Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 2009-08-19MINUTE S ~o°~x~ S:~'~.~ SPECIAL MEETING CITY COUNCIL o and c'~LIFOR~1~ REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, California 94083 CITY HALL LARGE CONFERENCE ROOM 400 GRAND AVENUE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080 WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 19, 2009 5:30 P.M. Purpose of the meeting: Call to Order. TIME: 5:35 p.m. 2. Roll Call. Present: Councilmen/Boardmembers Garbarino, Gonzalez and Mullin, Vice Mayor/Vice Chairman Addiego and Mayor/Chairwoman Matsumoto. Absent: None. * For reporting purposes, participants are referred to in the remainder of the minutes by their titles affiliated with the City Council. 3. Public Comments -comments are limited to items on the Special Meeting Agenda. None. 4. Closed Session: CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6) Agency designated representative: Kathy Mount Employee organizations: AFSCME, Local 1569, AFL-CIO Confidential Unit, Teamsters Local 856 International Association of Firefighters, Local 1507 Mid-management Unit International Union of Operating Engineers, Loca139 South San Francisco Police Association Public Safety Managers Executive Management Unit. Time In: 5:36 p.m. Report out of Closed Session: Direction given. No action taken. Closed Session: Conference with Legal Counsel: Anticipated Litigation (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c).) Initiation of Litigation: One Case Time Out: 7:40 p.m. Report out of Closed Session: The City Council and Redevelopment Agency Board voted 5-0 to Not join the CR.A lawsuit against the State challenging the recently enacted law which reallocated a portion of the 2009 and 2010 redevelopment agency funds away from the Agency 6. Study Session: review of design concept and pro-forma for Mid Peninsula Coalition's proposed affordable housing development at 636 El Camino Real, and review of design concept and pro-forma for proposed mixed-use development of Giffra property, located at 224 to 238 Grand Avenue. Housing and Community Development Consultant, Armando Sanchez introduced representatives from the Mid-Peninsula Coalition (Mid-Pen), who were present to discuss the progress of the proposed affordable housing development at 636 El Camino Real. President ofMid-Peninsula Coalition, Matt Franklin thanked Council and began a Power Point presentation highlighting Mid-Pen's history, credit and the planning done for the housing development at 636 El Camino Real. Mr. Franklin stated Mid-Pen had been working very closely with the Redevelopment Agency (Agency) and were extremely excited to continue working collaboratively towards completing the development. Mr. Franklin then introduced the design team, which included BAR's Lead Architect, Paula Krugmeier, Landscape Architect, Paul T. Lettieri of the Guzzardo Partnership Inc., and BAR staff Douglas Oliver. Ms. Krugmeier began by highlighting the shared goals of the City and Mid-Pen to create an affordable and livable community in a high density setting while meeting the guidelines for the El Camino Real general plan. It was Mid-Pen's feeling that their design would be able to accomplish all of those goals. Highlights of the design concept included: a "U" shaped configuration of 2.5 to 5 story buildings, creating a series of courtyards as key to supporting the intended retail and family uses; mixed use of materials such as stucco and horizontal siding to create a residential feel within a contemporary context; added eves, stepping, trellises and decks to provide deep shadow; a softening of the exterior colors and decks; and an open courtyard to provide space for a community room, playground equipment, gardening and quiet area. Cars would come and go on the south and north sides, there would be a paved auto court and main underground garage with access from El Camino Real Boulevard. In addition, there would be 5000 square feet of retail space with direct access to El Camino Real. Councilman Gonzalez questioned how many buildings and how many units were located on El Camino Real. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING AUGUST 19, 2009 MINUTES PAGE 2 Mr. Franklin stated there were two (2) buildings due to the need to separate the retail space from the residential units. Parking would be located behind the retail area and residents would enter units through a breezeway. Ms. Krugmeier reported there were 107 units. Councilman Mullin asked what kind of separation was envisioned between the property and the residential homes located on A and B streets. Would there be a screeninglbuffer? Ms. Krugmeier stated the garage went to four (4) feet within the property line and the planned buffer was to have various species of bamboo, creating a lush, green screening/barrierbettyeen property lines. Councilman Garbarino questioned the type of barrier that would be used between the development and the high school. Ms. Krugmeier stated it would be also be a variety of species of bamboo. Mr. Franklin spoke of the affordability and stated it was between 30 to 50% of the Affordable Median Income (AMI) for a range of a 1 to 4 person household. Rents were established to keep "working folks" in mind. Vice Mayor Addiego requested clarification as to the location of the breezeway and asked if Mid- Pen had been involved with other projects containing retail components. He also requested an example of what 5000 square feet would look like. Mr. Franklin referred to the diagram to better explain the location of breezeway. He further noted that Mid-Pen had been involved with other mixed use projects such as a 16,000 square foot property next to City Hall in downtown Redwood City, the Baywatch Restaurant with four (4) Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units in downtown San Mateo, and a mixed use building with a Starbucks located in Union City. He noted the 5000 square feet planned for the South San Francisco development maybe challenging, but was open to various floor plans including one (1) or two (2) retail spaces, and the potential to be coffee shop and/or cafe space. Housing and Redevelopment Manager, Norma Fragoso gave Thai Satay, located on Grand Avenue, as an example of 3000 square feet. Councilman Gonzalez questioned the width of the lot located on El Camino and asked for the renderings of B Street to be explained. The Councilman also asked how many parking spaces would be provided. Ms. Krugmeier responded the lot was 180 feet by 450 feet. Mr. Franklin went on to explain the B Street rendering noting the stoop frontages and individual entrances. He explained there would be 238 spaces (a ratio of 1.8:1). Mid-Pen had looked into putting in driveways but space had been as issue. There was however, additional street parking. Ms. Krugmeier clarified there being 217 spaces for residents and 18 spaces for retail. For City Staff, Councilman Mullin questioned the pedestrian access from C Street. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING AUGUST 19, 2009 MINUTES PAGE 3 City Planner, Susy Kalkin stated there were no direct access and no easements. Vice Mayor Addiego questioned the proximity of the development to the BART station and whether or not residents/riders would be more likely to walk or use another form of public transportation from the station. He stated that he liked the project's look and feel, that it reminded him of Brownstones in New York. Planner Kalkin stated the distance was such that people would more likely take the bus than walk. Mayor Matsumoto stated she loved the idea of using bamboo and questioned if there were any specific species being looked at. Landscape Architect, Paul Lettieri stated they were looking at clumping types such as timber and black bamboo. Councilman Gonzalez questioned if the School Board had seen the plans. Mr. Franklin stated they had not, but Mid-Pen was trying to reach out and were eager to work with the Board. Presentation on 636 El Camino Real concluded. Housing and Redevelopment Manager, Norma Fragoso presented plans for the Giffra property, located at 224-238 Grand Avenue, with Ristorante Buon Gusto as the anchor tenant. The buildings are historic structures, though not officially on the local or national register. In the past, there had been some tenancy issues causing the City to back away from an agreement until such time the owners were in agreement about bringing in a high quality tenant. Mayor Matsumoto noted the tenancy issue was what had stalled the plan before. She wanted the owners to know that nothing would be agreed upon until the City was assured the National $1 Store (National) would no longer be a tenant. She asked if the City had any say over who the new tenant might be. Manager Fragoso stated the property owners had established an agreement with the owners of National in which they understood that their tenancy would be terminated once construction began. The agreement is such that the City would be indemnified from all claims and would incur no relocation obligations. Manager Fragoso stated the City would have a say in the new tenancy, noting that she had put the owners in touch with consulting firm, Terranomics. She believed once the enhancements were in place, the retail establishments interested/considered would be very different from the current tenant. Manager Fragoso went on to discuss plans for the residential/housing project and went over some of the complexities of retrofitting the building. The plan included converting current units into several 2-3 bedroom units located above Ristorante Buon Gusto. Mayor Matsumoto questioned why was there going to be three (3) bedroom units when one of the main goals was to attract young professionals from East of 101. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING AUGUST 19, 2009 MINUTES PAGE 4 Vice Mayor Addiego questioned the same. Manager Fragoso explained how building code and the building's current configuration had limited the options. Rather than wasting several thousand square feet, the limitations had been addressed with the addition of a pop-up. Building code regulations had brought forth several other issues such as types of stair cases to use, windows and fire safety. These issues were still in the process of being worked out. Addressing the retrofitting issues had caused the price of the project to increase from $1.7 million to somewhere in the $2 million range, which Manager Fragoso found to be reasonable considering all of the complexities. However, she was agreeable to the Mayor's suggestion and stated Staff would look into the possibilities of including units more attractive to the stated demographic. Manager Fragoso continued to explain the various renovations, which included an addition of an attractive back door and trash enclosure. With these additions, parking had become an issue. Originally, thirteen (13) units had been hoped for but the plan was now down to ten (10) units because parking could not be accommodated. The Planning Commission (Planning) had agreed to a 1:1 ratio parking. She also went over some issues Planning and the Design Review Board (DRB) had with aspects of the design, namely the DRB's disapproval of the "contemporary' look of the pop-ups. The DRB, Housing Subcommittee, Historical and Parking Place Commissions would be consulted and revisited before meeting with Planning and finalizing the design with Council. Financially, Manager Fragoso stated it was a standard note at 4% interest with a total repayment and no forgiveness. She felt the units, if designed and. marketed properly, would sell well and the Agency could be paid back within approximately 15 years. In closing, the Agency felt the project would be a good investment. Councilman Gonzalez stated he agreed with the idea of including more one (1) or two (2) bedroom units in an effort to promote a more professional atmosphere. He noted he had attended a discussion on what type of environment single people had preferred when looking for a residence. It was reported they had concerns with living in multi-family units and desired a more upscale and professional type of atmosphere and less of a family type atmosphere. In keeping those criteria in mind, Manager Fragoso stated the finishing details and materials in areas such as the bathroom and kitchen would also follow suit. Councilman Garbarino stated projects as ambitious as this were exactly what he wanted to see for the Downtown revitalization. Vice Mayor Addiego noted a full scale conversation needed to be had regarding parking issues. He questioned why there was a need for any spaces at all when there would be a commercial parking structure available across the street. He wasn't sure the Council and Planning were on the same page in this instance. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING AUGUST 19, 2009 MINUTES PAGE 5 Attorney Mattas asked Council if they would like to provide direction to Planning for a possible Zoning Code update and revisit the item at a later Council meeting. Councilman Mullin agreed that the discussion was necessary. Council was agreeable to Attorney Mattas' suggestion. Manager Fragoso stated if she was hearing willingness from Council, she could run two (2) sets of plans and push for more units with the current number of available spaces. Mayor Matsumoto stated she would like to see a stronger design element on the Fourth Lane side. Manager Fragoso stated she would keep Council updated as designs take shape through Friday memos or the Housing Subcommittee. Councilman Gonzalez wished to make a final comment on the parking issue and stated residents could possibly park across the street. Attorney Mattas believed a parking variance would be required and perhaps Council should hold off on further comments as it may come before them at a later date. Mayor Matsumoto stated the Parking Place Commission must be included in all discussion and not be side-stepped. Adjournment. Being no further business, Mayor/Chairperson Matsumoto adjourned the meeting at 8:33 p.m. Submitted by: Anna M. Brown Deputy Clerk City of South San Francisco Appr ve Karyl atsumoto Mayor/Chairperson City and Redevelopment Agency of South San Francisco SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING AUGUST 19, 2009 MINUTES PAGE 6