OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

South San Francisco Planning Commission Regular Meeting – April 16, 2020

Planning CommissionThursday, April 16, 2020
BodySouth San Francisco, California
SessionPlanning Commission
DateThursday, April 16, 2020
StatusFILED
Video Record

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Transcript — Verbatim
0:00

If there are no comments from the public, why don't we uh move on to the calendar?

0:05

Uh Madam Clark, can you please uh read the items directly?

0:10

Approval of the regular meeting minutes of February 20th, 2020 and approval of the regular meeting minutes of March 5th, 2020.

0:19

Okay, uh any commissioners have any questions or comments.

0:25

Um I I do have um I don't know if this is for Claire or uh for both of the minutes.

0:32

I was noticing that the votes, uh some of them show uh six to one.

0:39

Um I believe uh Commissioner Evans or Rester Evans was uh asking for some of those.

0:45

So should should those be six zero with an ST or some of the votes show six one and some show uh six zero.

0:55

So I just want to make sure we take a look at that.

0:59

Uh make sure it's not looking like a no vote and just looking like a uh uh six yes votes six yes votes and that's that's correct, Chair Wong.

1:11

I think we'll fix that um to reflect the uh the actual vote because uh you're right.

1:16

I I do believe uh Vice Chair Evans was not present.

1:20

Uh okay.

1:22

I just want to make sure it didn't look like uh someone's voting no for some of these things when uh when no one was.

1:27

Sure.

1:28

Um if any other commissioners have any uh want to pull those uh items or do we have a motion to approve?

1:41

I'll make a motion that we approve the regular meeting minutes of February 20, 2020 and March 5th, 2020 as amended to reflect the proper books.

1:55

All right, we have a second by Commissioner Zang.

1:58

Uh Madam Clark, can we have a roll call, please?

2:02

Commissioner Bernardo.

2:05

Yes.

2:06

Commissioner Murphy.

2:08

Yes.

2:09

Commissioner Smarina.

2:11

Yes.

2:12

Commissioner Zhang.

2:14

Yes.

2:16

Commissioner Shahade.

2:18

Yes.

2:19

Vice Chair Evans.

2:21

Yes.

2:22

Chair Wong, motion passes.

2:24

Yes.

2:26

Okay, great.

2:27

Um moving on to uh public hearing.

2:30

Um, can we have item number three, please?

2:33

Report regarding a conditional use permit, design review, and waivers and modification requests for the community civic campus and recreation joint facility design at the northeast corner of El Camino Real and Chestnut Avenue, subject to Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code and determination that the project is consistent with the the adopted supplemental environmental impact report per sequest.

3:03

Um staff if you can give your report, please.

3:06

Yes.

3:07

Absolutely.

3:08

Can you hear me, Chair Vice Chair Commission?

3:11

Yep, loud and clear.

3:13

All right.

3:13

Tony Rosley with your friendly quarantine planning division.

3:17

Uh the project before you tonight represents several years of design effort by the city and Smith Group Architecture to design a new community civic center.

3:28

The schematic design of the community civic campus was reviewed by the commission almost a year ago, April 2019.

3:36

Since then, the design has been fine-tuned, the landscape architecture completed uh with several options that really depend on future funding and grant opportunities.

3:47

Uh the design review board provided comments in support of the design and the project team has updated the city council on a quarterly basis with the design strategy.

3:58

So tonight staff is requesting that the planning commission take action and approve both the entitlements request and that the project is consistent with a previously adopted supplemental EIR that was originally adopted by the city council in December 2017.

4:17

Similar to the police department facility uh reviewed last year, there are certain design considerations that require either a use permit or a waiver and modification approval, and that's really given to the significant site constraints of the property as well as the placemaking architectural design that they require some minor waivers.

4:39

The applicant team, including Ken Littman and others from the lead firm Smith Group, uh would like to share an overview presentation of the final design, and then I'm happy to come back and answer any questions at the conclusion of their presentation.

4:54

With that, I'll invite Ken to uh join us and share the presentation.

5:01

Okay, uh can I just confirm, Tony, that you can see the screen.

5:06

Yeah, correct.

5:08

Okay, great.

5:09

Okay.

5:09

All right.

5:10

Um, so um hi everyone.

5:12

Uh my name's Ken Litwin.

5:14

Uh Tony mentioned I work with Smith Group, um, the project architect for the library and parts and rec project.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Public Health Awareness█████████████████████████████████████████████56%
Cybersecurity██████7%
Cannabis Regulation█████6%
Procedural████5%
Design Review████5%
Parks And Recreation███4%
Parks and Recreation██3%
Public Safety██2%
Engineering And Infrastructure██2%
Summary of Proceedings

South San Francisco Planning Commission Regular Meeting – April 16, 2020

The South San Francisco Planning Commission held a regular meeting via teleconference on April 16, 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The commission considered three public hearing items and received a staff update. No public comments were made on any agenda item. All votes were unanimous except where a commissioner recused themselves.

Consent Calendar

  • Minutes of February 20, 2020 and March 5, 2020: Approved with an amendment to correct vote tallies to reflect the absence of Vice Chair Evans. Motion passed 7–0.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • No members of the public spoke or submitted comments on any agenda item.

Discussion Items

  • Item 3 – Community Civic Campus Park and Recreation Joint Facility: Staff presented the final schematic design for a new community civic center (library, parks/recreation, council chambers) at the northeast corner of El Camino Real and Chestnut Avenue. Key details: project cost $120 million, building area over 80,000 sq ft, three stories, 220 parking spaces, and a 1.4-acre park. Two playground concepts (Tech & Innovation and Nature & Adventure) were presented, with community feedback favoring the nature option. The main entrance was redesigned to a single ramp (steeper slope with handrails) to improve accessibility. ADA parking: eight spaces required, with three additional spaces along Antoinette Lane for council chamber access (180‑foot distance). Commissioners asked about green screens at the parking structure (options include live wall, green screen, or metal panel) and the status of playground funding (not yet fully funded; part of base bid lawn). The project was found consistent with the 2017 Supplemental EIR. Motion to approve the conditional use permit, design review, and waivers/modifications subject to findings and conditions passed 7–0.

  • Item 4 – Cannabis Delivery-Only Operation at 337 Littlefield Avenue: Applicant element seven proposed a delivery-only cannabis business in 1,900 sq ft of existing office/warehouse space. Hours: 8 a.m. to 10 p.m., seven days a week. No storefront retail; online/phone orders only. Community benefit contribution: $5,000 per year. The site is at least 600 feet from residential uses and complies with security requirements. A commissioner noted the thoroughness of the application. Discussion included the state licensing timeline (8–12 weeks) and annual operator permit review. Motion to approve the conditional use permit for a five‑year term (expiring 2025) passed 7–0.

  • Item 5 – Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance Update: Staff presented a draft ordinance to comply with new state laws effective January 1, 2020. Key changes: review period reduced to 60 days; ADUs allowed on multi‑unit parcels; maximum size of 1,000 sq ft for attached ADUs (50% of primary unit or 800 sq ft, whichever greater); 16‑foot height limit for detached ADUs; no replacement parking required when a garage is converted; impact fees only for ADUs 750+ sq ft. Commissioner Tzang recused himself due to a potential conflict of interest. The commission recommended adoption by the City Council. Motion passed 6–0 (Tzang recused).

  • Item 6 – Staff Update on Costco Temporary Modified Hours: Staff reported that Costco on El Camino Real received temporary approval to receive deliveries starting at 3 a.m. (instead of 6 a.m.) due to COVID-19 demands. Conditions included notifying the adjacent Treasure Island Mobile Home Park, minimizing noise and lighting, and prohibiting truck idling along the northern driveway. The update was informational; no commission action required.

Key Outcomes

  • Consent calendar minutes approved as amended (7–0).
  • Community Civic Campus project entitlements approved (7–0).
  • Cannabis delivery‑only operation conditional use permit approved for five years (7–0).
  • ADU ordinance resolution recommending City Council adoption approved (6–0; Commissioner Tzang recused).
  • Costco temporary hours update received without action.

Meeting Transcript

If there are no comments from the public, why don't we uh move on to the calendar? Uh Madam Clark, can you please uh read the items directly? Approval of the regular meeting minutes of February 20th, 2020 and approval of the regular meeting minutes of March 5th, 2020. Okay, uh any commissioners have any questions or comments. Um I I do have um I don't know if this is for Claire or uh for both of the minutes. I was noticing that the votes, uh some of them show uh six to one. Um I believe uh Commissioner Evans or Rester Evans was uh asking for some of those. So should should those be six zero with an ST or some of the votes show six one and some show uh six zero. So I just want to make sure we take a look at that. Uh make sure it's not looking like a no vote and just looking like a uh uh six yes votes six yes votes and that's that's correct, Chair Wong. I think we'll fix that um to reflect the uh the actual vote because uh you're right. I I do believe uh Vice Chair Evans was not present. Uh okay. I just want to make sure it didn't look like uh someone's voting no for some of these things when uh when no one was. Sure. Um if any other commissioners have any uh want to pull those uh items or do we have a motion to approve? I'll make a motion that we approve the regular meeting minutes of February 20, 2020 and March 5th, 2020 as amended to reflect the proper books. All right, we have a second by Commissioner Zang. Uh Madam Clark, can we have a roll call, please? Commissioner Bernardo. Yes. Commissioner Murphy. Yes. Commissioner Smarina. Yes. Commissioner Zhang. Yes. Commissioner Shahade. Yes. Vice Chair Evans. Yes. Chair Wong, motion passes. Yes. Okay, great. Um moving on to uh public hearing. Um, can we have item number three, please? Report regarding a conditional use permit, design review, and waivers and modification requests for the community civic campus and recreation joint facility design at the northeast corner of El Camino Real and Chestnut Avenue, subject to Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code and determination that the project is consistent with the the adopted supplemental environmental impact report per sequest. Um staff if you can give your report, please. Yes. Absolutely. Can you hear me, Chair Vice Chair Commission? Yep, loud and clear. All right. Tony Rosley with your friendly quarantine planning division. Uh the project before you tonight represents several years of design effort by the city and Smith Group Architecture to design a new community civic center. The schematic design of the community civic campus was reviewed by the commission almost a year ago, April 2019. Since then, the design has been fine-tuned, the landscape architecture completed uh with several options that really depend on future funding and grant opportunities. Uh the design review board provided comments in support of the design and the project team has updated the city council on a quarterly basis with the design strategy. So tonight staff is requesting that the planning commission take action and approve both the entitlements request and that the project is consistent with a previously adopted supplemental EIR that was originally adopted by the city council in December 2017. Similar to the police department facility uh reviewed last year, there are certain design considerations that require either a use permit or a waiver and modification approval, and that's really given to the significant site constraints of the property as well as the placemaking architectural design that they require some minor waivers.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com