Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-03-15Mrn~uTEs March 15, 2007 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION TAPE 1 CALL TO ORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7:30 n.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioner Honan, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Teglia, Commissioner Zemke, Vice Chairperson Giusti and Chairperson Prouty ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: None Planning Division: City Attorney: Engineering Division: Police Department: Fire Prevention. Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner Steve Carlson, Senior Planner Mike Lappen, Senior Planner Girard Beaudin, Associate Planner Bertha Aguilar, Admin. Asst. II Sky Woodruff, Assistant City Attorney Dennis Chuck, Senior Civil Engineer Sergeant Alan Normandy, Planning Liaison Tom Carney, Code Enforcement Officer CHAIR COMMENTS AGENDA REVIEW Chief Planner Kalkin noted that Genentech has requested that item 4 be heard before item 3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Tony Hamedany, Director of Engineering of Colombus Manufacturing, wanted to address the Genentech Childcare facility and the issues with their cooling units. Mr. Hamedany was informed by Chief Planner Kalkin and Commissioner Prouty that he can relate his comments on the item when it is before the Commission. PUBLIC HEARING 1. Stonegate Estates Planned Unit Development Modification Stonegate Home Development/Owner -Applicant Stonegate Estates & Hillside Avenue P07-0010: PUDM07-0001 DR07-0006 8- MND-01-012 Modification of a Planned Unit Development and Design Review allowing exterior window and door changes to several dwellings situated on the Southeast corner of Hillside Avenue and Stonegate Drive in the Medium Density Residential (R-2-H-P) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.84, 20.85 & 20.91. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. Commissioner Prouty stated for the record that he was invited by the developer to tour the site. Ed Dauo, Stonegate Estates Developer, noted that their presentation would cover the three plans for the Planning Commission Meeting of March 15, 2007 homes and the changes that occurred at every level. Plan A changes and comments: Mr. Dauo noted that the sliding doors were changed to swinging doors to meet life safety needs, windows were changed from side to side sliding to single hung vertical, fireplace moved for functionality, replaced grid windows with windows without grids and the entry was raised by 14 inches to allow entry into home. Additional changes were octagon vents from eyebrow vents. Commissioner Teglia asked the applicant to compare the plans with before and after pictures and direct the Commission to the correct pages. Mr. Dauo noted that the page numbers were kept the same in the new plans to make it easier to identify the changes. Plan B changes and comments: Mr. Dauo reviewed some of the changes made to this home plan: a solid core door was removed; windows were added in the kitchen, stairway and bathrooms; grids were removed from some of the windows; the entry was raised by 14 inches to allow entry into home, Commissioner Teglia noted that the second level and third level doors should be kept consistent. He added that they don't have to be full grids, but could just have grids on the outer edges. Mr. Dauo stated that it would be better to have them without grids to keep the views. Commissioner Teglia suggested keeping the grids consistent on all the doors. Commissioner Sim questioned what the Design Review Board's comments were on the windows with grids. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the Design Review Board wanted to keep the grids and also liked the original mullions. Commissioner Sim noted that the grids are not bad given the style of architecture. Mr. Dauo stated that most custom homes do not use many grids and felt that it was best not to include grids in order to keep the views. Commissioner Sim reiterated that the presentation needs to show the before and after views side by side. Commissioner Teglia noted his concern with the glass looking blank without the grids. He added that on sheet A.7b drawing 1, the center bar was removed while other bars have been extended to the arch area. He also noted that the through wall chimney flues. Mr. Dauo noted that plans A & B were approved with through wall vents and in order to be consistent they are requesting that the C plans also have them because building code requires a five foot wrap from a wall. He stated that all the vents are now direct in all three plans. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the chimney elements were originally approved with the intention to be operational and if the change is approved the chimneys will be nonfunctional. He pointed out that the Design Review Board felt that the original location of the chimney was the better of the two options. Senior Planner Carlson pointed out that elevation 1 for building B has a roof structure below the upper story window and noted that drawings one and four show this change. Commissioner Teglia asked if there was a function for the roof change. The applicant's architect noted that a beam needed to be added when this was sent to the structural engineer to support the structure and it sticks out 16 inches. They wished to cover this with something that would look natural. Mr. Dauo stated that they could leave the chimneys and the grids if the Commission so desired. Chairperson Prouty clarified that the applicant is willing to leave the grids in the windows, and the changes that are needed to meet certain building and structural requirements are okay with the Commission. Commissioner Teglia stated that the windows with the center bar are a great improvement and added that the grid windows on the lower and second levels should be maintained. Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Zemke and Commissioner Moore noted that they are inclined to take the Design Review Board's recommendation regarding the grids. Plan C changes and comments: s:V~%v~.utes~~twal~zed M~wutes~2oo~\os-is-off Rpc n~tCwutes.doc page 2 o f9 Planning Commission Meeting of March 15, 2007 Commissioner Teglia asked if the proposed single hung windows meet egress standards. Senior Planner Carlson noted that this change came to staff's attention in February and does not know if the Building Official has approved these. Commissioner Teglia asked that this be looked at because casements may be required rather than single hung windows. Mr. Dauo noted that they do not have an issue with this if the Building Division looks at it for compliance. Mr. Dauo noted that the C plan changes are moving windows, removing grids from windows and relocating the chimney. Commissioner Teglia asked why the chimneys were not being placed where they were originally approved. Mr. Dauo stated that the C plans are duets that share a wall which is problematic from a Building Code perspective. Commissioner Teglia asked staff if the chimneys were approved. Senior Planner Carlson stated that they were approved and the Design Review Board had suggested that these should stay in their approved location to differentiate the two units. Commissioner Teglia asked if the fireplace and the chimneys could be placed where they were originally approved. Senior Planner Carlson stated that he would need to check with the Building Official. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the chimneys on the roof can be approved although they may be nonfunctional. Mr. Dauo stated that if the Commission wishes to keep them, they will put them where they were originally approved. Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Teglia and Commissioner Honan noted that they would like to see them where they were previously approved and, if at all possible, they should be functional. Commissioner Honan stated that the Commission is being told of all the issues that occurred out in the field and felt it necessary to have the Building Official present to answer the Commission's concerns. Commissioner Teglia stated that the sliding windows would need to be changed to meet egress standards and every bedroom has a door access or casement access for egress. He felt that it was not necessary. Mr. Dauo noted that changes were made only to plans A and B for egress but not to plan C. Commissioner Sim felt that the Commission is micromanaging the project and the applicant needs to return to the Commission with a much more decipherable presentation. Chairperson Prouty suggested that the Commission visit the site, being that the project is under construction, and see the changes that have been done. He asked if the Commission could visit the site to make a determination. Assistant City Attorney Woodruff stated that the Commission would not be able to go as a collective body unless a special meeting was noticed and meeting place and time specified. He added that individual trips to view the site is possible followed by a public noticed meeting. Commissioner Honan felt that the Building Official should be available to answer the Commission's questions on the changes. She added that the changes are not being clearly presented to the Commission. Commissioner Moore stated that it is best to visit the site to get a clear picture of the changes. Commissioner Sim stated that he is inclined to accept the Design Review Board's recommendations. Consensus of the Commission to individually visit the site and discuss the item at a re_gular meetin_g. Motion Sim /Second Honan to continue the item to April 5, 2007 On the question Commissioner Honan asked what the issues with the storage area in plan C were. Senior Planner Carlson stated that there is a heating duct in the storage area and added that some of the Commissioners have had issues with garages and storage areas becoming illegal bedrooms. Commissioner Honan pointed out that this area cannot be used at anytime as a living space and asked that the heating ducts be removed. s:~MLwutes\~CwALized M%v~utes\2oo~~os-is-off Rpc M~wutes.doc page s of9 Planning Commission Meeting of March 15, 2007 Approved by unanimous voice vote. 2. Kaiser Medical Office -Time Extension Kaiser/Owner Kaiser/Applicant 230 Oyster Point Blvd. PCA06-0008: UP04-0031, PM04-0003, DR04-0077, & TDM04-0004 Time Extension for a Use Permit to allow the construction of a single-story medical office building on Oyster Point Boulevard in the Planned Commercial (P-C-L) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.24 and 20.81. Public Hearing opened. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. Commissioner Teglia noted that the concern with regards to the meandering sidewalk was to provide a buffer between the street and the sidewalk. Michael Kay, Kaiser Capital Projects Manager, gave a brief PowerPoint presentation on the project. There being no speakers the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Teglia noted that a meandering sidewalk would not work on this site and suggested that a buffer between the street and the sidewalk is needed. He suggested that the time extension could be granted based on the applicant incorporating a buffer between the street and the sidewalk. Commissioner Zemke asked what the distance was between the side of the building and the street. Mr. Kay replied that it is 20 feet with a 14 foot rise. Commissioner Zemke added that a retaining wall could be added with some landscaping to soften the look of the wall. Chairperson Prouty asked how the setbacks for this project line up with the setbacks on the adjacent site. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the standard building setback requirement is 20 feet, but the Commission can review this in light of the setback approved for 200 Oyster Point Boulevard. Chairperson Prouty noted that this is an opportunity for the Commission to comment on the project and require some changes to what was approved. Commissioner Teglia added that the applicant can add the elements of the Master Plan to this project without requiring the applicant to redesign the entire project. Commissioner Honan also felt that this was the opportunity. Motion Teglia /Second Honan to deny the extension of the Use Permit. On the question Commissioner Zemke clarified that the Commission is asking that the applicant look at the Master Plan and adapt the elements of that into this project for a consistent look. Senior Planner Carlson noted that rather than denying the extension, the Commission can continue the item to allow the applicant to respond to the Commission's comments. Commissioner Teglia and Commissioner Honan withdrew their motion and second. Motion Teglia /Second Honan to continue the item to allow the applicant and staff to incorporate the current Master Plan guidelines into the site plan. Approved my unanimous voice vote. s:~n-tCwutes~~CwAlized r~nLwutes~2oo~\os-is-off iz.PC rn~wutes.doc page ~ ofy Planning Commission Meeting of March 15, 2007 Recess called at 9"09 p.m. 4 Genentech Building 31 Carla Boragno/applicant Genentech, Inc/owner 1631 Grandview Dr. P05-0005: DR05-0003 & UP05-0002 Meeting recalled at 9:14 p.m. Use Permit to allow construction afive-story office building (Building 31) with a total floor space of 150,972 square feet at 1531 Grandview Drive in the Genentech R&D Overlay District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.39.60, 20.40.050, 20.40.060, 20.81 & 20.85 Public Hearing opened. Senior Planner Lappen gave a PowerPoint presentation. Shar Zamanpour -Genentech, Dan Jonatta -Johnson Fain Architects, gave a presentation on the project. There being no speakers, the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Zemke asked if there had been soil tests to determine what is on the site. Mr. Jonatta noted that all the borings necessary for the structure have been conducted with the two previous buildings and added that there should not be any surprises on the site. Commissioner Teglia questioned if the project has been presented to the Commission before. Senior Planner Lappen noted that the building was conceptually presented to the Commission at the annual review. He added that the building was submitted in 2005 and was delayed with the master plan process. Commissioner Teglia stated that historically there have been study sessions on the Genentech building proposals and this did not occur with Building 31. Commissioner Teglia noted that the focus is on the courtyard and noted that the side that faces Grandview does not have a good aesthetic view. He stated that the entrance cutout is a straight "L" rather than a graceful concave. He asked if more aesthetics were discussed on the Grandview side. Senior Planner Lappen stated that during the design review process staff discussed bringing in the elements on the interior out to the street and accentuating the view corridors. Commissioner Teglia felt that the gaps between the buildings are an interesting aspect of the site and the walkway could have been expanded. He also suggested having a curve on the long section to take in the curve of the street. He added that colored cement, pavers or stamped concrete could be included on the entry of the driveway. Commissioner Sim reiterated Commissioner Teglia's comments on addressing the outside of the of the building and noted that this is an opportunity of showcasing Genentech to the community. Commissioner Moore added that Genentech needs to take advantage of the Grandview side and enhance that elevation. Commissioner Honan and Commissioner Zemke felt that the Planning Commission needs to start having study sessions on projects like these. Chairperson Prouty asked if a wind study had been conducted at the site. Mr. Jonatta noted that a detailed model was built in Colorado where a wind study was conducted with a large model during the design process to make sure that the wind factor was minimized. He added that the wind will be going mainly through Building 31, where they used the landscaping to break down the wind. Chairperson Prouty pointed out that this area is a main entrance to the campus and would like to see more design concepts on the Grandview elevation. Mr. Jonatta noted that the glass expression on the inside is the meeting room and break areas. He added s:~MCwutes\~%walCzed M%wutes\zoo~~os-rs-off R.~c Nt~wutes.doc gage s o f9 Planning Commission Meeting of March 15, 2007 that this expression is being threaded through the passage and it occurs on the Grandview expression. Commissioner Teglia asked the architect if they had explored increasing the aesthetics on the building's Grandview elevation. Mr. Jonatta noted that the curvilinear expression is large and it lines into the expression and becomes a trellis. He felt that the feel from the inside has been taken and expressed to the public side. Commissioner Teglia noted that there is more that could be done for the Grandview elevation by taking some cues from the earlier buildings like a wave on one of the other buildings. Ms. Zamanpour noted that the Commission has requested Genentech look further into the design details of the Grandview side of Building 31 and asked if the Commission had any other comments that they should address for the next meeting. Commissioner Honan reiterated that a study session is needed prior to the Public Hearing item. Senior Planner Lappen asked if the Commission wanted a study session when this item returned before them that would be separate from a Public Hearing. Chairperson Prouty confirmed that this was the case. Senior Planner Lappen asked if the Commission could consider a study session and a public hearing on the same day. Commissioner Teglia felt it was difficult to do so. Commissioner Honan stated her preference for a study session before the regular meeting. Chief Planner Kalkin noted that there is no requirement that the Commission take an action at any public hearing. She pointed out that the applicant is asking that they be scheduled for a public hearing in the event that all the Commission's concerns are addressed by the next meeting. Commissioner Teglia noted that if the Commission's comments are not addressed the Public Hearing could be continued at that time. Commissioner Sim stated that the details have to be demonstrated and added that the landscape and architecture can also be more engaging. Chairperson Prouty suggested that the building should look and feel like part of the site and follow the curve of the street. Motion Teglia /Second Honan to continue the Public Hearing to April 5, 2007. Approved by unanimous voice vote. 3. Genentech Childcare Facility GENENTECH INC/applicant GENENTECH INC/owner 444 Allerton Avenue P06-0024: UP06-0008 & DR06-0020 Use Permit allow construction of a 51,000 s.f. childcare facility serving approximately 500 children, comprising six separate buildings, at 444 Allerton Avenue located in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.32 and 20.81. Senior Planner Lappen gave a PowerPoint presentation. Shar Zamanpour -Genentech and Joseph Hobart Weiss -Architect and Richard Prakopcyk - Director of Site Planning CHU2A gave a presentation on the project. Tony Hamedany, Director of Engineering of Columbus Manufacturing - 493 Forbes Boulevard, noted that their business is very close to the proposed childcare facility site. He stated that they operate a food manufacturing facility and he is concerned with the amount of ammonia on site for their refrigeration. He stated that they have all the training necessary for them, but was uncomfortable with a childcare facility being in close proximity to their warehouse. Senior Planner Lappen noted that all facilities have to comply with State and local regulations in order to go through the approval process. He added that Genentech had to conduct a due diligence study in order to select their site. He stated that Genentech and the Fire Department are prepared to answer Commission questions on the proposed project. Lisa Sullivan, Director of Strategic Facilities Planning, stated that in the choosing a site for a childcare facility s:\M%wutes\~%wal%zed MCwutes\2oo~\os-is-off izpc r~Cwutes.doc page 6 of9 Planning Commission Meeting of March 15, 2007 they took into consideration the health and safety of their employees. She pointed out that they previously chose 501 Forbes which is adjacent to the Columbus facility, and the due diligence report and environmental study noted there was not any significant issues with the site. She stated that they were concerned on the emissions from the manufacturing facility, but found that it was a nuisance odor rather than a health hazard. She added that because the prevailing winds occurred so often they decided instead to acquire 444 Allerton, where they and conducted the same due diligence study for facilities within a 2,000 square foot radius. She stated that they received a letter from Department of Substance Toxics Control noting that there is no environmental impact on the site. Public Hearing closed. Vice Chairperson Giusti questioned if the proposed childcare center is in addition to the existing facility or if it will replace it. Ms. Zamanpour noted that the current location on Gateway is on leased land which is rumored to be redeveloped in the future by Chamberlin. Genentech has projected that the new facility will accommodates their growth. Commissioner Honan asked that the Fire Department give their comments on the issue with the Columbus Manufacturing company. Code Enforcement Officer Tom Carney noted that the Fire Marshall has looked into this and also has a disaster management plan in case of any emergency. Commissioner Teglia noted that the block walls make the facility look like a prison and felt that they could be softened with climbing landscaping on the street side. He added that the photomontages with the pastel colors are beautiful but do not give a clear representation of what the project will look like. He also suggested using another material other than corrugated steel. He noted his concern with 40 stalls reserved for the drop off of 500 children and stated that this was insufficient for parents dropping their children off. He stated that the full 100 parking stalls will need to be reserved for drop-off purposes and that the employees would need to park in one of the adjacent parking lots. Mr. Weiss noted that this childcare center has a two hour start period and the full 500 kids do not start at the same time. He added that 8-10% of the spaces are typically reserved for drop off and some of the overflow spaces could be used for drop off. Commissioner Teglia asked if any consideration was given to Genentech employees driving to the closest parking lot. Ms. Zamanpour stated that Allerton is flat and their employees can park at the Forbes Boulevard parking lot and walk their children over to the facility. She added that a crosswalk is already at that location and as part of the Master Plan they will also have crosswalks on Cabot. Vice Chairperson Giusti asked if Genentech projects having 500 children everyday at the facility. Ms. Zamanpour noted that the capacity is 500 and they may not have full capacity due to vacation and sick days. Commissioner Moore asked if the odors from the Columbus facility would impact the center. Ms. Zamanpour noted that the wind studies conducted show that this site is not affected. Commissioner Moore was concerned with odors or fumes surrounding the children at the center. Ms. Zamanpour noted that this site was studied to make sure that it was safe for the children. Commissioner Honan stated that the children would be dropped off, go through a check point with their parents and finally dropped off in their building. She asked how much time the procedure would take. Mr. Weiss stated that it would be a range of 10 to 15 minutes. Commissioner Honan noted her concern with the length of time taken to check in the child with only 40 parking spaces and felt that it would still be insufficient with 80% attendance. Ms. Sullivan stated that the turn around projected has been calculated to 10 minute intervals with 40 parking stalls. She added that with all 100% attendance there would be a need of about 60 parking stalls. Commissioner Teglia asked when employees would start their work day. Ms. Sullivan stated that the start times vary from 6:30 am to 10 a.m. Ms. Zamanpour stated that if there is not enough parking available for drop off they will be informed of it. She added that the parking is monitored to make sure that there is plenty of parking and if more is needed they can designate more parking stalls for drop off and the employees can park in other lots. Chief Planner Kalkin added that Ms. Sullivan has expressed the willingness of Genentech to start off with s:\Mtwutes\~twal~zed Mtwutes\2oo~\os-2s-off R.pc t~ntwutes.doc gage ~ of9 Planning Commission Meeting of March 15, 2007 more than 40 parking stalls if the Commission wishes to do so. Commissioner Honan stated that she would feel more comfortable with designating more parking spots from the beginning of the project. Commissioner Teglia stated it is easier to have the employees park elsewhere and have all the parking available for drop off at the facility by car. Commissioner Honan asked if the shuttle bus would have a stop at this site. Ms. Zamanpour noted that there are shuttle stops near the facility. Commissioner Honan asked if an employee could use the shuttle to drop off their child at the childcare facility. Ms. Zamanpour noted that this could be done if the employee chose to do so but this was not taken as a typical case and made the initial assumption that the children would be dropped off. Chairperson Prouty stated that the Commission can choose a number of parking spaces that the Commission feels will be sufficient for drop-off purposes and adjust it based on Genentech's needs. Chief Planner Kalkin stated that these changes can return to the Commission for review and can be adjusted at that time. Ms. Zamanpour noted the spaces are designated drop off and will be empty all day except for when the children are dropped off and picked up. She added that they are comfortable with 60 spaces being designated for this purpose which will be monitored and reported back to the Commission. Commissioner Moore asked if Genentech is giving the employees a special provision to allow for drop off of their child at the childcare facility. Ms. Sullivan stated that there are flexible start hours for the employees. Commissioner Sim asked how this facility compares to other childcare center the architect has worked on. Mr. Weiss noted that with larger childcare centers the village concept has been used and they have been very successful such as one that was built for Pfizer. Commissioner Sim stated that the building and landscape are childlike and asked if the center will be particular to this City. Mr. Weiss stated the center was designed to work with the site and they strived to an exciting and engaging place for children. Commissioner Sim asked what types of materials were used. Mr. Weiss noted that the material depends on the environment and for this site stucco was chosen. Commissioner Teglia added that the project seems institutional and is stark. He stated that the Commission is looking for more aesthetically pleasing buildings and not what has been previously approved. He reiterated his concern with the pastels being used and use of corrugated steel. He suggested that the windows could be enlarged and that this item should return to the Commission as a study session. Commissioner Sim stated that the City developed childcare center has interesting expressions. Motion Teglia /Second Sim to continue the Public Hearing to April 5, 2007 with a study session prior to the Public hearing. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Teglia asked staff if a light or a stop sign was being considered at Forbes and Allerton. Chief Planner Kalkin noted that this is included in the East of 101 traffic improvement plan. Commissioner Teglia noted that this is a major thoroughfare and there is an existing traffic signal at Gull and Forbes. He questioned when the Commission would have an opportunity to review this. Chief Planner Kalkin noted that if this is included in the traffic mitigation plan for East of 101, it is an adopted measure already. She added that staff would check on that and report back to the Commission. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS ITEMS FROM STAFF ITEMS FROM COMMISSION None Commissioner Teglia asked that Code Enforcement visit 111 Chestnut because there is a potential fire hazard with overgrown weeds. Commissioner Giusti stated that the mechanical equipment on the old Cala building is visible and asked if it s:\M%wutes\~%walLzed r~twutes~oo~~os-is-off xpc Mtwutes.doc page s ofy Planning Commission Meeting of March 15, 2007 could be hidden from the public view. Chief Planner Kalkin stated that they are required to screen new equipment prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy. Chief Planner Kalkin added that at the March 14`h City Council meeting the Genentech Master Plan was approved and a consultant contract was also approved for the zoning ordinance update. Commissioner Prouty pointed out that Fairfield does not reflect any major changes on the windows. Commissioner Teglia added that a spandrel section was being installed on the park and asked for an update. Senior Planner Lappen replied that Assistant City Attorney Grossman has been informed and he has been in contact with the developer. He added that there are a limited number of leases that were permitted on the commercial portion but that certificates of occupancy are not being issued for the residential units. Commissioner Prouty thanked staff for bringing forward the Stonegate Estates revisions to the Commission and pointed out that developers need to know that they need to build what was approved. Vice Chairperson Honan noted the importance of holding study sessions on large projects. Senior Planner Lappen apologized for bypassing the study sessions and understands the Commission's needs to have study sessions. Commissioner Teglia added that the Commission should never feel rushed to make a decision. He stated that staff should inform the applicants that the Commission expects high quality presentations. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC ADJOURNMENT Motion Honan /Second Teglia to adjourn the meeting. Approved by ~'nanitmous vojc~e vote. r,~ Susy Kalkiry' Secretary to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco SKlbla Jol~fi Prou , Planning of City of S uth rperson Francisco None 11:12 P.M. s:V~Cwutes\~LwalCzed n~Cwutes\2oo~\os-25-off RPC Miwutes.doc pagey of9