The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09-04-2008 PC e-packetCITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 33 ARROYO DRIVE September 4, 2008 7:30 PM WELCOME If this is the first time you have been to a Commission meeting, perhaps you'd like to know a tittle about our procedure. Under Oral Communications, at the beginning of the meeting, persons wishing to speak on any subject not on the Agenda will have 3 minutes to discuss their item. The Clerk will read the name and type of application to be heard in the order in which it appears on the Agenda. A staff person will then explain the proposal. The first person allowed to speak will be the applicant, followed by persons in favor of the application. Then persons who oppose the project or who wish to ask questions will have their turn. If you wish to speak, please fill out a card (which is available near the entrance door) and give it, as soon as possible, to the Clerk at the front of the room. When it is your turn, she will announce your name for the record. The Commission has adopted a policy that applicants and their representatives have a maximum time limit of 20 minutes to make a presentation on their project. Non-applicants may speak a maximum of 3 minutes on any case. Questions from Commissioners to applicants or non-applicants may be answered by using additional time. When the Commission is not in session, we'll be pleased to answer your questions if you will go to the Planning Division, City Hall, 315 Maple Avenue or telephone (650) 877-8535 or by a-mail at web- ecd(a~ssf. net. Mary Giusti Marc C. Teglia Chairperson Vice-Chairperson Wallace M. Moore Stacey Oborne John Prouty Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Eugene Sim Commissioner William Zemke Commissioner Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner Secretary to the Planning Commission Steve Carlson Senior Planner Gerry Beaudin Senior Planner Linda Ajello Sean Flanagan Associate Planner Associate Planner Bertha Aguilar Clerk Please Turn Cellular Phones And Pacers Off. Individuals with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services to attend and participate in this meeting should contact the ADA Coordinator at (650) 829-3800, five working days before the meeting. In accordance with California Government Code Section 54957.5, any writing or document that is a public record, relates to an open session agenda item, and is distributed less than 72 hours prior to a regular meeting will be made available for public inspection at the Planning Division counter in the City Hall Annex. If, however, the document or writing is not distributed until the regular meeting to which it relates, then the document or writing will be made available to the public at the location of the meeting, as listed on this agenda. The address of the City Hall Annex is 315 Maple Avenue, South San Francisco, California 94080. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 33 ARROYO DRIVE September 4, 2008 Time 7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL /CHAIR COMMENTS AGENDA REVIEW ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of meeting minutes of December 6, 2008, February 7, 2008, April 19th and August 7, 2008. PUBLIC HEARING 2. Downtown Sidewalk Seating Ordinance 8~ Guidelines The City of SSF/Applicant Downtown Zone District P08-0055: ZA08-0005 Amendment to SSFMC Chapters 20.06, 20.26 and 20.74 to provide for sidewalk seating in the Downtown Commercial Zone District in conjunction with restaurants or other businesses selling food and/or beverages, and related guidelines for sidewalk seating. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 3. Update on 160 Produce Avenue P06-0088: PUD07-0003, UP06-0020 & DR06-0072 4. Update on 648 Commercial Avenue 5. 18 month review for Henry's Lounge Henry 8~ Victoria Concepcion/applicant Westborough Sq Shopping Ctr/owner 2262 Westborough Blvd P06-0133: UP06-0029 18 month review -Use Permit to allow live musical entertainment at an existing restaurant at 2262 Westborough Boulevard in the Retail Commercial (C-1) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.22 and 20.81 Planning Commission Agenda - Cont'd Page 3 September 4, 2008 ITEMS FROM STAFF ITEMS FROM COMMISSION ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC ADJOURNMENT ~i Su Kalki Secreta o the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco NEXT MEETING: Regular Meeting September 18, 2008, Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA. Staff Reports can now be accessed online at: http://www.ssf.net/depts/comms/planning/agenda minutes asp or via http://weblink.ssf. net SK/bla S:\Rgewdas\Flaww%wg Covuw~iss%ow\2008\09-04-D8 RAC R9ewdA.doc MINUTES December 6, 2007 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION TAPE 1 CALL TO ORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7:30 ~.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioner Honan, Commissioner Moore, Vice Chairperson Giusti and Chairperson Prouty ABSENT: Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Teglia* and Commissioner Zemke STAFF PRESENT: Planning Division: Mike Lappen, Senior Planner /Acting Chief Planner Steve Carlson, Senior Planner Girard Beaudin, Associate Planner Bertha Aguilar, Admin. Asst. II Building Division: Barry Mammini, Senior Building Inspector City Attorney: Brian Grossman, Assistant City Attorney Engineering Division: Ray Razavi, City Engineer Dennis Chuck, Senior Civil Engineer Tracy Scramaglia, Consulting Engineer Police Department: Sergeant John Kallas, Planning Liaison Fire Prevention: Dave Scardigli, Assistant Fire Marshall CHAIR COMMENTS AGENDA REVIEW Senior Planner Lappen informed the Commission that Commissioner Sim called the Planning Division and noted that his absence was due to personal reasons. He pointed out that one of the items from staff will be a report on the Genentech shuttle stops from City Engineer Razavi and requested that this be heard prior to item #2. Reauest _aranted by Chairperson Prouty ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARING 1. Parking Comp of America/applicant Hanna, Elias/owners 160 Produce Avenue P06-0088: UP06-0020, DR06-0072 8 PUD07-0003 Commercial Planned Unit Development Permit allowing a combined on-site and off-site landscape area of 12,884 square feet instead of the minimum requirement of 47,350 square feet. Use Permit and Design Review allowing a new canopy entry and landscaping, with 24 hour operation, generating in excess of 100 average daily vehicle trips, fences greater than 3 feet in height within the minimum required street setbacks, and expanding the existing commercial parking use on several lots MINUTES December 6, 2007 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION TAPE 1 CALL TO ORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7:30 a.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioner Honan, Commissioner Moore, Vice Chairperson Giusti and Chairperson Prouty ABSENT: Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Teglia* and Commissioner Zemke STAFF PRESENT: Planning Division: Mike Lappen, Senior Planner /Acting Chief Planner Steve Carlson, Senior Planner Girard Beaudin, Associate Planner Bertha Aguilar, Admin. Asst. II Building Division: Barry Mammini, Senior Building Inspector City Attorney: Brian Grossman, Assistant City Attorney Engineering Division: Ray Razavi, City Engineer Dennis Chuck, Senior Civil Engineer Tracy Scramaglia, Consulting Engineer Police Department: Sergeant John Kailas, Planning Liaison Fire Prevention: Dave Scardigli, Assistant Fire Marshall CHAIR COMMENTS AGENDA REVIEW Senior Planner Lappen informed the Commission that Commissioner Sim called the Planning Division and noted that his absence was due to personal reasons. He pointed out that one of the items from staff will be a report on the Genentech shuttle stops from City Engineer Razavi and requested that this be heard prior to item #2. Request granted by Chairperson Prouty. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARING 1. Parking Comp of America/applicant Hanna, Elias/owners 160 Produce Avenue P06-0088: UPO6-0020, DR06-0072 8~ PUD07-0003 Commercial Planned Unit Development Permit allowing a combined on-site and off-site landscape area of 12,884 square feet instead of the minimum requirement of 47,350 square feet. Use Permit and Design Review allowing a new canopy entry and landscaping, with 24 hour operation, generating in excess of 100 average daily vehicle trips, fences greater than 3 feet in height within the minimum required street setbacks, and expanding the existing commercial parking use on several lots Planning Commission Meeting of December 6, 2007 adjacent to San Mateo Drive in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.30, 20.32, 20.73, 20.81, 20.84 & 20.85 Public Hearing opened. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. * Commissioner Teglia arrived at 7:40 p.m. President of Parking Company of America Brett Wanstreet and Project Architect Ysidro Farias gave a presentation on the project. Some items covered were the replacement of the canopy, widened drive aisles, fire access, queuing aisles and landscaping on the site. There being no speakers the Public Hearing closed. Commissioner Teglia noted that this is not an appropriate use of a Planned Unit Development. He noted that the application could require a study session or a subcommittee. He requested some guidance from staff to see what can be done and how to mitigate it. He noted that this is a prime location which was identified as a future site for a retail power zone. He added that a Planned Unit Development works well with housing projects because of the park amenities derived from it but in this case it does not make sense because it is being used as a way to bypass certain requirements. He pointed out that there is not a presentation on the project with specific proposal or any alternatives. Senior Planner Carlson stated that staff had requested for these items and also encouraged the applicant to provide 10% landscaping. He added that this type of parking lots are an important source of revenue to the City. Chairperson Prouty noted that at a previous meeting for this item the Commission asked for mitigation solutions and elevations to visualize how the will look and work. He was concerned with safety and questioned if there was a way to reorient the driveway because the current entry design is dangerous. He asked to see elevations of possible landscaping. Commissioner Moore reiterated the Commission's concern to see renderings of the proposed landscaping. Senior Planner Carlson questioned if the Commission is interested in seeing alternatives for the fencing other than chainlike. Chairperson Prouty replied affirmatively and also requested that the applicant address the safety issues for the sites ingress and egress. Motion Teglia /Second Moore to continue the item off calendar to allow the applicant to return with proper documentation and proposals for landscaping and the chain link fence. Roll call: Ayes: Commissioner Honan, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Teglia, Vice Chairperson Giusti and Chairperson Prouty Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Commissioner Sim and Commissioner Zemke Approved by majority voice vote. 2. Anchor Drugs John Muffareh/applicant Jajeh, Richard 8~ Jennifer/owner s:~M~wutes~l2-o6-0~ rzpC M%wutes.doc Page z o f g Planning Commission Meeting of December 6, 2007 161 S Spruce Ave P07-0114: Signs07-0049, DR07-0071 8~ VAR07-0006 Design Review and Type C Sign Permit to allow the conversion of an existing office building into a mix of retail and medical office uses, associated accessibility upgrades and a monument sign including changeable copy, and an 8 space Parking Variance located at 161 S. Spruce Ave. in the Planned Commercial (P-C-L) Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC 20.24, 20.76, 20.82 and 20.85. Public Hearing opened. Associate Planner Smalley presented the staff report. Commissioner Teglia questioned if alternative technologies had been explored in lieu of an LED sign. John Muffareh, architect, gave of brief history of Anchor Drug's tenure in the City. He noted that their business is increasing and their current location does not allow them to meet the industries current requirements. He added that the new location provides them with more space and a better facility for their patients with ADA accessibility. Chairperson Prouty noted that the LED sign should be dim and not a bright illuminated sign. Mr. Muffareh noted that they are enhancing the sign with masonry and architectural features as well as providing a lot of pavers. He added that the are working with SamTrans on adding a bus stop in front of the facility because it is a critical factor to the functions of the facility. Commissioner Moore questioned if the sign would contain any other type of advertising other than the services provided. Mr. Muffareh noted that they will advertise flu vaccines and dates. Commissioner Moore noted that the sign needs to be low but at a level so that the public can view them. Mr. Muffareh noted that they want the facility to have a certain appeal and a brightly lit sign will not do this. He noted that the services will be provided on a regular basis and they do not want to be hanging banners on the building. Commissioner Teglia noted that it is good to see the family business expand in the City and felt that a changeable sign is needed for their facility. He noted that the sign is low enough that it does not pose many concerns for him and it sonly appealing to their clientele. He was concerned that a black background LED sign with red lettering will not work for him. He suggested an LCD sign rather than the LED. Mr. Mufareh noted that the sign is not meant to advertise any product but is strictly meant as a service to the community informing them of upcoming events. Chairperson Prouty commended the applicant for the application Commissioner Honan noted that the Commission needs to start looking at the benefits of this type of signs and questioned where the services would be advertised. Mr. Muffareh noted that the advertising would be on the bottom because their main focus is to advertise the business an the building's tenants. Commissioner Honan thanked the applicant for not considering banners or real estate type signs for advertising of their services. There being no speakers the Public Hearing closed. Vice Chairperson Giusti questioned if the Grand Avenue facility was going to be closed. Mr. Muffareh noted that the location will remain open. Motion Honan /Second Giusti to approve P07-0114: Signs07-0049, DR07-0071 & VAR07-0006. S:\M%wutCS\12-06-0~ RPC M%v~,ute5.doc Pagesof e Planning Commission Meeting of December 6, 2007 On the question: Commissioner Teglia suggested adding the following conditions of approval: Staff and the applicant to work with the applicant to explore the technologies to place on the bottom of the sign and that the final model of the sign be subject to review and approval of the Planning Commission. Motion Honan /Second Giusti to amend the motion to include Commissioner Teglia's recommendation. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Sim and Commissioner Zemke -absent. Item added under Agenda Review 3a. Presentation on shuttle turnouts in the Genentech Campus City Engineer Razavi gave a brief presentation on shuttle stops to the Commission. He noted that there are temporary striped bike lanes and the shuttle stops can be accommodated in the interim until the sewer lines are installed in 2008. Chairperson Prouty questioned if there were going to be any turnouts in the future. City Engineer Razavi noted that the design will come to the Commission when these improvements are scheduled. Commissioner Teglia noted that the bike lanes are good for temporary solutions. 3.b Founder's Research Center (FRC) III -Buildings 16 8 17 GENENTECH INC/applicant GENENTECH INC/owner 330 Point San Bruno Blvd P07-0091: UP07-0015 ~ DR07-0057 Use Permit and Design Review to allow a new five story, 278,600-square-foot research and development two-building complex, including a bridge connection between Buildings 15 & 16, located at 330 Point San Bruno Boulevard in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.39, 20.40, 20.81 & 20.85 Public Hearing opened. Associate Planner Beaudin presented the staff report. Genentech representative Shar Zamanpour and design team members Gary Nagamuri and Michael Painter presented the project to the Commission. There being no speakers, the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Honan, Vice Chairperson Giusti and Commissioner Teglia noted that the applicant responded to the Commission's concerns. Commissioner Teglia questioned if the parking lot adjacent to the Bay Trail at the point would remain as public parking and access for the Bay Trail. Associate Planner Beaudin stated this is correct. Chairperson Prouty questioned how far the eyebrows of the building would be set out? Mr. Nagamuri noted that it is about 18 inches. Chairperson Prouty commended the applicant on stealthing of the mechanical equipment and the landscaping. S:\M%v~utBS\12-06-0~ RFG Mi.N,utCS.dOC PG1gC 4 Of 8 Planning Commission Meeting of December 6, 2007 Motion Teglia /Second Giusti to approve P07-0091: UP07-0015 & DR07-0057 Roll call: Ayes: Commissioner Honan, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Teglia, Vice Chairperson Giusti and Chairperson Prouty Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Commissioner Sim and Commissioner Zemke Approved by majority voice vote. 4. Zoning Text Amendment -Displays GENENTECH INC/applicant GENENTECH INC/owner 1 DNA Way P07-0118: ZA07-0006 Zoning Text Amendment to the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District (SSFMC Section 20.40) to include regulations for signs and banner displays in accordance with Sections 20.40, 20.76, 20.86. Public Hearing opened. Associate Planner Beaudin presented the staff report. There being no speakers the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Teglia noted that the Zoning text amendment will be for the Genentech Campus only and not for another part of the City. Assistant City Attorney Woodruff noted that this is correct. Motion Teglia /Second Moore to approve resolution 2665(a)-2007. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Sim and Commissioner Zemke -absent. Recess taken at 9:00 p.m. Recalled at 9:10 p.m. 5. Type "C" Display Sign -Buildings 4, 20 8~ 36 GENENTECH INC/applicant GENENTECH INC/owner 1 DNA Way (B4) 1000-1400 Grandview Dr.(620) 1776 Grandview Dr. (636) P07-0119: SIGNS07-0050 Type "C" (Display) Sign application to allow Genentech to install and manage displays on Buildings 4, 20, and 36 on the Genentech Campus in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.40, 20.76, & 20.86. Public Hearing opened. Associate Planner Beaudin presented the staff report. Shar Zamanpour, Genentech, gave a PowerPoint presentation on the proposed banner signs. There being no speakers the Public Hearing was closed. s:\M%vi,utes\22-o6-0~ Rpc r~nCv~utes.doc pagesof 8 Planning Commission Meeting of December 6, 2007 Motion Teglia /Second Moore to approve P07-0119:Signs07-0050. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Sim and Commissioner Zemke -absent. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 6. 6 Month Review - EI Faro Use Permit Jesus Ontiveros/applicant Ruth L. Bushman/owner 435 EI Camino Real P05-0124: UP05-0025 Use Permit allowing adrive-thru window addition to an existing restaurant situated at 435 EI Camino Real in the Retail Commercial Zoning District (C-1 ), in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.22 and 20.81. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. Commissioner Honan commended EI Faro on the cleanliness of their site. Motion Teglia /Second Moore to accept the review as fulfillment of the conditions of approval. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Sim and Commissioner Zemke -absent. 7. Use Permit Review -Double Day Office Double Day Office Services/applicant Krieger, Clarence/owner 340 Shaw Rd. P03-0137: UP03-0026 Use Permit to allow outdoor storage of trucks and extended hours of operation from 6 AM to 2 AM in the M-1 Industrial Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC 20.30.040 (a), 20.30.040 (b) and 20.81. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. Commissioner Honan noted that the outstanding issues have gone on for too long and added that the extension can be limited to 30 days rather than 90. Senior Planner Carlson noted that staff can return in a shorter period of time with an update to the Commission. Commissioner Teglia questioned if the City Attorney or Code Enforcement could follow up on with violation notices accompanied with fines. Assistant City Attorney Woodruff stated that fines and Code Enforcement actions are part of the options in the staff report. Commissioner Teglia noted that the extension could be adequate time for the applicant to get the last of the issues resolved with regard to water quality. Commissioner Honan concurred. Motion Honan /Second Giusti to continue the review for an additional 45 days. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Sim and Commissioner Zemke -absent. 8. General Plan Conformity Finding The City of SSF/applicant California Water Ser/owner s:~riCwutes~2-o6-0~ Rpc NtCwutes.doc Page 6 0{ a Planning Commission Meeting of December 6, 2007 80 Chestnut Avenue P07-0122: PCA07-0006 General Plan Conformity finding for a potential purchase by the City of South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency of property located at 80 Chestnut Ave in the O-S Open Space Zone District, in accordance with provisions of State Planning Law (Govt. Code Section 65402) Senior Planner Lappen presented the staff report. The Commission did not have any issues with the proposed General Plan Conformity finding. Motion Giusti /Second Moore to approve P07-0122: PCA07-0006. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Sim and Commissioner Zemke -absent. 9. General Plan Conformity Finding The City of SSF/applicant Trinidad, Edgar A/owner 314 Miller Ave P07-0123: PCA07-0007 General Plan Conformity finding for a potential purchase by the City of South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency of property located at 314 Miller Avenue in the (D-C-L) Downtown Commercial Zone District, in accordance with provisions of State Planning Law (Govt. Code Section 65402). Senior Planner Lappen presented the staff report. The Commission did not have any issues with the proposed General Plan Conformity finding. Motion Teglia /Second Giusti to approve P07-0123: PCA07-0006. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Sim and Commissioner Zemke -absent. 10. General Plan Conformity Finding The City of SSF/applicant Price, Ronald 8~ Florine/owner 1 Chestnut Ave P07-0124: PCA07-0008 General Plan Conformity finding for a potential purchase by the City of South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency of property located at 1 Chestnut Avenue (APN 011-322-030) in the Planned Commercial Zone District, in accordance with provisions of State Planning Law (Govt. Code Section 65402). Senior Planner Lappen presented the staff report. The Commission did not have any issues with the proposed General Pfan Conformity finding. Motion Moore /Second Teglia to accept the review as fulfillment of the conditions of approval. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Sim and Commissioner Zemke -absent. 11. General Plan Conformity Finding The City of SSF/applicant Raffin, Evelyn L/owner 216 Baden Ave S:\M%v~,utCS\12-06-0~ RPC M%v~utes.doc Fage~of a Planning Commission Meeting of December 6, 2007 P07-0125: PCA07-0009 General Plan Conformity finding for a potential purchase by the City of South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency of property located at 216 Baden Avenue (APN 012-334-030) in the D-C Downtown Commercial Zone District in accordance with provisions of State Planning Law (Govt. Code Section 65402). Senior Planner Lappen presented the staff report. The Commission did not have any issues with the proposed General Plan Conformity finding. Motion Teglia /Second Giusti to accept the review as fulfillment of the conditions of approval. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Sim and Commissioner Zemke -absent. 12. Resolution to endorse the Ten Guiding Principles of the Grand Boulevard Initiative. Associate Planner Smalley presented the staff report. Motion Teglia/ Second Moore to approve resolution 2665(b)-2007. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Sim and Commissioner Zemke -absent. 13. Wet Weather Program Presentation. Senior Civil Engineer Dennis Chuck and presented the wet weather program. ITEMS FROM STAFF Senior Planner Lappen thanked Commissioner Honan for her service on the Commission. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION Chairperson Prouty noted that it has been a pleasure working with Commissioner Honan and thanked her for the service given to the City. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC ADJOURNMENT None 10:07 P.M. Motion Honan /Second Moore to adjourn the meeting. Adjourned by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Honan and Commissioner Moore absent. Susy Kalkin Secretary to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco SK/bla s:\Miwutes\12-o6-0~ izpc MLv~.utes.doc Mary Giusti, Chairperson Planning Commission City of South San Francisco page 8 of e MINUTES February 7, 2008 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION TAPE 1 CALL TO ORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7:30 D.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Prouty, Commissioner Zemke, Vice Chairperson Teglia and Chairperson Giusti ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Planning Division: Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner Allison Knapp, Consultant Planner Bertha Aguilar, Admin. Asst. II City Attorney: Sky Woodruff, Assistant City Attorney Police Department: Sergeant John Kailas, Planning Liaison Fire Prevention. Tom Carney, Code Enforcement Officer CHAIR COMMENTS Presentation of a resolution commending Judith Honan for Planning Commission Service. Chairperson Giusti presented a resolution 2666-2008 to Judy Honan. Judy Honan thanked staff and Marty Van Duyn for the great job done throughout her years on the Commission and noted that being on the Commission was not hard work because she was doing something she loved. Chief Planner Kalkin stated thanked Judy Honan on behalf of her staff for a wonderful working relationship throughout the years. Commissioner Prouty, Commissioner Sim and Commissioner Moore thanked commissioner Honan for her service to the community. AGENDA REVIEW No Changes ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR None 1. Approval of regular meeting minutes of September 20, 2007. Motion Prouty /Second Teglia to approve the Consent Calendar. Approved by unanimous voice vote. PUBLIC HEARING 2. Myers Development/applicant Myers Development/owner San Bruno Mnt/Bayshore Blvd PM07-0001: P06-0073 Parcel map to divide the 17.91 acre parcel known as "The Development Parcel" (APN No. 007-650-160) into two parcels: Lot A 15.00 acres and Lot B 2.91 acres; located in the Terrabay Specific Plan District in accordance with Planning Commission Meeting of February 7, 2008 SSFMC 20.63 and Title 19 (Subdivision Ord.) Public Hearing opened. Consultant Planner Knapp presented the staff report. Vice Chairperson Teglia acknowledged the need for reciprocal easements and parking, and questioned if this would be managed like an ownership association where the association would be responsible for maintenance. Consultant Planner Knapp noted that the maintenance responsibilities would rest with the two parcel owners and be apportioned according to each of the owners' proportional share of the land.. Both owners would need to meet to deal with potential conflicts. Shepherd Heary, representing Myers Development, was present to answer any questions. There being no speakers the Public Hearing was closed. Motion Sim /Second Teglia to approve PM07-0001. Roll Call: Ayes: Commissioner Zemke, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Prouty, Vice Chairperson Teglia and Chairperson Giusti Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None Approved by roll call vote. 3. Burns & McDonnell Engineering/applicant Shell Oil Products/owner 135 N. Access Rd P07-0135: UP07-0024 & DR07-0080 Use Permit and Design review allowing an 8 foot tall fence within the minimum require front setback situated at 135 North Access Road, in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.32, 20.73, 20.81 and 20.85. Chief Planner Kalkin presented the staff report. Roshi Mozafar, representing the applicant, noted she was available to answer any questions the Commission might have. Vice Chairperson Teglia questioned if the K-rail would be painted. Chief Planner Kalkin replied that the K-rail would be painted to blend in with the landscaping. Vice Chairperson Teglia asked if there would be landscaping. Chief Planner Kalkin noted that the proposed landscaping consists of rhaphiolepis which is a low maintenance species of bush. Vice Chairperson Teglia was concerned that the rhaphiolepis was not going to be enough landscaping and noted that he would like to get more landscaping the site. The project applicant noted that sheet MS11 showed some of the landscaping and noted that the bushes would be planted every three feet. Commissioner Sim questioned what the species were, to which the applicant responded that the species were as recommended by the landscape architect. Commissioner Zemke questioned if there would bean irrigation system for the landscaping. The project applicant noted that there would be. Motion Teglia /Second Sim to continue P07-0135: DR07-0080 to February 21, 2008 to allow the applicant to incorporate additional landscaping into the plans. Approved by unanimous voice vote. S:\MbvLUtCS\02-0~-08 RPC Mw~,utES.dDc Page2Df4 Planning Commission Meeting of February 7, 2008 4. Parking Company of America/applicant Elias S. Hannat/owner 160 Produce Ave P06-0088: PUD07-0003, UP06-0020 & DR06-0072 Commercial Planned Unit Development Permit allowing a combined on-site and off-site landscape area of 14,113 square feet instead of the minimum requirement of 47,350 square feet. Use Permit and Design Review allowing a new canopy entry and landscaping, 24 hour operation, generating in excess of 100 average daily vehicle trips vehicles, fences greater than 3 feet in height within the minimum required street setbacks, and expanding the existing commercial parking use on several lots adjacent to San Mateo Drive in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.30, 20.32, 20.73, 20.81, 20.84 & 20.85 Chief Planner Kalkin noted that the applicant had requested that this item be continued to March 6, 2008. Motion Prouty /Second Moore to continue P06-0088: PUD07-0003, UP06-0020 & DR06-0072 to March 6, 2008. On the question Vice Chairperson Teglia stated that the staff report has offsite landscaping as one of the options and asked that the applicant elaborate on the opportunities for this. Approved by unanimous voice vote. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS ITEMS FROM STAFF ITEMS FROM COMMISSION None • Landscaping -Chairperson Giusti noted that the island along 101 adjacent to the Sheraton Four Points hotel should be landscaped because it is an entry to the City, but was unsure if it was Caltrans or the City's property responsibility. • Health and Safety -Vice Chairperson Giusti noted that there are always birds fighting for food at the Belle Air Road Costco and questioned if this posed a health issue. • McLellan median -Commissioner Sim noted that there is a median divide on McLellan near the new transit village developments and was interested in the details and questioned if the concrete barrier will remain in the center. Chief Planner Kalkin noted that the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) reviewed it and they have a recommendation. She added that what currently is at the site may not be the final solution. • Oyster Point Blvd. -Commissioner Prouty questioned if Kaiser is going to build the medical facility on Oyster Point Boulevard or if they were only going to install landscaping for the time being. Chief Planner Kalkin replied the Kaiser facility is now under construction. • Street trees -Commissioner Teglia noted his concern with the lack of trees in South San Francisco. He pointed out that the intention to improve the look of the City is there but City staff has not embraced this. He added that the street tree species are types that won't grow very tall because the streets department does not want to deal with roots buckling the sidewalk. He pointed out that root barriers can be used to eliminate this issue. He suggested a meeting to discuss better options for trees in the City rather than the trees being used now. • Intersection -Commissioner Teglia questioned why there were now three stoplight controlled intersections along Oyster Point Boulevard: Gateway, Gull, Eccles. He asked that staff report back on this inquiry. • Street trees (Cont'd)- Commissioner Moore questioned if staff had any input on choosing the type of vegetation being planted. Chief Planner Kalkin noted that staff does have input on street trees with new development but they must be selected from a list of approved street trees. Chairperson Prouty stated that the City has an easement for installing trees and with funds available trees can be installed on a block by block basis. s:\Nt~wutes\o2-off-08 RpC Nt%wutes.doc page s of -~ Planning Commission Meeting of February 7, 2008 Commissioner Teglia noted that if someone requests a tree in front of their home, one will be installed but some are not appropriate to the environment. He added that some trees need irrigation and some don't but it is time to raise the bar at a City level. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC None ADJOURNMENT 8:13 P.M. Motion Teglia /Second Prouty to adjourn the meeting. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Susy Kalkin Mary Giusti, Chairperson Secretary to the Planning Commission Planning Commission City of South San Francisco City of South San Francisco SK/bla s:~n~Cwutes~o2-off-08 RAC Mtwutes.doc page ~ of 4 MINUTES August 7, 2008 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION TAPE i CALL TO ORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7:30 u.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: CHAIR COMMENTS Commissioner Oborne, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Prouty, Commissioner Zemke, Vice Chairperson Teglia and Chairperson Giusti None Planning Division: Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner Steve Carlson, Senior Planner Girard Beaudin, Senior Planner Linda Ajello, Associate Planner Sean Flanagan, Associate Planner Bertha Aguilar, Admin. Asst. II City Attorney: Brian Grossman, Assistant City Attorney Engineering Division: Sam Bautista, Senior Civil Engineer Police Department: Sergeant Jon Kallas, Planning Liaison Chairperson Giusti announced the passing of Joseph Fernekes and noted that the meeting would be adjourned in his honor. Commissioner Prouty asked those present to stand and observe a moment of silence for Joe Fernekes while he rang 8 bells to honor Mr. Fernekes who was an honorary member of the Oyster Point Yacht Club. He added that the City had lost a valuable member of the community noting that Joe had played an integral part in so many of the City's projects. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that Joe Fernekes moved to SSF when he was 21, had been a member of the School Board of Trustees and his PE teacher. He pointed out that he had certainly left his mark on South San Francisco. Commissioner Zemke noted that Joe was his role model and will miss him. Commissioner Sim reiterated the Commission's sentiments. Commissioner Moore noted that he worked with Joe on the Centennial Committee and will also miss him. Commissioner Oborne recalled seeing Joe when she was in the Citizen's Academy and was impressed that he had been present every week. AGENDA REVIEW No Changes ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of regular meeting minutes of July 17, 2008. 2. Type "C" Sign Program Planning Commission Meeting of August 7, 2008 S & W Signs/applicant Citi Garden/owner 245 S. Airport Blvd P08-0039: Signs08-0024 & DR08-0018 (Continue to August 21, 2008) Type "C" Sign Permit for the Citi Garden Hotel/SFO at 245 So. Airport Blvd in the Planned Commercial Zone (P-C-L) District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.24, 20.76 & 20.86 Motion Teglia /Second Prouty to approve the Consent Calendar. Chairperson Giusti -abstained from approval of the minutes. PUBLIC HEARING 3. Type "C" Sign Program -Summerhill SummerHill Homes/Owner Marketshare, Inc/Applicant 1410 EI Camino Real P03-0092: SignsS08-0028 Type "C" Master Sign Permit for Summerhill Homes to install temporary on-site marketing signs at 1410 EI Camino Real in the Transit Village (lV-RH) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.27, 20.76 & 20.86. Public Hearing opened. Chief Planner Kalkin presented the staff report. James Gochnauer, Marketshare, noted he was available for any questions the Commission might have. Vice Chairperson Teglia was concerned with the bay window area being covered with a sign for a year since it is such a prominent feature Commissioner Prouty and Commissioner Oborne agreed with Vice Chairperson Teglia's comment. Commissioner Oborne noted that a change of color might improve the look and feel of the sign. Vice Chairperson Teglia stated that the applicant can accomplish their goals with the ground signs but felt the sign on the bay window was too much. Mr. Gochnauer noted that they are open to changing the color of the sign in question. There being no speakers the Public Hearing was closed. Motion Teglia /Second Prouty to approve P03-0092: Signs8-0028 with deletion of the clinging window signs. On the auestion• Commissioner Zemke asked the applicant if they were willing to remove the clinging sign and replace it with a ground sign on the corner. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that this is a good alternative. Motion Teglia /Second Prouty to amend the motion as suggested by Commissioner Zemke Roll Call: Ayes: Commissioner Oborne, Commissioner Zemke, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Prouty, Vice Chairperson Teglia and Chairperson Giusti Noes: None s:\Miwutes\o8-off-08 RpC Mtv~ utes.doc page 2 of 6 Planning Commission Meeting of August 7, 2008 Abstain: None Absent: None Approved by roll call vote. 4. Time Extension for Home Depot Greenberg Farrow - C. Shaw/applicant Acadia D.R. Mgmt Inc/owner 900 Dubuque Ave. PCA08-0004 (P05-0035, PUD05-0003, UP05-0010, TDM05-0003, Signs05-0044, DR05-0020 & EIR05-0003) Time Extension -Commercial Planned Unit Development Permit allowing parking in a portion of the front setback; Use Permit allowing outdoor sales, outdoor storage, a use generating in excess of 100 vehicle trips per day, up to 24 hour daily operation, and the determination of a parking rate; Design Review of a 101,171 square foot Home Depot store, a 24,215 square foot garden center, open at-grade parking and a 2 level parking structure; Transportation Demand Management Plan reducing vehicle trips; Type C Sign Permit allowing a master sign program consisting of new building facade signs with a total sign area of 1,103 square feet located at 900 Dubuque Avenue (APN 015-021-090 & SBE 135- 41-41 PAR.1) in the Planned Commercial Zoning District (P-C-L) in accordance with SSFMC Chapters: 20.24, 20.74, 20.76, 20.78, 20.81, 20.84, 20.85, 20.86 & 20.120. An EIR assessing the environmental impacts associated with the development was previously certified by the City Council on July 26, 2006). Public Hearing opened. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. Beverly Metz, Home Depot Senior Real Estate Manager, noted that they are revisiting their budget and re- evaluating construction costs for the approved Home Depot design. Commissioner Prouty noted concern with granting an extension if the properly would be vacant for another year. He added that there have been leasing signs posted at the site and questioned if the applicant intended to lease the building. Ms. Metz noted that they have decided not to move forward with the San Francisco location which changes their market strategy and improves the viability of the South San Francisco location. She noted that they have been marketing the property to allow time for them to evaluate the construction costs and design. Commissioner Zemke noted that the Lowe's project turned out very nice and was concerned that Home Depot will cut costs on the design of the building. Ms. Metz noted that they are fully committed to maintaining the approved design elements, but are looking at construction and geotechnical costs. Commissioner Sim asked if the applicant is looking at the internal and functional aspects of the building rather than the aesthetics. Commissioner Moore stated that there seems to be some sort of competition because Lowe's and Home Depot stores are built next to each other in other areas. Ms. Metz noted that shopping patterns and number of stores within a market can help or can hurt. She noted that in Metro 280 there are two Home Depot stores that are successful that are across the street from each other. She stated that Home Depot had felt both this and the San Francisco location would be too much, but the market shift has been a good thing for their business because it drives shoppers. Commissioner Moore noted that Home Depot has closed some stores. Ms. Metz replied that they have closed 15 stores across the nation but are monopolizing on market conditions in this area. s:\Mtv~utes\o8-o~-08 RPC riCwutes.doc Page s of 6 Planning Commission Meeting of August 7, 2008 Public Hearing closed. Motion Teglia /Second Sim to grant a one year extension. On the auestion• Commissioner Prouty noted that he is not in favor of a one year extension and felt more comfortable granting a 6 month extension to see what occurs with the site. He was concerned with the property being vacant for a long period of time. Ms. Metz was concerned that 6 months would not be sufficient time if this required them to go through the planning and building processes but could be okay if they could with return for another 6 month extension if needed at that time. Vice Chairperson Teglia added that the design changes should not be very substantial and in 6 months the applicant could have a good estimate on a construction schedule. Motion Teglia /Second Sim to approve resolution 2674-2008 with a recommendation fora 6 month time extension. Roll Call: Ayes: Commissioner Oborne, Commissioner Zemke, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Prouty, Vice Chairperson Teglia and Chairperson Giusti Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None Approved by roll call vote. Vice Chairperson Teglia asked that staff convey to Council that the 6 month review is predicated on the expectation that either plans will be submitted for finalization, or the applicant demonstrates substantial progress towards submitting construction plans. 5. Anchor Drugs Richard & ]ennifer Jajeh /Owner John Muffareh /Applicant PCA08-0003: (P07-0114, DR07-0071, SIGNS07-0049 & VAR07-0006) Review of alternative methods for changeable copy and refinements to the proposed signs related to the conversion of an existing office building into a mix of retail and medical office uses at 161 S. Spruce Avenue in the Planned Commercial (P-C-L) Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC 20.24, 20.76, 20.82 and 20.85. Chief Planner Kalkin presented the staff report. John Muffareh noted he was available to answer any questions the Commission might have. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that LCD signs are less intrusive than LED signs. He noted that when the Commission discussed the item he was under the impression that the announcements were going to be for hours and certain specials the business would have. He noted that 20 feet reaches the sidewalk and Spruce Avenue and questioned what type of messages the applicant was going to put on the sign and what type of audience they were reaching out to. Mr. Muffareh noted that the location of the sign places it at 20 feet to the curve and for drivers on Spruce it does not allow enough clarity. He stated that they are looking at 40 to 60 foot viewing distance and anything closer will distort the image. He pointed out that an LCD unit requires multiple screens and is best designed for viewing video at a much closer range. Vice Chairperson Teglia questioned if this is the best technology available. Mr. Muffareh noted that it is good for viewing videos or a moving display. Vice Chairperson Teglia clarified that the display will not be running letters but s:~riLwutes~o8-o~-08 RpC M%~.utes.doc page ~ o{ 6 Planning Commission Meeting of August 7, 2008 a static display that will change. Mr. Muffareh replied affirmatively and noted that it is a privilege to have the opportunity to have this type of sign in the City. He added that the advertisements would be screening tests, vaccinations and on occasion a sponsor's logo. He noted that their main goal is to advertise a service to the members of the City and not sales advertising. Commissioner Oborne noted her concern about the potential for the copy on the signs to eventually cross over from this type of service advertising to advertising of goods. Commissioner Zemke asked that the applicant describe where the sign would be located. Mr. Muffareh noted that it would be along the street where the green belt is located. Commissioner Sim noted that the graphics are not available for details such as stone texture and other details. Mr. Muffareh noted that it is part of the original design approval and added that in terms of the copy, it will be straight forward without any special additions. Chief Planner Kalkin noted that that the copy was conditioned and read Condition of Approval A7 into the record as it was approved by the Commission for project number P07-0114, speaking of the type of copy allowed. Motion Teglia /Second Sim to accept the review as fulfillment of the Conditions of Approval Roll Call: Ayes: Commissioner Oborne, Commissioner Zemke, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Prouty, Vice Chairperson Teglia and Chairperson Giusti Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None Approved by roll call vote. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 6. Update on 648 Commercial Avenue Chief Planner Kalkin gave a status report on design outcome for the 648 Commercial Avenue project. Rita Fontana (represented her parents Serafino and Rose Fontana) noted that the this meeting was meant to have the Commission discuss the comments of the Design Review Board (DRB) on July 17"'. She pointed out that the side entrance was removed at that meeting and the properly owner was to obtain a survey showing the placement of the structure on the lot. She added that the architect stated that the owner, Mr. Valencia, would like to revisit the side entrance but opted to table it in order to expedite the process. She pointed out that the Commission's packet continues to reflect the side entrance on the plans at the basement floor. She was informed by Senior Planner Beaudin that the revised plans were in plan check and when she spoke to Chief Building Official Kirkman she found that the stairs were removed and the planter remained. She added that she discussed the surveyors map with her Civil Engineer, Mr. Arata, and noted that the new map by, Mr. Valencia's Civil Engineer, Dominguez and Associates, shows the three story structure five feet from the property line on the corner closest to Commercial Avenue and on the back of the house it is 4 feet 11 inches from the property line. She added that the map reflects that the two story structure in the back is one and a half feet from the property line, but it is actually 9 inches from the property line per Mr. Arata's survey. Ms. Fontana noted that with the history of the project a more accurate survey needs to be performed. She noted that the measurements were to be taken from Mr. Arata's survey and the survey does not reflect this. Vice Chairperson Teglia asked staff if the side entrance was deleted. Chief Planner Kalkin replied affirmatively and noted that the applicant agreed to do so at the DRB meeting. Commissioner Prouty questioned which map would be used. Chief Planner Kalkin replied that these are both licensed engineers and will have to be reconciled through a third party via the City Engineer. She added that this section of the City is difficult because there are not many monuments to use as a starting point. Ms. Fontana s:\M%v~utes\og-off-og Rpc MCwutes.doc Pagesof 6 Planning Commission Meeting of August 7, 2008 pointed out that it was difficult for them to do the survey because there are no monuments in the area at all. Vice Chairperson Teglia questioned if there was still an issue since the side entrance was removed. Chief Planner Kalkin noted that the setback does not change but there will not be any closer encroachment and the initial issue was a walkway on the side of the property which will not be there. Commissioner Prouty noted that the Commission needs be confident in staff's ability to resolve this issue. Commissioner Sim noted his concern with the elevations stating that it looks like a false facade sitting on top of a thin horizontal slab, the columns are on a different grid line and the parapet looks like it is falling apart. Vice Chairperson Teglia and Commissioner Sim discussed the lack in appealing aesthetics of the design. Vice Chairperson Teglia added that the Commission tried to accommodate the applicant and is concerned that the home will stick out like a sore thumb. Commissioner Sim noted that there is no base ground level and the home does not feel like it has firmness. Mr. Valencia, owner, noted that the reason for this is that there is a structural beam and the railing cantilevers over the beam. He added that the railing is in the front portion and does not go behind. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that there are exterior railings that the public is going to be looking through. Mr. Valencia noted that the railings will be on the outside perimeter of the deck. Commissioner Sim noted that it could work if the railing goes in and engages the facade. Mr. Valencia noted this could be done. The Commission discussed the option of appealing the Chief Planner's approval and it was decided that the Chief Planner can incorporate the Commission's concerns as items that need to be addressed. Commissioner Sim suggested that the railing could look more 3 dimensional such as a bay window. He encouraged the applicant to engage the facade. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that the Chief Planner can incorporate these suggestions and give the Commission and update as to the final decision. ITEMS FROM STAFF Chief Planner Kalkin presented new Associate Planners Sean Flanagan and Linda Ajello to the Planning Commission. Associate Planners Ajello and Flanagan gave a brief summary of their work history. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION None ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC None AD]OURNMENT 9:23 P.M. Motion Prouty /Second Moore to adjourn the meeting in memory of Joseph Fernekes. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Susy Kalkin Mary Giusti, Chairperson Secretary to the Planning Commission Planning Commission City of South San Francisco City of South San Francisco SK/bla s:~MCwutes\o8-off-og Rpc riLwutes.doc Page 6 of 6 ~~xS Planning Commission ~o ,.,,.,:~~~. 0 o Staff Report c9lIFOR~~A DATE: September 4, 2008 TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO MUNCIPAL CODE TO AMEND CHAPTER 20, SECTIONS 20.06.230, 20.26.060 AND 20.74.060 TO PROVIDE PROVISIONS FOR SIDEWALK DINING IN THE DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL (D-C) ZONING DISTRICT IN CONJUNCTION WITH RESTAURANTS OR OTHER BUSINESSES SELLING FOOD AND/OR BEVERAGES, AND RELATED STANDARDS FOR SIDEWALK SEATING. Owner: City of South San Francisco Applicant: City of South San Francisco Case Nos.: P08-0055 & ZA08-0005 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the attached ordinance and related criteria and standards allowing sidewalk seating in the Downtown Commercial (D-C) Zoning District, subject to the approval of a Sidewalk Dining Permit and adherence to the City's Sidewalk Dining Standards. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: On September 7, 2007, the City Council conducted a study session to discuss long-term development opportunities and strategies as well as urban design ideas for the Downtown area. One outcome of this study session was the highlighted need for visual upgrades to the public spaces in the Downtown to complement the civic initiatives celebrating the City's Centennial Year, and outdoor dining opportunities were specifically mentioned as a feature that should be encouraged. Staff retained the services of an urban design firm to apply a creative approach to upgrading the Grand Avenue streetscape and other public areas. From field visits and review of historic photographs, the attached Downtown Improvement Program was developed. The program provides a framework within which to consider individual upgrade projects by placing elements in short, medium, or long-term categories. Short-term improvements include the acquisition of new sidewalk planters, hanging baskets, banners, provisions for sidewalk seating and consolidated newspaper racks. Medium-term improvements include new trees, historic markers, new benches, and updated trash receptacles. Long-term elements include improvements to the breezeways and alleys, new gates on existing surface parking lots, storm water runnels, new bus shelters and a potential new park. Staff Report To: Planning Commission Re: P08-055 -Downtown Sidewalk Seating Ordinance September 4, 2008 Page 2 of 4 On March 3, 2008 the program was presented to the merchants at a Downtown Subcommittee meeting, where the general reaction of the merchants was overwhelmingly positive, and it was formally endorsed by the Redevelopment Agency in May 2008. Based on direction received, the subject Zoning Ordinance Amendment has been drafted with the goal of facilitating the sidewalk dining component of the program by providing a streamlined permitting process based on clear performance standards. DISCUSSION: Consistent with policies in the General Plan and the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan for the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project, and direction from the City Council, staff has drafted provisions to allow the operation of sidewalk dining in conjunction with food and beverage establishments in the Downtown Commercial (D-C) Zoning District. The intent of the provisions are to provide for increased activity, revitalization, and business opportunities in the downtown area and create a pedestrian environment to encourage multiple stops by visitors and more frequent visits Downtown. Since sidewalk dining would be conducted on sidewalks located within the City right-of--way, specific criteria and standards have been developed to ensure that the health, safety and welfare of the public is protected, with the least imposition on pedestrians, vehicular movement, and downtown business patrons and proprietors. As proposed, establishments wishing to create a sidewalk dining area would be required to apply for a Sidewalk Dining Permit, which would be subject to approval by the Zoning Administrator. The Sidewalk Dining Permit would be a revocable encroachment permit, which would allow the applicant to utilize the City right-of--way for the purposes of establishing an outdoor seating area for its patrons. For establishments that provide alcoholic beverage service, approval of a use permit would also be required. It is also proposed that outdoor dining areas be exempt from additional parking requirements. The Criteria and Standards, attached, that have been developed by staff are intended to ensure that the permitee and property owner maintain the Sidewalk Dining Area in a safe, orderly, and clean condition to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public who use the right-of--way for pedestrian travel. The Criteria and Standards include the design, maintenance and general standards for Sidewalk Dining. The criteria and standards include: maintaining an unobstructed four-foot path of travel between the defined sidewalk dining area and pedestrian right-of--way; compliance with Americans with Disability Act (ADA) Standards; not obstructing any points of building ingress and/or egress; restricting the location of the sidewalk dining area when located on a corner lot; maintenance and appearance of all outdoor furniture, umbrellas and other associated items; and prohibiting any storage of materials in the City right- of-way, thus requiring that all furniture and appurtences be removed from the public right-of--way at the close of each business day. For establishments serving alcoholic beverages, the permiee will be required to establish a barrier in order to separate the Sidewalk Dining Area from the pedestrian path of travel. Said barriers must be Staff Report To: Planning Commission Re: P08-055 -Downtown Sidewalk Seating Ordinance September 4, 2008 Page 3 of 4 temporary in nature and cannot be permanently affixed to the ground or building structure. Portable planters with live plants, removable bollards and other similar features may be used to provide the enclosure. The height of the enclosure will be restricted to a minimum of one-foot and maximum of three-feet. The permitted hours of operation for sidewalk dining are predicated upon the City's noise level standard for the D-C Zoning District, SSFMC Chapter 8.32.030, which permits a maximum of 60 dB between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. The permitted hours of operation for any Sidewalk Dining Area shall correspond with those as dictated by the City's Noise Regulations. The Zoning Administrator and Code Enforcement Officer will be responsible for the enforcement of the Sidewalk Dining Standards and Criteria. The Zoning Administrator will have the authority to revoke or modify any Sidewalk Dining Permit that interferes with the public use of the right-of--way and any violation of the conditions of the permit will be subject to revocation of the permit and/or Enforcement, Penalties and Legal Procedures, pursuant to SSFMC 20.98. Similar ordinances exist throughout the state, as well as in other Bay Area communities, including the Cities of Pleasanton and Mountain View. Staff researched and reviewed similar ordinances and worked with all applicable City departments and agencies in order to develop the draft Sidewalk Dining Criteria and Standards for South San Francisco. Implementation of the Sidewalk Dining Permit will require several Code Amendments, as shown in Exhibit A of the Resolution, as well as adoption of Criteria and Standards, also attached. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Staff has determined that the proposed project is categorically exempt pursuant to the provisions of Class 11, Accessory Structures, Section 15311(c) Placement of seasonal or temporary use items such as lifeguard towers, mobile food units, portable restrooms, or similar items in generally the same locations from time to time in publicly owned parks, stadiums, or other facilities designed for public use; Class 1, Existing Facilities, Section 15301, Minor alteration of existing facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of an existing use; Class 4, Minor Alterations to Land Section 15304 (e) Minor temporary use of land having negligible or no permanent effects on the environment, including carnivals, sales of Christmas trees., etc.; and Class 5, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations, Section 15305 (b) Issuance of minor encroachment permits. (CEQA Guidelines). RECOMMENDATION: The proposed ordinance amendment is consistent with the South San Francisco General Plan Land Use and Economic Development objectives and guiding policies to promote Downtown revitalization. The Staff Report To: Planning Commission Re: P08-055 -Downtown Sidewalk Seating Ordinance September 4, 2008 Page 4 of 4 Sidewalk Dining Criteria and Standards will establish comprehensive design standards and guidelines for sidewalk dining in the Downtown; promote business attraction, retention and expansion; promote downtown's vitality and economic well-being; and encourage development of Downtown as a pedestrian friendly mixed-use activity center. Therefore, City staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution recommending, that the City Council adopt the ordinance and related criteria and standards allowing sidewalk seating in the Downtown Commercial (D-C) Zoning District, subject to the approval of a Sidewalk Dining Permit. Linda Ajello, AICP, Associate Pl er ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution and Findings Draft Sidewalk Criteria and Standards Exhibit #A -Draft Ordinance Amendments South San Francisco Downtown Improvements and the Centennial Celebration RESOLUTION NO. PLANNING COMMISSION, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL CODE TO AMEND CHAPTER 20, SECTIONS 20.06.230, 20.26.060 AND 20.74.060 TO PROVIDE PROVISIONS FOR SIDEWALK DINING 1N THE DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL (D-C) ZONING DISTRICT IN CONJUNCTION WITH RESTAURANTS OR OTHER BUSINESSES SELLING FOOD AND/OR BEVERAGES, AND RELATED STANDARDS FOR SIDEWALK SEATING. WHEREAS, at a September 7, 2007 study session, the City Council for the City of South San Francisco encouraged staff to explore opportunities for outdoor seating and dining in the Downtown Commercial zoning district; and, WHEREAS, the proposed zoning amendments and accompanying comprehensive design standards will allow restaurants and other businesses selling food and/or beverages in the Downtown Commercial zoning district, to apply for and obtain from the Zoning Administrator a sidewalk Dining Permit to allow for seating and dining within the publicright-of--way, with certain restrictions intended to protect the public health, safety, and welfare and maintain compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act; and, WHEREAS, the proposed zoning amendments and accompanying comprehensive design standards for sidewalk dining are consistent with the policies and objectives articulated in the City of South San Francisco General Plan, including but not limited to the following: 3.1-G-1: Promote Downtown's vitality and economic well-being, and its presence as the city's center. 3.1-G-2: Encourage development of Downtown as apedestrian-friendly mixed-use activity center with retail and visitor-oriented uses, business and personal services, government and professional offices, civic uses, and a variety of residential types and densities. 3.1-I-7: Undertake a Downtown streetscape improvement program. 9-G-2: Continue efforts to incorporate noise considerations into land use planning decisions. 9-I-7: Require the control of noise at source through site design, building design, landscaping, hours of operation, and other techniques, for new developments deemed to be noise generators. WHEREAS, staff has determined that approval of the proposed zoning amendments is categorically exempt from CEQA review under Class 11, Accessory Structures (CEQA Guidelines, § 15311(c)), Class 1, Existing Facilities (CEQA Guidelines, § 15301), Class 4, Minor Alterations to Land (CEQA Guidelines, § 15304(e)), and Class 5, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations (CEQA Guidelines, § 15305(b)); and, WHEREAS, on September 4, 2008, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed zoning amendments and comprehensive design standards for sidewalk dining in the Downtown Commercial zoning district. NOW THEREFORE, based on the entirety of the record before it, which includes without limitation, the South San Francisco General Plan, the South San Francisco Municipal Code, all reports, minutes and transcripts from the September 4, 2008 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco, does hereby RESOLVE as follows: The foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution. 2. Subject to conditions of approval, the Planning Commission recommends adoption of the proposed zoning amendments to sections 20.06.230, 20.26.060 and 20.74.060 to allow issuance of Sidewalk Dining Permits in the Downtown Commercial zoning district. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting held on the day of , 2008 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: u42~86.2 ATTEST: City Clerk DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 20, SECTIONS 20.06.230, 20.26.060 AND 20.74.060 TO PROVIDE PROVISIONS FOR SIDEWALK DINING IN THE DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL (D-C) ZONING DISTRICT IN CONJUNCTION WITH RESTAURANTS OR OTHER BUSINESSES SELLING FOOD AND/OR BEVERAGES, AND RELATED STANDARDS FOR SIDEWALK SEATING. WHEREAS, at a September 7, 2007 study session, the City Council for the City of South San Francisco encouraged staff to explore opportunities for outdoor seating and dining in the Downtown Commercial zoning district; and, WHEREAS, the proposed zoning amendments and accompanying comprehensive design standards will allow restaurants and other businesses selling food and/or beverages in the Downtown Commercial zoning district, to apply for and obtain from the Zoning Administrator a sidewalk Dining Permit to allow for seating and dining within the publicright-of--way, with certain restrictions intended to protect the public health, safety, and welfare and maintain compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act; and, WHEREAS, the proposed zoning amendments and accompanying comprehensive design standards for sidewalk dining are consistent with the policies and objectives articulated in the City of South San Francisco General Plan, including but not limited to the following: 3.1-G-1: Promote Downtown's vitality and economic well-being, and its presence as the city's center. 3.1-G-2: Encourage development of Downtown as apedestrian-friendly mixed-use activity center with retail and visitor-oriented uses, business and personal services, government and professional offices, civic uses, and a variety of residential types and densities. 3.1-I-7: Undertake a Downtown streetscape improvement program. 9-G-2: Continue efforts to incorporate noise considerations into land use planning decisions. 9-I-7: Require the control of noise at source through site design, building design, landscaping, hours of operation, and other techniques, for new developments deemed to be noise generators. DRAFT WHEREAS, the City Council has exercised its independent judgment and determined that approval of the proposed zoning amendments is categorically exempt from CEQA review under Class 11, Accessory Structures (CEQA Guidelines, § 15311(c)), Class 1, Existing Facilities (CEQA Guidelines, § 15301), Class 4, Minor Alterations to Land (CEQA Guidelines, § 15304(e)), and Class 5, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations (CEQA Guidelines, § 15305(b)); and, WHEREAS, on September 4, 2008, the Planning Commission, at a properly noticed public hearing, recommended approval of the proposed zoning amendments and comprehensive design standards for sidewalk dining in the Downtown Commercial zoning district, and on 2008, the City Council held a properly notice public hearing to consider the Planning Commission's recommendation. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco, does hereby ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. AMENDMENTS A. The South San Francisco Municipal Code is hereby amended to add subsection (h) to section 20.06.230 as follows (additions in double-underline; subsequent subsections shall be re- lettered sequentially): 20.06.230(h) Sidewalk Dining. An outdoor area set up and maintained on the public sidewalk, within the Citv right-of-wav. for the nuroose of selling and serving food and/or beverages for immediate consumption by an adioining restaurant or other business which sells and serves food and/or beverages for immediate consumption. B. The South San Francisco Municipal Code is hereby amended to add subsection (g) to section 20.26.060 as follows (additions in double-underline): 20.26.060(g) Sidewalk Dining shall be permitted subiect to approval of a Sidewalk Dining Permit by the Zoning Administrator. Sidewalk Dining. pursuant to Section 20.06.230, is exempt from the use permit requirement unless the sale of alcoholic beverages is included, in which case a use permit is required. Sidewalk Dining shall adhere to all standards identified in the "Sidewalk Dining Criteria and Standards". C. The South San Francisco Municipal Code is hereby amended to add subsection (k)(3) to section 20.74.060 as follows (additions in double-underline): 20.74.060(k)(3) Approved sidewalk dining areas are exempt from parking requirements. DRAFT SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid or unconstitutional, the remainder of this Ordinance, including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, provisions of this Ordinance are severable. The City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase hereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be held unconstitutional, invalid, or unenforceable. SECTION 3. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall be published once, with the names of those City Councilmembers voting for or against it, in the San Mateo Times, a newspaper of general circulation in the City of South San Francisco, as required by law, and shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its adoption. Adopted as an Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting of the City Council held the day of, , 2008 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: City Clerk As Mayor of the City of South San Francisco, I do hereby approve the foregoing Ordinance this day of , 2008. Pedro Gonzalez, Mayor 3 DRAFT 1142787.1 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SIDEWALK DINING CRITERIA AND STANDARDS September 4, 2008 Purpose Consistent with policies in the General Plan and the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan for the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project, the City wishes to allow the operation of sidewalk dining in conjunction with food and beverage establishments in the downtown area to provide for increased activity, revitalization, and business opportunities. Sidewalk Dining, which would be subject to a Sidewalk Dining Permit and adherence to the City's Sidewalk Seating Standards, would be conducted on sidewalks located within the City right-of--way. The City has developed specific criteria and guidelines to ensure that the health, safety and welfare of the public is protected with the least imposition on pedestrians, vehicular movement, and downtown business patrons and proprietors. Criteria and Standards A. Permit Required. A sidewalk dining permit, which is a revocable encroachment permit, shall be required for any tables, chairs, benches or other appurtenances placed in the public right- of-way for the purpose of establishing a sidewalk dining area. The Zoning Administrator shall issue said permit upon finding that all standards and requirements of this section have been met. Applications for sidewalk dining where alcoholic beverages will be served shall also require a use permit. B. Hours of Operation. Hours of operation shall be limited to the hours of operation of the associated indoor dining establishment, but shall not be permitted earlier than 7:00 a.m. or later than 10:00 p.m. C. Procedure. 1. Establishment of a sidewalk dining area shall require issuance of a sidewalk dining permit by the Zoning Administrator. The Zoning Administrator may establish conditions of approval for the sidewalk dining permit as necessary for conformance with the requirements of this section. 2. The sidewalk dining permit is nontransferable and, unless revoked, shall remain valid for one (1) year from the date of issuance. 3. In order to continue operation of a sidewalk dining area beyond the term of the permit, the owner/operator shall submit a new application for a sidewalk dining area. 4. Applications shall be submitted on the prescribed form to the Zoning Administrator. D. Standards. The following standards shall be met for the establishment and maintenance of a sidewalk dining area within the public right-of--way. 1. Physical Requirements. a. An unobstructed sidewalk clearance of four-feet shall be maintained for pedestrians at all times from the edge of any table, chair, bench, planter, or other appurtenances used as part of a sidewalk dining area (see Figure 1). b. Where the sidewalk dining area is located adjacent to the street, and in addition to the requirements stated in 1(a) above, aneighteen-inch clearance shall be maintained from the face of the curb to the sidewalk dining area unless there is parking parallel to the street, in which case atwo-foot clearance is required (see Figure 1). c. No sidewalk dining area shall obstruct any points of building ingress and/or egress. d. On a corner lot, no sidewalk dining area shall be located within the area bound by the extensions of the corner building walls between the building and the curb. e. All sidewalk dining furniture and appurtenances shall be removed at the close of each business day. No storage of materials on sidewalks is allowed. f. No portion of a sidewalk dining area shall be permanently attached to the sidewalk or building. g. Any umbrella, heater, or similar feature used in a sidewalk dining area shall be safely secured. h. Sidewalk seating is exempt from the parking requirements of SSFMC Chapter 20.74. 2. Design. a. The design and appearance of all proposed improvements or furniture, including but not limited to tables, chairs, benches, umbrellas and planters, to be placed in the sidewalk dining area shall present a coordinated theme and be compatible with the appearance and design of the building, as determined by the Zoning Administrator. b. The design of all improvements and furniture shall be of a quality to sustain weather and wear, shall be of a material other than molded plastic, and shall be of natural finishes or dark colors. c. Planters and planter boxes, if used as temporary dividers, must be planted and maintained with live plants. d. No signs shall be permitted in connection with a sidewalk dining area (including sign copy on umbrellas) except as may be required by the City or Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control for reasons of public health or safety, or unless as approved by the Zoning Administrator as part of the application. e. No entertainment or use, operation, or playing of any musical instrument, loudspeaker, sound amplifier, or other machine for the production or reproduction of sound is permitted in the sidewalk dining area. £ No electrical appliances, heating or cooking of food or open flames shall be allowed in the sidewalk dining area. Use of portable heating devices may be permitted with approval from the Fire Marshal. 3. Maintenance. a. The permittee and the property owner shall maintain the sidewalk dining area and the adjoining street, curb, gutter and sidewalk in a neat, clean and orderly condition at all times, regardless of the source of the refuse and litter. This shall include all tables, chairs, benches, planters, or other appurtenances placed in the public right-of--way. Provisions shall be made for trash receptacles to serve the sidewalk dining area, subject to the approval of the Zoning Administrator. b. Activities involving the sidewalk dining area shall be conducted in a manner that does not interfere with pedestrians, parking or traffic. c. The permittee shall ensure that the sidewalk dining area is limited to business patrons. d. The permittee and the property owner shall be responsible for preventing excessive noise to ensure minimal or no intrusion on the merchants and inhabitants of downtown. e. If necessary, the permittee or the property owner shall clean the surface of the sidewalk by washing or buffing to remove any stains, marks, or discoloration to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works and in accordance with prevailing storm water and water quality regulations. f. Umbrellas shall be kept clean and in good condition, secure in windy conditions, and fire-treated. 4. Special standards for sidewalk dining areas with alcoholic beverage service. a. A use permit shall be required for all sidewalk dining areas serving alcoholic beverages. b. Alcoholic beverages may only be served in sidewalk dining areas which are established in conjunction with a restaurant. For purposes of this section, a "restaurant" is a Full Service Eating and Drinking Establishment, as defined in Section 20.06.090 of the City of South San Francisco Zoning Code. c. Sidewalk dining areas shall be defined by an enclosure of no more than three (3) feet in height measured from the ground or sidewalk level and no less than one (1) foot. Enclosures shall be designed in compliance with ADA accessibility guidelines and shall provide safe pedestrian access to the public right of way and designated parking spaces. The enclosure shall be compatible with the appearance and design of the associated building and sidewalk dining area. Such enclosure shall be portable and may consist of planters, removable bollards or similar features which involve no alteration or damage to the sidewalk. d. All entrances/exits of the sidewalk dining area shall be posted with signs stating that alcoholic beverages must be kept within the sidewalk dining area at all times. In addition, small cards shall be placed on each table giving notice that removal of alcoholic beverages from the sidewalk dining area is not allowed. e. The capacity of the sidewalk dining area shall be limited to the number of seats approved in the sidewalk dining permit. f. Provisions for the storage and/or preparation of alcoholic beverages shall not be permitted in the sidewalk dining area. g. Empty beverage containers shall be removed from the sidewalk dining area as soon as possible. h. A license shall be obtained from the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) prior to the operation of a sidewalk dining area serving alcoholic beverages and shall be maintained continuously as long as alcoholic beverages are served in the sidewalk dining area. Loss of such license shall automatically constitute termination of the City permit to serve alcoholic beverages in the sidewalk dining area. E. Indemnification/Insurance. The permittee shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officers and employees from and against all claims, losses, damage, injury and liability for damages arising from the permittee's use of the public right-of--way. The permittee shall provide to the City, in a form and in amounts acceptable to the City Attorney, certificates of insurance substantiating the existence of a general liability policy covering the area subject to the permit. F. Temporary Suspension of Permit. The Director of Public Works shall have the right to suspend or prohibit the operation of a sidewalk dining area at any time because of anticipated or actual problems or conflicts in the use of the sidewalk area. Such problems or conflicts may arise from, but are not limited to, scheduled festivals, parades, marches and similar special events; repairs to the street, sidewalk or other public facility; or from demonstrations or emergencies occurring in the area. To the extent possible, the City will give prior written notice of any time period during which the operation of the sidewalk dining area must be suspended. G. Violation of Conditions. 1. Any sidewalk dining that is initiated, operated, or maintained contrary to the provisions of this chapter, including but not limited to operating without required permits, unlawfully obstructing the public right-of--way, or failure to adequately maintain and clean the sidewalk dining area, shall be deemed a public nuisance and subject to Enforcement, Penalties, and Legal Procedure, pursuant to Section 20.98 of the City's Zoning Ordinance. H. Revocation and Modification of Permits. If at any time a sidewalk dining area interferes with the public use of the sidewalk, the Zoning Administrator may review, modify or revoke the sidewalk dining permit. A sidewalk dining permit issued pursuant to this section is subject to Section 20.91, Revocation and Modification of Permits. Any modification, suspension or revocation is subject to the appeal procedures outlined in Section 20.90. \ 1 1 ~~ J w EXHIBIT A ZA-O8-0005 -Proposed Amendments to South San Francisco Municipal Code: Amend Definition Sections as follows: The definition of "Sidewalk Dining" is added as subsection (h) to section 20.06.230 and subsequent subsections shall be re-lettered sequentially. 20.26.230(h) Add subsection: Sidewalk Dining. An outdoor area set up and maintained on the public sidewalk, within the City right-of--way, for the purpose of selling and serving food and/or beverages for immediate consumption by an adjoining restaurant or other business which sells and serves food and/or beverages for immediate consumption. Modify District Downtown Commercial District Use Regulations as follows: 20.26.060 Special operations or structures. (a) Any use which involves drive-through windows, hours of operation from midnight to 6:00 a.m., on-site liquor sales or the open storage or display of goods, materials, or vehicles (other than parking) shall require a use permit. b) Unless approved with a use permit for the open storage of goods, all uses (except parking) shall be conducted entirely within a building. (c) Temporary office trailers are permitted only as temporary construction offices during the period of construction and only with building division approval. (d) The seasonal sale of pumpkins and Christmas trees are exempt from the use permit requirement. These uses are subject to building division and fire department approval. (e) Catering trucks are exempt from the use permit requirement. (f) Existing gasoline sales establishments which add the sale of beer or wine for off-site consumption shall require a use permit. (Ord. 1050 § 22 (part), 1989: Ord. 1006 § 2 (part), 1986) (g) Add subsection: Sidewalk Dining shall be permitted subject to approval of a Sidewalk Dining Permit by the Zoning Administrator. Sidewalk Dining, pursuant to Section 20.06.230, is exempt from the use permit requirement unless the sale of alcoholic beverages is included, in which case a use permit is required. Sidewalk Dining shall adhere to all standards identified in the "Sidewalk Dining Standards and Guidelines". 20.74.060(k) Add subsection: 20.74.060 (k)(3): Approved sidewalk dining areas are exempt from parking requirements. ~~//~~ ~ V! -~+ Z -~ W °~ ~ U W ~ .~ ~'O 1/~ ~ ~Si ~ G _ U Z .~ O Z O O U U Z Z r~ Y I C/~w) I ~~ ~, .~, t ~. ~ ~ i ww+ . w-.r ~ " ~ ~~ 1 • i ~ r~ •~ .d~-a~ ~. __ -~- i ~~~ ~. ' ~ ~~~: TT"~~~ ,.~`'~ ~. J• ~ ~ i F ~~s ~ 1 Y ~~ ' ~+, ~ • ' /. ~ k .: ~~ ~ ? YiiYG~i r • LL , ~, .~ Q U 4 l~~~+ M~{ W f Q r r ~. ~ `i ~' ~~ t - F_ a sa ~ r i ~ VJ Z W W O Z O H Z O O O U U Z a Z /~wJ I O 0 L U .~ a~ U t ~~ F~ ~ ~-~ .;~ +' - _~= .~ ~+. .. ~ ~ ~ "t r'~ . :~ a:? ~,, ~ ~ ~ i ~a !I ~# .. !J "h Z, -. ~ s ~ - , ~~ ~ ~: ~~ ~~ ~. waal laoHS• (/~ Z W W ~ J Y W '" < W w d ~ e 4 w fu y Z ~ i -- W Ow^ W f>~ ~ 2~i ~ ~~~ H O = ° W 0 Y a~~ ~. = "'1., '~^t ~ .,.h.` ~ 'k~i ~ ~~i _~ w~ rU^ V / ^~~ •~ i _ ~' ~. /~ ~ ..__ t f- VJ Z W W O OC a. Z O H Z O D O U U Z Q Z Q O ~ ~~~~ ~+ U .~ a~ V t a ~ ~ :, _ _ .~- ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ U ~ (~ ~ L ~ ~ ~ Q C~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U '~ .~ O N ~ ~ U ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ W O ~/~ ~ V J ~~-+ Z ~ W °~ ~ U W - ~ .ca ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °' _ U Z ~ O~ H `~ Z O O U U Z a z ~ Q ~ V O rO = O U 0 a~ U _~ N c~ ~L 0 .~ 2 • L O a ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ > o ~ ~ ° ~ ° ~ ~ O~ ~ ~ Q (~ , ~ J . a~ ~ .~ L ~ N O ~ LL ~ ~ ~ . .~ U ~ ~ G~ ~ O ~ ~~ ~ ~~ O ~ v v~3 cn ~~ U W O VJ Z W W Z O H z O D O U U Z Q Z Q O .~ f+ U .~ .~ U t W H H OC O .~ U c~ a~ ca H U ~ ~ ~ _ O ~ c~ o ~ ~ a- ~ ~ o ~ a~ ~ ~ o i ~ }' ~ ~ N U ~ CQ ~ ~- ~ ~ ~ a a~ ~ ~ W ~;~..u #x H Z W W O a z 0 z 0 0 0 U U Z Q OC Z Q Z H O 0 U ca .~ a U 1 ,. ,~, ~'. OC W ~ H ~ H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z 00 ~,~ W o ~ ~ ~ ~~^w U ~ ~ >, ~ d' ~ ~ ~~ ~ U ~ N ~ Y m W O ,,, -_ , . ~. VJ Z W W O DC a. Z O H Z O O U U Z Q Z Q O 0 .~ L .Q U .~ a U t U (~ c~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ O H ~ ~ O O U _ • ~ ~ •~ ~~ ooca ~~~ ._ ~~'~ U ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~Q ~~i0 N~~O Z~°o .~ ~~ O m .~'~ ~~ ~~ 0 O U ~~_ U~ ~ ~ ~~ Q~ ~p W ~ ~/~ V J ~-+ Z ~ W °~ ~ a~ U W ~ ~ ' 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ _+ ~ U Z ~ ~ . 0 ~ .t ~ ,~.." Z O 0 U U Z Q Z ~ ~ a W ~ ~ _ ~ ~ oc O ~ • O ' V J W ~~. r r . ~ _~ ° ~ ~ ~ a~ ~~ o ~ ~M ~ N O ~ ''-~ ' N j (6 ~, V :~ i a~ ~ (Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~U ~~~ ~' N ~ ~_ ~~ ~ ~ ' ~ N~ ~ ~-~ ~ CV ~ ~ ~ O ~ ` N ~~ O ~- ~ ~ (~ ~~ ~~ p U Mcfl U cn~ U .~ 0 U O N i U !~ `i 'j -' ~ „ W H o ~ o ~ ~ 0 a~ _ N ~ U O U O ~ -- ., `.;~ 1 H Z W W O a z 0 z 0 0 0 U U Z Q Z a z 0 .~ L. .Q a~ a~ U ca .~ a~ U t i ~.-.r 0 ca a~ 0 C~ _~ W a~ ~ L ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ C~ ~ m c~ ~ ~ ~ a- ~ O cn ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ N ~ ~ .~_ U LL = J Cn • • • l ' y ~ +~.. .__. 11 r ',~ r (~ rLn V w,~ ~ d ~~ r} ~ ~- _.. ~T_ ,~ ~ ~ ~~~~ • ` .~r.rr ~~ ~'° ~. ~. ,. ,, t .~ ~ ~. W 1- _~ O w VJ Z W W 0 Z O H Z O 0 U U Z Q LL Z Q C/O I .~ U .~ U t i U \V O U L 7 /'` y .~ O U O i U L ^Mw w w N k N ~O DO ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ o0 x x N DO ~~ 0 U _W i -~. U O U O O ~ a~ ~ ~ W _~ F- ~ ~ ~ s ~-~ ~ ~ a, - Q _O ~ )~ `I-I ._ W ~ ~ ~ W _~ W VJ Z W W O Z O H Z O O O U C!1 U Z Q 0! Z Q C!1 .~ L U .~ U W H W CO ~--+ O ~~ a~ 0 .~ ~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~: ~ ! , r I .~ // 1 ff ~, ., , L L f~ V .~ .~ c~ 0 0 U U .~ •J a L -~ ~. w O ~X N N . ^_` W O ~~ L C L ~~ V ~_ L '+r J L O 0 U w t~ ~x M W O W Z W W Z O H Z O O U U Z Q Z Q H C!1 .~ L U ca U t OC ~ W i H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ . W L m (~ L.L i i N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ U ,~ ~ ~~ U ~ ~ ~ N U O •i O 0 ~ ~ k N W D W .. :; ~/~ ~ V J +~ Z ~ W °~ W U ~ ~ O ~~ oc ~ ~ ~ °' _ U Z~ O~ Z O O V U Z Q Z 'Q VJ 'O /1 0 L c~ a~ L W ~ ('~ •--+ W ~ ~ • W D W ~ 0 r^ VJ Z ~ W °~ U W ~ ~ O ~ 1~ ~ _ U Z ~ O ~ ~ `~ Z O 0 0 U U Z Q OC ~ ~ ~ Z ~ ~ Q W .~ ~ H J _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ a~ a ~ c~ L ~ ~ a~ ~ .~ ._ ~, o ~ ~ = U L -~--+ +-r U ~ _~ W W w H Z W W a z 0 z 0 0 0 U U Z a z a z 0 0 U .~ a~ U t ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ( ~ ~ ~ c~ c~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (~ L L- a--+ ~ V J ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (~ a"r m ~ w z ~ W Z O J `, ~. - i4 ' VJ Z W W OC a. Z O H Z O O O U U Z Q Z Q O N U .~ U a~ ._ ice. V ii /~/.~ Li a~ a~ c~ ~ ~ OC L W ~ H ~ C~ ~ Z ~ O ° J Cn L .~ -~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ o rn V O .v O cn ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L ~ .~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ O cn ~ ~ ~ ~ (a ~ O ~ J ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ N ~ G~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ .. ~ !~~ ~~ ._ ~r- m .~ .~ L 0.. ~U N ~~ ~ _°o _o L ~ a~ ~ ~~ ~ ~' U O ~ (n L Q U (~ ~ +_~ N ~ ~ O • Q L O Q U • O ~_ m N N i • ~I W Z O J H- Z W W a z O z O 0 0 U U Z a z a z 0 f+ U U i •J W H C~ Z 0 J r ~ ti~ ~:~i~ i7~ ;. W i ~ ~ . ^~ W a~ c~ c~ ~ , w ~ ~; ~ ~ ~ `' a~ ~+ , i O ~~,'c ~ -~-~ ~ tP ~" ~l ~ r• .:. O v ' ~~ ~=~ .- ~ ~ x a ~ ~ (/~ I~ i •J V ^ A+ i t r ~, F ~~ ~ ..~ ;- ~. ~1 r ~,~ r ~; L~ _ ~~ (Cf 0 a ~ ~ ~ ~ N c~ ~ ~ ^~,, W ~~ ^~ W L +-+ ~~ U~ ~_ ~ ~. ~ W Z O J ''^^ ~ VJ O Z ~ W °~ W U ~ .~ 0 = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L _ U ~ Z ~ •-+ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~ 0 0 0 U ~ ~ ~ U ~ Z ~ Q V N L O Z ~ ~ Qw ~ O ~/' ~ ^ v ' ^~ ~ Z I- O O ~ J ~~ .- .,~ •~f ,- i i ~i ® ,~ r ® ; ,~! ~ ~ ~ ~. ~--- ~. 'fi O~._'_ ~,... ~w W ~, Z O o J ~' o i. i. U i, O J ~. ~~ i V ~_ ~ Q = ~'" C. O =; -r ~ s4 .X ~ a ~~ W -Q /1 Z W W Z O H Z O 0 O U U Z Q Z Q I O f+ W U .~ U W Z J L Q. V a. (~ _ ~ ~ ~ L ~U .~ ~ '}~ ~ Q' / /1 ~> ~ U to (a 0 N ~ cam ~~~. ~ ~ ~ a~ ~° ova ~~ U ~U L ~ • ~ a--r ~ U L ~ Q 0 ~ ~ ~- (6 J Q ~ ~ V,~ Q to .__I W Z J H Z W W O a z 0 z 0 0 0 U U Z Q Z Q Z H O ~-+ U .~ a~ U z c~ 3 ~ ~ W ~ Z }' O J W ;' Y ,. .~ ,~~~ '~ {.R W Z O J O ~/~ V J Z ~ W °~ S G ~ U W ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U Z t ~ ~ O ~ ~- ~ ~ c~ Z ~ O C~ O (t'S U ~' ~ ~ U w ~ Z V N Q v Z V .~ Q J v~ m ~, _ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ O w ~n z ._..~~ ~,. M, 4M ~? ,,~~A it ~_ . i ~ ;li~' .~ . .) , ~"~ ~ f 1!.~~' ~K i ~ ~ ~i '~~, ,~~~ -r ~ ~ ~ ~,~ t ~ , ~, ~~,, s '` tP~, ;. +1111 ~ f.' _,; n ~; ~~~~.. -der V! Z W W O Z O H Z O D O U U Z Q LL. Z Q C!1 C!1 .~ U .~ U s a w v Q U J m a w z a~ c~ c~ -~ c~ C~ c~ c~ N _~ .~ V ~/~ ~ V J ~+ Z~ W °~ WU O .~ ~ ~ ~ °' _ U Z~ Z O O U U Z Q LL ~Q I r. ~ -~ . " ~! C^ ' .~~ .; . ,~ ~~ _ ._.... ~~ ~, i ~ -- ~, ._~~ ~~ ~~ ,- ,, _--- - ~ -~,Jf~ - ~~= _~~ e N ~ - -- -- ~ ~ ('~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ (~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L V~ N N i .~ U ~~. ~! ~~: J ~. am u w.~~::_:~,:_,::: ~~- - ~~~ ~ i W O ~ V `~ Q ~ M 3 ~~ ~ ~~'• I W t t/~ I~ ~ ~ U ! r W ~ -~ Z N ~/~ ~ V! ~+^+ Z~ W °~ W U ~ .~ /0 ~ Y~ ~ S~ G _ U Z .~ Z O O U U Z Q Z Q 0 C/~ LINDEN AVENUE Y. ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ .7 V 2~ ~3 ~~ ` Y W V Q a ~ ~ ~ ~ N J ~ ..I m ~ a ~ _ ~ vI ~ W L (~ ~ Z ~- C~ a W W ~~ Q f, ~ /l Z Q /jl l7 U N W a--i O `J\~ ~~~_` ~ . • _^~ ~ ~ M ~~ ' ~ E ~ ~S~ ~a~ Mn , `~ ~ .r j ~~J L\ r~ t ~w ' Memo To: Honorable Chairperson and Planning Commissioners From: Steve Carlson, Senior Planner Date: August 29, 2008 Re: P06-0088 Parking Company of America 160 Produce Avenue The Planning Commission last reviewed this matter at their meeting of May 1, 2008. The Commissioners raised several concerns including safety and the lack of adequate landscaping. The matter was continued off calendar to allow the applicant to review the Commissioner's comments -especially those regarding the need to provide better screening and more on-site landscaping. The Commissioners also indicated that if the matter was not resolved by July, that the matter should be scheduled for the Commission review to consider taking steps to achieve compliance with the previous Use Permits (e.g. fencing and landscaping). We were preparing to bring this matter to the Commission, until we were advised that the applicant had hired a legal firm with expertise in land use. In our continuing effort to work with the applicant and resolve the matter, we deferred taking the matter to Commission in order to meet and review the issues. Our expectation is that the applicant will be prepared to bring the matter before the Commission in the very near future. If the applicant is not prepared staff will bring the matter to Commission no later than October. ~~xs Planning Commission ~o ,.,,,,~.~,~ 0 o Staff Report c9LIFOR~~A DATE: September 4, 2008 TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: 18-Month Review of a Use Permit to allow live musical entertainment at an existing restaurant at 2262 Westborough Boulevard in the Commercial (C-1) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.22 and 20.81 Owner: Applicant: Address: Case Nos.: RECOMMENDATION: Westborough Shopping Center William Henry & Victoria Concepcion 2262 Westborough Boulevard P06-0133: UP06-0029 It is recommended that the Planning Commission accept this report as meeting the requirement of the 18-month review in accordance with Police Department Use Permit Condition of Approval B. 2. H. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: On January 4, 2007 the Planning Commission approved a Use Permit allowing live musical entertainment within an existing restaurant at 2262 Westborough Boulevard. The approval is subject to 6-, 12-, and 18-month reviews. The six-month review was completed on August 16, 2007 and the one-year review was completed on February 21, 2008. It has now been approximately 18-months since the live entertainment portion of the business began. Staff has received no complaints regarding operations at the site and therefore recommends that the Planning Commission accept this report in fulfillment of the one-year review. rry Beaudin, AICP, LEED AP Senior Planner Attachments: Conditions of Approval Conditions of Approval P06-0133: UP06-0029 "Henry's" -Use Permit 2262 Westborough Boulevard CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL P06-0133: UP06-0029 "HENRY'S" USE PERMIT 2262 WESTBOROUGH BOULEVARD (As recommended by City Staff January 4, 2007) A. Planning Division requirements shall be as follows: 1. The applicant shall comply with the Planning Division's standard Conditions and Limitations for Commercial Industrial and Multi-family Residential Projects. 2. The project shall be completed and operated substantially as indicated in the plans prepared by the applicant, dated November 16, 2006. The applicant shall apply for a sign permit with the City prior to erecting any new signage for the project. 4. Prior to initiating the amplified live music portion of the business, the applicant shall have a professional Engineer complete an acoustic report and submit it to the City's Chief Planner to ensure that the project noise is in compliance with SSFMC noise requirements. The applicant shall be responsible for any costs associated with "peer review" necessary to evaluate the acoustic study/report. 5. Prior to initiating the live music component of the business, the applicant shall construct and maintain a trash enclosure that meets or exceeds City standards. 6. Hours of operation will be limited to 11:OOam to 12:30am Sunday through Thursday, and 11:OOam to 2:OOam Friday and Saturday. 7. The music type shall be generally limited to smooth jazz and soft rock, similar to those artist's described in the staff report (i.e. Benoit, Kenny G, Sade, Kenny Loggins, the Beatles, and Chicago). 8. The owner/applicant shall install a trash enclosure at the rear of the tenant space that is covered and architecturally compatible with the building. The enclosure must be drained to the sanitary sewer and included a grease separator. Planning Division contact Gerry Beaudin, Associate Planner, (650) 877-8353 Conditions of Approval P06-0133: UP06-0029 "Henry's" -Use Permit 2262 Westborough Boulevard B. Police Department conditions of approval are as follows: Municipal Code Compliance The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 15.48 of the Municipal Code, "Minimum Building Security Standards" Ordinance revised May 1995. The Police Department reserves the right to make additional security and safety conditions, if necessary, upon receipt of detailed/revised building plans. 2. Additional Requirements A. Mandatory installation of the high-tech ceiling for sound reduction B. Mandatory installation of carpet beneath all speakers for sound reduction C. Both front and rear doors, and windows must be closed during any music being played for reduced sound to the neighborhood D. Proposed floor plan must be submitted to Police Department prior to approval of Use Permit E. Site must not exceed maximum occupancy at any time (including employees) pursuant to the CA Fire Code F. One licensed, unarmed and uniformed Security Officer must be at the front door to provide security, and enforce maximum occupancy concerns. Please contact Community Relations Sergeant at (650) 877-8922 for a list of approved security companies for use in South San Francisco. G. A dance floor and dancing is not permitted. H. Use Permit subject to 6, 12 and 18-month review by Planning Commission I. Street must be swept clean of refuse, e.g. cigarette butts, etc. nightly, prior to departure. J. A alarm system, monitored at a central station, is required. K. If cash exceeding $100 is to be kept on-site unattended, a safe with a minimum rating of TL-15 is required. L. The Chief of Police may immediately suspend the Use Permit upon any singular major incident at this site, or for any violations of the Use Permit. Police Department contact, Sergeant E. Alan Normandy (650) 877-8927 C. Fire Department conditions of approval are as follows: 1. Comments at plan check. Fire Prevention contact, Bryan Niswonger, 650/829-6645 Conditions of Approval P06-0133: UP06-0029 "Henry's" -Use Permit 2262 Westborough Boulevard D. Building Division conditions of approval are as follows: 1. Comments at plan check. Building Division contact, Jim Kirkman, 650/829-6670