Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Minutes 1984-02-22 MINUTES THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO Regular Meeting February 22, 1984 TIME: 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Community Room, Municipal Services Building CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Addiego called the South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman Mark N. Adiego, Vice Chairman Richard A. Haffey, Members Emanuele N. Damonte and Gus Nicolopulos Absent: Member Roberta Cerri Teglia Also present: Executive Director/Secretary C. Walter Birkelo, Assistant Secretary Louis Dell'Angela, Agency Treasurer Barry Lipton, Mr. John Aguilar and Mr. John PelDo, representing Homart .... Development Company A~ ~DA REVIEW: Executive Director Birkelo stated that there were no additions nor deletions to the evening's agenda. APPROVAL OF Vice Chairman Haffey moved, seconded by Member Damonte, that the Minutes MINUTES: of the regular meeting of January 11, 1984, be approved. Motion, as made and seconded, was regularly carried; Member Teglia, absent. APPROVAL OF Member Damonte moved, seconded by Vice Chairman Haffey, that the claims BILLS: as submitted for payment in the amount of $461,724.55, February 22, 1984, be approved. Motion, as made and seconded, was regularly carried; Member Teglia, absent. REVIEW OF GATE- The next item for the Board's attention was the review of Gateway WAY BOULEVARD Boulevard Landscaping Plan. LANDSCAPING PLAN Executive Director Birkelo recounted the Agency Board's review of the over- all landscaping plans for the project area and the amendment to the way Gateway Boulevard butted into East Grand Avenue. To improve that area, Homart Development Company has redesigned the entry way on Oyster Point Boulevard and East Grand Avenue, and he stated that Mr. Aguilar was present to explain'the design concept. MEMBER TEGLIA Member Teglia appeared present at 7:09 p.m. PP~ENT REVIEW OF GATE- Mr. Aguilar, Development Director, stated that there were two p~fposes for W~-BOULEVARD the reexamination of both the Gateway and East Grand Avenue, and Gateway ~ DSCAPING and Oyster. Point Boulevard: 1) realignment dictated by the redesign of F N potential extension of Gateway Boulevard; 2) a~matter of equal importance - (bontinued) the immediate impact of the entry way into the park from Grand Avenue. He reiterated the action of the Boardin its approval of the Master Plan for the 117 acres which included the landscape plan and which plan has been interpreted i.nto the construction contract currently under way by O.C. Jones and financed by the Assessment District. He further explained the reexamination of the design that was included in the construction for both OySter Point Boulevard and East Grand Avenue. He stated that attention was focused on the entrancewal.1 and that this part was still under study. He introduced Mr. John Pelgo, in charge of the off-site architecture and all construction activities, to further comment on the redesign of the actual landscape areas, planting scheme, and grading scheme. Mr. Pelgo remarked that they have done some minor redesign to the entry ways at East Grand Avenue and Oyster Point Boulevard at Gateway Boulevard, but that they have not changed the area of the landscaping. He stated that they have made some modifications to the grading and have added some planting with no planting having been removed. From the artistic rendering, he described the proposed work which would include scooping of ground to form a mound which would be a backdrop for the entry monument. He next described the plantings. In answer to the BOard's inquiry, Mr. Pelgo stated that the mound will do several things: will help to conceal some high-tension wires transversing the site, will act as a backdrop for the monument yet to be selected, and will create more interest and add more greenery to that area. The Board questioned the compatability of the landscaping with a monument not yet decided Mr. Pelgo assured it would be integrated. The Board conceded that the mounding was not a problem; but because it is a monument- type sign, they would be very interested in knowing how the sign relates. Mr. Aguilar stated that Homart would accelerate their schedule on the entry wall; that they had a conceptual agreement in-house on the form of the wall and monument; that they were addressing the materials and colors and would be back to the Board with a complete package. He requested that the contractor be permitted to work with them to fine-grade the area. Chairman Addiego stated that he recognized that the sign was a separate situation and would agree with Mr. Aguilar's proposal and leave an option open for the sign. Member Nicolopulos so moved, seconded by Member Teglia; motion, as made and seconded, was unanimously approved. PRELIMINARY After an introduction by Mr. Birkelo, Mr. Carl Wohlquist, architect for ARCHITECTURAL~RE- Granada Royale Hotels, explained that they had attempted to incorporate VIEW GRANADA the main theme of the center into their design. He stated that this R~T--LE would be a "first" for Granada Royale because they were deviating from 2/22/84 Page 2 PRELIMINARY their typical design which is "Spanish." He commented that various things, ~RCHITECTURAL RE- i.e., colors, could be done to accommodate the amenity elements but that ~ ~ GRANADA balconies are a "must" with the Granada Royale. He described the illusion ~ ALE of space and openness, the concept developed by Mr. Wooley for the Hometels. (vvntinued) He stated that they had full architectural drawings for 348 rooms. In response to the Board's inquiries, Mr. Wohlquist explained in detail the original A-frame concept. He described the problems involved with the design and its effect on vegetation in the atrium area. He stated that it was only an experiment and Granada Royale would not consider the A-frameinany of its hotels. Member Nicolopulos praised the design presented and felt it was in the category of the finest hotels in San Francisco. Member Teglia commented on the A-frameashaving fine architectural features. She remarked that what would be approved would set the tone for the rest of the development, not matching but complimentary. Member Teglia suggested that she would like to have some professional input to simplify some of the architectural lines of the building. This suggestion was accepted by Mr. Wohlquist to soften the design and remove some decco art without changing the design. Chairman Addiego referred to the document, letter dated February 7, 1984, to Mr. Joseph W. Harris, Vice President of HOmetels Development Corporation, signed by Louis Dell'Angela, Assistant Secretary. He addressed the first paragraph as a recommendation. Assistant Secretary Dell'Angela stated that they were not asking for approval this evening only direction from the Board as to the building configuration and style. Mr. Wohlquist reiterated the Granada Royale's policy of having balconies on all of their buildings. He remarked that color treatment would soften the contours. It was the consensus of the Agency Board that'an advisory board look at the plans for suggestions but be congnizant that the Agency Board is the Design Review Board for the Agency. GOOD AND WELFARE: Chairman Addiego invited anyone in the audience to speak. No one spoke. ADJOURNMENT: Member Haffey moved, seconded by Member Nicolopulos, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion, as made and seconded, was unanimously approved. Time of adjournment: 7:55 p.m. APPROVED: Mark~. Addiego,~ The Redevelopment Agency of the City of '-- -South San Francisco 2/22/84 Page 3 RLmPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, C. ~-~' " ' Director/Secretary The entries of the Redevelopment Agency meeting show the action taken by the Board to dispose of the item. Oral presentations, arguments,~and comments are recorded on tape. The tape is on file in the office of the City Manager. The docUments related to the items are on file in the office of the City Manager and available for inspection, review, and copying. 2/22/84 Page 4