20091006_es

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

Inter-Departmental Correspondence

Planning and Building Department

DATE:

September 21, 2009

BOARD MEETING DATE:

October 6, 2009

SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING:

10 days, within 300 feet

VOTE REQUIRED:

Majority

TO:

Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:

Lisa Grote, Director of Community Development

SUBJECT:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Consideration of a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Medium-Low Density Residential to Office Commercial and a rezoning from Single-Family Residential (R-1/S-92) to Planned Unit Development-134 (PUD-134). The purpose of the amendment and zone change is to allow construction of a 12,600 sq. ft., 2-story commercial/office building with underground parking. The project also requires the merger of two parcels and a grading permit for excavation in the amount of 12,200 cubic yards. The property is located at 2126 and 2128 Sand Hill Road, in the unincorporated West Menlo Park area.

RECOMMENDATION

1.

Certify the Mitigated Negative Declaration as complete and adequate in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

2.

Adopt the resolution to change the subject parcel’s General Plan Land Use designation from “Medium-Low Density Residential” to “Office Commercial.”

3.

Adopt the ordinance to change the subject parcel’s Zoning Map designation from R-1/S-92 (Single-Family Residential/10,000 sq. ft. Minimum Parcel Size) to “PUD-134” (Planned Unit Development-134).

4.

Adopt the ordinance to enact the “PUD-134” (Planned Unit Development-134) Regulations, applicable only to the subject parcels.

BACKGROUND/PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION

The Planning Commission initially considered a planning application for a mixed-use office commercial building consisting of 12,400 sq. ft. of commercial office space and 2,000 sq. ft. of residential space at their March 25, 2009 hearing. The project was recommended for denial by the Commission. The Commission found the Mitigated Negative Declaration was incomplete and did not adopt it, and found that the project, as designed, did not comply with the General Plan for the following aspects of the project: (1) bulk and positioning of the building, (2) noise, (3) pedestrian and cyclist safety, (4) inadequate delivery area, and (5) parking limitations.

A revised Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared to examine noise and pedestrian and bicycle safety. New mitigation measures were added to address pedestrian and bicycle safety. No new mitigation measures were required for noise. The document was circulated for 20 days and no comments were received.

At the August 26, 2009 Planning Commission meeting, in addition to the original mixed-use project, an alternative version of the project was presented which eliminated the residential component of the project. The second version also reduces the bulk of the building, reduces the size of the second floor and total square footage by 1,800 sq. ft., and creates a larger green roof on the top of second floor of the building. Changes from the initial proposal, which appeared in both versions of the project presented at the August 26 hearing are based on both input from the community and County requirements. These modifications include: (1) a new first floor footprint and 36-foot front yard setback which moved the building 16 feet away from Sand Hill Road to improve pedestrian safety and to allow adequate height at the garage entrance for emergency vehicle access, (2) relocation of the elevator from the rear of the property to the side of the building, and (3) the change to self-service, 5-car mechanical parking equipment.

At the public hearing, the San Mateo County Planning Commission reconsidered the project with the modifications and recommended the second version, the commercial only alternative, for approval, with additional conditions. The new conditions of approval require a loading zone, a widened driveway, clarification on landscaping and allowed uses, and restricted access to the green roof on the second floor.

DISCUSSION

Approval of the proposal requires that findings be made regarding the proposed General Plan land use map amendment, the Planned Unit Development District rezoning and the grading permit. The findings address compatibility, desirability, harmonious land uses, and the absence of public safety menaces and negative impacts. Studies for noise, traffic, geotechnical, and shadows were completed to evaluate environmental impacts from the project. The proposed PUD has development standards which are similar to surrounding zones and commercial zones within the County. The use will not replicate and intensify the impacts created by high-density residential uses. The project has been redesigned and conditioned to reduce safety and environmental impacts to less than significant.

Some controversial aspects of the project include (1) environmental issues (noise and pedestrian and bicycle safety), (2) development standards (floor area ratio, lot coverage, setbacks, and parking), and (3) operation and quality of life issues (business restrictions, landscaping, and relocation of elevator). Many of these controversial aspects of the project have been mitigated in response to the public concerns and requirements imposed by the County. A detailed discussion of the public comments can be found in the Discussion Section of the Board of Supervisors staff report.

With the additional mitigation measures, modifications to the project made by the applicant, and the Planning Commission’s additional conditions of approval, the Planning Commission is recommending the required findings for a General Plan amendment, PUD zoning, and associated grading permit for this proposal, can be made by the Board.

The approval of the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning to a Planned Unit Development for a professional office building, and the associated grading permit, contributes to the Livable Communities 2025 Shared Vision outcome because it is consistent with the County’s land use regulations, including the General Plan and Zoning Regulations. The property is located within the West Menlo Park area, near transportation corridors, existing commercial, and residential uses, and creates a live/work community.

FISCAL IMPACT

None.


			COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Planning and Building Department


DATE:				September 21, 2009
BOARD MEETING DATE:				October 6, 2009
SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING:				10 days, within 300 feet
VOTE REQUIRED:				Majority

TO:		Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:		Lisa Grote, Director of Community Development

SUBJECT:		EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Consideration of a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Medium-Low Density Residential to Office Commercial and a rezoning from Single-Family Residential (R-1/S-92) to Planned Unit Development-134 (PUD-134). The purpose of the amendment and zone change is to allow construction of a 12,600 sq. ft., 2-story commercial/office building with underground parking. The project also requires the merger of two parcels and a grading permit for excavation in the amount of 12,200 cubic yards. The property is located at 2126 and 2128 Sand Hill Road, in the unincorporated West Menlo Park area.

RECOMMENDATION

1.	Certify the Mitigated Negative Declaration as complete and adequate in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

2.	Adopt the resolution to change the subject parcel’s General Plan Land Use designation from “Medium-Low Density Residential” to “Office Commercial.”

3.	Adopt the ordinance to change the subject parcel’s Zoning Map designation from R-1/S-92 (Single-Family Residential/10,000 sq. ft. Minimum Parcel Size) to “PUD-134” (Planned Unit Development-134).

4.	Adopt the ordinance to enact the “PUD-134” (Planned Unit Development-134) Regulations, applicable only to the subject parcels.

BACKGROUND/PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION

The Planning Commission initially considered a planning application for a mixed-use office commercial building consisting of 12,400 sq. ft. of commercial office space and 2,000 sq. ft. of residential space at their March 25, 2009 hearing. The project was recommended for denial by the Commission. The Commission found the Mitigated Negative Declaration was incomplete and did not adopt it, and found that the project, as designed, did not comply with the General Plan for the following aspects of the project: (1) bulk and positioning of the building, (2) noise, (3) pedestrian and cyclist safety, (4) inadequate delivery area, and (5) parking limitations.

A revised Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared to examine noise and pedestrian and bicycle safety. New mitigation measures were added to address pedestrian and bicycle safety. No new mitigation measures were required for noise. The document was circulated for 20 days and no comments were received.

At the August 26, 2009 Planning Commission meeting, in addition to the original mixed-use project, an alternative version of the project was presented which eliminated the residential component of the project. The second version also reduces the bulk of the building, reduces the size of the second floor and total square footage by 1,800 sq. ft., and creates a larger green roof on the top of second floor of the building. Changes from the initial proposal, which appeared in both versions of the project presented at the August 26 hearing are based on both input from the community and County requirements. These modifications include: (1) a new first floor footprint and 36-foot front yard setback which moved the building 16 feet away from Sand Hill Road to improve pedestrian safety and to allow adequate height at the garage entrance for emergency vehicle access, (2) relocation of the elevator from the rear of the property to the side of the building, and (3) the change to self-service, 5-car mechanical parking equipment.

At the public hearing, the San Mateo County Planning Commission reconsidered the project with the modifications and recommended the second version, the commercial only alternative, for approval, with additional conditions. The new conditions of approval require a loading zone, a widened driveway, clarification on landscaping and allowed uses, and restricted access to the green roof on the second floor.

DISCUSSION

Approval of the proposal requires that findings be made regarding the proposed General Plan land use map amendment, the Planned Unit Development District rezoning and the grading permit. The findings address compatibility, desirability, harmonious land uses, and the absence of public safety menaces and negative impacts. Studies for noise, traffic, geotechnical, and shadows were completed to evaluate environmental impacts from the project. The proposed PUD has development standards which are similar to surrounding zones and commercial zones within the County. The use will not replicate and intensify the impacts created by high-density residential uses. The project has been redesigned and conditioned to reduce safety and environmental impacts to less than significant.

Some controversial aspects of the project include (1) environmental issues (noise and pedestrian and bicycle safety), (2) development standards (floor area ratio, lot coverage, setbacks, and parking), and (3) operation and quality of life issues (business restrictions, landscaping, and relocation of elevator). Many of these controversial aspects of the project have been mitigated in response to the public concerns and requirements imposed by the County. A detailed discussion of the public comments can be found in the Discussion Section of the Board of Supervisors staff report.

With the additional mitigation measures, modifications to the project made by the applicant, and the Planning Commission’s additional conditions of approval, the Planning Commission is recommending the required findings for a General Plan amendment, PUD zoning, and associated grading permit for this proposal, can be made by the Board.

The approval of the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning to a Planned Unit Development for a professional office building, and the associated grading permit, contributes to the Livable Communities 2025 Shared Vision outcome because it is consistent with the County’s land use regulations, including the General Plan and Zoning Regulations. The property is located within the West Menlo Park area, near transportation corridors, existing commercial, and residential uses, and creates a live/work community.

FISCAL IMPACT

None.