Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 04/04/2002 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 33 ARROYO DRIVE April 4, 2002 CALL TO ORDER I PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7 :30 p.m. ROLL CALL I CHAIR COMMENTS MEMBERS PRESENT: COlnmissioner D'Angelo, Commissioner Honan, COlmnissioner Meloni, Commissioner Sim, Vice Chairperson Ochsenhirt and Chairperson Romero Commissioner Teglia Arrived at 7:36 p.n1. MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Planning Division: ThOlnas C. Sparks, Chief Planner Susy Kalkin, Principal Planner Steve Kowalski, Associate Planner Kimberly Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Barbara Hawkins, City Engineer Richard Hannon, Developlnent Coordinator Ray Honan, Environlnental COlnpliance Coordinator Maurice Dong, Assistant Fire Marshall City Attorney: Engineering: Water Quality: Bldg./Fire Prevo AGENDA REVIEW Add Closed Session pursuant to Government Code 54954.2(b )(2) Closed Session: Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) Existing Litigation: Aetna Realty vs. City of South San Francisco Motion Honan I Second Sim to add the closed session to the agenda. Approved by unanilnous voice vote. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR Approved 1. Approval Regular Meeting Minutes of July 19,2001, November 15,2001 and March 7, 2002. Approved 2. SandHill Property Co., 345 East Grand, LP-owner/appl. Dowler-Gruman Architects 345 East Grand Ave. UP-Ol-034 and ND-01-034 Continued (Recommend continuance to April 18, 2002) Use permit allowing a new 210,560 square foot research and developn1ent facility with a lnulti-story parking garage for 600 vehicles, an outdoor service yard, operating 24 hours per day and generating in excess of 100 vehicle trips situated at 345 East Grand Avenue in the Planned Industrial zoning district (P- S:\Minutes\04-04-02 RPC.doc Page 1 of 8 Approved on April 18, 2002 I) in accordance with SSFMC sections 20.32.060 , 30.32.070 (a) and 20.32.070 (b). 3. Spiros Kakoniktis-owner Antonio M. Brandi-applicant 90 Oak Ave. RZ-01-054, DR-01-054 and ND-01-054 Continued (Recommend continuance to April 18, 2002) Zoning Reclassification from Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-2) to High Density Residential Zoning District (R-3), Design Review of a 15 unit apartInent building, and an Agreement with the City allowing 2 dwellings to be affordable units resulting in a density of 36.7 dwelling units per net acre instead of the maxilnun1 of 30 dwellings per net acre as provided by State Law, situated at 90 Oak Avenue in the Medium Density Residential (R-2) Zoning District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.18 and 20.87. Vice Chairperson Ochsenhirt abstain on March 7, 2002. Commissioner Honan abstain 7-19-01 Motion Meloni I Second Ochsenhirt to approve the Consent Calendar. Approved by majority voice vote with Commissioner Ochsenhirt abstaining frOln the minutes of March 7, 2002 and Commissioner Honan abstaining frOln the minutes of July 19, 2001. PUBLIC HEARING - AGENDA ITEMS 4. Welch Family Partnership-owner3l TetraTech Wireless/Peter Clement-applicant 631 EI Camino Real UP-01-085 and Categorical Exemption Class 32 Section 15332 In-Fill Development Use Pennit to allow the installation and co-location of a telecOlnmunication facility consisting of three rooftop antennas and associated mechanical equipment at 631 El Camino Real in the Retail Commercial (C-l) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.81 and 20.105. Staff Report given by Associate Planner Kowalski. Recess taken at 7:37 p.m. Recalled to order at 7:39 Mary Ann Miller gave a presentation on the project proposal. Cary Horton, Attorney for Metro PCS, noted that Metro PCS was given another possibility of looking in another location. 631 EI Camino is staff s preferred location for an antenna because there is already an existing facility at that site. She pointed out that the permit was being recOlnmended for denial and instead of having the permit denied she asked that the Commission give them SOlne ideas as to how they can reach the goals of the Cormnission with regard to a telecOlnmunications facility. She noticed that they could try a raydOln type design for the rooftop, or parapets, which would add mass to the parapet. Public Hearing opened. Public hearing closed. Commission comments: . Will short GPS antennas work for the purposes of the teleCOlllinunications facility? . The applicant can look into mounting an antenna directly onto the parapet so that it is flush with the wall; they S:\Minutes\04-04-02 RPC.doc Page 2 of 8 Approved on April 18, 2002 could also consider other sites such as, the San Francisco water site, light poles, School district propeliy, and even some clean rooftops in the area. · Smoke stacks are not a good idea and the Cormnission would prefer to see a better quality 10cation. · Antenna height can be lowered and 2 micro sites instead of one macro site might be lnore appropriate. · The Commission noted that the DRB and staff might have fallen into holding these requirelnents because it is the wish of the Commission. They discussed that the DRB should be looking at these applications in detail and not only approve of one because it is identical to the size and shape of the existing antennas. Applicant response: · The GPS antenna is a tracking device that gives latitude and longitude. · They have not considered mounting the antem1a on a parapet because it lnight not give them the height needed. · The applicant agreed to explore the Commission's recormnendations and return with more options for a cell site. Motion Te2:lia I Second Sim to continue the item. Approved by unaniInous voice vote. 5. Embassy Christian CenterlJoshua & Diane Krishna/applicant Mehrdad Elie-owner 91 Westborough Blvd. (1st Floor) UP-01-090 and Categorical Exemption Class 1 Section 15301 Existing Facilities Use Permit to locate a church within an existing office building located at 91 Westborough Boulevard in the Planned Commercial (P-C) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Section 20.24.030. Public Hearing opened. Staff report given by Associate Planner Kowalski. He pointed out that there were revised Conditions of Approval distributed to the Commission. The changes were; Condition #5 the word Pennit was used and it has been deleted, and adding condition #6 to have the City Attorney review the parking lease agreement. Joshua Krishna gave a brief description of their establishment and how they would schedule services around bank business hours. Diane Krishna, co-applicant, read a letter of support for the Use Pennit from the Salvation An.ny into the record (a copy is available on file). Carol Koski, 860 Olive SSF, a member of the congregation, spoke in support of the Use permit. Public Hearing closed. Commission comments: · The lease for Embassy Christian is for two years; will the parking lease agreelnent be for two years also? Staff's response: · The City will not regulate how long the lease is as to the tenn of the parking agreement. There is a requirement that the City be notified when the parking agreen1ent expires or is terminated at that time the use would have to be stopped. Motion Sim I Second Te2:lia to approve up-o 1..090 with amended conditions of approval. Approved by unanimous voice vote. S:\Minutes\04-04-02 RPC.doc Page 3 of 8 Approved on April 18, 2002 Recess called at 8:22 p.m. Recalled to order at 8: 3 5 6. Britannia East Grand Cherokee San Francisco LLC-owner Slough Estates-applicant 450 East Grand Ave. (Easterly terminus of East Grand Ave.) PUD, GP, UP, DR, DA-01-006 and EIR-01-006 Britannia East Grand Master Plan (EIR, PUD, GP, UP-OI-006) to construct a phased develoPlnent consisting of nine officelR & D buildings totaling approximately 783,533 sq. ft., an 8,000 sq. ft. childcare facility, a 5,000 sq. ft. fitness center, 8,000 sq. ft. of restaurant/retail use and two (2) five-to seven-level parking garages; a General Plan Amendlnent to delete the proposed East Grand Avenue roadway extension to Point San Bruno Blvd.; Design Review of nine R & D Buildings and Parking Structure A (DR-OI-006) and consideration ofa Development Agreement (DA-OI-006) Public Hearing opened. Staff report presented by Principal Planner Kalkin. Assistant City Attorney Johnson responded to a letter frOln Anne Mudge, representing SSF Scavenger Company, regarding the slough remediation and bond issues · The slough under remediation is part of Haskins' property and is not part of the property owned by Slough Estates. This project does not impact the slough and under CEQA there are no significant environmental impacts to the area, therefor it is not addressed in the EIR. · The Scavenger Company believes that Slough Estates should pay a million dollar bond for the ren1ediation of the slough. Haskins and Scavengers created a parcel that was distinct from any other developable parcel that consists of slough as part of the property transaction. The Planning Cormnission added a condition of approval to the MRF proposal to guarantee the remediation of the property by Haskins, and they paid a bond to tie them to the remediation of the property. Commission comments: · The Commission asked for clarification as to where the slough that needs to be remediated is located, who owns the slough under remediation, and where did the problem begin. . The site should have been cleaned up before the MRF went into place. · Chairperson Romero noted that the slough issue was raised when the MRF approval was before the Commission. The site was subdivided and the responsible party was not identified. The slough is being separated once more with this proposal. Staff's response: · Chief Planner Sparks pointed out that the project does not include the slough and does not iInpact the project. The slough to be remediated is owned by Haskins and the portion owned by Slough was studied and cleanup is not required. . Chief Planner Sparks noted that BCDC and the Water Quality Control Board are moving forward with the cleanup, although there is not a finn timetable. Commission comments to the applicant: . Commissioner Teglia asked if there had been tests on the slough and if it was contaminated. . Commissioner D'Angelo was concerned with the level of contmninants and there not being a great difference between the levels on the Slough Estates property than that on the Haskins property. S:\Minutes\04-04-02 RPC.doc Page 4 of 8 Approved on April 18, 2002 . Commissioner D'Angelo asked how the developer would prevent disluption of the soil and fmiher contaminating the slough. . Commissioner D'Angelo questioned if there was going to be pre-testing and post testing. Applicant's response: . Tonl Graff, consultant, noted that a Corrective Measures Work Plan was produced by Henshaw & Associates in October of 2000 for the remediation of the slough on behalf of Cherokee Associates and Richard Haskins. The study showed that the area requiring remediation is on the Haskins property and the area owned by Slough Estates does not have contamination of concern that would require remediation. He added that Cherokee and Haskins are going forward with the Water Board in negotiating final details of the remediation. . Mr. Graff noted that where lead exists it will be filled and excavation will take place only for installing utilities. There will not be a significant amount of soil removed. They are finalizing a soil management plan with DTSC. . Mr. Graff pointed out that there is no monitoring in the slough but there is a previously conducted study that shows where the lead exists. Specially trained workers will handle the soil on a daily basis. Presentation continued. Additional discussion by staff, developer and the Commission: Commissioner D'Angelo asked Assistant City Attorney Johnson if the property owner was responsible for cleanup of the contaminated site. Assistant City Attorney Johnson noted that the property owner and anyone in the chain of title would be responsible. Commissioner Teglia noted that the difficult issue is getting the responsible parties to comply with the cleanup. The City has to be comfortable with the remediation and the toxic levels before the project is approved. He pointed out that the City is encouraging a bay trail and there will be people enjoying the shoreline and this makes it part of the project. He asked if the area has been neglected in the examination of its toxicity because it is outside of the project area. Chief Planner Sparks replied that it has been surveyed and sampled. The contamination in the area is below action levels for clean up. Assistant City Attorney Johnson noted that CEQA requires that the impacts of a project be examined and existing conditions are not considered ilnpacts of a project. Therefore they are not included in the Mitigation Measures and remediation would not be required. Commissioner Teglia asked if the Commission could look at the slough remediation issue even if it is not under their jurisdiction. Assistant City Attorney Johnson replied that it should not be looked at for the purposes of certifying the EIR. COlnmissioner Meloni expressed concern about approving the project and the City being sued because of any health hazards that may occur. Assistant City Attorney Johnson stated that she was not aware of a federal or state provision that would hold a jurisdiction accountable for relnediation by granting a land use approval. Vice Chairperson Ochsenhirt noted that the owner is to disclose this information and the new owner accepts thenl with the purchase of the property. Comnlissioner D'Angelo asked the applicant to have the contamination numbers to the COlmnission and City Council in 2-4 weeks. Mr. Rogalla and Mr. Graff agreed to have these numbers to the Commission as requested. Commissioner Teglia asked how lnuch landscaping would be put in to the site if Phase II would not be built out. be no building. Assistant City Attorney Johnson noted the DA calls for a development plan to be submitted by July 31, 2003, in which the applicant would have to provide a landscaping ilnprovement plan acceptable to the City. S:\Minutes\04-04-02 RPC.doc Page 5 of 8 Approved on April 18, 2002 COlnmissioner Meloni asked why the letter of credit is to be submitted 60 days after the grading pernlit is issued and not the day the permit is issued. Assistant City Attorney Johnson noted that this was the projected tilne that was needed to calculate the value of the cormnon landscaping improvements. Commissioner Meloni prefers that it be issued when grading permit is issued. Commissioner Meloni asked about the elevations of parking garage B. Architect noted that it is the same design as parking structure A. Principal Planner Kalkin noted that parking structure B and the final landscape improvements were not included in this phase of the DRB approval and will require separate DRB and Planning Commission approval. Public Hearing closed. Principal Planner Kalkin distributed to the Commission a map of the slough area that showed the fill area and augmentation of the wet area proposals. Chairperson Romero noted that this is still an unresolved issue and remains in the City. The City needs to have an active involvement to make sure that the appropriate agencies resolve this ongoing issue. Chief Planner Sparks noted that there is a clean up order and the responsible parties are working on this. COlmnissioner Teglia noted that the Water Control Board has jurisdiction over the cleanup but the COlnmission has jurisdiction on the approval of the project. The Commission can decide not to approve the project until the land is prepared. Cornnlissioner D'Angelo noted that Mr. Haskins suggested that a mitigation measure be imposed to relnediate the contamination. Assistant City Attorney Johnson noted that the City cannot require as a mitigation measure an impact that's not caused by the project. Vice Chairperson Ochsenhirt noted that the contamination of the site was there prior to the MRF site approval. The Commission needs to focus on the current project being that the proper agencies are working on the clean up. He asked why the East Grand Avenue to Point San Bruno Boulevard extension was being taken out of the proposal. Commissioner Meloni pointed out that there does not need to be an extension because it will create more traffic and it won't enhance the area. Chairperson Romero echoed Commissioner Meloni's comments and noted that he is satisfied with retaining the elnergency access in place of a full roadway connection. Vice Chairperson Ochsenhirt asked if the public art being provided is in absence of the Park in-lieu fees. Assistant City Attorney Johnson noted that Vice Chairperson Ochsenhirt was correct and that park in-lieu fees are only triggered by residential developments. Chairperson Romero noted that there a possibility that the childcare center will be moved off site due to an asbestos problem. He would prefer that it stay on the site and have the developer explore an alternative area within the project. Mr. Graff explained that the childcare center is on a location that would work given the layout, the lead and asbestos in the area. Chairperson Romero noted that if the lead is going to be harmful for children then it would not be safe for adults. Mr. Graffpointed out that there are significantly more stringent requirelnents for childcare facilities than there are for commercial buildings. Chairperson Romero asked if it is likely that the childcare center could go on site. Mr. Graff stated that there is no current reason why it would not go in there. Commissioner Sim noted that this is a difficult situation for the proj ect. He also pointed out this applicant should get the same opportunity that the Scavenger Company got when they proposed their proj ect. He suggested that the Commission could condition the project to encourage a study on the isolated corner of the Slough Estates property to find out what type of contamination exists. Chairperson ROlnero wanted to make sure that Council is aware of the Commission's concerns with the clean up of the slough and having it take place. s: \Minutes\04-04-02 RPC.doc Page 6 of 8 Approved on April 18, 2002 Commissioner Teglia asked what the developer could do to raise the Commission's comfort level. Assistant City Attorney Johnson pointed out that the City does not have the authority to order clean up of a contaminated site. The Cormnission can condition the project in order to have them clean the site if there is contmnination on the site. Commissioner Teglia asked if there is a way to address the slnall amount of contamination that is identified in one sample on the southeast corner of the site. Mr. Graff noted that this could be addressed by covering it with some additional landscaping. Commissioner Teglia asked if there could be some language in the DA to be able to handle whatever toxicity there is in this particular location on the Slough Estates property. Assistant City Attorney Johnson noted the Commission could suggest that the Council add a condition that if the site is identified by the state agencies as highly contmninated then that the proper process be taken to remediate that site. Commissioner Teglia suggested that it be made part of the Development Agreement. Assistant City Attorney Johnson suggested adding a condition of approval rather than having a condition in the DA because the conditions of approval will run with the approval and the land. Recess called at 10:13 p.m. to discuss the language of the Condition. Recalled at 10:27 p.ln. Chief Planner Sparks read the following language for approval by the Cormnission: "The applicant shall conduct further investigation to the satisfaction of the Planning Division in the area of known contamination on the portion of the subject property known as the slough and relnediate any contamination to levels acceptable to DTSC andlor the Regional Water Quality Control Board." Commissioner Teglia asked if the condition honors the Commission's intent to have the shoreline capped because of bay trail access by the public. Chief Planner Sparks noted that this area should not be characterized as industrial and is comfortable with the condition covering the intent of the Commission. Cormnissioner Teglia suggested that in the introductory sentence they add "in recognition of the fact that this is a public access bay trail recreation area." Motion Sim I Second Meloni recormnending that the Council certify EIR-OI-006, including the finding and a statement of overriding consideration. Approved by unanimous voice vote. RESOLUTION 2615 Motion Sim I Second Honan recOlnmending that the Council approves General Plan Anlendment GP-O 1-006. Approved by majority voice vote. COlnmissioner Ochsenhirt voted no. RESOLUTION 2616 Assistant City Attorney Johnson recommended revising the condition that the Commission will add to say "to the extent that the area is designated as bay trail and recreation ... ... ..." Motion Sim / Second Te2:lia recormnending that the City Council approve PUD-OI-006, UP-OI-006 and DR-Ol- 006 to approve the Britannia East Grand Master Plan with additional condition and adopt an Ordinance to approve the Development Agreement. Approved by unanimous voice vote. RESOLUTION 2617 7. Closed Session: Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) Existing Litigation: Aetna Realty v. City of South San Francisco. Vice Chairperson Ochsenhirt was excused from the meeting at 10:36 p.m. The Commission entered into a Closed Session at 10:36 p.m. Reconvened at 10:57 p.m. No action was taken. No direction given. S:\Minutes\04-04-02 RPC.doc Page 7 of 8 Approved on April 18, 2002 ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 8. Items from Staff None 9. Items from Commission None 10. Items from the Public None ADJOURNMENT 10:59 p.m. Motion Honan I Second Sim to adjourn the meeting. Approved by unanimous voice vote. ~~~#~ ~~(~&V" Secretary to the Planning COlnmission City of South San Francisco William ROlnero, Chairperson Planning Commission City of South San Francisco NEXT MEETING: Regular Meeting April 18, 2002, Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA. TCS/blh S:\Minutes\04-04-02 RPC.doc Page 8 of 8 Approved on April 18, 2002