Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08.20.98 Minutes MINUTES CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 33 ARROYO DRIVE August 20, 1998 CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL / CHAIRMAN COMMENTS PRESENT: Chairman Barnett, Vice Chairman Teglia, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Baldocchi, Commissioner Honan, Commissioner Masuda ABSENT: Commissioner Romero ALSO PRESENT: Planning: City Attorney: Police: Jim Harnish Steve Carlson Susy Kalldn Mike Lappen Adam Lindgren S gt. Massoni APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR None PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 1. Economy Inn/Michael Amin, Applicant Sierra Inn Motel Partners, Owner 701 Airport Blvd. F:\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1998\082098.WPD Page 1 of 12 PUD-98-059 and Categorical Exemption Class 1, Section 15301 , Planned Unit Development to allow a two-room addition onto an existing 21 room motel with exceptions to standard parking and side yard setback requirements in accordance with SSFMC 20.24 and 20.84 Sr. Planner Kalkin presented the staff report. Lou Dell'Angela, 1818 Gilbreth, Burlingame spoke on behalf of the applicant. He indicated that Mr. Amin and Mr. Perner were available to respond to any design issues. He spoke of the recent beautification efforts by the City on Airport Boulevard by planting trees, which in part was intended to encourage businesses to upgrade their properties. He stated that in his opinion this is the first step in that direction, and if approved, win encourage other businesses to follow suit. He stated that the applicant is in agreement with the conditions of approval, and was available to answer questions. Commissioner Honan asked the number of employees. Mr. Amin responded that they have three full time employees including the manager. Chairman Barnett asked if there was anyone who would like to speak for or against the item, being none, he closed the public hearing and turned it over to the Commission. Vice Chairman Teglia requested that the architect provide information on landscaping and improvements. The architect, Ronald Perner, 1849 Bayshore Highway, Burlingame provided details on their efforts to improve the appearance through landscaping, elevations, and other details. He addressed the issue of parking exception request, citing the reason as a need to comply with handicap requirements. Vice Chairman Teglia asked about plans for the proposed landscape changes. Mr. Perner stated that they did not have plans available for the landscaping, adding that a landscape architect would evaluate the area to improve it in the best possible way. He added that the applicant is attempting to insure that the building is totally upgraded and provides a clean fresh new appearance, and landscaping is a part of that. Chairman Barnett asked the architect to provide further details on the location of the new rooms and extension. Vice Chairman Teglia asked staff if parking counts had been conducted on occupants who may have parked on surrounding streets. Staff responded that it would be extremely difficult to ascertain that, however existing parking spaces within the site were closer than parking on the street. He asked if the original Use Permit had provisions for landscaping, and asked if the current landscaping is in poor condition. Staff responded that it is in need of upgrading, but in fairly good condition. He stated that he likes the idea of improving the structure, but expressed a concern that pUD's are being over utilized. He also expressed a concern with the parking F:\File Cabinet\01d PC\working\minutes\1998\082098.WPD Page 2 of 12 situation. He stated that his idea of redevelopment was not a building that was built in 1980, and that the redevelopment area was put in place for a different reason. He stated he was not sure that improving an existing structure, that should be improved, justifies a PUD. Commissioner Honan agreed with Vice Chairman Teglia, adding that she was very concerned with the lack of parking. She added that if the establishment filled up, there was no other option but to park but on the street. She asked if staff could provide a different view. Staff responded that parking analysis have shown that the employees are there during day time hours, while the patrons of the motel are there at night. Commissioner Honan stated that she did not agree with that concept. She also asked, if the additional two rooms are not approved, would the improvements to the facility and landscaping still be done. Mr. Amin responded that he was concerned at the focus being placed on the landscaping rather than the overall project. He added that they are trying to improve a property that has aged, including the landscaping. He stated that pedestrian circulation through the neighborhood cuts through his property causing the landscaping to suffer a lot of wear and tear. He further added that the original landscaping scheme did not wear well, and they are evaluating it for material that will be more adaptable to the area. He responded to the issue of parking by stating that he agreed with staff that most of the customers leave by 7:00 or 8:00 in the morning and invited them to visit the lot or he could provide pictures taken during the day which would prove that the lot during the day has very few cars. He responded to Commissioner Honan's question by stating that without the additional two rooms, the improvements would not be economically justifiable. He added that the design is reasonable and straight forward, and based on actions taken by staff and the Commission over the last year and a half, this is well below what the approval process has been with other new hotels. Mr. Dell'Angela added clarification to the parking issue by adding that not only have they provided a two week study of actual count, but the City has also contracted out with consultants that verify the parking ratio in the current hotel/motel business is lower than what was previously considered reasonable and this project goes beyond that and would allow for a cushion. Mr. Amin added another point of clarification regarding the concern for the employees, stating that they tend to hire local employees within the neighborhood, and have a minimal turn over, and in terms of demand today, those employees walk to work. Vice Chairman Teglia asked why the landscaping was not maintained before. Mr. Amin responded that it was his position that the landscaping has been maintained. He directed attention to the problem with the area being a downward slope corner lot, and when the City expanded their storm drain system, the water caused the topsoil to erode. He stated that the landscaping in the front is pretty well maintained, and added that they have a gardener that comes twice a week for maintenance. F:\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1998\082098.WPD Page 3 of 12 Vice Chairman Teglia stated part of the justification for the project is improvement of landscaping which he would expect should have been maintained from the beginning. Mr. Amin responded that in his opinion the landscaping has not been neglected, but he is in agreement that it is in need of upgrading. Chairman Barnett added that his feelings are that the landscaping should be maintained regardless of the improvements or addition of more rooms. He stated that if the attitude is such that a property will be upgraded in exchange for additional rooms, that attitude would not fly. Commissioner Baldocchi stated that the landscaping is not overgrown with weeds, adding that it is run down and could have been maintained better. Mr. Barnett agreed that it is not totally blighted. Mr. Amin responded that knowing the external forces which caused the original problems, he believed that they could do a better job not. He apologized if he gave a different impression. Chairman Barnett reiterated that the Commission would like to see the upgrade done regardless, adding that he understood economic constraints, however it was his opinion that properties should always be maintained. Mr. Amin stated that in terms of maintenance they believe the property is a standard AAA property, but they would like to do better in order to compete with the newer hotels. Commissioner Honan asked for clarification on whether the two employees live in South City, and whether they took a bus or walked. Mr. Amin responded that they both live in South City, and they both walk. Commissioner Sim cited his concerns, and asked if staff could respond to the issue of past precedence set on other projects where the ratio was less than current standards, he asked for clarification on traffic study that was conducted which references "Harry", and asked if that was the hotel manager. He was concerned that it if that were the case it might create a conflict. He also asked the Assistant City Attorney to respond to the requirements for ADA. Ms. Kalkin responded that the reference to "Harry" is the hotel manager and cited two similar facilities approved by the Planning Commission 1995. Mr. Lindgren responded that the ADA standards are currently being researched in response to previous questions by the Commission. He stated that he would be prepared to provide a full discussion on that issue either at the next Terrabay meeting or the following meeting, adding that he is aware that public facilities have ADA requirements and provisions under state law which provide for specific handicap access and ramps, but could not respond to whether a hotel room has to meet those requirements. F:\File Cabinet\Old PC\ working\minutes\1998\082098. WPD Page 4 of 12 Commissioner Sim stated that until the City Attorney provides a clearer indication on the standards for the project in terms of ADA requirements, he was not in a position to make a determination tonight and would suggest that the item be continued unless the applicant was on a time schedule. He added that he wanted to insure that fairness is projected and the decisions are made on facts rather than emotions. He asked for a clarification on the parking study to insure that it is unbiased, and on the ADA requirements. Mr. Dell'Angela asked that the Commission look at the entire picture. He stated that they would prefer continuance rather than denial, but cited reasons why the project should be approved tonight. Vice Chairman Teglia asked staff about reasons behind mitigation measure ordinarily associated with a PUD's, and whether that applied to this PUD. Ms. Kalkin responded that staff attempted to address that by imposition of condition to require upgrade landscaping throughout the site. Vice Chairman Teglia stated that he felt it was great that the motel is being upgraded and he was not totally against it, however he added that he thought staff is wielding the PUD too much. Chief Planner Harnish stated that he understood Commissioner Teglia' s concern. He explained that the project originally came in it was proposed as a variance. He added that since a variance has very specific findings, based on physical impediments to the property, which could not be applied in this case. He added that the only other option was to consider the PUD as a way to make a slight variation from the standards, adding that he agreed that there was not a significant quid pro quo, that is normally found, however in staff's judgement the variations were considered slight and the improvements were significant enough where they felt that it could be justified as a PUD, adding that the Commission could exercise their independent judgement on it. Vice Chairman Teglia added that he understood but felt that standards should be higher and justification should not be given for something that should be expected. He added that he felt that Economy Inn or any other business would do some upgrading to their building as a normal course of business, and added that if this were to go through he would look for something additional beyond the landscaping, perhaps additional tree planting on the sidewalk area or something to justify it. Commissioner Masuda stated that he visited the site today around 2:30 p.m. and on Cypress and Pine there was not a parking space available. He added that he likes the improvements, and commented that the landscape would need to be replaced, but had reservations on losing two parking spaces. Commissioner Sim stated that he had also visited the site both inside and out today around 1 :00 p.m. and saw a lot of vacant parking spaces in the parking lot. He added that the problem is with trucks, freight forwarding, and all the other activities on that street. He stated that the site is a very difficult site, and the proposed modifications will be an improvement to the site. He stated F:\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1998\082098.WPD Page 5 of 12 that in response to the landscape issue, the Commission is looking for a landscape plan. He asked staff to respond to the Design Review comments and other issues. Ms. Kalkin responded. Commissioner Baldocchi asked if they would like to continue it to the September 3, 1998 meeting to allow time to address the landscape and parking issues. Following some discussions, it was determined that the September 3, 1998 meeting would not provide sufficient time to resolve the items in question. Vice Chairman Teglia moved that it be continued to the September 17, 1998 meeting. Mr. Harnish asked if Commissioner Sim wanted additional verification in terms of the traffic survey. Mr. Sim responded that not necessarily. Ms. Kalkin added that the results of that survey were also played out in a formal parking demand analysis prepared by an independent consultant for the two hotels referenced earlier, and that study could be provided. Mr. Harnish suggested that staff also could do some spot checks. Commissioner Honan requested that plans for the improved landscape be provided. Motion-Teglia/Second-Baldocchi-approved by unanimous voice vote to continue to the September 17, 1998 meeting. Approved by majority voice vote. ADMINISTRA TIVE BUSINESS 2. Items from Staff a. Study Session Oyster Point Marina Resort - General and Specific Plan Amendments to allow land use changes including a floating hotel in areas designated as Open Space, Precise Plan allowing a phased commercial office and hotel development, and a Tentative Parcel Map allowing several parcels to be reconfigured. Mr. Carlson presented the staff report. Mr. David Watson, representing King Ventures provided information on the property and the proposed project. He spoke about the proposed physical design of the buildings, landscaping, and traffic circulation proposals for the area and improvements to Oyster Point Boulevard and Marina Boulevard. He spoke of pedestrian and bicycle access through the bay trails, walkways, and elevated boardwalks in front of the property allowing people the opportunity to move along the bay side of the property. He spoke of working with the Harbor District as a component of the project. He added that what they are processing is a master plan for the entire development and precise plans for Phase I which includes three components: 1) A 34-unit hotel facility with a 5,000 square foot lounge and small meeting room area, 2) Renovation and relocation of the Marina Cafe, 3) 45 units of hotel condominium units which they are hoping to create a condominium ownership, and they are intended to serve families and traveling businesses. He F:\File Cabinet\Old PC\ working\minutes\1998\082098. WPD Page 6 of 12 added that this component would be deferred to a later time in order to work out more specific details. He added that the remainder of the project moves out toward the bay, and with the proposed changes, filled bay area could be used for additional foot print to accommodate a restaurant and hotel rooms. He stated that the third phase is the area that will require BCDC and other jurisdiction's approval and one that will be dealt with once a conceptual approval is 1m own from the City's perspective, adding that they have been speaking with BCDC throughout the process, but nothing definitive can be determined until a real application is submitted. He concluded by providing information about the parking analysis and their proposals to staff to meet parking requirements. Commissioner Masuda asked if there were plans to install a restroom and shower in the vicinity of the Rod and Gun Club to accommodate the people going to the beach. He also asked if the hotel parking could be used for people going to the beach. He asked if Section 5 would remain a park. Vice Chairman Teglia asked if there were plans to upgrade the beach. The developer responded that beyond public access improvements and the restroom there had not been dialogue about specific improvements but added that they are open to it. Chairman Barnett asked if Phase I is a specific plan at this point and Phase II and ill general type planning without specific plans. He asked if parking should be addressed now or now or later, adding that he thought it was a problem and should be addressed from the start. Mr. Carlson responded. The applicant reassured the Commission that they intend to comply with the parking needs due to their past experience with the consequences of not having enough parking. Vice Chairman Teglia asked if they have commitments for who will run the hotels and restaurants. He asked if the public parking for access to the bay as required by BCDC had been factored in. He asked if the existing pier would be moved to accommodate the floating hotel adding that he is excited about the floating hotel, however he was concerned of eliminating slips, and would be opposed to a two story hotel on the water. He asked staff what the expiration was for the agreement with Airport regarding the noise and residential use in that area, and he asked for clarification on the ownership on the lease. Mr. Carlson responded to the issue of the airport agreement. The applicant responded that they will operate the hotels, with the exception of the condominium hotels component which offers the investment approach and is different, however with that component they have requirement that those hotels be managed through their entity. He stated that they own the restaurants, and they will seek either local interested parties or other outside reputable restauranteurs to operate the facilities adding that it was premature at this point to F:\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1998\082098. WPD Page 7 of 12 provide a definitive response to that issue. Commissioner Honan asked if the applicant could provide more specific details on what the BCDC is discouraging. She also asked if considerations have been given to the wind conditions in the area. The applicant and Mr. Harnish responded. Commissioner Baldocchi asked how far the hotel on site 1 is from the 100 foot bay shoreline Chairman Barnett stated that he thought it was a good project and would like to see it go forward. Other Commissioners agreed. Vice Chairman Teglia stated that the only problem he could foresee would be the 30 unit hotel on the water, but overall he thought it was a good plan. Commissioner Masuda stated that BCDC has a shadow requirement, however he felt it was possible since there are two existing piers. Commissioner Sim expressed his excitement for the design, he encouraged that the pedestrian theme recommended for the linear park be expanded to the street, giving the pedestrian experience on the front side. He also asked that further landscaping be considered on the street front both the Oyster Point and the other area. He added that the floating hotel may require persistence in terms of convincing BCDC, or it may need to be explored further to make it work. He also asked staff to verify that the number of General Plan Amendments would not be a problem. He also asked the applicant to consider the quality of site plans that are presented, adding that he would like to see a three dimensional, high quality design. The City Attorney and Mr. Harnish responded to the question about the number of General Plan Amendments. Chairman Barnett stated that they would like to see the plan go forward. Vice Chairman Teglia asked if staff or Mr. Grenell could provide updates on the other parcels. Mr. Carlson responded. Chairman Barnett stated that he wanted to discuss the merit of continuing the General Plan discussions until Commissioner Romero was in attendance. Mr. Harnish stated that the project was four months behind and it had been tentatively scheduled for the September 17th, however if the Commission was concerned with having the full commission available he could understand. He added that there were members present in the audience who were here for that item. Assistant City Attorney pointed out that Commissioner Baldocchi had informed him of a F:\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1998\082098.WPD Page 8 of 12 situation this afternoon which led him to conclude that she should not participate in those discussions this evening. He added that if the Commission wished to proceed, with the item he would giving a presentation on why she should not participate. He added that the facts are now being obtained to ascertain whether she will be able to participate in future discussions in that area. Vice Chairman Teglia stated that it had been scheduled for tonight, and some people had come, and he asked if Commissioner Romero had requested that it be continued. Chairman Barnett asked for if the Commission could support continuing the item, particularly now with two Commissioners not being able to participate. Commissioner Honan stated that if members of the general public were here and had something to say, she would like to hear that it it can be done. However she agreed that it should be continued until Commissioner Romero was in attendance. Mr. Harnish stated that there was a member in the audience who wanted to speak on the Oyster Point Marina project. Mr. Peter Grenell, General Manager for the San Mateo County Harbor District stated that he wanted to update the Commission on a couple of items. He stated that Board of Harbor Commissioners approved in concept, the plan that was presented this evening. He indicated that he would be sending a letter to the applicant, the City Manager, and Mr. Harnish. He pointed out that at this time the applicant does not have a lease to develop the site, and those negotiations are ongoing at this time. He added that they anticipate an agreement will be presented to their Board by the third week in September for consideration. He went into further details regarding the areas that they are looking at relating to the sites. He added that the proposal to the applicant is that the lease will consist of three leases for each parcel, and the totality of the leases will be for the applicant's phase 1 only. He provided further details on parking flexibility, landscaping and public areas. He added that he has had discussions with City Manager regarding the overall future vision for Oyster Point with all the issues in progress. He added that the intent for development calls for a master plan development for Oyster Point. He added that some grant applications are being sought with developer participation. He spoke of the RaiserlHilton proposal and similar collaborations, some of which will be written into the leases. He added that they have a final agreement for the design of a bait shop facility which they hope to have in operation by the third week of October. He said they are looking at bringing in Commodore Dining Yachts which have been given permits and license agreement by the Harbor District. He spoke of the collaboration under way between the City and the Harbor District to develop ferry and water taxi service in and out of Oyster Point, adding that a potential grant source for federal money for a ferry terminal. He spoke of the improvements through the widening of Oyster Point Boulevard being a major improvement that will benefit the entire area. He stated that the Marine Center is being looked at for enhancement. He added that as a comfort level, the agreement used for the RaiserlHilton is F:\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1998\082098.WPD Page 9 of 12 one where similar issues have already been resolved to both the City and the District's satisfaction and could be used as a template. He added if that lease is acceptable to this applicant, it would expedite the lease. Commissioner Masuda asked where the Commodore Yacht would be docked, and the duration of the permits, and suggested that the vessel be placed next to the floating hotel. Mr. Grenell responded to Commissioner Masuda's questions and comments. Vice Chairman Teglia commented that the area by the harbor master could provide room for parking, and with considerations for ferry service the best course may be to relocate the fuel dock and have the end pier be the ferry dock. He also asked if stacked storage had been considered. b. General Plan - Preferred Plan presentation Chairman Barnett asked about the appropriateness of allowing the audience to speak. Commissioner Sim asked if the members of the audience be permitted to speak under the oral communications. Chariman Barnett recommended continuance and then if anyone from the audience chose to speak they could do that under oral communications. Commissioner Sim asked that in the future, the potential speakers should be allowed to speak up front. Motion-Masuda/Second-Sim - following discussions to continue to the regular meeting of September 17, 1998. Approved by majority voice vote. c. Minor Use Permit (MUP-98-065) Approval-714 Larch Ave. Chairman Barnett asked for an explanation as to why this item was on the. Mr. Harnish responded that it was informational only. Mr. Harnish informed the Commission of: · South San Francisco Days in the Park September 19th at Orange Park. · He announced the new addition to the Planning Division staff, Bertha Hernandez. · That the comment period for the Terrabay EIR had closed and the comments are being reviewed. He also informed them that he has a conference and would not be at the next Special Meeting. Assistant City Attorney thanked Commissioner Baldocchi for bringing the potential conflict to his attention and informed the Commission that he would welcome any requests for research of potential conflicts from any of the Commissioners and he would attempt to resolve those issues as quickly as possible to allow them to participate. F:\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1998\082098.WPD Page 10 of 12 3. Items from Commission Commissioner Masuda asked if Ong Pin restaurant could be asked to get a larger garbage can. Vice Chairman Teglia suggested that Commission recognize Steve Carlson and Jim Harnish for their presentation to Council regarding the Summerhill project. He asked for clarification on what appeared to be a problem with the last study session where the applicant stated that staff did not have the appropriate information. He suggested that as an aid to identify potential conflict problems for the Commissioners, the City Attorney rnight consider having a map. He also asked about he previous report on the sign at gas station across from Sees, and the shack in the rear of the pizza place on the corner Orange Avenue and EI Camino Real. Mr. Harnish responded to the issue of the study session, by adding that the study session is a time for the developer to present the proposal to the Commission, and any material such as that would be the responsibility of the developer to have at the study session. He added that the information that the developer was referring to is information that staff presents to the Commission when the application is presented. Vice Chairman Teglia suggested that in the future if the developer is not prepared, that the study session be canceled once that is determined. Commissioner Honan raised a concern with the stands approved for Rita Hernandez, and now she has a folding table where fruit is being placed. She asked, that since part of the condition of approval for Economy Inn was the landscaping, should staff have required them to have landscape plans. Mr. Harnish responded that notice has been given to that Hernandez establishment as well as the other one that situation and other problems with crates. He stated that normally the conditions for landscaping require that they come back with plans subject to the review and approval by staff, and something like this would not normally require that they have those plans finalized. In response to a question by Vice Chairman Teglia regarding a PUD, he stated that with regular PUD's those plans were normally available, however in this case it was addressed less formally by staff. It was not identified as a critical issue that the Commission would be that concerned. Commissioner Baldocchi asked for a diagram for Phase ill of Terrabay including the hook ramps. Vice Chairman Teglia stated that he would like more information on the hook ramps. Chairman Barnett stated that he would plan to address that issue at the meeting. 4. Items from the Public None 5. Adjourn F:\File Cabinet\Old PC\ working\minutes\1998\082098. WPD Page 11 of 12 Motion-Sim/Second-Teglia to adjourned. Meeting adjourned 10:25 p.m. Jim Harnish~')eCre y Planning Co miss n City of South San rancisco ~eC~S;- Planning Commission City of South San Francisco JH:is NEXT MEETING: Special Meeting August 27, 1998 _ Regular Meeting September 3, 1998, Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA. F:\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1998\082098.WPD Page 12 of 12