Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-06-01MINUTE June 1, 2006 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION TAPE i CALL TO ORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7:30 n.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioner Giusti, Commissioner Prouty, Commissioner Romero, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Teglia, Vice Chairperson Honan and Chairperson Zemke ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: CHAIR COMMENTS AGENDA REVIEW None Planning Division: City Attorney: Engineering Division: Police Department: Fire Prevention. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of regular meeting minutes of April 20, 2006. 2. Club Marakas (formerly Welte's Bar) Pasco, Albert & Barbara/Owner Welte's Bar/Applicant 254 Grand Ave. P03-0006 UP03-0001 18 Month Review -Use Permit to allow live indoor entertainment at an existing cocktail lounge in the Downtown Commercial (D-C-L) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.26 and 20.81. 3. Alvarez Residence - 2nd Story Addition Blanca Alvarez/Owner Blanca Alvarez/Applicant 86 Leo Cir P06-0037: PUDM06-0001 ~ DR06-0031 Susy Kalkin, Principal Planner Steve Carlson, Senior Planner Mike Lappen, Senior Planner Girard Beaudin, Associate Planner Bertha Aguilar, Admin. Asst. II Peter Spoerl, Assistant City Attorney Ray Razavi, City Engineer Dennis Chuck, Senior Civil Engineer Sergeant Alan Normandy, Planning Liaison Tom Carney, Code Enforcement Officer No Changes None Planned Unit Modification and Design Review allowing a 1st & 2nd story addition totaling 420 sq ft to an existing single-family residence at 86 Leo Circle in the Single Family Residential & Planned Unit Development Zone District (R-1-D-P) in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.16, 20.78, 20.84, & 20.85 Planning Commission Meeting of June 1, 2006 CONSENT CALENDAR -continued 4. Dollar Tree Type "C" Sign AKC Services, Inc/applicant Steven P. Silvestri/owner 555 EI Camino Real P05-0172: SIGNS05-0059 Type "C" Sign Permit to install a canopy sign, double faced monument sign and building facade sign with a total sign area in excess of 100 square feet situated at 555 EI Camino Real in the Retail Commercial (C-1) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.22, 20.85 & 20.86. 5. 249 East Grand Georgia Pacific Corporation/Owner James H. Richardson/Applicant 249 East Grand Ave. P05-0019: DR05-0043, EIR05-0001, PM05-0002, PUD05-0001, SIGNS06-0008, TDM05-0001 8~ UP05-0005 (Continue to June 15, 2006) Use Permit, Design Review and Preliminary TDM Plan to construct a phased development consisting of four office/R8~D buildings totaling approximately 534,500 SF, 5,500 SF of ancillary commercial space, and related landscaping improvements on a 15.75 acre site; Tentative Parcel Map to resubdivide a 15.75 acre lot into 5 parcels with reciprocal parking and access easements throughout, and a Planned Unit Development to allow creation of lots which do not abut a dedicated public street; Type C Sign Permit for a comprehensive sign program; and, request for a Development Agreement. Motion Romero /Second Sim to approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of item 3, which was pulled by Commissioner Teglia. Commissioner Romero, Commissioner Sim and Commissioner Teglia abstained from the minutes of April 20, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING -Consent Calendar items 3 Alvarez Residence - 2nd Story Addition Blanca Alvarez/Owner Blanca Alvarez/Applicant 86 Leo Cir P06-0037: PUDM06-0001 & DR06-0031 Planned Unit Modification and Design Review allowing a 1st & 2nd story addition totaling 420 sq ft to an existing single-family residence at 86 Leo Circle in the Single Family Residential & Planned Unit Development Zone District (R-1-D-P) in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.16, 20.78, 20.84, & 20.85 Commissioner Teglia questioned what staff's response to the letter received regarding the proposed addition was. Acting Chief Planner Kalkin noted that the letter was dealing with the rental of the unit and staff does not have the ability to address whether they are renting a room out or homeowner occupied. Commissioner Teglia noted that there is not much control over that, and noted that this is not a second unit that will not have a separate ingress and egress. Acting Chief Planner Kalkin noted that this was correct and it is an addition to the home. Associate Planner Beaudin noted that he will respond to the inquiring party as to what the City has control over and what it cannot control. Motion Romero /Second Sim to approve P06-0037: PUDM06-0001 & DR06-0031. s:\rnCwutes\F%wal%zed rnCwutes~2oo6~o6-oz-o6 R.~c rnLwutes.doc page 2 o f io Planning Commission Meeting of June 1, 2006 On the question: Commissioner Prouty asked that there be a note in the file stating that it cannot be used as a second unit. Acting Chief Planner Kalkin noted second units require approval but this is not an application for a second unit. Approved by unanimous voice vote. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6. Home Depot/applicant Levitz SL San Francisco/owner 900 Dubuque Ave. P05-0035: PUD05-0003, UP05-0010, TDMO-0003, SIGNS05-0044, EIR05-0003 & DR05-0020 (Continued from May 18, 2006) Environmental Impact Report assessing environmental impacts, Planned Unit Development allowing a reduced front setback; Use Permit allowing outside storage and display, Design Review allowing construction of a 101,579 square foot Home Depot store, a 24,215 square foot Garden Center, open at- grade parking and a 2 level parking structure and generating in excess of 100 daily vehicle trips; Type C Sign Program comprised of building facade signs and retention of an existing pole sign with a total area exceeding 300 square feet; Transportation Demand Management Plan reducing traffic effects, situated at 900 Dubuque Avenue in the Planned Commercial (P-C-L) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.24, 20.81 8~ 20.85 Public Hearing opened. Recess called at 7:39 p.m. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. Recalled to order at 7:43 p.m. Vice Chairperson Honan asked staff to review some of the issues at the May 15~' meeting, being that she was absent. Senior Planner Carlson noted that some of the Commission's comments were: Traffic, queuing with the left turn pocket into the site Traffic backing out to US Highway 101 Alternative access through the JPB site Commissioner Teglia added that they also asked for better aesthetics and rooftop parking. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the pictures presented by Commissioner Romero encouraged the applicant to revise the plans. Greg George, Home Depot, noted that the architect has revised the plans. He pointed out that they looked into rooftop parking extensively and found that it doubles the cost of the building. He stated that he is unable to provide rooftop parking. Frank Coda, Architect, gave a PowerPoint presentation and addressed some of the changes made to the proposal. The changes were - Added a second lane into the parking lot, one is dedicated for the first level and the other allows the driver to continue straight this addressed the queuing concerns. They added a significant tower element to show the entry to the site. They upgraded the parking deck with vertical elements and freestanding trellises on the exterior The architect eliminated the orange color, with the exception of the corporate logo. The fence is not a chain link fence but wrought iron fence. S:\M%wutCS\~wtgl.%ZCC{ M%wutPS~2006\06-02-06 RFC M%wut&s.doC Fq(~C 3 0 f 20 Planning Commission Meeting of June 1, 2006 Decorative lighting elements were added to the garden center and on the parking structure which was carried all around the deck. Public Hearing closed. Commissioner Prouty questioned if there was going to beano left hand turn at the median. He suggested that they not be allowed to make a left turn which would ensure that the driver goes toward the deck. Mr. Coda noted that they were entertaining the no left turn option but also did not want the customers that were in that area to go back out to the street to get find a parking space. Commissioner Giusti thanked the architect for not using orange color on the structure. Chairperson Zemke asked if the columns that support the parking structure had ivy growing on them. Mr. Coda noted that the columns will have ivy growing on them and the upper level planters will have vines growing on them. Chairperson Zemke also asked if there was going to be a stairway by the cargo elevators. Mr. Coda noted that this will be included. Commissioner Prouty asked if the freight elevators were the same size as those in the Colma store. Mr. Coda noted that the Colma elevators were smaller than the ones proposed in this Home Depot. Chairperson Zemke asked how opaque the mesh behind the wrought iron fence was for viewing purposes. Mr. Coda noted that the mesh is a three to two inch square so that people cannot pull things through them. Commissioner Romero was concerned with the palette enclosure and trash compactor area. He was concerned with this area becoming an outdoor area like with other Home Depots. He noted the importance to have a Condition of Approval requiring for everything to be contained within the building. Mr. Coda noted that there are enclosures that can be solid walls and could screen it more along so that it is not visible from Dubuque. Commissioner Romero asked where the delivery trucks would load and unload materials. Mr. Coda noted that all deliveries are done in the back. Mr. Coda and Commissioner Romero discussed the circulation of delivery trucks on the site. It was explained that the trucks would be at the site when the store is closed to the public and would enter the site through the customer access area and then go to the back and unload. Commissioner Romero stated that he does not want to see continuous outdoor storage in the palette area and containers in the parking lot or in the seasonal sales area. Mr. Coda suggested that there need to be some screen walls in the area to ensure what they are after. Commissioner Romero suggested continuing a wrought iron fence to screen the area too. Commissioner Romero asked if the SSF store going to replace the Colma store and if Home Depot was moving more towards serving contractors rather than for the consumers. Mr. Coda noted that they are not planning on expanding their operations to contractors and assured the Commissioner that this site would be a consumer Home Depot. Commissioner Teglia noted that the layout of the building on the property. He felt that the tower sticks out and did not see it as an improvement. He stated that the East elevation is the front door and the North elevation will be visible from 101. He pointed out that the loading docks and the storage will be seen from 101 and the building would have a better presence if it were oriented towards 101. he felt that the building should be offset towards Dubuque and the loading docks should be in the rear facing towards the railroads with a pocket lane. Vice Chairperson Honan asked for a clarification in the deliveries of the materials. Mr. Coda noted that they prefer to have delivery trucks in off peak hours. Vice Chairperson Honan noted that there will be an option of having the store operate 24 hours a day which will cause the store to have deliveries during business hours while there are customers in the store. Mr. George noted that the design and merchandise of the store is a typical Home Depot and not a contractor oriented store and added that the contractor base of their customers is 25%. He added that every delivery is a scheduled delivery and the goal is to deliver on non-peak hours. Vice Chairperson Honan asked if deliveries would s:\rnCwutes~~iwa~Czed M%wutes~2oo~O\o6-os-o6 R.pc Mt~.utes.doc Page ~F o f zo Planning Commission Meeting of June 1, 2006 be in the day on weekends. Mr. George noted that if they City desires not to have weekend business they could work with no deliveries on one day of the weekend and have deliveries on the other day of the weekend to be fully stoked on Monday morning for business. Vice Chairperson Honan asked where the appliances that have been returned be stored. Mr. George noted that the non operable appliances be scheduled for pickup as soon as possible and be stored near the delivery docks in the meantime. Vice Chairperson Honan asked how often the pickups of these appliances are performed. Mr. George noted that he would look into this and respond to Vice Chairperson Honan. Commissioner Teglia asked if the applicant considered a Home Depot Expo at the site. Mr. George noted that the expo concept and business model changed two years ago and added that 15of those were closed in the United States. Commissioner Sim noted that he is looking at the vertical expressions and noted that the north and west elevations do not match. Mr. Coda noted that these will be corrected because the west elevation is the determining height. Commissioner Sim added that the south and east elevations have the same matching issues. Mr. Coda noted that there are some corner elements that need to be refined corrected. He pointed out that the east elevation needs to wrap and a peak will go away. Commissioner Sim noted that he has not seen the roof plan for the parking structure to see how much density and coverage there is. Commissioner Sim added that the parapet should be screened and should look real. He noted that the loading and unloading is going to be an eyesore. He stated that the architect needs to show cross sections of 101 and how they expect to screen views from this area. He pointed out that the lighting will create a nightscape that will be dramatic when someone drives by. Commissioner Teglia and Mr. Coda explored the reorientation of the building towards Dubuque with loading in the back or on the side. Mr. Coda noted that they have explored it but have little flexibility because of heights and scales. Commissioner Teglia felt that the current design is not the best for the site. Commissioner Prouty asked if the architect could look at the truck delivery area to see if they could avoid any potential storage issues. Mr. Coda noted that there may be a way but could explore the rear corner in totality. Commissioner Sim stated that the cumulative effect of the aesthetics and traffic is significant. He would like to see a diagram of where the footprint relative to the building stands. Mr. Coda noted that some of the photos are very hard to put together but will try and put something conceptual together. Commissioner Romero was concerned with the carts not having a specified storage area because they are scattered throughout the parking lot. Mr. Coda noted that there are cart corrals throughout the parking lot. Commissioner Romero added that there should be a designated storage area for the carts and not throughout the parking lot. Mr. Coda pointed out that the concept is to have them stored in the vestibule. Commissioner Romero asked what would be washed down at the TRC storage. Mr. Coda replied that this is where customers would return any rental equipment and it would be washed down and prepared for next rental. He added that they comply with the current codes for this type of area. Commissioner Romero asked if the outside display area would be on an ongoing basis. Mr. Coda stated that this will be ongoing depending on the sales that are occurring at the time. Commissioner Prouty asked what the use would be for the seasonal sales area. Mr. Coda noted that this area would be used about four to five times a year and with the exception of the Christmas tree sales they are all a week in duration. He clarified that the sidewalk display area will be the ongoing display area. Commissioner Prouty asked if the cart corrals were going to take up some of the parking spaces and if so, how much would it impact the parking on the site. Mr. Coda noted that these are already in the plans and do not impact the parking. s:V~ILwutes\~~waLCzed r~twutes~2oo6\o6-os-o6 R.~c Mtwutes.doc Page o f io Planning Commission Meeting of June 1, 2006 Vice Chairperson Honan noted that that this looks like a standard Home Depot building. Mr. Coda noted that it is a custom design because they do not have other Home Depots with a parking garage. She noted that she is not comfortable on the design. Mr. Coda noted that they can work on the details of the corner and pointed out that they are nearing their budget on this project. Vice Chairperson Honan was uncomfortable with the location of the loading docks and pallet storage. Commissioner Teglia noted that the Commission is looking for other details on the plans, which is something the architect is willing to do but there is a time constraint issue. He suggested having the applicant withdraw their application and work with staff to make the proposed project aesthetically pleasing. He noted that if this is what they are going to render on decision on, then the Commission could conclude that there are no overriding considerations to warrant the project and deny the project. Chairperson Zemke asked for clarification from staff on time constraints. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the applicant has one year under California law with only a maximum of a total of a 90 day extension in which the decision making body has to make a decision, which includes City Council. He noted that the one year timeline was up on May 31 and the applicant has agreed to an additional 60 days, until the end of July. He pointed out that if the applicant returns on the June 15th meeting the Council has both meetings in July to review the project. Commissioner Romero asked that a comparative analysis of Home Depot and Lowe's be given to the Commission when the applicant returns. Senior Planner Carlson noted that both sites are separated by a building and stated that it is difficult to get a good picture of the area from different angles. Commissioner Romero noted that he does not want to move the project forward with a recommendation to deny. He asked if the applicant was willing to return to the Commission and address the issues brought up at the meeting. Mr. Coda stated that they would like the opportunity to do this. He clarified that they granted a 45 day extension which was up to July 15th. He felt that they are agreeable to extending that if the Council needs another session with the applicant. Commissioner Prouty pointed out that getting a full picture of the area and a perspective of both sites is very important so the Commission has a full picture of what this will look like. Mr. Coda noted that they cannot get a 3-dimensional view of the site and a 2-dimensional view of the area is extremely difficult to get. Commissioner Sim noted that a physical model will allow each individual to see the project in different ways and see the entire context of 101, adjacent buildings, and the project. Mr. Coda noted that a 3-dimensional model may not be ready in the short time frame they have. He noted that a strip elevation would give the Commission some sense of the masses. Commissioner Teglia reiterated his concern of the loading dock and trash compactor areas. He suggested that the architect explore putting these on the railroad side. Commissioner Sim suggested seeing a materials color board. Chairperson Zemke noted that the Commission's consensus is to see a roof plan, screening of the freight area or possible relocation, additional detail on the sign tower, cumulative visual effects of this project and Lowe's, cart storage and corner treatments. Commissioner Teglia added that they see the total sign program. Mr. Coda noted that the initial submittal did have the detail and due to time constraints could not include it with this packet. He stated that it would be in the future packet. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the next meeting is on June 15th at which they will have a Public Hearing on Lowe's and this may be the Commission's opportunity to see both projects together. He added that CalTrans sent in a letter after the statutory comment period. Their comments are on the traffic study and one of many of their comments is in their jurisdiction. He pointed out that the City has been using the traffic model that they suggested and has met with CalTrans to inform them of this. He also added that the City is not obligated to respond to their comments because the comment period has closed. Many of the impacts that they are s:V~lCwutes\~Cwaltzed r~[wutes~zoo~\o6-oi-o6 R.pc MLwutes.doc page 6 of zo Planning Commission Meeting of June 1, 2006 concerned with are occurring in the year 2020 and it is likely that the freeway will not be able to provide traffic accessibility. He concluded that staff is overstating the effects on traffic and local street system. Motion Sim /Second Romero to continue the item to June 15, 2006. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Teglia addressed the architect and suggested that they ask for additional time if they are not ready by the June 15"' meeting. Recess called at 9:25 p.m. [Items 7-11 were discussed together.) 7. Type "C" Sign (Shell) Eleanor Colombani/Owner Jim Martin/Applicant 710 EI Camino Real P05-0055: SIGNS05-0017 Recalled to order at 9:35 p.m. Type "C" Sign Permit to install new signage at a gas station situated at 710 EI Camino Real in the Retail Commercial (C-1-L) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.76 & 20.86. 8. Type "C" Sign (Shell) Jim Martin/applicant Equilon Enterprises, LLC/owner 899 Airport Blvd. P05-0056: SIGNS05-0018 Type "C" Sign Permit to install new signage at a gas station situated at 899 Airport Boulevard in the Planned Commercial (P-C-L) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.76 & 20.86 9. Type "C" Sign (Shell) Peter Tobin/applicant Equilon Enterprises, LLC/owner 123 Linden Ave. P05-0072: SIGNS05-0025 Type "C" Sign Permit to install new signage at a gas station situated at 123 Linden in the Planned Commercial (P-C-L) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.24, 20.76 & 20.86 10. Type "C" Sign (Shell) Peter Tobin/applicant Shell Oil Co./owner 248 So. Airport Blvd. P05-0073: SIGNS05-0026 Type "C" Sign Permit to install new signage at a gas station situated at 248 So. Airport Blvd in the Planned Commercial (P-C-L) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.24, 20.76 & 20.86 11. Type "C" Sign (Shell) ARC Architects, Inc./applicant Derenzi, Marie G/owner 140 Produce Ave. P05-0111: SIGNS05-0043 Type "C" Sign Permit allowing a master sign program including building facade signs, canopy signs, monument sign, and a pylon signs exceeding 10 feet in height and signs exceeding 100 square feet in area, s:\Mtwutes\~CwalCzed n~Cwutes\2oo6\o6-os-o6 rzPC MCwutes.doc Page ~ o f 20 Planning Commission Meeting of June 1, 2006 situated at 140 Produce Avenue, in the Planned Commercial (P-C) Zoning District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.81 & 20.86 Public Hearing opened. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. Kristina Lawson, Attorney for Shell, introduced Pete Tobin the architect for Shell and Facilities Engineer Jim Martin. She added that they submitted alternative pump sign designs to Shell in Houston and not all of them were approved. She informed the Commission that the 710 EI Camino site has been cited for being out of compliance with State law and has negotiated with the officer that cited them to not fine them until they have obtained a Use Permit from them. Pet Tobin, Arc Inc. Architects, noted that they are agree to the condition attached to the five stations pertaining to removal of all the illegal signs and banners above the service bay doors. He added that all the temporary signs in the planters have already been removed and stated that he had been to the sites and checked that they were removed. He gave a presentation showing what exists at the locations. He showed 3 examples of what Houston Shell had recommended for the sites, which were their current standards, the 65% percent reduction of the "V-power" company logo and the regular size of their logo. He also had a presentation board showing what the competitors currently have at their locations. Jim Martin, Shell Oil Facilities Engineer, stated that all five facilities are company owned but are franchised to independent businessmen. He pointed out that the Commission's decision on the sign programs will determine their ability to compete with other businesses. He added that it is not only Shell applying for this but also those individual businessmen. Public Hearing closed. Commissioner Teglia asked if all three examples were options. Mr. Martin noted that all three of the examples are options and these options are standard signs that are available. He added that anything else would be a custom job and expensive. Chairperson Zemke noted that there are no placards on the top of the pumps and pointed out that some stations do put these on. Senior Planner noted that staff would not support signs on that area nor consider the term "quality fuels". Commissioner Teglia questioned if the City's preference is the reduced "v-power" sign with the banner at the top removing the quality fuels statement. Senior Planner Carlson noted that this is the case if the Commission wants the banner at the top with the pump number and if the Commission wants to allow the color on the banner it is their discretion. He pointed out that they are trying to get the "v-power" in compliance with law so that it is viewed at the pump and on the street. Vice Chairperson Honan stated that she prefers the one that does not say "v-power" because it looks cleaner and neater. Commissioner Prouty noted that this is also his preference. He was concerned with illegal signs and banners which were still at the 710 EI Camino Real site in the morning. Ms. Lawson noted that Shell has managers that try to make sure that everything is in compliance. She added that they have been successful in keeping the temporary ground mounted signs off the lawns. She committed that once their RVI is approved a letter will be sent to these dealers making it clear that they need to keep the illegal signs off. Commissioner Teglia asked what the sign requirements are for smog signs. Ms. Lawson noted that there are requirements and is not familiar with what they are. Commissioner Teglia noted that instead of it being a banner it could be part of the sign permit or part of the monument sign. Ms. Lawson added that the requirement by State law could be the square sign that has the check on it. Commissioner Giusti noted that she too prefers a cleaner sign and questioned if "quality fuels" has to be on the top and bottom of the pump. Ms. Lawson noted that this is one of Shells registered trademarks and they do s:\MCwutes\~~wa~~zed M%wutes\2oo6\o6-os-o6 izPC MCwutes.doc gage 8 of 20 Planning Commission Meeting of June 1, 2006 want to have that on the pump because they do not have an approval of taking it off. Assistant City Attorney Spoerl noted that State Law requires one iteration of the registered trademark and there is no requirement to have it twice. Commissioner Romero was not concerned with the duplication of the trademark but with advertising food, beverages and other items. He stated that there should not be any advertising in the areas that are white on the examples. Commissioner Prouty agreed that the issue is not the trademark but all the additional advertising on the site. Senior Planner Carlson suggested that the Commission consider a potential amendment with the sign code to allow more than what State Law allows. Commissioner Prouty noted that a trademark is hard to get approved and does not have an issue with the trademark being displayed. He reiterated his concern with other advertising. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the Commission needs to make it clear what is being allowed because there may be other company trademarks that could be added to the pumps. Commissioner Teglia asked if Senior Planner Carlson was recommending only one trademark. Senior Planner Carlson noted that State law only requires one trademarked sign but asked that the Commission state what they will accept to be consistent in how they will deal with other stations. Chairperson Zemke noted that he prefers the signage that is neater with "quality fuels" and the font is not noticeable from the street. The Commission and Ms. Lawson discussed how many gas companies are moving towards branded fuels. Ms. Lawson asked that all gas stations in South San Francisco be asked to meet the same requirements that these Shell stations have had to meet. Assistant City Attorney Spoerl felt that there does not have to be two trademarks approved for the sign program and that would be in compliance with State law. He added that this may not set too much of a precedent for the other stations. Motion Romero /Second Proutv to approve the standard option with the trademark on the top and bottom. On the question: Commissioner Teglia noted that the individual trademarks vary from franchise to franchise and that they would be considering signs on a case by case basis. Roll Call vote for item #7 - P05-0055: SIGNS05-0017; #8 - P05-0056: SIGNS05-0018; #9 - P05-0072: SIGNS05- 0025: #10 - P05-0073: SIGNS05-0026; and #11 P05-0111: SIGNS05-0043 Ayes: Commissioner Giusti, Commissioner Prouty, Commissioner Romero, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Teglia, and Chairperson Zemke Noes: Vice Chairperson Honan Abstain: None Commissioner Teglia asked staff to check if all the smog check signs that are not required by state law be removed. Senior Planner Carlson noted that there are active Code Enforcement cases and will look into it. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 12. FY06-07 Capital Improvement Program City of South San Francisco/owner Citywide P06-0058: PCA06-0004 Adoption of Planning Commission Resolution Finding that the Proposed Capital Improvement Program is Consistent with the adopted City General Plan, in accordance with Government Code, Division 1, Section S:\M%wutes\~~wal.%zed M%wutes~2.006\06-02-06 RFC M%vi.ute5.doc Fogey o f 20 Planning Commission Meeting of June 1, 2006 65401. Senior Civil Engineer Chuck presented the staff report. Commissioner Teglia asked why the Chestnut Avenue widening was no longer on the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and if it will no longer be done, he asked if the parking would be restored on Chestnut. Senior Civil Engineer Chuck noted that there was opposition to it and never carried forward. He added that the Oak Avenue extension should alleviate some of the traffic from Chestnut. He noted that he put the parking restoration on Traffic Advisory Committee's (TAC) agenda for review. Commissioner Teglia noted that there is a budget for fiberoptics from IT and suggested that the Audio/Visual system in the MSB could be updated for a low amount of money. Senior Civil Engineer Chuck noted that this is from the I"f department and it is so that they can see the progress and connect the buildings. Commissioner Teglia noted that the system in the MSB is not working well. He suggested that the system needs to be updated. Commissioner Romero asked about extending the sidewalk on Hickey Boulevard to Colma. Senior Civil Engineer Chuck noted that they have contacted the Superintendent of Public Works to see if this can be done within the Department and not require a full CIP project. He added that he would get back to the Commission on this issue. Motion Teglia /Second Prouty approving resolution 2653-2006 recommending that the City Council approve the CIP for Fiscal Year 06-07. Approved by unanimous voice vote. ITEMS FROM STAFF 13. Genentech Master Plan -Study Session Schedule Senior Planner Lappen noted that there are two potential schedules for the Commission to decide when they would like to have Study Session on the Genentech Master Plan. One would be two two hour study sessions on a Thursday that is not a regular Planning Commission meeting and the other is to have three study sessions before the regularly scheduled meeting. Consensus of the Commission to meet arior to regu/ar P/anninn Commission, Acting Chief Planner Kalkin noted that a new application has been filed for the last part of Phase III and will be returning to the Commission in the future. She asked that the Commission inform the clerk of their potential vacation schedules to make sure that there will be a quorum during the summer. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION None ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC None AD70URNMENT 10:42 P.M. Motion Prouty /Second Sim to adjourn the meeting. Approved by unanimous voice vote. %~~!; Sushi Kalkir~ Acting Secretary to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco SK/bla William Zemke, Chairp on Planning Commission's City of South San Francisco s:\n~~wutes\~twal~zed M~wutes~2oo6\06-07-0~ R.pc MCwutes.doc Age io o f io