Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9-15-2020 Final Minutes DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO DATE: September 15, 2020 TIME: 4:00 PM MEMBERS PRESENT: Chris Mateo, Chair Sean Winchester, Vice Chair Michael Nilmeyer David W. Nelson, Frank Vieira MEMBERS ABSENT: none STAFF PRESENT: Sailesh Mehra, Planning Manager Tony Rozzi, Principal Planner Chris Espiritu, Senior Planner Stephanie Skangos, Associate Planner Patricia Cotla, Planning Technician 1. Adminstrative Business – Staff Presentation on Single Family Dwellings • DRB generally recommends approval of the SFD projects that were presented • A series of future meetings with DRB and Staff are recommended, including but not limited to: architectural histroric preservation, and planting review with the Parks and Rec. Department 2. OWNER Rabih Ballout APPLICANT Abraham Zavala ADDRESS 508-512 South Airport Blvd PROJECT NUMBER P20-0051: DR20-0025 PROJECT NAME Exterior Modifications (Case Planner: Gaspare Annibale ) DESCRPTION Design Review for exterior modifications to a commercial building at 508-512 South Airport Blvd in the Business Commercial (BC) Zoning District in accordance with Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code and determination that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA. Approved as submitted 3. OWNER Frank Adasiewicz TR APPLICANT Frank Adasiewicz TR ADDRESS 360/364 Alta Vista Drive PROJECT NUMBER P19-0028: UP19-0016 & DR19-0040 PROJECT NAME New Residential Development (Case Planner: Stephanie Skangos) DESCRIPTION “Resubmittal” - Planned Unit Development to merge 4 parcels and construct 14 Single Family Homes with ADU units at 360 and 364 Alta Vista Drive in accordance with Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code The Board had the following comments: 1. The Board liked the revised design concept. 2. The added dormers were a nice feature to the design. 3. The applicant listened to and addressed the prior DRB comments. 4. The Board liked the different design element styles - Eyebrow & Craftsman. The windows on the garage doors added a nice feature to the design. 5. Consider adding a horizontal band to the elevations along Alta Vista Drive to tie all the material finishes together. This will also create a nice shadow line. 6. All detail information was addressed in the resubmittal. 7. The play area was well incorporated into the design. 8. The proposed landscaping plan will work well for the site. 9. Consider changing Cercis canadensis, Eastern Redbud to Cercis canadensis var. texensis 'Oklahoma', “Oklahoma Redbud”. 10. The one way access into the development will provide a nice safety feature for the residents and pedestrians. 11. The site is still under-parked for the number of units being proposed. 12. Consider removing the grates with vines along the drive aisle, as this will diminish fire access. Recommend Approval with Comments 4. OWNER Jamasbi Firoozeh APPLICANT Jamasbi Firoozeh ADDRESS El Camino Real & Hickey Blvd PROJECT NUMBER P20-0021: DR20-0015 PROJECT NAME New Work Live Units (Case Planner: Christopher Espiritu) DESCRIPTION Design Review to construct four work live units on a 10,703 square ft. lot on the corner of El Camino Real and Hickey Blvd in the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District in accordance with Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code and determination that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA. The Board had the following comments: 1. The Board is concerned with the appearance of the development; consider some material changes to help break up the massing. 2. The Board is questioning the proposed green roof Provide updated renderings / elevations of the experience of the green roof from the street level, as you are unable to see the green roof. 3. The design is very industrial looking and does of fit in with the surrounding neighborhood. 4. Add some vertical elements to the design. 5. The proposed plans are lacking articulation to the design. 6. The development is lacking a sense of arrival to the site. 7. The applicant needs to hire a Civil Engineer and a Landscape Architect to help with the redesign and help with the constraints of the site. 8. The Civil Engineer needs to consider an analysis of the site‘s topography and topographic study of the site is required. 9. The section through the building shows the garage level pushed towards El Camino Real, constricting the pedestrian walkway and driveway. Consider pushing the garage floor level back into the hill aligned with the rear of the building to increase the pedestrian and driveway width for safety. 10. The Board is concerned with the heavy traffic coming off of El Camino Real, and the safety of the pedestrians using the walkways within the site needs to be addressed. 11. A traffic study should be conducted given that vehicles in this segment of El Camino Real typically speed and vehicles attempting to access the site may create hazards at the proposed driveway. 12. The sidewalk across the driveway at the gas station is not shown on the plans. Crosswalk striping or signage should be considered for safety. 13. The entry drive to the units is very close to the entry drive to the motel parking lot. Traffic from El Camino Real may make the mistake of using the driveway to the proposed units to enter the gas station or motel parking lot, which poses a major safety concern for the pedestrians at the live-work units. Consider a design pattern on the drive way approach that will distinguish the entrance into the site, as this will help direct individuals to the existing gas station and motel. 14. Consider changing the paving into and through the site from asphalt to decorative concrete, stamped concrete or unit paving, to help distinguish the use of this area. 15. Provide signage identifying this entry as “Private Drive” or some other warning to stop the general public from using this driveway. 16. The rear of the motel backs up against a tall slope, and a concrete drainage channel captures all this water from the rear and routes it around the south end to the corner of the new work-live unit building, which is a conflict and needs to be resolved. 17. The sidewalk leading to the adjacent parking lot appears to run into a storage enclosure on the motel parking lot, which needs to be resolved. 18. The large trees behind the project appear to be California Buckeye, a deciduous species that drops leaves in late summer. 19. Plant minimum 3 species of tall evergreen/coniferous trees. One at the northeast corner and two at the southeast corner, near the rear property line at the base of the slope. 20. These will grow taller than the proposed units and soften the stark boxy appearance of the project. Consider the following: • Pinus canariensis, Canary Island Pine • Cedrus deodara, Deodar Cedar • Cupressus macrocarpa, Monterey Cypress 21. Design the level landscape area for the residents to use; not just plant trees. 22. The plant species list includes species that may not do well at this location as these species do not like the wind: • Hebe • Princess Flower 23. Consider undergrounding the electrical wires, as there is currently a PG&E pole in the middle of the development. Resubmittal required 5. OWNER PS Business Park APPLICANT The Hanover Company ADDRESS 124 Airport Blvd & 100 Produce Avenue PROJECT NUMBER P18-0074: RZ18-0003, GPA18-0004, EIR18-0005, DR18-0038 PROJECT NAME Multi-Family Residential Units (Case Planner: Tony Rozzi/Chris Espiritu) DESCRIPTION “Resubmittal” - General Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, and Transportation Demand Management Plan to redevelop an existing office park development consisting of two parcels into 480 multi-family residential units at 124 Airport Boulevard and 100 Produce Avenue. The Board had the following comments: 1. The Board liked the revised architectural updates, articulation is much more interesting concept. 2. The architectural corner treatments are particularly a nice element. 3. The at grade pedestrian engagement updates are much appreciated. 4. Adding the dog park to the development is a nice added feature. 5. The Hanover team listened to the prior comments and addressed the DRB concerns. 6. The new design incorporated the existing and proposed changes and it was a beneficial feature to see the before and after appearance. 7. There are six (6) night photos of the tunnel lighting. The upper right photo and the lower left & lower middle photos do not do as good job creating visibility for persons in the tunnel so focus on a well-lit tunnel. 8. In selecting the final design, consider the ultimate visibility for safety and to ease the decision for anyone walking into and through the tunnel. 9. Change the London Plane Tree from the parent Platanus x acerifolia to the variety Platanus acerifolia 'Columbia'which is more mildew resistant in SSF. 10. Applicant to return with a Master Sign Program for the campus. Recommend Approval with Conditions.