Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09.02.99 Minutes CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 33 ARROYO DRIVE September 2, 1999 CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TAPE 1 The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL / CHAIR COMMENTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioner Baldocchi, Commissioner D'Angelo, Commissioner Romero, Vice Chairperson Sim and Chairperson Honan MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioner Meloni and Commissioner Teglia STAFF PRESENT: Planning Division: Thomas C. Spar"ks, Chief Planner Susy Kalkin Mike Lappen Econ. Community Dev. Director ofECD Van Duyn City Attorney: Adam Lindgren Engineering: City Engineer Cyrus Kianpour Police Dept.: Sgt. Mike Massoni AGENDA REVIEW Chief Planner Sparks explained that the Aegis parcel map was before the Commission for approval. This was brought to the Commission under a separate item because it was not ready when the first portion of the project went before the Commission. He added that Shelton Properties (item #2) would be continued. He gave a brief summary of what was on the projected agenda for the upcoming months. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Aegis Assisted Living Properties LLC, Applicant Thomas J. Callan, Jr., Owner 2280 Gellert Blvd. PM-99-027 Tentative Par"cel Map to divide a 3.9 ::t acre site into two separ"ate parcels. Motion Sim / Second Baldocchi to approve the Consent Calendar. Approved by unanimous voice vote. PUBLIC HEARING - AGENDA ITEMS 2. Shelton International Holdings, Inc Owner AMB Investment Management, L.P.-Applicant 375-389 Oyster Point Blvd. UP-99-093 and Categorical Exemption: Class 1, Section 15301 Use Permit allowing offsite parking on a multi par"cel business park in the Planned Industrial (P-I) and the Planned Commercial (P-C) zoning districts in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.24, 20.32, and 20.74. G:\File Cabinet\O ld PC\working\minutes\1999\090299.doc Page 1 of 8 (Recommend continuance to October 7, 1999) Motion Romero / Second D'Angelo to continue the item. Approved by unanimous voice vote. 3. General Plan Update City of South San Francisco Citywide GP-99-061 and EIR-99-061 Certification of Draft EIR, Review of the General Plan documents, and Planning Commission Recommendations to City Council. (Continuedfrom August 19, 1999) Chief Planner Sparks gave a description of the process that the Commission would go through. First, that the Commission take public comment, and second that the Commission have a consensus to approve the new language in blue highlight and use that consensus as a direction to staff. Public Hear'ing opened. Clark Funkhouser, 122 Second Avenue - San Mateo, was opposed to some General Plan modifications that impact his families propeliy on the north side of Sign Hill. Reasons for his opposition were: 1) The open space designation and densities proposed are not consistent with the urban nature of SSP. 2) Downzoning outlined is a full property that would be taken. 3) The designation is redundant with the use permit process, which protects the environmental issues and high slopes. He reiterated his opposition to the proposed changes, and asked the Commission to reevaluate the plan and to allow them to generate a responsible development. Fred Etzel, 4 Embarcadero Center #510, representing Ted, Carol and Keith Simas who own the Shell gas station at Hickey Boulevard and EI Camino Real. He presented the Commission with new information in regard to BART and stated that BART would create a gateway to the Airport. SSF has a unique opportunity to create a transit village that would establish SSF and will invite people to come back again. The City should maintain the existing land use designation around EI Camino Real. The San Bruno BART Station area is retail and this should be consistent for the SSF BART Station. Policy 3.3-1-13 is for the San Bruno Bari Station area it ensures the development is transit oriented, and he thought this policy should be put in for the SSF BART station. He suggested that the Commission consider preparing a Specific Plan for the SSF transit village. He also pointed out a color illustration of the Millbrae BART station in their handout and added that the Commission should take advantage of the opportunity for economic development and for urban design. He added that if these policies are adopted it would encourage big box retail to come into the area, and would become a retail wasteland. He also pointed out on an aerial map of the SSF BART station, to the extreme left is the old Macys warehouse that is owned by Costco, and to the right there is a vacant lot that is also owned by Costco He added that Costco has identified two residual sites on their plans and Costco is unclear on what they will be doing with these two sites. He proceeded to read a newsletter on land use designations. He urged the Commission not to allow a big box retail in the BART station area and asked them to encourage a transit village instead. Tim Cremin of Baker & McKenzie, 2 Embarcadero Center, was speaking on two issues: 1) TelTabay Project. They have submitted a letter in regard to the compliance of the General Plan with the Development Agreement for the project. The General Plan land use designations and policies should be made consistent with the approved Terrabay project, Development Agreement, and Specific Plan. He added that the letter discusses the specific changes that should be made consistent. 2) North slope of Sign Hill. He reiterated Mr. Funkhouser's comments in regard to the open space designation. The designation policies allow one residential unit per 20 acres and this does not provide a viable use in the City. They are concelned that the drastic downzoning will tie the owners' hands leaving them without options. Michael Valencia, 600 EI Camino Real- San Bruno, representing Golden Gate Produce Terminal. He reviewed G:\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\090299.doc Page 2 of 8 the amendments to the General Plan and is concelned with the intent not being clear. He read an article from the San Mateo times that had language from the Draft General Plan document on page 6-1-8. David Gallagher, 621 Larch A venue, stated he has lived with the TelTabay project's noise, dirt, traffic, and construction vehicles which has ended a lot of wildlife. He added that they have nearly 1,000 signatures opposing the project on Sign Hill. He stated that the owners of some parcels presented a reasonable project to staff and he thought that this was misleading because it was over 300 units. He wants this area to be open space and be made a park. He encourages the zoning designation change to open space and the one residential unit per 20-acre designation. Louis Dell' Angela, 1818 Gillbreth Road #111, wanted the comments on page 7 of the staff report to be clarified in regard to the school district. He is representing the Scopesi family in regard to the annexation of a property into SSF from Country Club. He suggested that the policy be deleted or modified. Elaine Bill, 297 Alta Vista Drive, has been under negotiations with different developers and the other owners of acres for some time. She stated that she is not against development and her neighborhood suppOlted the development in the rural neighborhood. She added that if this change is made it will render their property useless. Patti Sarracino, 624 Larch A venue, noted that the view outside her window is the north slope of Sign Hill. She stated that they are not stopping anyone from making any money but do not want anymore development on the hill. She urges the Commission to keep the one residential unit per 20 acres designation. Jackie Williams, 242 Longford Drive, questioned policy 3.12-1-3 in regard to the Serra Vista school site, which has been surplus property for five years according to the SSF Unified School District. She wants the policy changed to state that the City would keep the site zoned education purposes. Louis Dell' Angela, 1818 Gillbreth Road #111, clar"ified that the school site has not been declared surplus propelty and has been closed for some time. He added that the school boar"d has no intentions of declaring the site surplus because the enrollments might change. Public Hear"ing closed. Chief Planner Sparks responded to the comments by the public. Mr. Funkhouser, Mr..Cremin, Ms. Bill, Mr. Gallagher, and Ms. SalTacino were concerned with Sign Hill. He stated that the issue was addressed in a meeting with Mr. Funkhouser and Mr. Cremin. The CUlTent policies in the General Plan call for one dwelling unit per 10 acres, which is a general open space policy. He stated that a use permit allows a variety of other uses up to one dwelling unit per acre. He added that it is a discretionary decision not an entitlement. Mr. Etzel was correct on a number of things if the Commission chooses to do it, and that the Costco proposal is not before the Commission. He noted that the Millbrae BART station has a clearly developed plan but is not in the same category as the SSF BART station. The Millbrae station is over 100 acres and the SSF station is less than 40 acres. In the Millbrae station there is BART, CALTRAIN and Highway 101 very close, and SSF has BART only. A conceln with a transit village is having small businesses and this is something that would detract from downtown. The transit village also implies high density residential, which the Commission does not want in that area. Mr. Cremin addressed the TelTabay Development Agreement and it has the entitlements under the conditions. Mr. Valencia's concelns about the Produce Terminal will be cleared with the specific changes before the Commission. Mr. Dell' Angela's comments will be clarified and in regard to Country Club annexation the City does not want to take inappropriately developed propelty. The existing circumstance does not prevent anyone form trying to be annexed. He noted that a policy has been changed and these changes might satisfy Ms. Williams concelns. The policy allows schools and any change to this site in regard to zoning would go before the Commission and the City Council for approval. Recess taken at 8:40 p.m. Recalled to order at 8:55 p.m. G:\File Cabinet\O Id PC\working\rninutes\1999\090299.doc Page 3 of 8 Staff started with a PowerPoint presentation. . Economic Development Chief Planner Sparks stated that they were deleting the wording of putting a power center in the area of the produce terminal. Commissioner Romero stated that he liked the idea of a town center in the East of 101 ar"ea and wanted to know why this was changed. Chief Planner Sparks stated that this was not a bad idea but the way it was originally presented is not workable. Staff has tried to come up with something that is not as concentrated but encourage all developments to participate in that type of thing. Commissioner Romero asked if the intent of this policy could be accomplished when a new application is submitted. Chief Planner Sparks stated that this could be worth exploring. Commissioner Baldocchi asked if there was a traffic study done in the area, and is concerned with having these concentrated on the bay front which would add traffic. Consensus of Commission to make this change as recommended bv staff. Chief Planner Sparks pointed out some language that was in regard to private streets, which was the concern of the Commission. This allows the Commission to account for private streets and does not prohibit them. He stated that this would have to be implemented into the zoning consistency study. Commissioner Romero thought that if a private street would be considered for approval, there would be some criteria in regard to the slope. Senior Planner Kalkin stated that the City has a written policy on private streets and this policy is going to be used on calculating density. Commissioner Romero asked for a clarification on the verbiage "account for private streets". Chief Planner Sparks stated that if a private street is put in the outcome will be a greater density. They are trying to level this out so this does not occur. Commissioner Romero suggested that the language be, "the density calculations for public or private streets be based on the same criteria". Ti\.PE2 Some additional changes that were shown to the Commission were 1.) Eliminating the power center language, 2.) A new policy reflecting the existing low density residential that is in the area and us now being added at Orange and Chestnut, and 3.) Not restricting commercial designations to one area. . Downtown Sub Area Commissioner Romero stated that the business commercial classification should allow some flexibility near the San Bruno BART station. This would not be applicable for every business commercial designation but specifically for that area. Chief Planner Sparks noted that a concern was unintentionally allowing residential development East of 101, where there is a lot of this category. Commissioner Romero asked that this should specify the San Bruno BART station ar"ea. Chief Planner Sparks stated that these can be addressed when the BART area is being discussed. Commissioner D'Angelo was concelned with the intent of designating the area around the San Bruno BART station to residential. He added that a policy does not encourage this because of the noise level. Commissioner Romero added that he also wanted to address this issue. Commissioner Romero suggested that policy 2-1-17 be deleted because this area is outside the 65 CNEL contour. Chief Planner Sparks stated that the Zellerbach building has a 10 10 lease and the Airport might be controlling it through the entire period of this proposed General Plan. Commissioner Romero stated that if the area is not in the zone the possibility of the land becoming available for development is there. The mixed-use classification would not be appropriate. He added that the second paragraph of that policy stated that housing seems appropriate in a transit-oriented use but the area is entirely in the 65 db CNEL and pOliions within the 70 db CNEL. He added that the Commission was shown documentation that showed it was outside that zone. Senior Planner Kalkin stated that the diagram shows a that the area is entirely within the 65 db CNEL contour. Mr. Bhatia stated that a portion G:\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\090299.doc Page 4. of 8 of this property is outside of the 65 CNEL. He suggested adding language that specified "to the extent that the property id outside of the 65 CNEL". Commissioner Romero stated that the en'tire statement should be deleted. Chief Planner Sparks asked if Commissioner Romero wanted to delete the explanatory paragraph. Commissioner Romero stated he wanted that done and the explanatory paragraph to policy 2-1-17 was deleted. Commissioner D'Angelo asked if this would impact any agreements that the City has with the airp011. Chief Planner Sparks clarified that the City is bound by these agreements and they would not be impacted. Commissioner Romero suggested that policy 2-G-7 be revised by changing the "consider" to "encourage", and to add "to retain in centers where they would supp011 transit". Commissioner D'Angelo stated that this would also apply to the South San Francisco BART station because it is not singular but global. Chief Planner Sparks stated that it is a guiding policy in the land use section. Commissioner Romero asked if it would be a problem in the South San Francisco BART station. Commissioner Baldocchi asked if the same type of development was trying to be created at both stations Consensus of Commission to delete the exvlanatorv varaf!ravh ofvolicv 2-1-17. to chanf!e volicv 2-G-7ver Commissioner Romero's request. to leave volicv 2-1-18 and 2-1-19 as recommended bv staff. Commissioner Baldocchi was concerned with chain stores being on Grand A venue and wanted to know if the number of chain stores could be put in the downtown without having them take over the area. Chief Planner Sparks stated that it is difficult in trying to limit the types and numbers of uses in a particular area. Commissioner Baldocchi suggested having a small change to revitalize the downtown area. Vice Chairperson Sim suggested incorporating pedestrian walkways to continue the activities on Grand Avenue. Chief Planner Sparks suggested that it be discussed with policy 3.1-G-2. Vice Chairperson Sim questioned higher density in the downtown area. Chief Planner Sparks stated that this should evolve slowly and not immediately changing this. . Lindenville Sub Area Chief Planner Sparks stated that a policy has had the word "power center" removed to clarify some issues for the Golden Gate Produce Terminal. This ensures that the existing uses can stay and if they want to involve new development in the area it can be done. Consensus of Commission to leave volicies 3.2-G-3 and 3.2-1-5 as recommended bv staff. Commissioner Romero asked why the first section of 3.2-1-15 was deleted and changed to explore the feasibility. Chief Planner Sparks added that it is not a matter of eliminating a proposal and the language in red expands it. They are trying to look at expanding redevelopment in the area to contribute to solving the transp011ation issues there. There will be a much broader system to explore the feasibility. Commissioner D'Angelo asked if "explore the feasibility" versus "explore the feasibility of requiring new development" makes any difference. He wondered if "of requiring" was an important content, just to explore does not have an impact as opposed to requiring new development. Chief Planner Sparks stated that staff is looking at a requirement for new development to contribute money or something to help solve the transportation problems in the area. Having new development help itself and the whole area by improving transportation. Commissioner D'Angelo stated that this mandates whatever goes in there and they will have to pay a fair share of the cost. Chief Planner Sparks stated that the feasibility of that mandate is being explored. Commissioner Romero added that it seems flexible but the applicants in the City would be required to pay a fair share. Chief Planner Sparks added that there are a variety of mechanisms for participants in a given area to contribute to a variety of things. Consensus of Commission to leave 3.2-1-15 as recommended bv staff. G:\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\090299.doc Page 5 of 8 Chief Planner Sparks stated that 3.3-1-10 was the existing language, adding 3.3-I-IO-A has modified it. Comlnissioner Romero wanted to change the language in the section that says, "explore the feasibility including residential units into the mixed use development," should be changed to, "encourage mixed use development including residential in the business commercial zone near the San Bruno BART station." He also noted that the Zellerbach property should not be named, nor is it necessary to restrict development outside of the 70 db CNEL area due to the fact that the area is not in the zone. He asked that the language in regard to the 70 db CNEL be deleted, the Zellerbach property should not be named, and the language should be changed to what he mentioned ear"lier. Commissioner D'Angelo asked if the Zellerbach is outside of the Yz mile radius of the BART station. Mr. Bhatia replied that most of the property is. Commissioner D'Angelo added that Commissioner Romero is trying to include it in the BART Yz mile radius. He stated that he was not in consensus to change the section. Commissioner Romero added that it is an inclusive statement, which has both the business commercial and office. The office designation in the area is the lower section; the business commercial section is the upper area. He asked what the purpose was on making it contingent upon completion, or securing the funding for the Mission Road extension. Mr. Bhatia added that this had to do with the FAR. The office FAR is higher than the business commercial FAR, and because a larger project would generate more traffic. The Mission Road extension should be in place before the future project can happen. Commissioner Romero added that the City is trying to encourage high-density office development on the site. Mr. Bhatia clarified that it is assuming that the Mission Road extension is in place. Otherwise this would be a lower FAR if that extension does not occur. Commissioner Romero asked if the City would have to fund a new street. Mr. Bhatia added that the City is not funding this and that it is a variety of sources. Cominissioner Romero asked the Commission if they wanted to see a significant increase in traffic. Chief Planner Sparks added that this comes with the tenitory when density is increased around transit uses. Commissioner Romero added that this is the office section, according to the consultant, but the policy is specifically for the business commercial designation. He asked if they want to encourage office development on both sides. Chief Planner Sparks stated that encouraging anything on the Zellerbach site is going to have very little effect in the foreseeable future. Chairperson Honan stated that if both the San Bruno and South San Francisco BART stations were taken into consideration, she got the feeling that they are encouraging a mixed use of some sort. She added that they should try to make the residents that live close to the BART station happy also. Chief Planner Sparks added that they are attempting to restrict residential developments to the outside of the 65-db CNEL contour. Chairperson Honan added that the contour could change when the flight paths are changed. Chief Planner Sparks stated that if the 65- db CNEL changes so does the area addressed by the policy. Mr. Bhatia suggested that Zellerbach property should be deleted and it should say "encourage mixed use development including residential on any site." Commissioner Baldocchi thought it was inappropriate to name the Zellerbach building in the policy. Chief Planner Sparks stated that a par"agraph of 2-1-17 had been omitted but not the complete policy. Commissioner Romero understood that the whole policy was being omitted. Mr. Bhatia stated that Commissioner Romero's suggestion be taken and delete 2-1-17. It should be dealt with in context with the San Bruno BART station area. He proceeded to suggest language for a policy: encourage mixed use development including residential on sites designated for business commercial or office uses in the area of the San Bruno BART station outside of the 65 db CNEL. Consensus of Commission delete 2-1-17 and to leave 3.3-1-10-A as recommended by staff with additional language. Commissioner Baldocchi asked about guiding policy 3.2-G-l, which talks about maintaining the industrial character of Lindenville. She asked if the area could be bettered in any way. Mr. Bhatia directed Commissioner Baldocchi to policy 3.2-G-3, which specifies that the appearance of the area should be enhanced. Commissioner Baldocchi asked for an explanation on the population growth, and the negative effect on the G:\File Cabinet\O Id PC\working\rninutes\1999\090299.doc Page 6 of 8 existing quality of life. Chief Planner Sparks added that more people require more services and there are also positive effects. It basically depends on how it is dealt with. Consensus of Commission to leave 3.5-1-8 as recommended bv staff. . East of 101 Sub Area Commissioner Baldocchi asked if they were going to encourage commercial establishments throughout the East of 101 sub area. Chief Planner Sparks stated that they have discussed this. Commissioner Baldocchi added that she did not want those types of uses concentrated on the bay front. Chief Planner Sparks stated that these ar"e potential uses but will not be a large commercial center in the area. They do want to encourage more reasonable employee uses. Commissioner Baldocchi added that these types of uses are needed throughout the East of 101 Area and not be concentrated only in there. Commissioners Baldocchi and D'Angelo asked if they wanted to keep the two BART station areas consistent. Commissioner Romero liked a section that provided a new transit oriented village ar"ound the South San Francisco BART station. He added that these changes are regardless of any pending application, and that this does not mean he is encouraging high-density residential developments in the area. Chief Planner Sparks stated that this is part of the definition of a transit -oriented village. Commissioner Romero stated that as a resident he would like to see a transit oriented village around South San Francisco rather than commercial. Chairperson Honan stated that policy 2.4-G- 3 is not what the Commission is trying to follow and that they want something that SUppOltS transit. Chief Planner Sparks asked if the Commission was refeITing to office uses rather than residential and commercial uses. He suggested that the size of the par"king could be expanded to get a lot of usage of the BART station. Commissioner D'Angelo suggested having a transit village that is not commercial and residential only but a mixture of uses. He suggested that Mr. Fred Etzel give a suggested word other than transit village. Mr. Fred Etzel stated that land use should be looked at as horizontal layers and not just vertical zoning. He gave an example of Golden Gateway Commons in San Francisco, where they have retail on 1st floor, office on the 2nd floor and residential on the 3rd floor. This is mixed use in a horizontal context and integrating a variety of uses in the same structure. He added that the word transit village covers a broad range of usage. 'l'A.PE3 Chief Planner Sparks stated that the Commission has delineated the issues clearly. He added that some policies have been changed and staff would bring them back on the 16th. The Commission has clearly stated that they want a transit oriented mix designated and this requires changing many policies. Commissioner Romero asked that staff convey the Commission's consensus and he would like to feel their input to the entire process. Chief Planner Sparks stated that he would convey the Commission's comments to the City Council . EI Camino Real Sub Area Commissioner Romero thought it was necessary to add a policy prohibiting any new gas stations on EI Camino Real. He added that there are enough in SSF and they are closing down in San Francisco. He added that this goes well beyond any applications that are currently in process. He did not want to encourage any future gas stations in the City. Chairperson Honan asked if a survey was done on the number of fueling stations on EI Camino Real. Chief Planner Sparks stated that there was not a survey done specifically on fueling stations, but the number of pumps at service stations. He added that this was an unusual policy for a general plan. Commissioner Romero stated that there was a policy prohibiting any additional fast food restaurants on a ceItain street, and that was changed because of an applicant that wanted to put in a fast food restaurant. He questioned why they would allow any additional service stations to come in, when there are more than one in some intersections. Cormnissioner D' Angelo stated that guidelines are not policies and suggested that this be a guide instead of a policy. Chief Planner Sparks suggested that before the Commission makes a decision of this sort that they get a G:\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\090299.doc Page 7 of 8 study of some sort and then base their decision on those results. Mr. Bhatia stated that these were a source of revenue for the City. Commissioner D'Angelo stated that on the chart it shows 1.3%. Director of ECD Van Duyn stated that taking up a policy like this is too drastic. He suggested that the general plan can be amended at any time, and the policy can be analyzed before it is implemented. Commissioner Romero stated that this could have been brought up earlier in the process but feels that there are too many gas stations being allowed on EI Camino Real. Mr. Bhatia suggested introducing a policy that they study the possibility of prohibiting additional gas stations on EI Camino Real. Commissioner Romero suggested that a policy be put in stating that they study the feasibility restricting additional service stations from coming into the City. Chief Planner Sparks stated that this is part of the zoning consistency. Commissioner Baldocchi suggested that the changes downtown could be added on to this. She added that she would reintroduce this next week. . Westborough Sub Area Vice Chairperson Sim suggested having something in the General Plan in regard to having a parkway on a vacant land that is on the San Andreas fault. He is looking into beautifying the area and incorporating an entryway to the City from Pacifica. Chief Planner Sparks stated that they would make a park out of the Button property, which is near Junipero SelTa and Westborough. Senior Planner Kalkin stated that it is an unincorporated area. Consensus of Commission on makinf! a park out of the Button property. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 4. Adjourn Motion Sim / Second Baldocchi to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 p.m. ~G~~ Secretar"y to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco J:udP]]" Honan, Chairperson {),?,rarming Commission City of South San Francisco NEXT MEETING: Regular Meeting September 19, 1999, Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA. TCS/bh G:\File Cabinet\Old PC\working\minutes\1999\090299.doc Page 8 of 8