Prior to seconding the motion, Commissioner Shugart expressed her concern that the minutes do not reflect her concern or the concern expressed by Commissioner Iwasa regarding parking at the 1501 Cherry Street project.Specifically she indicated that the minutes reflect concern about a proposal for 1 parking space each for the 25 one bedroom units.She asked for opinion if the minutes should be corrected after staff listens to the audio or by her clarification this evening.She expressed concern that without the detail of the discussion in the minutes, a parking study could be prepared for the project which does not reflect the Commissioners’ interest in analysis of the parking proposal presented at the study session
Deputy City Attorney Rubens advised that the Commission could choose not approve the minutes and ask staff to bring them back with greater detail.He also indicated that since the meeting was a study session, the Commission is not bound to only those issues addressed at the meeting.
After further discussion between Commissioners about the level of clarity they felt was provided to the applicant at the study session, they took action on the motion.
Planning Manager, Deborah Nelson presented the item with a recommendation that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that they not adopt a Resolution of Intention for a General Plan Amendment, Zoning District Boundary Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment based on the findings and for reasons stated in the staff report.The primary reasons presented included:
Consideration of the proposed project would:
Supersede the collaborative City-wide General Plan update process
Drive land use decisions out of sync with the General Plan update
The General Plan Alternatives currently being considered by the General Plan Advisory Committee and reviewed at study sessions of the Planning Commission and City Council:
Consider sufficient sites for Housing
Do not consider sites for housing in Study Area 7 between Holly and Bransten, Industrial Road and Hwy 101
Do consider this same portion of Area 7 for Commercial, Industrial and Regional Retail Uses, including full implementation of the Economic Development Plan
Would consider in the EIR and Environmental Management Element, the potential impacts of particulate matter on residential uses from adjacency to Hwy 101
Land Use decisions should be balanced with consideration of the City’s Financial Health to:
Consider fiscal implications of Land Use decisions
Implement the goals of the Economic Development Plan
Proactively influence land use decisions to create sustainable economic growth
Consider that the purpose of the area proposed for a General Plan amendment is to facilitate:
The maintenance and growth of the economy
Tax revenues and employment
Balance of commercial/office and industrial land uses
Conflicts between new residential and industrial users
The proposal creates Land Use incompatibility by:
Lost opportunity of the site for future preferred Land Uses
Incentivizing investment in other large parcels for uses that are not preferred
Lost opportunity to fully realize the Economic Development Plan
The proposal is not consistent with requirements for General Plan amendment based on findings that it:
Does not meet expectations for orderly development
Does not further the East Side Specific Plan objectives
Is not necessary to meet housing needs
Is not a location which fits most standards for TOD (transit oriented development)
The proposal is not consistent with requirements for Zoning Map amendment based on findings that it:
Does not meet objectives of maintaining and enhancing the industrial community
Can not meet expectations for orderly development and protections of public health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare
Is inconsistent with objectives to preserve the area for industrial and commercial uses
The proposal is not consistent with requirement for Zoning Text Amendment based on findings that it:
Does not include provisions for industrial/commercial land uses
Would preclude reasonable use of the property for any other use
Cannot ensure an environment of stable and desirable character for users of the site or adjacent site
Would amount to spot zoning
Costs for providing municipal services can not be absorbed by the City
Planning Manager Deborah Nelson also emphasized that the City has invested hundreds of thousands of dollars as recently as last summer in the Economic Development Plan and the General Plan update.
Following the presentation, Commissioner Divney asked questions of staff.He inquired about the time commitment to conduct a General Plan Study for the area and if there is a convenient time.He inquired about the General Plan update process, its schedule and how far along in the schedule is the process.He also inquired about the State mandated Housing Element cycle and the City’s Housing Needs obligation.
Community Development Director, Al Savay, responded that the General Plan update is about ½ way through the 24 month process.He indicated that the Housing Element is on a 7 year cycle.The City’s current obligation is 599 housing units.He noted that the buildout analysis for the three Land Use Alternatives each provide for greater by several fold than the City obligation and up to 1975 new units.
John Baer, The Matteson Company, Applicant, distributed bound copies of a 112 page Power Point Presentation to the Commission and a few copies for the public.He verbally presented the power point.
He provided background on the strength of The Matteson Company for the production of Mixed-Use projects in the Bay Area and on converted sites.He indicated that virtually every one of their projects requires a General Plan Amendment.He illustrated location, size, architecture and features of other projects.He also presented the Company efforts to obtain opinion within the community and related this input to the project.
Mr. Baer spoke of efforts to attract tenants and uses which are currently permitted.He presented reasons why the site is not marketable.He suggested that the City promotion of some uses are not consistent with an area primed for change.
He asked the Commission not to foreclose further study of the area between Industrial Road and Hwy 101, Holly Street and Bransten Rd.He indicated that the applicant will cover the costs of a study.He asked that the Planning Commission recommend affirmatively to the City Council that such study be conducted.
Chair Phillips asked for Commissioners questions.
Commissioner Shugart sarcastically commented on the persuasiveness of the presentation and asked why the Commission just received copies the applicant’s presentation at the meeting.
Commissioner Divney asked the applicant and staff for the Assessor Parcel number of the property at 777 Industrial, the parcel indicated by the applicant that is no longer part of the proposal.
Planning Manager, Deborah Nelson replied that the parcel is 046-100-070.
Chair Phillips opened the meeting to Public Comment.
Jack Aho, 747 Industrial Road and owner of Superior Auto, explained to the Commission that he has been in business for 22 years.He owns three sites amounting to over 2 acres, one on Industrial, one on Terminal and one on Bransten.He stated that he does not think residential can co-exist within the area.It is not safe or healthy for a neighborhood.He stated, if the project goes through it would force him out.
Chair Phillips commented that Superior Auto is successful company, run without complaint from others.
Chair Phillips asked if the staff has anything to add.
Planning Manager, Deborah Nelson, commented on the discussions with the applicant beginning last summer and leading up to tonight.She mentioned that the City protocol is to enter all packets on-line on the Thursday prior to the meeting.She noted that the applicant had been made aware of the issues throughout the review process.
Community Development Director, Al Savay, spoke about the economic analysis conducted by Bill Lee.With regard to the area proposed for change by the applicant, Bill Lee had advised the City that the area offers valuable frontage and signage visibility to Hwy 101.Mr. Savay advised the Commission that 70% of the City revenue is from business to business sales in the Eastside commercial/industrial areas.
Mr. Savay commented that a study would require a larger review than 2-3 parcels.It is important to look at adjacencies.He explained that GPAC has considered the area and has heard from the HIA about potential inconsistencies.He stated that GPAC had considered the area in question as the only viable freeway frontage location for development.He explained the constraints of other freeway frontage lands such as the north west side of the freeway with the transfer station site, the PG&E site as unavailable, and other constraints.
Mr. Savay also mentioned that the property tax revenue for parcels in the Redevelopment area do not go to the General Fund.He noted that the City is in financial crisis and there are few options for the City to get new retail or commercial development.He noted that GPAC has held 8 meetings reviewing land use alternatives in some aspect.He mentioned that the Community Forum on Land Use Alternatives will be held on July 30, 2008 at the Hiller Museum.It could be a forum for the community to give additional input.He concluded with the comment that this one project has potential to circumvent the General Plan process already underway.
Chris Wuthmann, Renew Property Services, Consultant to the Applicant, spoke about his attendance at GPAC meetings.He said he has made a point at meetings about consideration of mixed-use.He said mixed use: does not cannibalize other development, is 24/7 and may be the best fiscal alternative.
Chair Phillips asked for a motion to close the public comment.
M/S Divney/Shugart to close the public comment.Motion passed 3-0.
Chair Phillips asked for Commission comment.
Commissioner Divney stated that the argument regarding inappropriate timing rings hollow.The mixed use proposal has merits.
Commissioner Shugart asked Chair Phillips to share his comments.
Chair Phillips stated that in his 10 years of involvement the City has waited for the Landmark site to develop.He stated he is unwilling to cut off the opportunity to consider a $75M specific proposal of developers with insight.Cities can not always plan for the viable use.
Commissioner Shugart stated that she liked what she had read in the proposal.However, she is negatively influenced by the argument that once the property is residential it won’t go back to another use.She is also negatively influenced by the loss of freeway frontage.She negatively commented on the effectiveness of the applicant’s presentation noting it was like being at a used car sale or time share sales presentation.
M/S Divney/Shugart that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that they adopt a resolution of intention pursuant to San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.136.020 C, for a General Plan Amendment, Zoning District Boundary Amendment and a Zoning Text Amendment for the property at 767 Industrial Avenue, San Carlos (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 046 100 360 & 046 100 220) for the reasons stated by the Commission.
Deputy City Attorney Rubens suggested that he will write findings for the Commission to adopt at a subsequent meeting.
Planning Manager Nelson reported that the City Council adopted the remainder of the Budget including the Financial Policies.She also mentioned that the City Council has approved an evaluation of City fees.Since the Community Development Department is a fee for service department, there are likely to be changes recommended.
Planning Manager referred to a letter in the packet and a letter on the Commission dais regarding this issue.She noted that there are a number of recreational uses which may contribute to problems.Staff will continue to try to facilitate a resolution.
Planning Manager, Deborah Nelson, reported that staff has worked with RDRC on process improvements.A package of new instructions and forms was sent to designers and architects for their input.An open house was held for one on one conversation and idea sharing.The new process will be instituted immediately.
