HomeMy WebLinkAbout7-20-21 Final DRB MinutesDESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
DATE: July 20, 2021
TIME: 4:00 PM
MEMBERS PRESENT: Sean Winchester, Chair
David W. Nelson, Vice Chair
Chris Mateo, Michael Nilmeyer& Frank Vieira
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Adena Friedman, Principal Planner
Chris Espiritu, Senior Planner
Christy Usher, Senior Planner
Gaspare Annibale, Associate Planner
Patricia Cotla, Planning Technician
1. Adminstrative Business – None
2. OWNER ARE-SF
APPLICANT ARE-SF
ADDRESS 191 & 201 Haskins Way
PROJECT NUMBER P21-0011: Signs21-0007 & DR21-0007
PROJECT NAME Master Sign Program
(Case Planner: Adena Friedman)
DESCRIPTION “Amend” the Master Sign Program for commercial building at
191 & 201 Haskins Way and 400 & 450 East Jamie Court in the
Business Technology Park (BTP) 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 Boardliked the amendments to the Master Sign Program.
2. The proposed tenant signs will be in scaled with the two office buildings.
Recommend Approval with Conditions and proceed to Planning Commission.
3. OWNER Infill Land Partners LLC
APPLICANT Infill Land Partners LLC
ADDRESS 1477 Huntington Avenue
PROJECT NUMBER P20-0079: UP21-0001, DR21-0004, TDM21-0001,
RZ21-0001, PUD21-0001, GPA21-0001 & EIR21-0001
PROJECT NAME 262 new multi-family units in a 7-story building
(Case Planner: Adena Friedman)
DESCRIPTION Use Permit, Design Review, Planned Development,
Transportation Demand Management Plan, General Plan and
Zoning Text Amendments to construct a new 7-story, 262-unit
multi-family building at 1477 Huntington Avenue in the
Business Commercial (BC) Zoning District in accordance with
Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code and the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
The Board had the following comments:
1. The design of the proposed project is too large for the site, in context of
removing trees throughout the site.
2. Consider different material finishes and colors.
3. The proposed roof trim has dark colors, where the towers have a white color
trim.
4. The site is lacking a sense of arrival to the building .
5. The Board is concerned with the removal of the 70 trees throughout the site,
including the trees along the Centennial Trail. The proposed plan has approx.
36 new trees, which is not a 2 for 1 replacement as required. The Eucalyptus
trees are 85’-105’ tall. The proposed building is less than 85’ tall. Most of the
proposed trees will grow to 30’-40’ tall.
6. Concern that the remaining trees will not survive after construction, and the
proposed trees will not reach the height of the 7-story residential building.
7. The new proposed trees will not help screen the pedestrian open space nor the
trail.
8. The north and south side of the building are lacking trees.
9. A survey is recommended to accurately determine tree sizes with locations with
proper canopy sizes and locate edge of existing pavement in relation to trunk
positions.
10. The proposed sidewalk along the north property line will likely cut the existing
tree roots designated to remain. Loss of roots is also a wind stability concern.
11. The proposed trees need to have a proper root zone to obtain potential growth.
12. Who is responsible for the tree maintenance?
13. Review the landscaping plan, as some the proposed species will not survive the
SSF elements such as Platanus racemosa, California Sycamore (subject to
anthracnose disease) and Tibouchina Urvilleana, Princess Flower (subject to
severe wind damage unless protected).
14. The proposed stoop walls could be constructed taller to help create more usable
area for the residences and protect against wind.
15. Considered relocating the porches to face the Centennial Trail, as the proposed
porches are currently facing Huntington Avenue, which will be a heavy traffic
roadway that will produce a lot of traffic noise.
16. Recommend that a good sealant treatment be added to the Corten steel metal
railings to prevent rust stains on the stucco wall and walkways.
17. The building design and architecture is good but needs additional attention to
make it higher quality and special.
18. Check with the Building Department on the proper requirements for the
handrails and ADA requirements.
19. Check with the Fire Department on the requirements for the fire circulation.
20. Where will the fire trucks enter the site from - Huntington or off the trail?
21. Check with the South San Francisco Scavenger Company on the proper
locations for the trash pickup.
22. The plan currently shows the trash area in the middle of the development.
23. How does the building management roll out the trash cans?
24. Will the parking curb cuts along the building be utilized for deliveries, pickup or
drop off zones for the residents?
25. Will there be a designated area for Uber or Lyft?
Recommend resubmittal.
4. OWNER Cindy Zeidan
APPLICANT Alex Tzang
ADDRESS 211 Fairway Drive
PROJECT NUMBER P21-0042: DR21-0018
PROJECT NAME 2nd Story Addition with an attached ADU
(Case Planner: Christy Usher)
DESCRIPTION Design Review to construct a 2nd story addition with an attached
ADU at 211 Fairway Drive in the Low Density Residential
(RL-8) Zoning district inaccordance with South San Francisco
Municipal Code and determination that the project is
categorically exempt from CEQA.
The Board had the following comments:
1. The Board liked the proposed project.
2. The design fits nicely with the neighborhood.
Recommend approval
5. OWNER Firoozeh Jamasbi
APPLICANT Kava Massih
ADDRESS El Camino Real and Hickey Blvd
PROJECT NUMBER P20-0021: DR20-0015
PROJECT NAME New Work Live Units
(Case Planner: Chris Espiritu)
DESCRIPTION “Resubmittal” - Design Review to construct four work live
units on a 10,703 square foot 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 liked the revised plan submittal.
2. The applicant took the previous DRB comments and responded with an
improved design that fits the area.
3. Consider adding a water sealant to the proposed Corten steel metal railings to
keep the metal from rusting and staining the walls and walkways.
4. Consider adding solar panels to the design.
5. Consider adding a protective wall or enclosure for the residents to have safe area
around the outdoor area, as the proposed area is near a busy roadway.
6. Consider relocaing the pedestrian space into the hillside to provide additional
space and greater separation from the street.
7. Check with the building division if elevators will be required for the building.
8. Review your landscaping plan, as some of the proposed species will not survive
the SSF elements. Ceanothus ‘Yankee Point’ has a shortend lifespan of 6-8
years. Ceantohus gloriosus ‘Anchor Bay’ has been growing at a corporate
campus east of 101 for over 25 years.Westringia fruticosa, Coast Rosemary is
not frost tolerant and should be replaced.
9. The proposed Mexican sage will not work on this site, as this species will suffer
from Powdery Mildrew.
10. Consider adding a screen hedge (no greater than 3 feet in height or about the
height of the hood of a car) to help screen the two green areas along El Camino
Real.
Recommend Approval with Conditions and proceed to Planning Commission.
6. OWNER Evangelina Arapeles
APPLICANT Luis Furushio
ADDRESS 132 Adrian Avenue
PROJECT NUMBER P21-0022: DR21-0010
PROJECT NAME Rear Addition
(Case Planner: Gaspare Annibale)
DESCRIPTION “Resubmittal” - Design Review to construct a rear addition at
132 Adrian Avenue in the Low Residential Density (RL-8) 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 liked the revised plan submittal.
2. The applicant addressed the roof plan concerns.
3. Make sure the proposed roof colors match the existing roof.
4. Work with the roofing company to ensure that the proper plywood is installed.
5. Consider adding lights at the garage door or side door.
6. Please consider using Arbutus ‘Marinia’, Marina Strawberry Tree (30’-40’
height) instead of the Arbutus unedo, Strawberry Tree shown (10’-15’ height),
which is a bush.
Recommend Approval with Conditions.
7.
OWNER SMPO ELC LLC
APPLICANT Sanford Group
ADDRESS 101 Gull Avenue
PROJECT NUMBER P21-0006: UP21-0003, DR21-0009, TDM21-0003,
EIR21-0002
PROJECT NAME New Office/R&D Campus
(Case Planner: Gaspare Annibale)
DESCRIPTION “Resubmittal” - Use Permit, Design Review and TDM Plan to
construct a new 7-story Office/R&D Building with attached
parking garage at 101 Gull Avenue in the Business Technology
Park (BTP) Zoning District and in accordance with Title 20 of
the South San Francisco Municipal Code.
The Board had the following comments:
1. The Board liked the revised plan submittal.
2. The applicant addressed the previous DRB comments and responded with an
improved design.
3. Consider adding some landscaping at the front entrance bulb-out.
4. The Oak Coast on the plan shall be protected and planted with proper treatment.
Don’t cover with irrigation, as this species will not survive.
5. The slope shall provide for proper stablization.
6. Consider a replacement for Rock Rose, which will not survive without fast
draining sandy soil.
Recommend Approval with Conditions and proceed to Planning Commission.