Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-01-15MINUTES January 1 S, 2009 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION CALL TO ORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL /CHAIR COMMEN'T'S ROLL CALL PRESEN'C: Commissioner Bernardo, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Ochsenhirt, Commissioner Zemke, and Chairperson Giusti. ABSENT: Commissioner Oborne, and Commissioner Prouty. STAFF PRESENT: Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner, Senior Planner Beaudin, Senior Planner Carlson, Administrative Assistant Aguilar, Assistant City Manager Van Duyn, Senior Civil Engineer Chuck, Sergeant Jon Kallas, and Fire Marshal Da Silva. Chief Planner Kalkin noted that Commissioners Oborne and Prouty were absent due to medical reasons. AGENDA REVIEW No changes. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS PRESEN'CAT[ONS Resolutions Commending Eugene Sim and Marc 'Teglia for their service on the Planning Commission Chairperson Giusti presented Resolution 2679-2008 to Eugene Sim. a Eugene Sim thanked the Commission and noted that he would be focusing on his business and family. Chairperson Giusti presented Resolution 2680-2009 to Marc Teglia. Marc Teglia noted his pleasure in serving with the Commission for the past 12 years. He encouraged the Commission to work with staff and the applicants to approve projects that they will be proud of. Commissioner Moore thanked Marc Teglia and Eugene Sim for their service and help in the City. REORGANIZATION Page 1 of 7 Election of 2009 Planning Commission Chair and Vice Chair Chairperson Giusti requested that the Planning Commission defer the reorganization to the next regular meeting due to the absence of two Commissioners. CONSENT CALENDAR Approval of meeting minutes of December 4, 2008. Motion--Commissioner Zemke/Second--Commissioner Moore to approve the Consent Calendar Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Oborne and Commissioner Prouty -absent. PU13L1C LIEAR[NCS Use Permit -New SFD Leozadio Zalvalza/Owner Octavaio Venegas/Applicant 813 Linden Avenue P08-0081: UPOB-0012 & DR08-0040 Usc Permit and Design Review to allow construction of a new single fiamily dwelling at 813 Linden Avenue in the Retail Commercial Zone (C-1-L) District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.22, 20.81 & 20.85 Public Hearing opened. Associate Planner Gross presented the staff report. Chairperson Giusti questioned if the house in the rear would be accessible from Linden Avenue. Associate Planner Gross noted that there will be pedestrian access from Linden Avenue, but that the resident would be another family member. Octavio Venegas, architect, asked if the Commission had any questions prior to going into detail of the home. Commissioner Ochsenhirt questioned whether the fence would remain to separate the two homes. Mr. Venegas noted that the 3 foot wall serves as a barrier and would remain. Mr. Venegas explained in detail how he designed the project in keeping with the city's regulations and the architectural details of the building. There being no speakers. The Public Hearing was closed. Commission `Lemke and Commissioner Moore noted that the home is in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. Motion--Commissioner Zemke/Second--Commissioner Moore to approve POS-0081: UP08-0012 & DR08-0040. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Oborne and Commissioner Prouty - absent Page 2 of 7 3. Alfonso Perez/applicant Alfonso Perez/owner 534 Avalon Dr. P05-0114: PUD06-0003, PMOS-0001 & DROS-0064 Modification of a Residential Planned Unit Development and Design Review allowing 2 new single family dwellings and a Tentative Parcel Map allowing a lot line adjustment between lots 56 and 57-A and a lot split of lot 56 resulting in lot areas of 9,228 SF, 11,787 SF and 11,739 SF, situated at 534 and 538 Avalon Drive, in the Single-Family Residential (R-1-C-P) Zoning District, in accordance with SSFMC Title 19 and Title 20 Chapters 20.16, 211.84 & 20.85. Public Hearing opened. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. Sandra Jimenez, project designer, presented the project to the Commission. PT Mammon, neighbor, spoke in support oFthc project. Public Hearing closed. Commissioner Zemke noted that the home designs are consistent with the neighborhood. Commissioner Moore stressed that the buildings must be built in accordance with the approved plans. Motion--Commissioner Zemke/Second--Commissioner Moore to approve POS-Ol 14: PUDOC-0003, PMOS-0001 & DROS-0064 Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Oborne and Commissioner Prouty -absent 4. Parking Co America Airport/applicant Hanna, Elias S/owner 160 Produce Ave P06-0088: PUD 07-0003, 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 the Planned Industrial (P-1) and the Industrial (M-1) Zoning Districts, in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.30, 20.32, 20.73, 20.81, 20.84 & 20.85. APiYs 015-I13-210, O15-113-290, 015-113- 330 thru 350, 015-113-440, 015-114-390, 015-114-420, 015-114-450 thru 500 Public Hearing opened. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. Page 3 of 7 David Sincatta, Attorney for Parking Company of America Airport (PCAA), requested that the Planning Commission approve their landscape plan and at,~r•eed that further study with regard to the entry is necessary. He proceeded to give a history of the project for the incoming Commissioners. Mr. Sincatta explained: i. The initial traffic study scope was similar to those required by a new project and not an existing use. z. They obtained incident reports from California Highway Patrol for the area for the last 5 years and out of 10 accidents, 5 occurred at Terminal Court. 3. They have Increased landscaping to 31,000 square feet and are losing 7-10% of stalls as a result of increased landscaping. a. They have moved the double decker buses to another lot. s. The Commission had noted a preference for alteimative B which had reduced landscaping. He asked that the Commission approve the project and allow them to work with staff on a phased approach to the landscaping. He proposed immediate landscaping of Produce Avenue to be completed in the spring of 2009, San Mateo Avenue would be completed by 2009 and the interior landscaping would be completed by fall of 2009. He further requested the ability to resolve the entry/exit within the next year along with installation of the canopy. He explained that the leases are being dealt with and they are working toward resolving the contamination of the interior of the site prior to landscaping. He felt that moving the entrance to Terminal Court will not solve the problem. Commissioner Moore questioned if trying to resolve the lease is problematic for PCAA. Mr. Sincatta replied aftirmatively and added that they have been in negotiations For over 6 months. Senior Planner Carlson replied that the landscaping reduction may result in the neighboring business, Park N Fly, questioning why they were required to provide 10% landscaping on an acquired easement when PCAA is not. He added that they explored a Cultural Arts in lieu fee, but because of the amount PCAA decided against it. Steve Kikuchi, clarified that, as the landscape consultant for Park N Fly they were able to provide 10% because they obtained an easement to allow them to provide it oft=site. Mr. Kikuchi explained that the Commission had noted its preference for the 7% landscape plan at the last meeting, and felt the most important areas to place landscaping were Produce Avenue and San Mateo Avenue. Chairperson Giusti questioned if larger plants would be used. Mr. Kikuchi replied aftirmatively. Commissioner Moore noted that the Commission was concerned with aesthetics and screening. Mr. Kikuchi replied that they are trying to meet the intent of the ordinance. Ethan Spiegelberg, Chief Operating Manager of PCAA, expressed the importance of the project and requested that the Commission approve the project in phases and get the project up to the City's expectations as soon as possible. Commissioner Moore noted that staff needs the traffic study because the entry is a concern and asked the applicant if they felt the traffic study was needed. Mr. Spiegelberg responded that the traffic study is not needed until Phase IV. Page 4 of 7 Senior Planner Carlson clarified that when the entry was installed on Produce Avenue the lot was much smaller, but the lot has doubled in size without additional review. He noted that there needs to be an assessment of the traffic stream and what the speeds are. He explained that the Commission could provide the applicant with feedback on the landscaping because the Commission was willing to work with the applicant on a reduced landscaping plan, but clarified that the Commission did not commit to reduced landscaping. Commissioner Zemke agreed with Senior Planner Carlson and felt that the entrance would be safer if it were relocated to Terminal Court and exiting directed to San Mateo Avenue. He was concerned with public safety and felt that they can work with the architect with regards to the landscaping. He was not in favor of reducing the 10% option and felt that the perimeter of the lot can be further landscaped. He clarified that the Commission was not in favor of a particular option but concurred that the landscaping did not need to be concentrated in the center of the lot. Mr. Sincatta explained that they are not asking for the Commission to approve an entrance plan and don't believe it makes sense to move the entrance to Terminal Court. iie pointed out that they want to start un some items to show their commitment to the site. There being no speakers the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Ochsenhirt stated that he was brought up to date on the project. He expressed concern about how long the project has gone without a decision and stated that staff is requesting a traffic study which the applicant should provide. He further pointed out that he was not in favor of the phased project and that the project needs to be approved as a complete project with specific time frames. He understood that concept A was not a good option. He suggested the possibility of a Planned Unit Development permit with requisite findings to show that the landscaping requirement could be supported at 7% on-site with the remaining 3% accommodated via the City's Cultural Arts in-lieu tee. He stated that the business is along a major thoroughfare and a traffic study needs to be done. Mr. Sincatta addressed the comments regarding the traftlc study and stated that they do not object to a traffic study but do not agree with the scope being much broader than necessary. He stated that they are willing to work out a scope for the study to be submitted to several traffic consultants. Commissioner Ochsenhirt asked that the applicant clarify why they do not agree with the scope. Mr. Sincatta explained that it is irrelevant to do a traffic count of the cars that go in and out of the site. Commissioner Ochsenhirt explained that the City is not only concerned with their entry and exit but the road in front and the surrounding intersections. Mr. Sincatta noted that he agrees with Commissioner Ochsenhirt but does not agree with the scope. Commissioner Ochsenhirt noted that the Commission needs the information staff is requesting in order to make a decision. Mr. Sincatta agreed to work with staff on what the scope would be. Senior Planner Carlson explained that t}te City would control the contract and if a request for proposal (RFP) is required, the schedule will be delayed by 4-6 weeks. He explained that PCAA would fund the study and the City would control the documents to determine what assumptions should be. He added that the Commission could give staff direction as to the traffic study and if they might support a reduction in landscaping with a contribution of 3% to the Cultural Arts in-lieu fund. Page 5 of 7 Commissioner Ochsenhirt was in favor of allowing 7% landscaping and having the remainder go towards the Cultural Arts fund. He agreed that 10% landscaping hides the lot too much and may not be good for security reasons. Assistant City Attorney Grossman advised that the Commission can give direction to staff and the applicant rather than having a motion. The Commission Commissioner Ochsenhirt directed the applicant to return with a traffic study, 7% landscaping & 3% in-lieu fees to the Cultural Arts Commission Senior Planner Carlson asked that the Commission confirm that the applicant is willing to pay an in-lieu fee because the cost can be significant. He explained that the applicant would need to work with staff with regards to the PUD findings. He stated that the item can be continued to February 5th in order to track the progress and added that the traffic study, if "sole sourced" can be completed within 2-4 weeks but the time frame will double if an RFP is sent out. Chief Planner Kalkin clarified that the scope of the traffic study would ultimately be the City Cngineer's determination. Mr. Sincatta noted that they preferred not to sole source the traffic study and have input on the scope of it. He pointed out that there is no issue with the City managing the study. Commissioner Ochsenhirt questioned if the applicant can work on the proposed landscape and contributing to the Cultural Arts fund. Mr. Kikuchi stated that the traffic study will determine where the landscaping will be installed. Mr. Sincatta stated that they could possibly contribute the 3% but would like to explore other ways to meet the 3% in dollars and cents giving it within the community. Chairperson Giusti questioned if the scope could include moving the driveway. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the price was high because the scope included three different proposals to be evaluated. Motion--Commissioner Ochsenhirt/Second--Commissioner Moore to continue P06-0088: PUD 07- 0003, UP06-0020 & DR06-0072 off calendar. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Oborne and Commissioner Prouty -absent ADMINISTRAT[VE BUSINESS 5. 18 month Review -New Wave Lounge -Use Permit Kelly-Moore Paint Co/Owner Billy Ket Chau/Applicant 107 I-Iickey Blvd PO6-0040: U POb-0013 l8 month review -Use Permit allowing a cocktail lounge with daily hours of operation from 3 PM to 2 AM and allowing karaoke and limited live entertainment consisting of piano playing, within 200 feet of a residential zoning district at 107 Elickey Boulevard in the Commercial (G1) 'Lone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.22 Sc 20.81. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. The Commission did not express any concerns. Page 6 of 7 Motion--Commissioner Ochsenhirt/Second--Commissioner Zemke to accept the 18-month review. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Oborne and Commissioner Prouty -absent. ITEMS FROM STAFF 6. Appointment of a Housing Element subcommittee. Chief Planner Kalkin requested that the Planning Commission appoint two members of to a housing subcommittee to work on the 2009 Housing element. Commissioner Ochsenhil-t and Commissioner Prouty were appointed to the Housing Element subcommittee. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION Commissioner Moore expressed get well wishes to Commissioners Oborne and Prouty. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Giusti adjourned the meeting at 9:34 p.m. ~~ Susy~Kalkitr~' Secretary to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco SlUbla % i~2.~ ~~C~Le~.,~J Ma yrMa G usti, Chairperson Planning Commission City of South San Francisco Page 7 of 7