HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-02-21MINUTES
February 21, 2008
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION
TAPE 1
CALL TO ORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Commissioner Oborne, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Prouty,
Commissioner Zemke, Vice Chairperson Teglia and Chairperson Giusti
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Division: Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner
Steve Carlson, Senior Planner
Girard Beaudin, Associate Planner
Bertha Aguilar, Admin. Asst. II
City Attorney: Sky Woodruff, Assistant City Attorney
Police Department: Sergeant John Kailas, Planning Liaison
Fire Prevention. Tom Carney, Code Enforcement Officer
CHAIR COMMENTS
AGENDA REVIEW No Changes
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None
CONSENT CALENDAR None
1. Burns & McDonnell Engineering/applicant
Shell Oil Products/owner
135 N. Access Rd
P07-0135: UP07-0024 & DR07-0080
(Continue to March 20, 2008)
Use Permit and Design review allowing an 8 foot tall fence within the minimum require front setback situated
at 135 North Access Road, in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapters
20.32, 20.73, 20.81 and 20.85.
2. Shoreline Court Master Sign Program
Ken Mark/applicant
OIK SIERRA POINT LLC/owner
6000 SHORELINE CT
P07-0101: SIGNS07-0043
(Continue to March 6, 2008)
Modification of a Type "C" Sign Permit for an increase in sign height and area for a Master Sign Program at
6000 Shoreline Court in the Planned Commercial (P-C-L) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters
20.24, 20.85 & 20.86.
Motion Prouty /Second Sim to approve the Consent Calendar. Approved by unanimous voice vote.
Planning Commission Meeting of February 21, 2008
PUBLIC HEARING
3. BEST DESIGN ~ CONSTRUCTION CO/applicant
United Ng Limited Part./owner
111 Chestnut Ave.
PCA08-0001
Time Extension of a Tentative Subdivision Map allowing the subdivision creating eight (8) parcels and
common area in accordance with SSFMC Title 19, Exceptions from the SSFMC Title 19 allowing lots sizes
less than 5,000 square feet and lots not fronting on a public right of way, in accordance the SSFMC Title 19,
Residential Planned Unit Development Permit allowing lot sizes smaller than the minimum requirement of
5,000 square feet and reduced minimum required setbacks, and parking at a rate of 3 spaces per dwelling
unit instead of 4.25 spaces per dwelling unit, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.78, Affordable Housing
Agreement restricting twenty percent (20%) of the eight (8) units as affordable dwellings in accordance with
SFMC Chapter 20.125, and Design Review allowing for the construction atwo-story eight (8) unit
condominium development, situated at 111 Chestnut Avenue (APN 011-312-090) in the High Density (R-3-L)
Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.85
Project Nos.: P02-0020: AHA02-0001, RZ02-0002, SA02-0001,PUD02-0002 and DR02-0008
Vice Chairperson Teglia noted he would be abstaining from the item due to a conflict of interest.
Public Hearing opened.
Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report.
Yolanda Manzoni, counsel for 111 Chestnut applicant, recalled that a 3 month extension was previously
requested and are returning for an addition 5 month extension. She pointed out that they have fulfilled all the
items brought up at the last meeting and the time extension will allow the finalization of the map without
having the entitlements expire.
Commissioner Prouty was concerned with projects not being built as approved and asked if the roof and
parking issues the Commission had during the review of the project in 2003 were addressed. Senior Planner
Carlson stated that the Commission's comments had been resolved and there were minor changes such as a
double door not being replaced with a single door and sidelights. He pointed out that the roof lines are in
conformity to what the Commission and Council had directed.
Commissioner Zemke asked if July 20, 2008 is the date the extension expires. Senior Planner Carlson
replied affirmatively and added that if the Commission had previously granted a one year extension it would
have expired in July.
Marc Teglia spoke as a resident against the project and added that the project is not the highest and best use
for the site. He pointed out that it is not in the City's vision for the thoroughfare. He suggested that the
Commission make the extension very strict if they decide to allow it but encouraged the Commission to deny
the extension in order reanalyze the project.
Public Hearing closed.
Ms. Manzoni clarified that all the delays with the exception of the change in ownership have been due to the
applicant and the City working together to make the project what the Commission and Council approved at
the site. She pointed out that the building permit is ready to be issued but will not be issued until the Parcel
Map is finalized. She urged the Commission not to open the discussion to what can be done with the .5 acre
parcel if the extension were to be denied.
Commissioner Sim asked if all loans and contractors have been secured for the project. Ms. Manzoni replied
affirmatively.
S:\M%wutes\~%wal.%zed M%wutes\02-21-08 RPC Mw~.utes.doc Page 2 o f ~
Planning Commission Meeting of February 21, 2008
Chairperson Giusti questioned if the playground was protected or if it is open to the parking area. Senior
Planner Carlson replied that the playground is surrounded by a fence and a gate in response to the
Commission's comments. He clarified that the General Plan allows a minimum amount of units that can be
proposed by a project and this one is at the minimum amount of units required. He further clarified that the
Zoning Code does not require the Planning Commission's review of rental units for which the applicant could
have proposed 14 units without going through a public hearing process. He concluded that this is a
compromise and is consistent with the developments surrounding it.
Commissioner Sim asked if the project would be constructed in phases. Commissioner Prouty questioned if
there was a bond on the project requiring it to be completed. Charles Ng replied that their loan will allow
them to due the project as one phase. Senior Planner Carlson added that we have not required building
bonds as suggested by Commissioner Prouty.
Commissioner Prouty questioned if the sewer system had been looked into by staff. Senior Planner Carlson
replied that Planning met with Public Works to resolve any drainage and capacity issues.
Commissioner Prouty stated for the record his opposition to the project due to the density on the lot and the
entire area. He pointed out that the intersection at Commercial and Chestnut is busy and this project will
increase traffic.
Motion Zemke /Second Sim to approve PCA08-0001.
Roll Call:
Ayes: Commissioner Oborne, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Zemke and
Chairperson Giusti
Noes: Commissioner Prouty
Abstain: Vice Chairperson Teglia
Absent: None
Approved by majority roll call vote.
ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS
4. 18 Month Review -Royal Auto Repair
Yousef Mustafa/applicant
Michael & Katie Hartmann/owner
1331 San Mateo Ave
P06-0015: UP06-0005
18 month review of a Use Permit allowing an automotive repair facility, generating more than 100 average
daily vehicle trips, with outside overnight vehicle storage, a fence and screen 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)(1) & Chapters 20.81 & 20.85.
Associate Planner Beaudin presented the staff report.
Commissioner Oborne questioned how long the business was operating without a license. Associate Planner
Beaudin replied that it had been for 3 months.
Motion Prouty /Second Teglia to accept the review as fulfillment of the Conditions of Approval. Approved by
unanimous voice vote.
5. 12 Month Review
s:~r~~v~.utes~~CwAI%zed MCwutes\o2-2i-o8 RPC n~Cwutes.doc gage s of ~
Planning Commission Meeting of February 21, 2008
Henry ~ Victoria Concepcion/applicant
Westborough Sq Shopping Ctr./owner
2262 Westborough Blvd
P06-0133: UP06-0029
One year review of a Use Permit to allow live musical entertainment at an existing restaurant at 2262
Westborough Boulevard in the Retail Commercial (C-1) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters
20.22 and 20.81.
Associate Planner Beaudin presented the staff report.
Motion Prouty /Second Zemke to accept the review as fulfillment of the Conditions of Approval. Approved by
unanimous voice vote.
6. 45 Day Review -Double Day Office Services
Krieger, Clarence/Owner
Double Day Office Services/Applicant
340 Shaw Rd.
P03-0137: UP03-0026
45 day review of a Use Permit to allow outdoor storage of trucks and extended hours of operation from 6 AM
to 2 AM in the M-1 Industrial Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC 20.30.040 (a), 20.30.040 (b) and
20.81
Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report.
Motion Prouty /Second Sim to continue the review to April 3, 2008 to allow work to be completed. Approved
by unanimous voice vote.
7. Study Session -Kaiser Permanente Expansion
Kaiser Foundation/applicant
Kaiser Foundation/owner
1330 EI Camino Real
P07-0014: MND07-0001, UP07-0001, 8~ DR07-0001
Use Permit Modification and Design Review allowing the expansion of the 14.328 acre Kaiser Medical Center
situated at 1200 EI Camino Real (APN 010-292-210) in the Planned Commercial (P-C) Zone District
incorporating a former motel situated on an abutting 1.376 acre parcel at 1330 EI Camino Real (APN 010-
292-130) in the Transit Village Zone District, off-site parking between the two sites, the conversion of a motel
into a medical facility and a new at-grade parking lot with landscaping, in accordance with SSFMC Chapters
20.24, 20.27. 20.36, 20.74, 20.81, 20.85 and 20.91.
Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report.
Commissioner Prouty stated that the summary given by staff is not his recollection of the study session. He
recalled Kaiser stating that they would use the motel building for temporary storage for their medical equipment
currently housed on the third floor of the hospital. He pointed out that the Council and Commission are looking at
a maximum of a 3 to 4 year temporary use, although Kaiser is projecting a 22 year use. He added that the long
term use of the hotel site should be kept consistent with the adopted General Plan.
Vice Chairperson Teglia felt that it was inappropriate for staff to draw conclusions from the earlier joint City Council
/ Planning Commission study session when the City Attorney specified that there would not be any conclusions at
the time. He pointed out that a presentation was given to which the Planning Commission and Council gave their
opinions of the additional information they would like to see. He did not believe that a decision had been made as
to whether or not to change the land use from one that contributes to the general fund to anon-revenue
producing land use. He pointed out his support for Kaiser to remain in the City and to replace their hospital, but
s:V~Cwutes~~~wA~Czed r~Cwutes~o2-2i-os RPC MLwutes.doc Page -c o f ~
Planning Commission Meeting of February 21, 2008
questioned if the current proposal was a good use for the area. He recalled requesting information on the current
use of the property and suggested that the City could assist Kaiser to find room to build a new hospital. He
pointed out that Kaiser should be planning for the rebuilding of the hospital now due to their timeline. He felt that
the site is poorly planned and they need to discuss the possibilities of doing the project right from the beginning.
He pointed out that the parking structure is underutilized, in violation of their own use permit. He felt that a study
session was needed with Kaiser, the City and an expert who can advise on methods and designs of hospitals. He
added that a master plan is needed for Kaiser.
Commissioner Sim recalled talking about the master plan during the study session to see the potential
opportunities and disadvantages of the entire site to create a scheme that both parties can benefit from. He
pointed out that he does not see Kaiser's vision, and the short term need they have has not been stated in formal
documents or studies. He concluded by stating that he was not supportive of the project.
Mike Murphy, project manager, noted that his primary function is managing the interior renovations of the hospital.
He pointed out that the motel is not the most attractive asset to Kaiser or the City but Kaiser is grateful to have the
space available. He explained that they had to evaluate their staff, primarily the non clinical staff, and decide who
can move away from the hospital and who cannot, which moved several administrative offices to other locations.
He pointed out that they will be investing more than $100 million inside the hospital to build a new ICU unit, in-
patient pharmacy and pathology department, doubling the size of the emergency room and adding more space to
the operating rooms.
Vice Chairperson Teglia pointed out that this work is being done in anticipation of seismic upgrades that need to
occur. He added that the Commission was told that the hospital had to be replaced by 2020 or 2030 and pointed
out that this is a subject the Commission needs to talk about right now to find out what Kaiser's final vision is and
how it can be incorporated into the City's vision for Kaiser. He questioned whether it does the City justice to do a
"band aid" approach for a while, or if it is time to look at a better use of the land.
Commissioner Prouty stated that this is being piece-mealed together and the study session's intent was to figure
out where the City was headed. He added that there was some support at the Council level to possibly exchange
some land to build a new hospital. He further noted that it is costly to build a new hospital. Mr. Murphy explained
that the hospitals being built by Kaiser are "template" hospitals that run about $700 million. He added that they
are being constructed in succession based on retrofit requirements/timelines, are and the next three priorities are
Oakland, Hayward and Redwood City, with South San Francisco behind that. He pointed out that Kaiser along with
the Commission, would prefer not using the motel, but it is needed because of the high use demand of the
hospital.
Commissioner Prouty stated that they had understood that the space was originally needed for storage and now it
seems that it will be used for administrative functions. He added that in the near future Kaiser will need some land
to construct a new hospital. He suggested that they start talking about their land needs now and reach agreement
with the City if PUC land is involved, so the City does not plan to build anything else on it. He pointed out that the
City would not leave a piece of land vacant until 2030 if they are not sure that this is the direction Kaiser and the
City are going. He added that having Kaiser stretch out from one end of EI Camino Real to the other is not the
best land use for the City, and suggested having Kaiser expand along Old Mission Road, which allows for better
access and fewer people crossing EI Camino Real. He pointed out that Kaiser will be spending a lot of money on a
property that they have to tear down, which puts the City in a bind.
Vice Chairperson Teglia added that the City could also be stuck with this building and suggested that Kaiser should
refocus their view on this property and put the South San Francisco hospital ahead of Redwood City. He pointed
out that what Kaiser wants to do may not fit with the City's needs, but the two bodies have not had a frank
discussion to look at what is mutually beneficial.
Senior Planner Carlson pondered, with the City Attorney's approval, if the Commission could limit the approval to a
3 or 5 year approval via a Development Agreement or other mechanism that addresses the Commission's concerns.
He added that this would allow for a larger study that would look at those issues so that the Commission does not
compromise what will happen to the Transit Village Zone and convert the motel to another use.
S:~M%wutes\~%wAlCzed M%wutes\D2-21-08 RPC MCwutes.doc page s o f ~
Planning Commission Meeting of February 21, 2008
Assistant City Attorney Woodruff pointed out that subsequent to the study session with City Council, Marty Van
Duyn, Susy Kalkin, Steve Carlson and he reviewed what staff had heard at the meeting which was clarification of
the 2030 timeframe and relocation of the administrative offices out of the main building and into the motel. He
mentioned that there was no direction given at the joint meeting, but there was no commitment on the Council's
part to require a master plan for the site, an exchange of land or approval of any particular project. Vice
Chairperson Teglia pointed out that nothing occurred at the meeting and that there was not a public hearing or
decision. Assistant City Attorney Woodruff added that there was information provided on what Kaiser intended to
do. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that staff got feedback on the information that was provided and information
that they would like to see in a future study session. He pointed out that they are not in a public hearing format
and no decision has been made. He added that there has not been a decision made on the appropriateness of
changing the land use of a hotel in the Transit Village Zone to a hospital use.
Assistant City Attorney Woodruff noted that there has been some determination on this because there is a cleaner
understanding of what Kaiser is proposing and staff's reevaluation of what the Zoning Ordinance and the General
plan say is that the expansion of hospital services can be expanded into the motel site under existing General Plan
and Zoning provisions. He pointed out that this change from the existing use but can be processed with a Use
Permit, whereas the previous review based on the variety of information received from Kaiser and what they were
proposing indicated that there might be a need for a more substantial change in the land use regulation in the
property. He explained that when staff met to decide what was the next step and reevaluated the applicable land
use regulations they decided that it could be done with a Use Permit and design review would be the area of focus
and that the Council seemed receptive to the timeframe for a use like that with the idea that it would be ultimately
transformed to a hospital. He concluded that as staff this is what was taken away from the meeting.
Vice Chairperson Teglia felt it was inappropriate and that staff does not make policy. He pointed out that it can be
done if approved and the policy makers need to make the decision if it is a good idea or not. He noted that no
decisions have been made and staff's influencing the decision is inappropriate. Assistant City Attorney Woodruff
clarified that staff is not trying to influence a decision, but rather is processing an application that has been
submitted.
Commissioner Prouty recalled hearing at the study session the City's support to allow Kaiser short term use of the
hotel but did not want to create a band aid approach. He pointed out that the transient occupancy tax will be lost
from that use, and although he supports Kaiser he felt he did not want to change the use of the property, but was
more comfortable with allowing them to temporarily use the property. He felt that a plan needs to be developed to
build a functional hospital and meet the City's needs. He added that this is the time to make this happen because
the land is available. He was concerned with putting little pieces of Kaiser along EI Camino Real rather than
developing a comprehensive plan.
Vice Chairperson Teglia added that the Commission develops policy and directs staff to make the recommendation
because the Commission is advisory to the City Council. Commissioner Prouty felt that developing a plan will take
some time and so will purchasing land and building a new hospital. He stated that he could approve a short term
solution under the current zoning and land use, but after 3 years the use would have to be terminated. He pointed
out that there is an opportunity for Kaiser to purchase some property that is controlled by the City. Commissioner
Prouty also recalled that storage space was needed for placement of medical equipment and some of the facilities
staff would be moving there.
Commissioner Zemke appreciated the effort that staff made in taking the study session feedback and using it as
best they could to address Kaiser's application. He pointed out that a clear message from the study session was
that they wanted to see what Kaiser's vision was and while making it a long term use and modifying the design is
one option he felt that the City needs to see what other options Kaiser has and how they fit into their vision that
might stretch out 20 years.
Commissioner Moore noted that there seems to be a consensus in terms of land use and duration of time. He
added that Kaiser can save money by looking into purchasing some land now and not later when it will be more
expensive.
5:\M%v~.utes\~%wq~Czed M%vtutes\02-21-08 RPC M%wutes.dOC Page 6 of ~
Planning Commission Meeting of February 21, 2008
Commissioner Sim pointed out that in order for the Commission to consider if this is the right project for the area
they need to see what their transition would be after 5 or 20 years. He pointed to the new Mills Peninsula Hospital
in Burlingame where they are revitalizing the EI Camino Corridor with their new image. He added that some
hospitals require long term strategic planning because there are other regulatory bodies that require some level of
review. He noted that it is a great opportunity to work with Kaiser in conjunction with the General Plan. He
addressed the Kaiser representatives and stated that the Commission understands Kaiser's space shortage, and for
the first time they have heard what is occurring within their community. He encouraged Kaiser to use their
talented engineers and architects to communicate to the Commission what is going on in their office, how they
intend to phase the project and how the current project fits into their long term phases.
Commissioner Prouty reiterated that the Commission supports Kaiser and they want to see what Kaiser's plan is to
meet both the City's objectives and build a good hospital.
Mr. Murphy noted that his primary focus is the inside of the hospital and pointed out that if they want a new
hospital by 2030 they would start the planning process in 2016. He pointed out that the hospital needs to be
usable during this transition. He added that the renovation is about $122 million and the infrastructure, such as
mechanical, electrical and emergency power, is an additional $40 to$50 million. He concurred with the
Commission that there needs to be a strategy that bridges the gap.
Vice Chairperson Teglia pointed out that Kaiser's strategy needs to take into account land use policies. He further
added that there is bad ingress and egress on the site, an underutilized parking structure and an MRI trailer that is
parked on the site. Mr. Murphy explained that there is a current application with OSHPOD (Office of Statewide
Health Planning and Development) to take the trailer away and have a mobile trailer visit twice a week in the back.
Direction given to staff,
ITEMS FROM STAFF
ITEMS FROM COMMISSION
None
Vice Chairperson Teglia asked for an update on the PUD application for 648 Commercial. Chief Planner Kalkin
replied that staff has met with the applicant and is waiting for alternatives to be submitted.
Commissioner Prouty welcomed new Planning Commissioner Stacey Oborne and asked her to give a brief
summary of her background. Commissioner Oborne stated that she has been a resident of South San Francisco
for 10 years and has a background in environmental law. She added that she works for the San Francisco City
Attorney's office.
ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC
None
ADJOURNMENT 8:50 P.M.
Motion Teglia /Second Oborne to adjourn the meeting. Approved by unanimous voice vote.
~~
Susy Kalkin Mary G sty, Chairperson
Secretary to the Planning Commission Planning Commission
City of South San Francisco City of South San Francisco
SK/bla
s:\r~Cwutes\~%wal%zed M%~.utPS\o2-22-og R.~c n-tiwutes.doc page ~ o f ~