The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMin - PC - 1989.01.09CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 9, 1989 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Chairman Jacobs on Monday, January 9, 1989 at 7:31 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Ellis, Garcia, Giomi, H. Graham, S. Graham, Harrison, Jacobs Absent: None Staff Present: Margaret Monroe, City Planner; Jerome Coleman, City Attorney; Frank Erbacher, City Engineer; Bill Reilly, Fire Marshal MINUTES - The minutes of the December 12, 1988 meeting were unanimously approved. AGENDA - Order of the agenda approved. ITEMS FOR STUDY 1. CONDOMINIUM PERMIT, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP AND SPECIAL PERMIT, 1532 FLORIBUNDA AVENUE, ZONED R-3 Requests: how will guests gain access to the underground parking if security gate is provided; is an antenna planned for this project; why is special permit needed for the 31 architectural trim; what is planned for the common outdoor area at the rear; will storage lockers be provided; will there be any recreation area on the roof; add condition that final inspection be completed and certificate of occupancy issued before close of escrow on the sale of each unit; will drainage at the bottom of the ramp, exterior lighting, dumpster location be shown on the final plans; will project be required to meet water conservation measures; letter addressing the special permit request, is it strictly for architectural design or does it impact the usable area of the building; details of proposed fence, location, height, type. Item set for public hearing January 23, 1989. 2. PARKING VARIANCE TO ADD 480 SF OF MEZZANINE RETAIL SPACE AT 1399 BROADWAY, ZONED C-1 Requests: explain how the addition of space will not affect the need for more parking; why is parking variance required; justification of the variance request; show hand rail on the plans, Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 January 9, 1989 is it open or just a wall; is there only one exit from the mezzanine. Item set for public hearing January 23, 1989. 3. SPECIAL PERMIT AND VARIANCE - EXPANSION OF NONCONFORMING USE AND EXPANSION OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS - 869 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-2 Requests: letter addressing findings for variance; diagram showing how declining height envelope applies. Item set for public hearing January 23, 1989. 4. PARKING VARIANCE - ADDITION OF MEZZANINE SPACE FOR STORAGE USE - 1031 CALIFORNIA DRIVE. ZONED C-2 Requests: status of wash area; where are customers' cars parked for this business; what happens to the mezzanine if this business leaves; ceiling height of new storage area; at what stage in the approval process is the encroachment permit from Council; sketch showing exactly what is being removed and what is being added; ask applicant to review project proposal and number of employees, he expects fewer employees in five years and the same number of customers, in view of this why is this expansion needed; when was the mezzanine built. Item set for public hearing January 23, 1989. 5. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR VEHICLE LEASING AND MAINTENANCE AT 1360 MARSTEN ROAD, ZONED M-1 Requests: why CE has no objection to the traffic from this use; time of day of the 53 daily vehicle trips, A.M./P.M. peak hour or some other time; what protection will be provided around the diesel fuel pumps; could paving of the yard be made a condition of approval. Item set for public hearing January 23, 1989. ITEMS FOR ACTION 6. PARKING VARIANCE FOR AN ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME WITHOUT PROVIDING A CODE STANDARD TWO CAR GARAGE, AT 1545 RALSTON AVENUE, ZONED R-1 Reference staff report, 1/9/89, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed details of the request, staff review, Planning staff comment, applicants letter, findings necessary for granting a variance. Three conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Discussion: size of the lot and lot coverage, garage dimensions needed to meet code requirement, one hour fire wall requirement, number of bedrooms with the proposed addition. Chm. Jacobs opened the public hearing. Robert Louth, applicant, was present. His comments: this is a small lot, he would rather Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 January 9, 1989 not add more structure than he is proposing, two cars can be parked in the garage now, everything else will meet code, he will remove the second unit which presently connects the house and garage. Responding to Commission questions, applicant advised he purchased the property recently with his father, he and his family will live there, he has three children (aged 17, 8 and 6), they will move in after the addition is completed; applicant did not know when this property was subdivided, lot meets the 5,000 SF minimum; he is a contractor. Applicant stated he would rather use the outside space for living area than have it taken up by enlarging the garage; he will need a fence along the sidewalk, will leave the driveway open; he was not aware at the time he purchased this property that a variance would be necessary. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Commission discussion/comment: concern about this large addition and reluctance of applicant to enlarge the garage; if the house were sold it would be a home with a variance and a substandard garage when it is possible to provide a standard garage, based on this cannot support the variance request; since applicant is a contractor he should have known a variance would be involved, think he should provide a standard size garage. C. Giomi moved to deny the parking variance for the reasons stated; she found there were no exceptional circumstances applicable to this property because it is a standard sized lot, there is room for expansion of the garage, no hardship exists. Motion was seconded by C. Harrison and approved on a 7-0 roll call vote. Appeal procedures were advised. 7. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A SECOND FLOOR REAL ESTATE OFFICE AND PARKING VARIANCE AT 1105 BURLINGAME AVENUE, ZONED C-1, SUB AREA A Reference staff report, 1/9/89, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed details of the request, staff review, applicant's letters, study meeting questions. She noted site is vacant at present, was used as a clothing store workroom and stock broker's office, the two proposed tenants would be subtenants of this applicant. Two conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Discussion: maximum number of employees proposed. in this second floor office space; allowed uses in Sub Area A, second floor real estate use requires a special permit; application requires a parking variance for change from workroom area and special permit. Chm. Jacobs opened the public hearing. King C. Hsiao, applicant, was present. His remarks: he has an office in San Francisco; presently he has only one full time and one part time agent working Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 January 9, 1989 in this area, he expects an accountant and a travel agent will share the space on the second floor and all share one secretary; in five years he would expect to have six employees; the 234 SF space marked recreation area will be used as a coffee room; it is hoped the five desks and a brokers, room shown on the drawing will create the impression of a larger office to clients visiting the site. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Commission/staff discussion: variance for parking; parking requirement for office use, real estate use has more people per area than the code recognizes. Commissioner comment: regarding real estate offices, believe 25% of the people are in the office, they come and go, cannot park in long term lots but use the short term lots needed by retailers and have a bigger impact on parking; with regular office uses people are there all day and can use long term lots; opposed because of the proposed location, wonder where applicant found parking spaces on California Drive, cannot support this use in this area; the city has tried to protect retail in this area; reason real estate was allowed on the second floor with a special permit was because some real estate offices have only one broker which would not be a problem, this applicant does not want to limit employees to two people. C. Giomi moved to deny the special permit and parking variance for the reasons stated in discussion. Motion was seconded by C. H.Graham and approved on a 7-0 roll call vote. Appeal procedures were advised. FROM THE FLOOR There were no comments from the floor. PLANNER REPORT CP Monroe reviewed City Council actions at its January 4, 1989 regular meeting. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:33 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Mike Ellis, Secretary