Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-10-02MINUTES October 2, 2008 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION CALL TO ORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioner Oborne, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Prouty, Commissioner Zemke, Vice Chairperson Teglia and Chairperson Giusti ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: CHAIR COMMENTS AGENDA REVIEW None Planning Division: Building Division: City Attorney: Engineering Division Police Department: Fire Prevention. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of meeting minutes of September 18, 2008. No Changes None Motion Prouty /Second Sim to approve the Consent Calendar. Approved by majority voice vote, with Vice- Chair Teglia abstaining. PUBLtC HEARING 2. 2131217 EGrand -Alexandria Real Estate ARE-SF No 21 L.P./Owner ARE-SF No 21 L.P./Applicant 213 8~ 217 East Grand P07-0106: UP07-0017, DR07-0065, DA07-0001, SIGNS07-0059 & EIR07-0001 (Continued from September 18, 2008) Use Permit, Design Review, Development Agreement, Transportation Demand Management plan, Master Sign Program and Draft Environmental Impact Report to construct a 9-story office/research and development and associated surface parking and landscape improvements building totaling 291,634 square feet and a five-level parking garage on a 6.94 acre site located at the northwest corner of East Grand Avenue & Roebling Road (APNs 015-041050 and 015-041-300)in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.32.060, 20.81, 20.85 & 20.120 Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner Mike Lappen, Economic Development Coordinator Girard Beaudin, Senior Planner Bertha Aguilar, Admin. Asst. II Barry Mammini, Senior Building Inspector Brian Grossman, Assistant City Attorney Ray Razavi, City Engineer Sam Bautista, Senior Civil Engineer Sergeant Jon Kallas, Planning Liaison Phil White, Fire Chief Planning Commission Meeting of October 2, 2008 Public Hearing opened. Economic Development Coordinator Lappen introduced the project and gave a PowerPoint presentation. He added that the Commission's action, if favorable, would include an additional modification to the Development Agreement to allow a contribution for a decontamination facility per the memo distributed to the Commission at tonight's meeting. Steve Richardson, Senior Vice President of ARE, noted that their company has been an active developer for the past 10 years in South San Francisco. He added that they had the first LEED certified lab building in South San Francisco and possibly in the United States. Niall Malcolmson - DGA Architects and Rich Sharp -Studio 5 Landscape Architects presented the project to the Commission. Vice Chairperson Teglia was pleased with the building design but noted his disappointment that some of the comments given to the applicant at the study session had not been addressed. He noted that the west elevation of the parking garage continued to be of concern. He pointed out that the architectural features on the front of the parking structure should be carried to the back side, which is actually a prominent frontage along Forbes Blvd., which would enhance the project. He noted his concern with staggered landscaping on the westerly property line and suggested adding a second row of trees (different species) to help screen this elevation. He added that they could also add trees in the gaps between street trees along E. Grand Avenue to give a staggered forest type effect to this frontage. Mr. Malcolmson clarified that they were not ignoring the comments but trying to integrate the grid-like architecture and noted that they will further explore the west elevation. Commissioner Prouty was also pleased with the projects completed by Alexandria in South San Francisco. He concurred with Vice-Chair Teglia's comments regarding the westerly garage elevation, but commended the developer and architect for having 85% of their parking in the garage and not maximizing the surface parking. Public Hearing closed. Commissioner Sim agreed with Vice Chairperson Teglia's and Commissioner Prouty's comments. He noted that the integrity of the design would be maintained regardless of the locations of elevator shafts and stairs once their location is determined. Mr. Malcolmson replied affirmatively. Commissioner Sim added that the Forbes Boulevard facade, specifically the garage, service and loading dock areas need to have more detail. He pointed out that some of these areas could have a border edge or a paving pattern in the service area or loading docks. Commissioner Prouty questioned if the textured portion on the ground level is going to be colored concrete. Mr. Sharp noted that it would be concrete similar to what is at 249 East Grand. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that the Commission likes the project and would support it with improvements to the west elevation and additional details. He added that the item needs to go before the City Council and questioned whether all but the Use Permit could be approved so that the item could be forwarded to Council and the Commission could approve the Use Permit at another meeting. Chief Planner Kalkin stated that it would be best and in keeping with standard practice that the Commission be satisfied with the design before the application is presented to the City Council. Mr. Malcolmson noted that they could get the requested items to the Commission for their next meeting. Motion Teglia /Second Prouty to continue P07-0106: UP07-0017, DR07-0065, DA07-0001, SIGNS07-0059 & EIR07-0001 to October 16, 2008. On the question: S ~MivLUtCS~Fi.vLGlLiz.Cd Mi.vtutC5~200$'~10-02-08 KPC MCvtutCS - REV.dOC PG1PE 2 tr~ ~ Planning Commission Meeting of October 2, 2008 Commissioner Zemke was in agreement with the other Commissioners comments but noted his concern with regards to adding more traffic to the East of 101 area. He questioned if there would be some sort of traffic control on East Grand and Forbes Boulevard to which staff noted that a new signal would be installed at East Grand Avenue and Roebling Road, and that traffic has been addressed in detail in the EIR. Commissioner Prouty questioned if the TDM plans can require that employers stagger start times in order to relieve congestion during peak hours. Chief Planner Kalkin noted that there is a measure provided for in TDM plans, but noted that it is not dictated, but rather available as a tool to relieve traffic congestion. Vice Chairperson Teglia acknowledged that our TDM requirements are results oriented but questioned if provisions can be added to require staggered start times. Economic Development Coordinator Lappen noted that the Engineering Division is in the process of updating the East of 101 Traffic Improvement Plan, which will investigate how to address any future needs for the area at which time they can look at stronger TDM measures. Approved by unanimous voice vote. 3. Review of 648 Commercial Avenue Senior Planner Beaudin gave a brief report to the Commission on the status of 648 Commercial Avenue. Javier Valencia noted that it has been over a year since the issues at his project site were identified. He noted that he would like the item to be resolved prior to the upcoming rainy season. Rita Fontana, representing the owners of 652 Commercial Avenue, thanked the Commission for continuing the discussion from the last meeting to accommodate her family emergency. Vice Chairperson Teglia questioned if the Commission was approving the design presented to them in the packet or the graphic given to them at the meeting. Senior Planner Beaudin clarified that the Commission is approving the graphic in the packet sent to them on Friday and the additional graphic was given to the Commission as a reference with regards to the overall massing scale. He pointed out that elevation A3.5.2 in the Commission's packet is the staff recommended elevation. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that in elevation A3.5.2 the main bay was dropped down and is closed off with a railing similar to the ones on the sides. He asked if the railing was directly in line with the front wall. Senior Planner Beaudin replied affirmatively and pointed out that the railing is clearer on sheet A3.6.1. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that the second level balconies have no access and are walled off. Senior Planner Beaudin confirmed that this was correct. Vice Chairperson Teglia clarified that the earlier attempt had smaller windows and now are larger. He added that sheet A3.6.1 shows the doorways extending up to the second level which was different than the initial design. Senior Planner Beaudin noted that this was a result of the Commission's comments incorporated during the Design Review process. Vice Chairperson Teglia stated that the openings can never be enclosed by a window or plexy glass and questioned if there was a provision for this. Senior Planner Beaudin noted that there is not a provision in place but that it would change the architecture which would trigger a Planned Unit Development Modification. Commissioner Prouty stated that he would be abstaining due to conflict of interest. Vice Chairperson Teglia questioned if there is a proper setback between the Fontana's property and the Valencia's property now that the property line has been identified. Senior Planner Beaudin noted that the contention has been the location of the monuments. He noted that there is an agreement that they are meeting the sideyard setback and added that the Building and Engineering Division's have reviewed the surveys also. Vice Chairperson Teglia asked if everyone knows that not one single item can be added or expanded unless it returns to the Planning Commission because it is a PUD. Senior Planner Beaudin noted this was correct. 5:\Miv~.utCS~~iv~.gliztd Miv~.utt5~200~10-02-DA R'PC MiwutCS - REV.dOC PUgG 3 Df ~ Planning Commission Meeting of October 2, 2008 Commissioner Prouty recommended placing a monument rather than nails because they could be moved. Mr. Valencia and Ms. Fontana replied that a monument exists with Mr. Arata's seal on it. Consensus of the Commission confirming the Chief Planner's decision to approve the final design. 4. Study Session South EI Camino Real General Plan Amendment POS-0076: GPA08-0001 Southern portion of EI Camino Real Study Session: General Plan Amendment for the southern portion of EI Camino Real between Chestnut Avenue and the City's southern boundary to allow for mixed-use development throughout the corridor Senior Planner Beaudin gave a brief presentation on the General Plan Amendment (GPA) study area Vice Chairperson Teglia questioned if this study also included the northern portion of EI Camino Real beyond Chestnut. Chief Planner Kalkin noted that that area is under study for a Specific Plan by a different consulting group which also covers the PUC property. Rajeev Bhatia, Dyett &Bhatia, gave a presentation on the project area and showed examples of projects in the Bay Area to compare heights and Floor Area Ratios (FAR). He asked the Commission if the City would like to see mixed use, what the maximum FAR and height should be. Vice Chairperson Teglia stated that the design of EI Camino Real should look like Santana Row and have two story buildings, a pedestrian friendly development and different types of uses. Vice Chairperson Teglia was concerned with having an unlimited height because developers tend to maximize the building potential on the lot and noted that there should be some regulation stating that the maximums are an envelope to allow creativity and not to maximize the development on the site. He stated that having a zero setback is not an issue for him provided the design of the buildings is such that they have an internal walkway built into the bottom level which allows the second floors to be on the street, as well as giving a pedestrian friendly feel. Commissioner Prouty suggested having certain maximum height requirements and the City can allow the development to increase the height through bonuses for good design /articulation. He stated that the City needs to encourage lot mergers because some of the properties have shallow depths and minimal widths. He pointed out that he would like to see mixed use development along EI Camino Real. He stated that the City does not want to see another project like Fairfield and added that he would support height limits from 50 feet and higher as long as the design has some articulation and is broken up at the street level. Vice Chairperson Teglia stated that he does not have any issues with unlimited heights as long as it is done correctly. He stated that Fairfield was supposed to have a main street presence and then the corner site was leased to Washington Mutual, a half block of what could have been several small businesses was lost. He pointed out that there needs to be some protection that will not allow this to happen again. He pointed out that the projects can have interior streets and stated that the Southwood Center is an area where this could be done. He also envisioned the apartment buildings along Southwood being sold and having additional retail along that strip, as well as having some type of mixed retail along the School District's property on EI Camino Real. Vice Chairperson Teglia added that there could be a project that would have presence on EI Camino, retail on the back, residential on the top floors and have underground parking. Mr. Bhatia asked if the Commission would be amenable to having underground parking with tall buildings. Commissioner Prouty noted that this could be the case in Vice Chairperson Teglia's vision of the Southwood Center. He pointed out that some of the apartment owners could look at redeveloping sites more positively because a mixed use project could raise the value of the property. Mr. Bhatia confirmed that the Commission wanted to see underground parking rather than surface parking on tall buildings. The Commission concurred S:~Miwute_S~Fiwglized Mi.wute5~2008~10-02-OR RPC Miwutgs - RF.v.doC Page4 of ~ Planning Commission Meeting of October Z, 2008 with him. Mr. Bhatia noted that a way to encourage this is to count all above grade parking or enclosed parking as building area. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that a critical mass of retailers is needed in order to get interest in the area. Commissioner Oborne also stated that she has no issues with height. Commissioner Sim stated that the Commission wants to encourage street engagement. He added that by carving buildings, the City can give bonuses and felt that the retail on the ground floor needs to be strong. He pointed out that the bonuses should be given by the strength of the design and the public amenities provided at the street level which could be paving patterns or art pieces. He further noted that the City needs to be flexible to allow innovative design. He stated that some building designs could not be appropriate for the corner or middle of the block. He noted that corner lots have two frontages and suggested the design needs to reflect this in order to provide some sort of consistency on a block. Mr. Bhatia asked if the Commission was concerned with FAR or appearance and design. Commissioner Prouty stated that there are small lots from the School District property to First Street and there is no room for creativity but noted that the other side of the street has more opportunities for improvement. Commissioner Oborne noted that there should be some level of mixed use to draw people to the area. Commissioner Moore stated that there should be corner buildings that set the tone. Vice Chairperson Teglia questioned if the height limit could be set with a discretionary unlimited height depending on the design. Commissioner Prouty questioned if this could be done. Mr. Bhatia asked what height would make the Commission uneasy. Vice Chairperson Teglia stated that the height would have to be proportional to the lot and set an 8 story hotel as an example of a potential development across from See's candies. Mr. Bhatia stated that a 55 foot height limit would allow retail on the first floor and 4 additional stories and should the developer want to go higher, they would need Planning Commission or City Council approval. Commissioner Prouty and Commissioner Sim clarified that the height could be increased by providing bonuses based on the design. Vice Chairperson Teglia stated that there needs to be different types of retailers in an area. Mr. Bhatia asked if the Commission wants to require the ground floor to be retail in order to have a critical mass because if only residential is allowed, a developer might not install retail. Vice Chairperson Teglia specified that EI Camino Real must have retail and the floors above can be residential. Commissioner Prouty stated that at a minimum two levels need to be retail and residential can go on higher levels. He stated that this will ensure the main structure to be retail. Vice Chairperson Teglia suggested that a main entrance needs to be at a minimum two levels. Mr. Bhatia stated that a requirement could be put in to have a minimum 15 or 18 foot tall retail establishment and added that they would like to limit the option of someone making a home on the second floor. Commissioner Prouty stated that at a minimum the first 24 feet has to be retail. Mr. Bhatia clarified that the Commission is looking at having a street level idea that engages the street. Commissioner Prouty and Vice Chairperson Teglia concurred. Commissioner Sim added that big boxes are not to be encouraged along EI Camino Real. He pointed out that stores such as Walgreen's or Long's need to incorporate residential on a higher level. S:~Mtv~.utCS\FiwpLiZCd Miv~,utC5~2008\20-02-OR RPC Miv~utGS - R6V.(ADC FG1PC S p f ~ Planning Commission Meeting of October 2, 2008 Commissioner Prouty stated that the new plan must also encourage lot mergers to ensure a quality development. Mr. Bhatia stated that the Commission can require a minimum lot area for certain height limits. Vice Chairperson Teglia suggested expanding the zone to include the block on First Street, Second Street and West Orange Avenue. Commissioner Prouty stated that the street is very narrow and EI Camino Real would need to be the access point for the development. Vice Chairperson Teglia added that the site could also accessed along Orange Avenue and EI Camino Real. Vice Chairperson Teglia added that the properties along the water easement, north of Ponderosa Drive, be included in the study area. Commissioner Prouty asked if the Commission wanted to encourage or discourage fast food restaurants. Commissioner Sim and Commissioner Oborne stated that it depends on how the project is done. Vice Chairperson Teglia stated that the Commission does not want to see lots where a fast food restaurant takes an entire lot but they could be incorporated into buildings within a bigger development. Commissioner Zemke stated that landscaping needs to be consistently focused on in order to add character to the building. Vice Chairperson Teglia questioned how much latitude the City had on EI Camino Real with regards to landscaping and noted that the City could possibly landscape the center median. Vice Chairperson Teglia stated that this should be explored. Mr. Bhatia suggested that the Commission look at having wider sidewalks because there are areas that do not have sidewalks. Vice Chairperson Teglia stated that they could also incorporate internal walks into the bottom of the structures. Commissioner Prouty questioned if there was any portion of the School District land to tie the projects together or if they were interested in selling some of the property to have a sidewalk. Chief Planner Kalkin stated that staff can look into it. She added that the City Council has recently adopted a landscape plan for all of EI Camino Real and these features can be incorporated into this amendment. Mr. Bhatia stated the next steps are to craft the language, prepare and distribute a Mitigated Negative Declaration for public review and comment. Commissioner Prouty asked that the consultant show good and bad examples of what would be allowed in the area. Vice Chairperson Teglia stated that this cannot be a simple General Plan amendment but it has to be a comprehensive form based amendment. He pointed out that he does not want to open the envelope without adequate protections in place. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS ITEMS FROM STAFF ITEMS FROM COMMISSION None Vice Chairperson Teglia stated that Town Liquors on Grand Avenue is cutting off its ingress and egress with illegal outdoor display. He stated that the only location on Grand Avenue with an outdoor display permit was encouraged to work with Economic and Community Development to upgrade their displays but they did not do this. He asked that Code Enforcement look into sign violations, outside displays violations and any other violations along Grand Avenue. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC None 5:\Mitn.utCS\Fiv~.ali.zCd Min.utL5~2008~1.0-02-OS RAC M%v~utGS - REv.dOC PgaG H Of ~ Planning Commission Meeting of October 2, 2008 ADJOURNMENT 09:15 P.M. Motion Prouty /Second Sim to adjourn the meeting. Approved by unanimous voice vote. ~_ ~%~ Sus}"Kalkin %` Secretary to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco Mary Giusti, Chairperson Planning Commission City of South San Francisco SK/bla S:~Miv~ute5~~ivLali~ ed Mi~.utes~20G8\IO-02-0S rzPC Mbv~.utes - K6V.doc Pane 3 cf ~