to build that out. Commend you on that idea for the BART plaza. You mentioned design build was the approach that BART takes and that's up to the City and BART to think about. That's a very intriguing idea to make a more useable plaza out of that. Being it was meant to be an entry area but obviously no drop off area, mainly for parking people going into that. It is a great vision for our City. Especially people who are driving into that BART station looking at our City with that interesting humanized plaza that talk about our residents and community. It's a great positive element to our City projected onto the rest of the communities. 1'd like to encourage staff and City Council's position. It's a great idea. Rick Williams That's where I think the issue of implementation needs to be more detailed. We have discussed it in the more technical committee for example on that plaza. Part of that was that we had a working relationship with BART real estate in Oakland, which actually isn't connected with south stations. The stations on this side of the bay are not connected with this new extension so we have had to go to them independently to discuss some of the ways that this might be able to be implemented. It has been brought to S :\Minutes\0621 0 1 RPC.doc Page 9 of 12 the attention of Costco representatives and the developers that are interested in that site that one of the things that could occur is that BART is terrible of maintaining any open space or landscaping. If the developer can get an easement to use that plaza as part of their open space amenity package with the residents, they could then as payment instead of money for the easement do the maintenance of that plaza. So they would have control and assurance that it would be a high quality space. It also requires some redesign from the existing effort and that could also be something that the development community could do in a working relationship with BART. There are also circulation issues relative to that same similar thing. They need a good egress point out of that development parcel. One of the issues that we have discussed with BART and the development community is that they get an egress point out onto the BART road that they would be able to access McLellan Boulevard and add a signal light' s intersection and could gain that access through an easement and be able to maintain the landscaping along that area. They can gain the access, maintain the property so it is a benefit amenity to the residents and it helps with the traffic circulation in the area. That's some of the detailed implementation recommendation. Some we talked about should be incorporated into the document to give people a more direct path of obtaining the vision. Prom a design concept appreciate the comments. Commissioner Sim I really like these reports because it talks about the master plan strategy a holistic approach to this area. Sometimes when projects are visualized implementation gets fragmented and lose pieces. Encourage staff and consultants to keep striving for that vision. Rick Williams Agree that the whole improvement package can't be achieved at once. Need to outline a phasing. Particularly around the high-density development the City has the ability to extract improvements associated with that development to make the public benefits. The open space plaza along McLellan was one of the elements talked about. Talked about the streetscape along McLellan and El Camino Real on Costco. Relati ve to the traffic issues of Costco, one of the things talked about this afternoon with Public Works was to have our traffic consultant look more carefully at the existing conditions at Costco because the EIR was done before Costco was in place. Asking our traffic consultant to do some on the field evaluations of the entry and exit points and see what can be done for that. We will be making some recommendations. Commissioner Teglia Recognizing that the rest of that site isn't built yet still has opportunities for some mitigation there. Rick Williams One of the things to be evaluated is this a parking problem or a circulation problem? Get the real measurements out in the field and make sure we understand the problems in the appropriate way. Commissioner Teglia Keep in mind its not just Costco but the gas station at the end of that road. May just be that perhaps widening Costco Drive can queue it up to have a direct lane to the gas station and into other parts of the parking lot. Whatever it takes to get the traffic off El Camino. If we have gridlock now when BART goes in and the rest of the high density residential goes in, it will be a mess. Rick Williams There's two elements to that and I believe we will look at this for our evaluation. The peak periods for the residential development and Costco are not going to be the same. It's an issue of looking at the timing of the high-density development and when the activity occurs relative to the Costco. Something to look at. We'll be looking in that further and there will be a supplemental to this report. Chairperson Meloni Thank you, Rick. Your report was well presented and can be sure there is a problem over at Costco, which was discussed at the subcommittee level. Mentioned a number of alternatives that could possibly take care of the problem. What you've heard from the public tonight is there is a concern about the neighborhoods and it is a viable concern. Feel that before this project starts its phases, the public's concerns in the neighborhoods become number one. The joint meeting with the City Council is a good idea to prioritize how the phases should work. Need to discuss in a manner that is open to the public with both Planning Commission and City Council are both present so it does not go back and forth. The improvements in the neighborhood to guarantee that there is no impact are number one priority. Secondly, did discuss the Hickey Extension thoroughly and it needs to be done by the time BART station opens. It is an intricate part of BART. Urge to make sure the public has ample time to look at the document. Rick Williams It's been a pleasure working with staff and have gotten a lot of good feedback from the subcommittee and technical committee both at the staff level and private community. 6. Items from Commission Vice Chairperson Romero I know we have already touched on the issue with regards to the Costco and some of S:\Minutes\0621 0 lRPC.doc Page 10 of 12 the problems that are out there. Although it is being included as the Village Plan, the problems were out there were identified previously and the staff was working with Costco to try to resolve some of them now not later. We have a circulation problem which is apparent the queuing of the gas station is going all the way into the entranceway. Needs to be resolved now. Chief Planner Sparks Those items are still being worked on. The emphasis early on was on noise. There were problems with refrigerator trucks being run in the wee hours of the morning and trash on the side of the building and landscaping issues. Those have been dealt with. There is much more enforcement regarding trucks idling out there at 5 a.m. That is not permitted. Hasn't occurred recently. Did some upgrades from initial installation. The trash is better taken care of. The circulation is a messier issue and is being analyzed. Won't promise an instant solution but it has not gone away. Vice Chairperson Romero What about the queuing of the gas station? If it is going into the parking lot for the people who aren't there to get gas and its stopping people.from making the right hand turn to get off ofEl Camino Real and the traffic is backing up on El Camino Real. Isn't it possible to get somebody from Costco to direct traffic? Chief Planner Sparks That's a suggestion I hadn't heard before. Perhaps in heavy hours as an interim measure that is a way to go. At your next meeting, I will bring a report in more detail as to what has gone on. Vice Chairperson Romero Prom what I've observed, it's a free for all. Chief Planner Sparks It's a very successful store. Vice Chairperson Romero I can see that, but anything that you can do to help the traffic move along and encourage Costco to do so would be appreciated. Chairperson Meloni I've noticed that the last couple of months there have been a lot of cellular applications. See more and more in residential areas. Concerned for aesthetics and health. Chief Planner Sparks West of 101 there are a few commercial areas, but this City is made up of mostly residential. If we are going to have comprehensive coverage it is inescapable to have some in residential areas. The majority have been on top of for example 306 Spruce, P. G.& E. towers and that sort of thing. The nature of the direction that the City has chosen to go, a greater number of smaller antennas rather than a few master facilities which would be quite substantial and clearly visible towers. Chairperson Meloni Staff knows how the Commission feels about them so they should be very cautious in their approvals into what is being brought forward. 7. Items from the Public Miguel Nunez, 285 Village Way, asked about the sidewalk being so narrow by the Giorgi building project. Chief Planner Sparks This is an issue we have heard quite a lot about. The response is that it was an error. We overlooked that in the processing. The applicant was entitled to bring in a project maximizing what he could get out of it. He did that and for variety of reasons, which ultimately are my responsibility, we didn't catch that it was going to result in a very narrow sidewalk. We are going to wind-up with that narrow sidewalk. What we will do to safeguard pedestrians in that narrow area I don't know, but I think it is pretty clear that we will have to do something. Commissioner Teglia On that issue, it was brought to staff's attention before the rest of the building went up when the foundations were just in. I believe it was brought to staff's attention by this board and I can't understand why not only is it too close to the sidewalk but to my understanding is that he has also encroached onto City property and will have to pay the City for that encroachment. Usually a developer would be required to rip out any construction where they shouldn't be. I would still like to see a better explanation as to why this particular developer seems to have enjoyed a rather convenient oversight of the City. Chief Planner Sparks The Baden frontage is a zero setback from the public right-of-way in the downtown area that's legal on Grand A venue, Baden, Linden and downtown area. Most of the storefronts are immediately adjacent to the sidewalk. In this case, Baden was widened and that took some of the right-of-way and it left a somewhat smaller sidewalk between what's legally the edge of the right-of-way and the street. That's a detail we should have picked up in the processing and we didn't. On the alley side, the lane, I understand, there was a problem of encroachment. The contractor dropped the footing about 6 inches onto City property in the right-of- way. I understand that appropriate compensation for that is being negotiated. I don't know that this developer has received any particular preferential treatment, but do wish it had come out a little better. Commissioner Teglia This brings up another issue. A residential development that was approved by this Commission with certain restriction was built not in conformity with those restrictions. Unfortunately the City S:\Minutes\0621 OlRPC.doc Page 11 of 12 building didn't catch it signed off on it and now we are stuck with it. In this case again, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to look at the Taco Bell, Fire station, the old Giorgi building, every other building on that street and see how they all line up. The foundations were obviously in the wrong place. I'm not understanding why Building is not being more sensitive to the implementation to the planning process. Maybe there is a communication problem between Building and Planning and should be focused on in the future to prevent these glaring embarrassments. Chief Planner Sparks Don't have a response to that. The Giorgi building on Baden is legal in terms of its setback. It is immediately at the right-of-way edge. Mr. Giorgi is entitled to have that building there. Commissioner Teglia You mean if we had realized that in the beginning we would have approved it that way? You said we missed it and we probably would not have wanted to do that, right? Chief Planner Sparks We could have negotiated an alternative treatment, but I need to emphasize he didn't do anything illegal. At least on that side of the building. Chairperson Meloni Remind everybody there is no meeting on July 5,2001. Chief Planner Sparks Couple of items from staff, would like to remind the Planning Commission that on July 18th there is a joint study session with the City Council on Childcare scheduled. Assistant City Attorney Johnson Coming back to Commission regarding the Anet program and the San Francisco Airport MOD. The MOD expires the August 29th of this year, however the reimbursement provisions will continue for an additional 5 years, August 29,2006. If the City changes the zoning during 2001 and 2006, we would have to repay all the money received plus interest from the San Francisco Airport. Chairperson Meloni So after 2006, we can do a zoning change and allow residential mixed use in the East of 101 area. Assistant City Attorney Johnson That would be something City Council would direct us to do. ADJOURNMENT Motion/Sim Second/Honan The meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. Thomas C. Spar Secretary to the lanning Commission City of South San Francisco ~J! . p1 (),'~, ,. ~,r, ()J /V ~.. ~ ./"1./ ~ Mi~~~\ Mel:i, Chairperson - Planning Commission City of South San Francisco NEXT MEETING: Regular Meeting July 5, 2001 cancelled, Regular Meeting July 19,2001, Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA. TCS/pc S :\Minutes\0621 0 lRPC.doc Page 12 of 12