Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1974.05.04THE CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY OF SPECIAL STUDY MEETING - MAY 4, 1974 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT Jacobs Kindig Mink Norberg Sine Taylor COMMISSIONERS ABSENT Francard COUNCILMEN PRESENT Amstrup Crosby Cusick Harrison Mangini OTHERS PRESENT City Manager Schwalm City Planner Swan City Engineer Davidson A special study meeting was called to order at 9:40 A.M. by Chairman Mink. The Chairman announced that this was a special informal study meeting of the Draft Tentative Environmental Impact Report, EIR-28P, for the Anza Master Plan. His suggested ground rules included intro- duction by David Keyston, Executive Vice President of Anza Pacific Corp., short presentations by each of the consultants preparing sections of the EIR for Anza Pacific, after which the privilege of questions and discussion would be open to City Council as well as Planning Commission. He also requested that statements from City staff be added to the input at this meeting which was called mainly to gather additional information or clarify various points. He emphasized that this was a draft report prepared by the applicant and that the final report would state the City's position; this study session was being audiotaped. David Keyston then introduced the consultants present: Robert Blunk, B1unk.Associates.Architects (History and Project Description); Len McVicar, Ribera & Sue (Land Use and Other Relationships); Peter Callander, Landscape Architect (Biological Impact); Howard Hickey, C.E. (Utility Services); Donald Goodrich, JHK & Associates (Traffic); he noted Planning Commissioners, City Council, City Planner, City Engineer, City Manager and George Keyston, president of Anza Pacific, as being in attendance. Mr. Keyston expressed appreciation for the cooperation given by the Planning Commission and the City Council with their projects in the past, and stated it was their feeling that the proposed Anza Master Plan was a reasonably practical plan. Robert Blunk presented a short description of the project. He mentioned that as much of the parking as possible has been placed underground. Over 30 percent of the project has been devoted to plazas, landscaped -2 - areas and public areas. There is one parcel not owned or leased by Anza Pacific, located approximately in the center of the overall project, which is owned by William -J. Purdy who was present at the meeting. A 6 -story office building is planned for this parcel and will include some office space, a bank and an eating and drinking establishment on the 6th floor. This building will be an addition to the Anza Master Plan and is not shown in the project as presented. Len McVicar noted that the City of Burlingame must have "a precise waterfront plan." He recommended that Anza Pacific prepare (1) a master sign plan program, (2) a streetscape plan, and (3) an architectural pallet for the color and texture of building materials. There being no representative present from Harding -Lawson Associates, Engineers and Geologists, Mr. Keyston summarized briefly the Physical Characteristics section of the EIR, indicating Anza Pacific has had a seismic analysis done on the entire project. Peter Callander discussed the biological impact and classified the area into two portions - terrestrial and aquatic. The aquatic portion was thought to have the most impact, including the inner lagoon which is the drainage lagoon between Anza Pacific property and Bayshore Freeway, all in City ownership, and the outer lagoon which is the 12 acre man-made tide lagoon owned by the State. Howard Hickey reminded that the existing utilities system was designed within the last six to seven years. The water system needs improvement in order to deliver fire flow and adequately serve high buildings. It was indicated there were no insurmountable problems with regard to the other utilities. Donald Goodrich of JHK & Associates estimated the traffic that would be generated and the road needs at the border of the project. Full develop- ment would generate 35,000 2 -way trips per day. Of these, about 96% would go to Bayshore Freeway. There will be a need for five lanes in and five lanes out to carry traffic of the ultimate development. It is estimated 60% of the traffic would go south or east and 40% would go north or west. The two existing traffic lanes will suffice until 45% of the proposed development is achieved. Alternative methods to add three lanes were described: (1) A new freeway overcrossing to connect Airport Boulevard with Oak Grove with no change to the Broadway or Peninsula freeway interchanges; (2) Add a six lane road from Airport Boulevard to interchange with Bayshore Freeway; (3) Widen Airport Boulevard to the east and to the west. Mitigating measures suggested were: (1) Encourage developer to replace office space with hotel space; (2) Encourage staggered and flexible working hours for employees; (3) Energy and EPA regulations are becoming more stringent; trip generation rates may be affected by higher fuel cost and improved air pollution control devices; (4) Improve transit and car pools including shuttle bus to S.P. stations, bus transit within the County, and, in the future, shuttle bus to the airport and BART. Mr. Goodrich demonstrated how Bayshore Freeway could be bent to the north into the inner lagoon so that ramps to a freeway interchange would not require demolition of housing along Rollins Road. -3 - Following the presentations by each of the consultants Mr. Keyston summarized three major impacts: visual, traffic and economic. There are diverse attitudes toward the visual and economic impact, and he stated that the City must give direction to Anza Pacific on the traffic problem. The impact of traffic deserves further study. He acknowledged that the scope of the study should be expanded and, hopefully, the City will be willing to proceed with a more comprehensive traffic study for Bayshore Highway/Airport Boulevard and the freeway interchanges. Discussing where the real public interest lies, Mr. Keyston noted that approximately 600,000 people have visited the Burlingame restaurants along the shoreline and over 200,000 people attended the drive-in theaters. Chairman Mink then opened the meeting for questions to the consultants which brought out the following information and facts. The hotel/convention center complex on Parcel 25 would include two 10 -story buildings and one 3 -story. Two "Y" type slip ramps on the northbound lanes of Bayshore Freeway were proposed because it would take many years to get an Oak Grove overpass. Mr. Goodrich confirmed that now is the time to work with DOT and that it is more effective for the City to ask them direct questions about a new freeway interchange. Parking will be needed for the commercial service establishments, hotels, restaurants, etc. The Master Plan might be achieved within a 7-15 year period, and it is reasonable to assume that 45% would be completed within five years. Concerns were expressed that the City would have little control over employee working hours, car pools and regional air and energy regulations. 17,000 new jobs will create pressures for more multi -family housing. The plan does not adequately solve traffic problems. A freeway interchange might cost up to $6,000,000 plus inflation. Expansion of San Francisco Airport will increase the amount of through traffic on Airport Boulevard. At 11:15 A.M. Chairman Mink called a recess to mitigate the coffee input/output problem after which the meeting reconvened at 11:25 A.M. It was Mr. Keyston's feeling that there would be no significant increase in public service cost. An additional fire engine would be desired and more police protection and traffic control would be required. City Engineer Davidson advised that the waste water treatment plant can handle the estimated increase of waste water from the project area. The growth inducing impact of the project needs to be examined. Analysis of the minimum and maximum impact on population, housing and business is needed, both direct and indirect. (Ed. CEQA requires that an EIR "discuss the characteristic of some projects which may encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environ- ment, either individually or cumulatively. It must not be assumed that growth in any area is necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment.") The Tentative Draft EIR is limited to the area within the perimeter of the project; this speaks both to economic and traffic impacts. More details were requested for the building curtain walls and for plant -4 - materials. The Commission requested information about basic design criteria, land use intensity and quantity of offstreet parking. For many years City policy has been that no housing be allowed on the east side of the freeway. State policy substantiates this and the Boundary Agreement requires that the land conform with Waterfront Commercial District regulations, that State property must be strictly public. There is an over-all public access easement over State lands. When a 16 story building was approved, the buildings in the Anza Master Plan were limited to 15 stories. They could all be three stories in height, thus eliminating open space and viewscapes. (Ed. Maximized parking resulted in a floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.15 SF per SF of land area. The building bulk of multistory parking structures is not included in this FAR.) It was suggested that the major amount of parking on upper levels be deferred until actually needed to obtain more open space. Chairman Mink requested staff comments and questions at this point in the meeting. City Planner Swan mentioned other concerns which should be considered. (1) A policy toward long range planning is needed. A decision should be made as to what is desired for this area 10 years from now. Policy is preferred to relying upon existing zoning regulations. (2) Relation- ships with surrounding land uses; the dump, inner drainage lagoon and drive-in theater are interim land uses. (3) Balance; the intensity of land use should be balanced with transportation systems that serve it. New technology may provide improved ways to move people, not just by adding street capacity to move cars. (4) Conservation of energy; power demand to air condition glass walled buildings is resulting in a change in building design. (5) Wind control in paved plazas; trees may not be effective and there will be downdrafts next to tall buildings. City Engineer Davidson emphasized studying the proposed freeway inter- change for connection to Airport Boulevard. His biggest concern was moving people in and out of the project. It was Chairman Mink's suggestion that the Commission get any questions on the record now before the next study meeting. Several additional comments were made. A 1016" high parking structure would permit two- level parking beneath. The City bus system may have a line through Anza Pacific property when the situation justifies it. The time sequence for construction should be explained - how will the EIR be expanded to cover this and other concerns? Chairman Mink thanked all those present for attending and stated that the Tentative Draft EIR would be a topic on the May 13 study meeting agenda to determine a time schedule for further study and hearing. It was suggested that locating the model of the Anza Master Plan in City Hall might be advisable since it will be a topic of interest and conversation for some time. -5- Mr. Keyston advised that he would submit a list of suggested revisions based on a set of assumptions, and stated that Anza Pacific is ready to come up with whatever additional revisions the Commission may want. Chairman Mink declared the meeting adjourned at 12:25 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Ruth E. Jacobs Secretary