Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2-20-18 Final Minutes (2)DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO DATE: February 20, 2018 TIME: 4:00 PM MEMBERS PRESENT: Nilmeyer, Nelson, Williams, Harris & Vieira MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Ryan Wassum, Associate Planner Justin Shiu, Consultant Planner Patricia Cotla, Planning Technician 1.OWNER ARE-San Francisco No 65 LLC APPLICANT Terezia Nemeth/ ARE-San Francisco No 65 LLC ADDRESS 201 Haskins Way PROJECT NUMBER P17-0096: ZA18-0001, UP18-0001. TDM18-0001, RZ18-0001, GPA18-0002, EIR18-0002 PROJECT NAME New R&D Building (Case Planner: Ryan Wassum) DESCRIPTION Rezoning and General Plan Amendment for 201 Haskins Way and 400-450 East Jamie Court, Use Permit, Design Review, Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan, and Draft Environmental Impact Report to construct a two-story 25,000 sq. ft. building (400-450 East Jamie Court), a five-story 290,765 sq. ft. office/ R&D building and a five-level parking garage on a 6.45-acre site (201 Haskins Way) in the Mixed-Industrial (MI) Zoning District in accordance with Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code. The Board had the following comments: 1. The Board liked the new proposed buildings located on the 201 Haskins Way property, with the following revisions and recommendations: a. Add a mid-block crosswalk to connect to the 400-450 E. Jamie Court campus. b. Prioritize pedestrian access between the sites where a drop off appears to take up all the space. Consider making the drop off part of a plaza space rather than a roadway. c. Reduce the size of the mechanical screening on the rooftop and choose a different material that better integrates with the buildings. d. The site is currently lacking active and open space areas for employee use; revise the site plan to incorporate enjoyable areas for outdoor dining, recreational and social use. e. Activate the area west of the parking garage by creating a central space and plaza for employees to congregate; incorporate outdoor furniture and sitting areas into the plans. f. Include renderings of active spaces, as well as rooftop terrace areas. The DRB would like to visualize how these spaces are being activated. 2. The Board did not like the newly proposed 25,000 sq. ft. building located at 400-450 East Jaime Court, and would like the following revisions: a. The new building has an outdated appearance and does not tie into the existing 400- 450 E. Jamie Court buildings; the new building should blend the style of the existing buildings with the new modern buildings proposed at 201 Haskins. b. The new building should incorporate similar colors, materials, clean lines, and an abundance of glass to help modernize the look of the building and tie it into the newly proposed buildings across the street. c. Street trees should be implemented along the front and sides of the property (currently no street trees are proposed). 3. The Board liked the proposed garage, subject to the following revision: a. Consider using marine grade stainless steel that will weather better than the alternative. 4. Landscape Plan: include an easy to read plan, calling out all proposed trees and plant species. The landscape plan should also reflect the following: a. Remove the following species and replace with local and drought-tolerant plants/ shrubs: i. Pinus Pinea due to invasive surface roots ii. Maytenus Boria susceptible to frost iii. Cistus Salviifolius requires fast draining sandy soil/short lifespan iv. Aroctostaphylos subject to disease/short lifespan b. Site-wide, incorporate larger trees that scale with the buildings (at least 3-stories high), and create additional variation of shrubs, plants, and grasses that will help improve the visual imagery. (Please note, all renderings should be updated to reflect changes) c. All street frontages, including Haskins and E. Jamie Court, should incorporate street trees that are adequately spaced (not too far apart). d. For proper tree growth, utilize a minimum of 12’x12’ structured soil pits. e. Where feasible, use more permeable paving areas for water retention that will reduce pressure to take up landscape space with bio-retention ponds, that can be developed as active and outdoor space for employees. 5. In the plan set resubmittal, the applicant should also include the following: a. Circulation for fire access and emergency vehicles. b. Trash location/ pickup areas (to be reviewed by Scavenger). c. Pedestrian circulation plan (including campus circulation and access to the Bay Trail). d. Wind Study (for usability of active and open space areas). Resubmittal required. 2 OWNER Zijun Xu APPLICANT Ted Pratt ADDRESS 7 Chico Court PROJECT NAME 2nd Story Addition DESCRIPTION “Resubmittal” - Design Review to construct a 2nd story addition to an existing single family dwelling at 7 Chico Court in the Low Density Residential (RL-8) Zoning District in accordance with Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code and determination that the project is exempt from CEQA, per Class 1, Section 15301. The Board had the following comments: 1. The Board liked the revised plans. 2. All the windows should match & be trimmed out to match existing dwelling. 3. In the front yard, select a tree species that will survive the SSF elements, consider an Evergreen species Recommend Approval with Conditions.