Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10.19.2020 Regular & PC Minutes @5:00MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE � y HOUSING STANDING COMMITTEE OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND c9lIF0PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, California 94083 MONDAY, OCTOBER 19, 2020 5:00 p.m. Teleconference via Zoom Housing Standing Committee conducted this meeting in accordance with California Governor Newsom 's Executive Orders N-25-20 and N-29-20 and COVID-19 pandemic protocols. CALL TO ORDER 5:02 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Vice Mayor Addiego, Councilmember Matsumoto, Planning Commission Vice Chair Evans, Planning Commissioners Faria and Shihadeh. AGENDA REVIEW None. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION Motion to approve the Minutes from the meeting on September 16, 2019. Motion — Planning Commission Faria / Second — Planning Commissioner Shihadeh to approve the Minutes from the meeting of September 16, 2019. Item was approved unanimously. 2. Study session for a Planned Unit Development consisting of 13 single family dwelling units with attached accessory dwelling units at 360 and 364 Alta Vista Drive. (Stephanie Skangos, Associate Planner) Associate Planner Skangos presented the item to the Housing Standing Committee (HSC) and recommended the HSC receive the staff report and provide input regarding the proposed Planned Unit Development at 360 and 364 Alta Vista Drive. She stated that on September 9, 2020, Morris Architecture submitted an application on behalf of William F. Adasiewiicz for a Planned Unit Development which consisted of merging four (4) parcels into one (1) and constructing 14 single- family dwelling units with attached accessory dwelling units (ADUs). The proposal had since been revised to include 13 single-family dwelling units (12 units to be combined as duplexes for a total of seven (7) structures) with attached ADUs and on-site open space. The seven (7) structures would be accessed by a one-way private street that wrapped around the development site. Three (3) areas of common open space were proposed, including a central walkway that accesses the front yard and main entry of each dwelling unit. Two (2) off-street parking spaces, one (1) covered and one (1) uncovered, were provided at the rear of each unit; entry to the ADUs would also be accessed from the rear. Associate Planner Skangos advised the proposed attached ADUs, one (1) per single-family dwelling unit, were consistent with Government Code regulating ADUs and the City's ADU Ordinance. The proposal also complied with the City's Inclusionary Housing Ordinance; 15 percent of the 13 single- family dwelling units, for a total of two (2) units, would be designated as affordable units. Associate Planner Skangos stated the Design Review Board (DRB) reviewed the initial proposal of 14 single-family dwelling units on October 15, 2019 and requested that several site planning and design issues be addressed, including pedestrian access and circulation, lack of architectural articulation and visual interest in side elevations, and concerns of overdevelopment of the site. The DRB reviewed revised plans on February 18, 2020, which included a reduction in number of units to 13 single-family dwelling units, 12 of which were proposed as duplexes within seven (7) structures, more accessible open space on-site, and clarification on both pedestrian and vehicular circulation. Although the DRB liked the overall revised design concept, there were still comments regarding too many design styles for the proposed porch columns, lack of architectural articulation and visual interest for the elevations of the units along Alta Vista Drive, separation between pedestrian and vehicular access, and landscaping along the central spine. On September 15, 2020, the DRB reviewed a subsequent revision to plans. The DRB felt that the applicant had adequately addressed all their comments and recommended approval of the proposed project with some minor comments regarding landscaping. Ryan Morris, Developer gave a brief overview of the development which included that the zoning for the property would allow up to eight (8) units per acre and the site was on 1.5 acres which netted about 13.4 units possible. Mr. Morris stated that most of the properties were on a gentle slope and all very buildable. The square footage of each unit would be around 1,790 square feet for the main house, plus 550 square feet for the ADU, and 220 square feet for the garage totaling just over 2,500 square feet for each unit. Mr. Morris advised the units would have a paved pathway between the units with plants on either side. Councilmember Matsumoto inquired whether a firetruck would have sufficient space in the development to turn around if needed. Mr. Morris confirmed there would be enough room due to the U-shaped driveway which allowed firetrucks to make a loop and continue around the driveway and exit out the other end. JOINT HOUSING STANDING COMMITTEE MEETING OCTOBER 19, 2020 MINUTES PAGE 2 Planning Commission Vice Chair Evans stated that she preferred the single home concept in terms of not feeling that it was a larger development that it really was. She believed the DRB would prefer more open space which drove the decision for a duplex setting. Principal Planner Rozzi clarified that the design aspect was what drove the redesign of the project primarily. He stated that open space had to be accessible, which added some complications related to design. Councilmember Matsumoto asked how many parking spaces were assigned per unit. Associate Planner Skangos confirmed there would be two (2) parking spaces per unit, one (1) covered and one (1) uncovered which was typical for a single family residence of that size. Planning Commissioner Shihadeh stated he liked the design and architecture of the units. He inquired whether there was a fire issue initially on the original design which prevented fire trucks from easily maneuvering at the site. Principal Planner Rozzi stated there would not be a fire issue as long as the homes were at least three (3) feet apart to allow a firefighter with equipment to pass through. He identified that the street design did take some redesign to strike a balance between a pedestrian pathway that felt safe and a road that could be used by an emergency vehicle. He couldn't recall specifics but would report back to Planning Commissioner Shihadeh after conducting some research. Planning Commissioner Shihadeh had concerns on parking with ADUs not requiring any parking. He stated the City was currently facing a major challenge with neighborhoods pertaining to parking. Planning Commissioner Shihadeh believed a family unit would have more than two (2) cars per unit. Associate Planner Skangos advised there were a couple of bus stops around the corner of the project. Per State law, regarding ADUs, additional parking spaces are not required if within a half mile walking distance from local transportation including a bus stop. Vice Mayor Addiego suggested an overflow parking lot in lieu of the open space originally designed for the project. He inquired whether staff looked at the possibility of building a center road that ended in a cul-de-sac at the project site. Mr. Morris stated they looked at that possibility at the early stages of the project but decided on the current design from a development standpoint, the utilities would be running down the center of the property for easier access rather than under the road. Councilmember Matsumoto suggested that the ADUs not be part of the BMRs. Her preference would be to designate a number of units as BMR to keep better track of funding. She asked whether this project would ever go before City Council or just the Planning Commission. Principal Planner Rozzi stated that the project could go before the City Council for the condo subdivision map and if the BMR agreement was non-traditional. He added that it could also go before City Council because staff was treating the project as a Planning Development so there would be a General Plan Amendment that would be going before City Council. Vice Mayor Addiego inquired whether it would be possible for the Planning Commission or the City Council to require some guest parking in a project like this. Principal Planner Rozzi advised staff JOINT HOUSING STANDING COMMITTEE MEETING OCTOBER 19, 2020 MINUTES PAGE 3 envisioned guest parking at the site but lost some on street parking due to fire requirements. Mr. Adasiewiicz believed the property had four (4) parking spaces for guests at the back of the property. He added that in front of the property, across the street there were two (2) churches which were vacant all the time except for Friday's and Sunday's. Principal Planner Rozzi confirmed that the City Council had the discretionary authority to require guest parking at the project site when this project goes before the City Council for the Planning Development. The Housing Standing Committee members thanked staff and the developers for their hard work and patience. ADJOURNMENT Being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 6:08 p.m. Submitted by: Gabriel R driguez, eputy City Clerk City of South San Francisco Approved by: W.A,4�7 Mark Addiego, Mayor City of South San Francisco Approved by the Housing Standing Committee: \Z / L \ / wz o JOINT HOUSING STANDING COMMITTEE MEETING OCTOBER 19, 2020 MINUTES PAGE 4