Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-04-06 c~'t\\ S~N p. co ~ ~~~ ~.'.~.P ~'- ,,_ r~ ~ <:> , ~",-,. () >-<6' . c~ ~, '(j; ~ ,.~ , .. _ I.\'~ ,,,t,,,,,,,nA_n u'~.~O '~~ II,'<-~4'W' ~--;- C<1l~~\.~ MINUTES April 6, 2006 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION CALL TO ORDER I PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL PRESENT: TAPE 1 7:30 D.m. Commissioner Giusti, Commissioner Romero, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Teglia and Chairperson Zemke ABSENT: Commissioner Prouty and Vice Chairperson Honan STAFF PRESENT: Planning Division: City Manager City Attorney: Engineering Division: Police Department: Fire Prevention. CHAIR COMMENTS AGENDA REVIEW Susy Kalkin, Acting Chief Planner Steve Carlson, Senior Planner Mike Lappen, Senior Planner Girard Beaudin, Associate Planner Chadrick Smalley, Associate Planner Bertha Aguilar, Admin. Asst. II Marty Van Duyn, Assistant City Manager Peter Spoerl, Assistant City Attorney Ray Razavi, City Engineer Raul Dacanay, Civil Engineer Sergeant Alan Normandy, Planning Liaison Bryan Niswonger, Assistant Fire Marshall Acting Chief Planner Kalkin that a commending resolution was to be presented to Thomas C. Sparks. Chairperson Zemke read the resolution into the record and presented it to retired Chief Planner Sparks. The Commission thanked him for working with them and noted that they enjoyed his tenure. Recess called at 7:38 p.m. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Edna's Ichiban (Ben Ramos}/applicant American National Ins. Co./owner 2234 & 2236 Westborough Blvd. P02-0001: UPM05-0005 (Continue to Apri/20, 2006) Recalled to order at 7:49 p.m. None Modification of a Use Permit to expand the range of entertainment options and expand an existing restaurant with alcoholic beverage service and hours of operation past midnight within 200 feet of a residential zone in the Retail Commercial (C-l) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.91. Motion Teglia I Second Sim to approve the Consent Calendar. Approved by majority voice vote. Absent Planning Commission Meeting of April 6, 2006 - Commissioner Prouty and Vice Chairperson Honan PUBLIC HEARING 2. COMERlCA BANK Hernandez, Jose J & Rita/Owner Comerica / Applicant 401 Grand Avenue (APN 012 305 260) P05-0168: UP05-0030, DR05-0098, SIGNS06-0002 (Continued from March 16, 2006) Use Permit application to allow financial services at 401 Grand Avenue in the Downtown Commercial (D-C-L) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.26, 20.81 & 20.85 Public Hearing opened. Associate Planner Beaudin presented the staff report. He pointed out that the Commission encouraged the building owner to apply for additional funds from the City's Community Development Block Grant and staff has begun conversations with the owner on how to pursue this. David Link, Applicant, noted that they addressed all the Commission's comments. Public Hearing closed. Commissioner Giusti asked if the entry on Grand Avenue matches the entryway on Maple Avenue. Mr. Link noted that the entryway was for 401 Grand only Commissioner Romero suggested moving the panels further back behind the windows. Mr. Link noted that they will lose teller space if they do this. Commissioner Romero questioned if the size of the image on the panels be limited. Mr. Link replied that they could be smaller. Commissioner Romero asked how the delivery and pickup of money will be coordinated and how often this occurs. Kimberly Smith, Attorney representing Comerica, noted that deliveries and pickups happen at least twice a week and they do not know the day and time that these occur. Commissioner Romero noted that the frequency is not an issue but that the lack of parking is. He was concerned that the red zone would be used to get the cash in and out of the bank. Mr. Link noted that the Police Department accepted the applicants parking proposal. Associate Planner Beaudin noted that the Police Department waived their condition with regard to deliveries and are comfortable with the proposal as is. The concern was with the armored vehicle being too far from the building which would create a safety issue. Commissioner Teglia questioned if the window would be completely covered by the panel. Todd Levine noted the tellers need to have the security so that no one can see behind the teller line. Commissioner Teglia asked what the depth of the box was from the window. Mr. Link noted that it is 2-3 inches from the glass. Commissioner Teglia felt that this was an issue because it could be mistaken as an advertising box and with some additional depth the glass and panel would not give this idea. Mr. Link noted that they have provided all the depth possible without crowding the teller space and affecting door swings. Todd Levine added that the poster size can be limited. Mr. Link noted that the images can be customized and the text can be limited. Ms. Smith added that they are not limited in the poster size and they will not be large because Comerica does not want it to look like a billboard. Commissioner Romero felt that the limitations and criteria of the signs have to be set by the City so that Comerica's Marketing Department knows what the constraints of the posters are. Acting Chief Planner Kalkin s:\MlvclAtes\Flvc~Llzel> MlvclAtes\200G\O-+-Ob-Ob RPC. MlvclAtes.l>ot 1>~ge 2 of3 Planning Commission Meeting of April 6, 2006 noted that Condition of Approval #4 could be amended to limit the text on the panel to no more than 15% of the panel area and limit the size to cover no more than a defined percentage. She added that the design will also need to approved by the Planning Division whenever they change the poster. Commissioner Sim noted that the image could be an abstract image. He added that this still meets Comerica's need for safety and privacy, as well as the City's concern to keep as much of the windows as possible. Commissioner Romero noted that an example of the artistic images that can be used is on the breezeway off of Grand Avenue. Commissioner Teglia asked that the applicant could provide a 4 inch deep inset for the panels. Todd Levine noted that this may not be possible because they would have to create a frame that would pull it away from the glass. He added that they could return with details and other materials when they are available. Acting Chief Planner Kalkin added that the Commission can direct the applicant and architect to work with staff on these details. Motion Teglia / Second Romero to approve POS-0168: UP05-0030 & DR05-0098 and amending Condition of Approval 4 to limit the window sign sizes and directing that the window boxes be resubmitted for final approval to the Commission. Approved by majority voice vote. Absent - Commissioner Prouty and Vice Chairperson Honan. 3. Royal Auto Repair Use Permit Michael & Katie Hartmann/Owner Yousef Mustafa/ Applicant 1331 San Mateo Ave P06-0015: UP06-0005 Use Permit allowing an automotive repair facility, generating more than 100 average daily vehicle trips, with outside overnight vehicle storage, a fence wall exceeding 3 feet in height in a minimum required front setback, in an existing 18,000 square foot industrial building, and Design Review of exterior changes to the building, parking lot, fence and landscaping at 1331 San Mateo Ave, in the M-1 Industrial Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC Sections 20.30.040 (a), 20.30.040 (b) and 20.73.020 (d)(l) & Chapters 20.81 & 20.85. Public Hearing opened. Associate Planner Beaudin presented the staff report and added a Condition of Approval that the roll up door at the south end of the building shall be removed and the wall shall be repaired to match the existing building. Kamal Fallaha, representing Mr. Mustafa noted that this is a new facility that is two times larger than their existing building on South Linden. This will enable better service and improve their operations. They agree with all the Findings and Conditions of Approval. Roy Uccelli, owner of 1341 San Mateo Avenue, stated that he is not opposing the operations of the proposed use. He noted that he and the property in question share a common driveway and noted that he does not want to see cars that have been serviced or need service parked on the driveway. He asked that the Planning Commission include conditions and regulations to avoid this problem. He added that a one year review should be added to the conditions of approval. Suresh Gir pointed out that the applicant's business has grown and they are pursuing a bigger building to park their vehicles inside. Public Hearing closed. s:\MlvclAtes\Flvc~Llul> MlvclAteS\200b\O-+-OG-Ob RPC MlvclAtes.l>ot p~ge 3 ofj Planning Commission Meeting of April 6, 2006 Commissioner Teglia asked if the overnight storage area will be used for storage of commercial vehicles. Acting Chief Planner Kalkin noted that parking spaces 22-30 are standard parking spaces and a Condition of Approval could be added to designate these for employee parking only and the rest of the parking spaces would be available for limousines. Motion Teglia / Second Sim to approve P06-0015: UP06-0005 and adding the following Conditions of Approval: . That all commercial vehicles or any vehicles repaired in the operation be stored in the designated overnight storage parking area off of Lowrie Avenue . Parking spaces 22-30 shall be employee designated standard vehicle parking only. (No limousine or vehicles on site for servicing.) . There will be a one year compliance review. Approved by majority voice vote. Absent - Commissioner Prouty and Vice Chairperson Honan. 4. 1070 Associates, LLC/Owner Vanguard Car Rental USA, Inc./ Applicant 1080 San Mateo Avenue P06-0007 & UP06-0002 (Continue from March 16, 2006) Use permit to allow a rental car fleet maintenance use, including construction of a maintenance building, car wash and related site improvements, at 1080 San Mateo Avenue in the M-1 Industrial Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Section 20.30.030 Public Hearing opened. Acting Chief Planner Kalkin presented Chad Smalley, Associate Planner, who previously worked in Solano County. Associate Planner Smalley gave the staff report. Mark Hudak, representing Vanguard, presented Art Turpel, Vice President of Vanguard Susan Najar, in charge of managing operations at San Francisco Airport (SFO) for Vanguard and Paul Salisbury, architect for 1080 San Mateo plans. Mr. Hudak noted that the lot is an "L" shaped lot. They propose to build the maintenance facilities on the flag portion rather than the flag pole portion of the lot. He added that the proposed buildings and the staging area for the cars will be behind existing buildings on another lot and not visible from San Mateo Avenue. He noted that all operations will be conducted on site and will not be adding to the congestion and parking problems on San Mateo Avenue. Mr. Hudak noted that the staff report is correct in stating that a car maintenance use is permitted in this zone but felt that staff was incorrect in believing that the primary use is for parking and storage of rental cars. He disagreed because Vanguard does not propose to store or park any of their cars at 1080 San Mateo. He stated three reasons why: . They are required to lease onsite parking at San Francisco Airport. He added that they currently lease 2,000 parking spaces on the airport site, which is more than they need now and in the foreseeable future. . Vanguard will invest $2.7 million to $3 million on the maintenance facility and equipment, which is too expensive just for an overflow parking lot. He pointed out that there will be 35 employees at the site servicing the rental cars. . Vanguard has a maintenance facility in Burlingame and it is a prime example of how the proposed s:\MlvclAtes\Flvc~Llul> MlvclAtes\200G\O-+-Ob-OG RPC MlvclAtes.l>ot PClge -+ 0{3 Planning Commission Meeting of April 6, 2006 facility will be managed in South San Francisco. He encouraged everyone to go and see how the Burlingame facility operates and added that there is no storage at that facility Mr. Hudak added that maintenance is the primary and only use proposed for the facility. He pointed out that the site is perfect for Vanguard but that the only negative side to it is that the site is too large. He added that there is no practical way to subdivide the lot or sublease it because it has a narrow frontage on San Mateo Avenue. He added that there will be employee parking, the maintenance facility, room for staging the cars to be serviced and some extra space that staff characterizes as parking. He reiterated that there is absolutely no need to use that for parking at the present time. He emphasized that the working relationship between Burlingame and Vanguard has been excellent. He added that they used to shuttle customers from the airport to the Burlingame facility for rental but that has evolved with the recent changes in that all the rental transactions have to be at the airport. He pointed out that they have an outreach program that serves the needs of hotel guests and business people off the San Francisco facility in a way that they do not jeopardize the needs of those at the San Francisco facility. He added that for the privilege of doing this they pay "per car" rental fees or a guaranteed minimum to Burlingame. He noted that they have brought this up to staff and could add a car rental desk on the facility and have cars available, which would be a benefit for those who need a car when dropping their's off at one of the automotive shops. He added that they will only have car rental maintenance at the facility and that the proper way of making sure that staff's concerns are met is through the Conditions of Approval. Public Hearing closed. Commissioner Teglia noted the applicant's presentation sounded reasonable. He asked staff it could be conditioned to conform to the zoning. Associate Planner Smalley replied that in order to tailor a condition and be sure that the amount of parking is incidental to the maintenance use, staff needs to know exactly how much parking is needed for the maintenance use. He pointed out that the correspondence from Mr. Hudak states no more than 60 cars will be at the facility but if that is the case, why are there 350 spaces being proposed. He added that if the applicant thinks the site is too large, why not find a more appropriate site, or another use that is appropriate for the site. Mr. Hudak stated that finding a site that is in proximity to the airport and properly zoned is difficult. He pointed out that they do not have an auxiliary use for the site other than rental car storage, which is something that staff will not support. They do not propose to do anything on the excess space. He stated that in addition to the maintenance of rental cars, the other operation that is carried out of the facility is when the new cars are unloaded, they need to be prepared to be a part of the rental fleet. He noted that they need to have the room to unload a couple of trucks with new cars. Commissioner Teglia asked how many car carriers would deliver to the site. Mr. Hudak noted that they need to get the cars off the lot within 48 hours. Art Turpel pointed out that they have been before the Design Review Board and responded to all their concerns. He added that there may be times when they have 100-120 cars sitting on the site, because they are moving through the process. He pointed out that they like the site for its room and this way avoid overflow to the street. He added that this is the first time he has been penalized for having more parking than required. Mr. Turpel noted that every car on the site is there for repair, new to the fleet or being taken out of the fleet. He added that the car rental operation's goal is to have 80% of the cars out on the street and not in overflow storage. Susan Najar noted that there would be no more than two trucks at a time, which would be unloaded within a couple of hours and leaving. Trucks never stay overnight. Commissioner Teglia noted that this is a rental site. He noted that a sales lot would be a benefit to the City. Mr. Hudak noted that Vanguard does not retail their out of service cars to the public. Mr. Turpel noted that s:\MlvclAtes\Flvc~Lluct MlvclAtes\200G\O-+-Ob-OG RPG MlvclAtes,ctot p~ge 50fj Planning Commission Meeting of April 6, 2006 they wholesale their fleet, but it may change in the future because they may have an at risk fleet at the time. Mr. Hudak noted that when this does occur they would have to amend the use permit and return to the Commission. Commissioner Romero noted that the he has reviewed staff's recommendation and the correspondence from the applicant and sees the use as a storage facility rather than a maintenance staging area. He mentioned that he could not see 679 cars that need to be rebuilt or repaired. He reiterated that it looks like a storage facility with a small area for maintenance. Mr. Turpel noted that they also have a system of moving cars in off hours. They send shuttlers to move a line of cars in a couple of hours and they need a line of cars because the moving of the cars to SFO will be done in off hours. Commissioner Teglia noted that this described storage and not maintenance. Ms. Najar pointed out that they have gas, oil change, and cleaning facilities at the airport. Mr. Hudak noted that a car taken to the maintenance facility for service would be back at the airport within 24 hours. Commissioner Romero appreciated the comments of the applicant and his team but did not agree with them. Commissioner Teglia noted that it does not do the City any good to have a business support themselves here and have the sales solely in San Francisco. He noted that rental could be onsite and they could have an outreach program to the businesses in the area. He added that the plans make the use look like a storage lot and pointed out that the plans need to show more of a rental facility rather than a storage lot. Commissioner Sim noted that he is in support of staff's recommendation because it seems like it will be storage. He added that if they want to show that there is an aUXiliary use the applicant has to be convincing. Mr. Hudak noted that the site is not ideal as a car rental facility because it is not a retail area of the City. He noted that there is a template in place for a fee like they have in Burlingame and can incorporate that into the current Use Permit for South San Francisco. He pointed out that putting another use on the site to convince the City that it is not a storage facility is unreasonable to ask of the applicant at this point. Commissioner Romero noted that it is unreasonable to ask the applicant for this and if Vanguard has a business decision to make in pursuing another course of action, they can do so at that time with staff. He felt that the Commission was reviewing the application before them only. Motion Sim / Second Romero to deny P06-0007 & UP06-0002 based on staff's recommendation Noes: Absent: Abstain: Commissioner Giusti, Commissioner Romero, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Teglia and Chairperson Zemke None Commissioner Prouty and Vice Chairperson Honan None Ayes: Approved by roll call vote. Acting Chief Planner Kalkin noted that there is a 15 day appeal period. 5. Julie Ball/Owner Genentechl Applicant 435 Forbes Blvd P05-0169i UP05-0032 & DR06-0006 (Continue from March 2, 2006) s:\MlvclAtes\FlvcaLluct MlvclAtes\200b\O-+-Ob-OG RHo MlvclAtes,ctot page G of.'} Planning Commission Meeting of April 6, 2006 Use Permit and Design Review to allow conversion of an existing industrial building into a 25,400 square foot fitness facility for Genentech employees only, located at 435 Forbes Avenue in the Planned Industrial (P-l) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.32, 20.81 & 20.85. Public Hearing opened. Senior Planner Lappen gave the staff report through a Powerpoint presentation. Lisa Sullivan, Director of Facilities Planning, noted that this project was not reviewed in the annual review. She noted that this amenity to their employees was outsourced. They heard that Fitness West lost their lease at their current location and were unable to secure to secure another site. They have been working on this project for 6 months. She noted that the site is smaller but is on the shuttle stop and it is conveniently located between the Gateway and Central Campuses Public Hearing closed. Commissioner Teglia felt that the bus stop on Forbes is not good because of traffic and that it would be much better if the shuttle circulated into Carlton Court and into the parking lot. City Engineer Razavi noted that Carlton Court is the preferred location for the shuttle. He pointed out that they looked at accommodating the shuttle on Forbes by having a smaller pullout on the street but there was a conflict with an existing fire hydrant. He reiterated that the first recommendation is Carlton Court. Commissioner Teglia stated that he is opposed to having bus stops on Forbes and also recommends the shuttle stops on Carlton Court. Commissioner Romero also felt that this could be done. Ms. Sullivan noted that Genentech has been working on the TDM program and have been working on streamlining the shuttle service. She pointed out that one reason the campus is working so well is that they have committed to reduce the amount of service between the Gateway Campus and other campuses to lower the wait time for the shuttle. Commissioner Teglia and Commissioner Romero noted that the shuttle stops can easily be adjusted to go into Carlton or into the parking lot and circle out to Forbes. Ms. Sullivan noted that it is not necessarily a problem but it means that they will not service it on a regular shuttle and will have to get a dedicated shuttle to service the fitness center and limit the hours. Commissioner Romero felt that the delay is not significant enough to justify impeding traffic on Forbes. Senior Planner Lappen added that the Master Plan is reviewing the shuttle stops as part of the TDM Plan. The Commission can ask that Genentech put together mapping to show the location of shuttle stops, and design of those as well as address safety issues. Commissioner Sim noted that some fenestration needs to be added to the area where the yoga room is. Ms. Sullivan introduced Senior Planner Dianne Abbott who worked on the project. Ms. Sullivan added that they looked at adding more fenestration but because the project is a tilt up they were unable to do that. Commissioner Sim noted that he is not demanding for windows, but noted that the fenestration, or some type of fenestration like articulation be included and could include a new material. Commissioner Romero asked if there would be additional windows to allow natural lighting in the building or if it was all going to be artificial lighting. Ms. Abbott noted that the windows along Carlton and Forbes will remain. She added that Yoga and other rooms require privacy and less distraction from the outside noises. Commissioner Romero noted that a skylight could be put into the ceiling. Ms. Abbott noted that this was also explored it was not possible because of the mechanical equipment. Commissioner Sim noted that there could be some punched windows on the tilt up. He noted the wall could be slightly re-engineered. Motion Teglia / Sim to approve P05-0169; UP05-0032 & DR06-0006 with an additional Condition of Approval that there be no shuttle stops on Forbes and that Genentech do their due diligence to s:\MlvclAtes\Flvc~Lluct MlvclAtes\200G\O-1--0G-Ob RPC. MlvclAtes,ctot p~ge 7- of:; Planning Commission Meeting of April 6, 2006 see if there is additional fenestration or architectural enhancements that could be included. Approved by majority voice vote. Absent - Commissioner Prouty and Vice Chairperson Honan. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 6. Elisa Sandoval/owner 915 Linden Ave. P04-0103 UP04-0029 Review of Use Permit to allow an existing linen supply service to expand into three adjacent tenant spaces at 915 Linden Avenue in the C-1 Retail Commercial Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.22 and 20.81. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the applicant is working on the boilers and they will need another 60 day continuance. Commissioner Romero noted that the Commission keeps postponing the review. Motion Romero / Second Teglia to continue for another 60 days. Approved by majority voice vote. Absent - Commissioner Prouty and Vice Chairperson Honan. Britannia Oyster Point I Slough Estates / Owner & Applicant TDM-00-063 Annual review of the Transportation Demand Management Plan for Britannia Oyster Point 1. Acting Chief Planner Kalkin presented the staff report. Jon Bergschneider, Slough Estates, noted that they are pleased with progress and will continue to work in achieving the goals of the TDM ordinance for South San Francisco. Elizabeth Hughes, The Hoyt Company, gave the TDM annual review through a Powerpoint presentation. Commissioner Teglia asked if any of the businesses support telecommuting. Ms. Hughes noted that it is a less than ideal opportunity for this kind of industry but they keep it as a commute alternative because there are some types of staff that can use it. She noted that it is supported by the businesses but not a heavily promoted option. Commissioner Teglia asked if there was another way to validate the mode shifts other than the surveys. Ms. Hughes noted that each tenant has the responsibility for tracking their own carpool permits and parking. She added that they are working with the Alliance to provide ridership data from month to month and track them this way also. Commissioner Teglia asked if there is data on how much parking is used and the amount of excess parking. Ms. Hughes noted that a parking count has not been included. Acting Chief Planner Kalkin added that this is a requirement for the triannual report which will have more detail, such as parking. Commissioner Romero asked if there was a detailed number of users of each of the modes of transportation. Ms. Hughes noted that SamTrans has 11 riders and it is not a good option because it does not service East of 101. Commissioner Romero noted that Caltrain's percentage of 52.3 is very impressive and asked if any of s:\MlvclAteS\Flvc~Llul> MlvclAtes\200b\O-1--0b-Ob RPC MlvclAtes.l>ot p~ge g ofJ Planning Commission Meeting of April 6, 2006 their riders have complained regarding the location of the station. Ms. Hughes noted that there were 78 people who use Caltrain and 49 use BART. She added that there were comments with regard to the shuttle systems. Commissioner Romero noted that this report is something that should be done for the entire East of 101 and is surprised with the numbers. He encouraged that staff should find a better location for a new train station due to the usage of the trains. Acting Chief Planner Kalkin noted that the City is currently working on the station and that it has been incorporated into the JPB Capital Improvement Program. Commissioner Sim asked how this compares to other cities analyzed. Ms. Hughes noted that the usage of the modes of transportation are industry driven, and varies significantly depending on if there is shuttle service, connectivity to public transportation and if there is paid parking. She added that in the Silicon Valley some employers were 20-25% parkwide but they are not on transit lines and their shuttle rides are 25 minutes long. Motion Teglia / Second Sim to accept the report. Approved by majority voice vote. Absent- Commissioner Prouty and Vice Chairperson Honan. ITEMS FROM STAFF None ITEMS FROM COMMISSION Commissioner Teglia noted that Council has a Fairfield subcommittee and asked that the Commission receive an update on the progress. Commissioner Romero noted that he had asked that the report on the Fairfield project be mailed to Commission for review. Senior Planner Lappen noted that there was a memo and he would provide it. Chairperson Zemke invited everyone present and all members of the public to the Soroptomist Spring event. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC None ADJOURNMENT 10:16 P.M. Motion Giusti / Second Romero to adjourn. Approved by majority voice vote. Absent - Commissioner Prouty and Vice Chairperson Honan. ~~h Susy Kal'kf;7 Acting Secretary to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco /ff~ J~ William Zemke, ChairpelfOn Planning Commission City of South San Francisco TCS/bla s:\MlvclAtes\Flvc~Lluct MlvclAtes\200b\O-1--0b-Ob RPG MlvclAtes,ctot p~gej ofj