Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Minutes 2008-12-10~p~`SN SA`V A O`t ~ ~~92 n ~~ o ,_ ~-~ -~_~ ~`~LIFOR~~~ MINUTES REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR MEETING MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING COMMUNITY ROOM WEDNESDAY DECEMBER 10, 2008 CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: AGENDA REVIE 6:30 p.m. Present: Boardmembers Garbarino, Gonzalez and Mullin, Vice Chairman Addiego and Chairwoman Matsumoto. Absent: None. The Executive Director recommended moving closed session items 5, 6 and 7 to the Special Meeting of Wednesday, December 17, 2008. The Agency so agreed. Chairwoman Matsumoto stated that with Consent of the Board she would like to move the Public Hearing before the Consent Calendar. The Agency so agreed. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. PUBLIC HEARING Hyatt Place Hotel -first Vijay Patel/applicant SRI Krishna Enterprises/owner 550 Gateway Blvd P07-0073: PP07-0001, SIGN07-0047, MND07-0003 VAR07-0004, TDM08-0003, DR07-0046 & Precise Plan, Type "C" Sign Permit, Design Review, Transportation Demand Management Plan & Variance applications fora 166 room, eight-story Hyatt Place Hotel, at 550 Gateway Boulevard, in the Gateway Specific Plan District in accordance with SSFMC chapters 20.57, 20.85, 20.86 & 20.120. Continued from regular meeting of November 12, 2008. Public Hearing Opened: 6:31 p.m. Senior Planner Beaudin presented the staff report recommending that the Redevelopment Agency approve application P07-0073 including a precise plan, mitigated negative declaration, setback variance, sign application, and transportation demand management plan fora 166 room hotel at 550 Gateway Boulevard, which was a two (2) acre vacant site. Several hotels had previously been approved at the location. The current proposal called for construction of a nine (9} story hotel with 166 rooms, onsite amenities, swimming pool, meeting area, dining area and food services. The hotel would come in under the Hyatt Hotel Brand and would cater to business travelers. The project complied with all standards outlined in the Gateway Specific Plan Area with the exception of the setback requirement. The requested variance was to allow parking a minimum setback of 14 feet to the rear facade of the building. The Agency had the authority to grant the variance which was necessary due to the depth of the property. The Applicant proposed to generously landscape the property and had agreed to place public art in area. Five (5) signs were proposed as part of the project including one (1) on each building elevation and including a monument sign at the entrance. Over the course of meetings before the Design Review Board, the project evolved. The resulting building proposal is based on contemporary architecture and employs a variety of materials. Circulation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration was also part of the approval process. During the 30 day review/comment period staff received letters from Caltrans and PG& E. Staff addressed and included its responses in the staff report. Senior Planner Beaudin closed by highlighting the project's incorporation of numerous green elements including environmentally friendly construction among other elements. Applicant Vijay Patel gave a power point presentation on the project. He explained the Hyatt Place brand was developed a few years ago to appeal to a higher end clientele and incorporates a mid scale food and beverage service as well as select services, excluding banquet facilities. The brand gives the customer the opportunity to select services consistent with his or her needs and wants. Mr. Patel then presented a series of interior shots of the hotel, including the gallery area with awine/coffee bar and grab-and-go food service station. Guest rooms were also displayed. Mr. Patel explained the Hyatt Place brand has 188 hotels in 39 states. He next presented renderings of the building including elevation and entrance shots and views from multiple angles. He advised his company operates hotels in the West and in Louisiana and hopes to make South San Francisco its business headquarters for its California properties. Mr. Patel reviewed the materials that would be used to construct the building and emphasized sustainability would be a priority. He further advised he had been building hotels with his brother-in-law since the early 1980s. Their philosophy is to cross train employees and they plan to have over 40 employees at the location. Public Hearing closed: 7:00 p.m. Boardmember Gonzalez advised he had met with Mr. Patel two (2) weeks ago and Mr. Patel had presented some of his ideas for the hotel. Boardmember Gonzalez had suggested the idea of solar panels. Mr. Patel advised the Company was still investigating to determine if solar made sense. REGULAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DECEMBER 10, 2008 MINUTES PAGF, 2 Boardmember Gonzalez encouraged Mr. Patel to look into hiring some of the City's high school students and also noted the tourism industry might benefit from the Ferry Service that is planned to come to Oyster Point. Boardmember Garbarino disclosed he had met with Mr. Patel He stated he was excited about the possibility of having a Hyatt Hotel in the City. He raised concerns over the current economic situation for hotels, particularly given that this hotel was targeting business travelers. He was concerned financing may dry up after construction began on the hotel and sought reassurances in this regard. Boardmember Garbarino also stated it was difficult to get a conceptual feel for the hotel without a table top model. Boardmember Mullin disclosed he met with Mr. Patel. He stated he was excited about the overall direction of the project. He questioned how long it might take the Company to resolve the issue of whether the incorporation of solar energy was possible with respect to the project. Mr. Patel responded the solar investigation could possibly be complete by the time the Company pulled permits. He also stated construction on the property would not begin until financing was guarantied. Regarding the current state of the hotel business, he advised the Company's numbers at the Hampton Inn which it operated in the Oyster Point Area were strong. Boardmember Mullin commented the interior of the building was beautiful but opined the exterior was fairly standard. He questioned the origin of the design. Boardmember Mullin further noted that PG&E expressed concern regarding future power line upgrades and the potential impact on the project. He questioned whether Mr. Patel was confident such an upgrade would not impact the hotel's operations. Mr. Patel advised the design was very specific to this location. The Hyatt Place standard building was constructed of stucco and brick. This design was intended to be an improvement. Regarding the power line issue, Mr. Patel advised the Hampton Inn next door shared the same power line, so the Company was very sensitive to the issue.. However, he did not predict a problem. Vice Chairman Addiego advised he met with Mr. Patel. At the time they met, the renderings Mr. Patel presented were different and now seemed refined. He questioned how many hotel properties the Company operated on the West Coast. Mr. Patel advised the biggest difference between the current and previous renderings was that the new plan called for rounded as opposed to flat stone. The balcony-like trim was also downscaled. Regarding West Coast properties, Mr. Patel advised the Company presently operated five (5) and was hoping to jump to 24. Vice Chairman Addiego opined it might be a very good time to jump into the project. He stated that in difficult economic times, the City often floats the idea of preferential hiring for City residents. REGULAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DECEMBER I0, 2008 MINUTES PAGE 3 Mr. Patel responded that in his experience operating the Hampton Hotel, local employees are best. 80-90oio of Hampton Hotel employees were South San Francisco residents. Vice Chairman Addiego questioned Counsel as to whether preferential hiring could be incorporated into the plan. Counsel Mattas responded staff could work with Mr. Patel to come up with agreeable language on the subject and bring it back before the Agency at a future date. Chairwoman Matsumoto disclosed she met with Mr. Patel and appreciated that he took some of her comments into consideration. She stated she would like to see local construction companies utilized on the project. She questioned whether the edge on the building lit up at night. Mr. Patel responded it was Hyatt's intent to have it light up, but it became too difficult to make happen. Chairwoman Matsumoto stated she found the transportation demand outline confusing. She questioned whether the outline went before staff for review prior to inclusion in the packet. She further questioned the number of employees referenced in the plan. Senior Planner Beaudin advised staff reviewed the outline. He stated the employee number referenced was part of the mitigation for a reduced parking requirement from 1.0-.93, which met the intent of reduced trip generation for the East of 101 Area. Boardmember Gonzalez requested Mr. Patel's cooperation with the Conference Center, especially since the hotel did not plan to have banquet facilities. He also inquired as to how Mr. Patel's Company could help with childcare activities. Mr. Patel advised he planned to work with the Conference Center and would even look into serving on the Authority. With regard to childcare, he commented the Company had put a small fund aside to donate to childcare projects. Senior Planner Beaudin advised the South San Francisco Municipal Code would require a $20,000.00 childcare contribution from the Company. Vice Chairman Addiego commented he liked Mr. Patel's overall plan and appreciated his desire to build a hotel in South San Francisco during these difficult times. He stated he was conflicted about approving the proposal until it addressed preferential hiring for South San Francisco employees. Boardmember Mullin concurred and added he would need more clarity on the solar piece before moving forward. Boardmember Garbarino stated Mr. Patel had addressed his concerns about the economic situation, but he would like to see a table model of the proposed project before making a determination. Chairwoman Matsumoto stated the TDM needed to be corrected with respect to Caltrain. REGULAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DECEMBER 10, 2008 MINUTES PAGE 4 Counsel Mattas advised staff could work with Mr. Patel to address the issues raised during the meeting. However, due to provisions in the Gateway Specific Plan, the Agency would need Mr. Pate1's concurrence to a continuance. Chairwoman Matsumoto requested Mr. Patel's agreement to a continuance of the public hearing to the Agency's next regular meeting set for January 14, 2009. Mr. Patel agreed to the continuance. Recess: 7:45 p.m. Meeting resumed: 9:23 p.m. CONSENT CALENDAR 2. Motion to approve the minutes of November 3, 2008 and November 12, 2008. 3. Motion to approve the expense claims of December 10, 2008 in the amount of $4,957,286.77. 4. Resolution No. 21-2008 authorizing the City Manager to approve a consultant agreement with Alta Planning + Design for the Bicycle Plan and appropriating $55,000 from Redevelopment Agency funds and amending the 2008-2009 Capital Improvement Program. Item No. 4: Chairwoman Matsumoto questioned why RDA money was being used for this purpose. Counsel Mattas advised it was appropriate to use RDA funds because the program was Capital Improvement related. Boardmember Gonzalez questioned how bicyclists would be permitted to use the path. Counsel Mattas advised the general rule is that bicyclists have the same rights to occupy the roadways as motorists, with the exception of freeways and expressways. Any restrictions on other types of roadways would have to apply uniformly to bicyclists and motorists. He noted police officers could cite bicyclists for traffic violations. Motion -Boardmember Garbarino/Second -Vice Chairman Addiego: to approve the Consent Calendar. Unanimously approved by voice vote. Recess: 9:31 p.m. Meeting resumed: 9:40 p.m. REGULAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DECEMBER I0, 2008 MINUTES PAGE 5 CLOSED SESSION 5. Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.8 real property negotiations related to 306 Miller Avenue. Company negotiator: Citi Residential Lending, Inc. Agency negotiator: Marty Van Duyn. Item not heard. 6. Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.8 real property negotiations related to 938 Linden Avenue. Company negotiator: CA Mortgage and Realty, Inc. Richard Johnson V.P. Real Estate. Agency negotiator: Marty Van Duyn. Item not heard. 7. Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.8 real property negotiations related to 323 Miller Avenue. Company negotiator: Rotary. Agency negotiator: Marty Van Duyn. Item not heard. 8. Conference with Legal Counsel: Existing litigation (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a)). South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency v. Clear Channel Outdoor. Closed Session began: 9:40 p.m. Open Session resumed: 10:05 p.m. Report out of Closed Session by Chairwoman Matsumoto: Direction given. ADJOURNMENT Being no further business Chairwoman Matsumoto adjourned the meeting at 10:05 p.m. Submitted .~ to Martinel '- arson, Clerk City f South n Francisco Approve /r L ~ ~ Kary atsumoto, Chairwoman City of South San Francisco REGULAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 10, 2008 PAGE 6