HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1972.10.30THE CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
October 30, 1972
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT
Cistulli Norberg - excused City Planner Swan
Jacobs City Engineer Marr
Kindig City Attorney Karmel
Mink
Sine
Taylor
CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission was called
to order on the above date at 8:05 p.m., Chairman Cistulli presiding.
ROLL CALL
The above -named members were present. Commissioner Norberg was
excused because of illness.
MINUTES
The minutes of the regular meeting of September 25, the adjourned
meeting of October 11, and the study meeting of October 11, 1972
were approved and adopted.
HEARINGS
1. REVOCATION OR SUSPENSION OF SPECIAL PERMIT FOR BUSINESS OFFICE
AND RESIDENTIAL USE OF UNCLASSIFIED LAND AT 290 BURLINGAME
SQUARE, BURLINGAME DEPOT, BY MRS. FRANCES FENA, TENANT ON LANDS
OF SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY
Chairman Cistulli announced this matter for final hearing, a 60-day
period having elapsed from its inception. Mrs. Fena was not present
at the beginning of the hearing. City Planner Swan reported that
the building inspector and the fire inspector had both inspected
the property on October 27 and had found it to be free of debris.
The City Planner inspected the property the same day and found it to
be in better condition as to shrubbery and condition of the lawn.
There is a garbage can, but still some debris under the shrubbery.
He objected to the four cars that he found parked there. He had
found upon investigation that two of the car owners were from
San Francisco, one from San Carlos, and the other car belonged to
tenant Frank Fena. He did not feel this many vehicles should be
allowed to park here, and suggested to the Commission that the
special permit be allowed to run until May 22, 1973, at which time
it could be subject to annual review, being granted from year to year.
He commented that with the beautification of Burlingame Avenue more
attention will be given to the depot and it should be maintained
properly. Commissioner Kindig commented that possibly the cars
were parked without permission. Commissioner Sine noted some improve-
ments, but felt that some of the bushes had not been given enough
attention.
- 2 -
Commissioner Kindig moved that the special permit for business
office and residential use at 290 Burlingame Square, Burlingame
Depot, be allowed until May 22, 1973, with the option for renewal on
an annual basis. Commissioner Jacobs seconded the motion and it
carried unanimously on voice vote.
2. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW AN.IN-BAY CAR WASH AT 1490 BURLINGAME
AVENUE, ZONED C-1 BY SHELL OIL COMPANY
Chairman Cistulli announced this application for hearing. Secretary
Jacobs read the applicant's letter of October 2,. 1972 giving their
reasons for the request. There will be no change in station layout
other than new landscaping on both Burlingame Avenue and El Camino
frontages and the installation of a "Free With Fill Up - Car Wash"
sign on the existing sign pole. The letter stated there will be no
blower unit, hence no increase in the noise emission level.
John Hughes, station operator, and John Williams, Shell representative,
were present. Plans were distributed to the Commission, and Mr.
Williams announced he would be glad to answer questions.
City Engineer Marr questioned the property line on Burlingame Avenue
as shown on the cross section. Shell's map indicates that it is
15.5' distant from the face of the curb whereas City records show
that the property line is 1118" in back of the curb. This would
put the proposed magnolia tree within their property line. He
noted, however, that the section for E1 Camino agreed with the
records. Mr. Williams conceded that the records for Burlingane
Avenue might well be correct.
Mr. Marr added that the sump was shown on the plans but no connection
was indicated for the waste water when it left the sump. Mr.
Williams stated he was certain it would go into the sanitary sewer.
The City Engineer cautioned that the City definitely did not want
the car wash water going into the gutter, and Mr. Williams replied
that the car wash water goes into the washing cycle and is released
within the building. He'added there is a strip drain in front of
the bay which catches most of the water, and it would not be permitted
to get into the gutter. The City Engineer stated he would like to
see this shown on the plans, and Mr. Williams said he would comply.
Also City Engineer Marr questioned the new sidewalks and drives
shown on the plans, but was informed by Mr. Williams that these
were for reference only and were actually the new additions when the
station was remodeled.
There were no comments from the audience either in favor of or
opposed to this application, and the public meeting was declared
closed.
Commissioner Sine, on questioning Mr. Williams, established that the
height of the price sign on E1 Camino would be 518" and that the
present revolving sign on the corner would be encased in brick and
a car wash sign added. This revolving sign would be 18' high. He
then commented that he would be agreeable if the revolving sign were
eliminated and the sign cut down to the same height as that of
- 3 -
Shell's competition across Burlingame Avenue. He noted the effect
that signs of this type have on the beautification of Burlingame
Avenue. Mr. Williams agreed that this sign could be fixed; however,
if it were lowered below 7' it would be a hazard on the corner.
Commissioner Jacobs indicated approval of either a fixed sign or
maintaining the height at 7'. Commissioner Mink thought fixing
the sign might create a design problem since visibility is needed
for the "Free With Fill Up - Car Wash." Commissioner Taylor
objected to the "Free With Fill Up" portion of the sign and
preferred merely "Car Wash." City Planner Swan cited the Burlway
Road Shell station which was allowed only the "Car Wash" portion and
which handles up to 500 cars per day. He stated he had talked with
the dealer who was very pleased with his business and did not feel
it was necessary to have the "Free With Fill Up" portion of the sign.
Chairman Cistulli asked if the "Free With Fill Up" portion would give
more business, and Mr. Williams replied in the affirmative, stating
it was his understanding that the operator on Burlway Road had recently
asked to have this type of sign installed.
City Planner Swan interjected that if the sign projects over the
sidewalk it must have 10' of clearance. Commissioner Kindig
commented that with the many auxiliary services that gasoline stations
are now offering to sell their product, it is best to be cautious
about what is permitted.
It was suggested that the applicant resubmit the application without
the "Free With Fillup" sign, but Mr. Hughes stated he wished to
complete the matter now. He said he would have no objections to
having the corner sign fixed instead of revolving, and eliminating
the "Free With Fill Up", having only the words "Car Wash." There
was further discussion of the sign.
Commissioner Mink moved that the special permit to allow an in -bay
car wash at 1490 Burlingame Avenue be approved subject to the following
conditions:
1. Specifications for the drainage plan for the car wash bay be
acceptable to the City Engineer.
2. Curb, gutter, and landscaping be according to plan.
3. Price sign in the plans be approved.
4. The revolving sign on the property be subject to revision and
review.
Commissioner Taylor seconded the motion and it carried unanimously
on roll call vote.
At this point, Mrs. Frances Fena entered the meeting and was informed
of the Commission's decision on her special permit. After some
discussion, she agreed to the terms of the permit.
3. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW AN OFFICE BUILDING WITH CAFE IN AN
M-1 DISTRICT ON BAYSHORE HIGHWAY SOUTH OF STANTON ROAD BY KAISER
AETNA AND AGENT, JACK WOODRUFF.
This application was announced for hearing by Chairman Cistulli.
Secretary Jacobs read the applicant's letter which stated their
plans for a three story, 105,000 square foot office complex. This
will be a wood frame building, featuring extensive use of redwood
both interior and exterior. A cafe with dining terrace is proposed
opening into the inner courtyard. Parking is for 355 cars. Pros-
pective t9nants have already shown interest. There will be strong
emphasis on landscaping with fountains and pools in the forecourt.
Secretary Jacobs also read a letter from Safeway Stores stating they
have entered into an option agreement for sale of this property to
Kaiser -Aetna Corporation, the dev&oper.
City Planner Swan showed slides of Woodruff's completed office
building at 875 Mahler Road. Several of the slides depicted the
interior of the front entrance and the interior courtyard containing
a fountain. The City Planner then introduced Mr. Copenhaver,
architect, of Matt Copenhaver Associates, who displayed and explained
projected transparencies of the plans. These included landscape
development plan showing degree of landscaping proposed, and
indicating the primary entrance on Stanton Road leading into the
parking area. There is also an entrance on Bayshore Highway. Mr.
Copenhaver commented that the 355 parking spaces would all be standard
size. Other drawings showed character of the building and its
generous use of wood in the combination of two and three story
elements. He displayed an elevation with cars in front of the
building as it would appear from Bayshore Highway, and drawings
showing section of the building and first and second floor plans.
Commissioner Taylor asked if the visibility of the parking lot could
be screened more from Bayshore Highway. The architect replied that
the terrain in this front parking area is low, the buildings are
three story and heavily landscaped. There should be no great visual
impact since the average car is 4Y high. There was a question on
eliminating the Bayshore entrance since this highway will soon be
modified and there will be a middle lane for left turns. Commissioner
Kindig inquired if there would be screening shrubbery around the
border. He was informed there would be planting along the sidewalks
and for a depth of 20 feet at the corner.
Commissioner Mink questioned if the Fire Department had reviewed
the circulation plan. City Planner Swan stated that the Fire
Department had reviewed the plan and made this report: "Portion
of building is more than 300 feet from fire hydrant. In accordance
with Burlingame Municipal Code, Section 17.08.040, on site fire
protection as determined by Fire Chief will be required." In a
discussion with Fire Inspector Pearson, it appears they will not
require sprinklers in this building, but the Fire Department is
interested in having additional hydrants to service the building.
The Fire Chief wants the condition left to his discretion. On the
question of the Bayshore entrance, the City Planner commented he
- 5 -
thought it necessary for security purposes. It may be necessary
to later restrict traffic to right turns only. Commissioner Mink
commented this was a good point since the Fire Department vehicles
would have to come over the Broadway overpass and enter the property
from Bayshore Highway. There was commission discussion of the
room for large Fire vehicles in the parking lot. City Planner Swan
noted that the parking meets the requirements of the code.
City Engineer Marr had no comments on the building at the present.
Chairman Cistulli requested more information about the cafe. Mr.
Arthur Boone of Kaiser Aetna told the Commission that the cafe is
primarily for the employees of the building and they do not have
any definite plans as to the type of tenant that will take the cafe
and the amount of space to be used. This is to be primarily for
breakfast and luncheon use. Commissioner Kindig disapproved of
giving a blanket approval to this cafe, and the City Planner was
questioned as to procedure. He replied that the code requires a
special permit for sale of goods and services at retail. Commissioner
Mink suggested approval of the concept of the cafe subject to review
of specifications when the operator comes in. Mr. Boone indicated
approval of this arrangement.
There was no audience comment against this special permit. Mr.
James Delehanty, 845 Malcolm Road, spoke in favor. He stated he had
seen the plans; the design is excellent; and the building beautiful.
He thought the project commendable and that the area would be
fortunate to have a building of this type. He approved, the cafe
since the waterfront restaurants are too expensive and too distant
for clerical employees. He stated he highly approved the Commission's
strictness about signs on Burlingame Avenue, and hoped they would
follow through in the industrial area.
The public hearing.was declared closed.
Commissioner Mink questioned the sign on the property and the land-
scaping. He stated he would like to see specific landscaping plans
reviewed by the Commission and completed before occupancy. The
representative noted there would be a sign inside the property
line, but it had not yet been designed.
Commissioner Mink moved that the special permit to allow an office
building with cafe in an M-1 District on Bayshore Highway south of
Stanton Road be approved with the following conditions:
1. Specific landscaping plans be submitted for review by the
Commission.
2. Additional fire protection necessary to meet requirements of the
code and with approval of fire department be included in the
building.
3. Cafe would be approved in concept but Commission would retain
right to review specific plans and operating hours, etc.
4. Any signs on this property are to be subject to a special permit.
ti
5. This building to be built according to plans and specifications
submitted October 30 with the exception of the sign.
Commissioner Jacobs seconded the motion and it passed unanimously
on roll call vote. The applicant was informed this special permit
would become effective November 7, 1972 if not appealed to the
Council.
4. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW A MOTOR FREIGHT TERMINAL IN AN M-1
DISTRICT AT 1341 MARSTEN ROAD BY INTERNATIONAL AIR COURIER
Chairman Cistulli announced this application for hearing. The
applicant's documentation was read, declaring this was an air freight
forwarding business for general commodities, giving owner of property
and officers of the business, and attaching a plot plan drawn to
scale as Appendix 5, copy of lease, articles of incorporation,
and certification of qualification.
Mr. Richard Cramer, operations manager, was present. He informed
the Commission that plot plan had been modified as requested.
City Planner Swan commented that the documentation is adequate and
there was sufficient parking to serve this company's needs. They
will use only small vehicles. He noted that the reason for the
special permit application is that this is a freight operator in an
M-1 district.
There was no audience comment either for or against. The public
hearing was declared closed,
There was no commission comment. Commissioner Kindig moved that this
special permit be approved in accordance with the application as
presented. Commissioner Sine seconded the motion and it passed
unanimously on roll call vote. The applicant was informed this
permit would become effective on November 7 if not appealed to the
City Council.
RECONVENE
After five minute recess meeting reconvened at 9:50 p.m.
OLD BUSINESS
1. PLAN REVIEW OF UNDERGROUND GARAGE IN REQUIRED YARD AT 1205
EL CAMINO REAL BY NEIL J. VANNUCCI
At the onset of this hearing Chairman Cistulli cautioned applicant
and his representatives about the use of strong language at the study
meeting. Architect Neil Vannucci apologized on behalf of his client,
Michael Kalend, who was not present.
Revised plans for this underground garage were received and displayed.
City Planner Swan told the Commission that the plans for the entire
project have not as yet been approved by the Fire Department, and
apparently they would like to discuss sprinkling of the entire living
area. However, it is felt the garage will not need the automatic
sprinklers as openings have been provided in the exterior walls.
- 7 -
Mr. Vannucci showed the Commission transparencies of revisions to
plans, showing landscaping. It is now proposed to install a concrete
retaining wall with backfill so that the fence will not be more than
six feet above final grade. The area in back of the wall will have
a ground cover of redwood chips. There could be additional planting
as well as the trees. He went on to discuss some of the other details
of the landscaping.
At this point Commissioner Taylor raised the question of whether
or not he should vote, since he had not been present when this was
discussed at the adjourned meeting October 11. Chairman Cistulli
noted that in this case there would not be a quorum, since neither
Commissioner Jacobs nor Commissioner Kindig had been present and
Commissioner Norberg was absent.
There followed considerable discussion as to procedure. It was
then agreed that the best method would be for Mr. Vannucci to withdraw
his application and resubmit later so that the entire commission
would be able to hear it and to vote on it. Mr. Vannucci requested
permission to withdraw his application with the prerogative of
submitting it again later. This request was granted.
2. REVIEW OF OFF-STREET PARKING REGULATIONS - RESOLUTION TO
RECOMMEND CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE
TO REQUIRE ONE AND A HALF OFFSTREET PARKING SPACES FOR EACH
DWELLING UNIT IN APARTMENT BUILDINGS.
Secretary Jacobs read Resolution No. 9 - 72 in its entirety. This
resolution recommends the adoption of an interim urgency zoning
ordinance to require additional off-street parking for new apartments.
The resolution states in part that the Planning Commission commenced
a study of off-street parking regulations on October 11 but that
pending completion of the study, interim policy is needed to guide
the design of residential buildings. It further recommended that
interim policy require oneparking space for each unit in an
apartment building and one additional space for each two dwelling
units.
Commissioner Taylor moved that the Commission adopt Resolution No.
9 - 72. Commissioner Kindig seconded the motion and it carried on
unanimous roll call vote.
VI. NEW BUSINESS
1. Schedulinq of special meetings to consider various regulations.
It was agreed to delay consideration of this item until later in the
meeting after discussion on environmental impact reports.
2. Review procedure for environmental impact reports
City Attorney Karmel addressed the Commission on this subject. He
reported that the California Supreme Court has been asked to rehear
its decision, to clarify its opinion and answer a number of questions
which the opinion leaves unanswered. The Attorney General joins
in this request, as well as about thirteen California cities.
The Court has twice extended the date on which it will have a
rehearing. The last extension was November 10. After the decision
came down, Assemblyman Knox got the Legal Government Committee
together to propose an amendment defining this decision. The Attorney
General has asked the Committee to see that there were a number of
changes made so as to relieve both the private developers and public
agencies of many of the questions for which they had no answers.
In the meantime, the City Attorney commented, many California cities
are floundering. However, some have taken a first step by way of
resolutions toward an action of sorts. He felt that Burlingame
should adopt a procedure for processing the environmental impact
reports until different instructions are received.
The City Attorney noted that each Commissioner had been furnished
with the 3-page tentative questionaire on environmental impact of
a project as well as the negative impact declaration. He added that
it seemed clear to him that such minor matters as repairing a fence
etc, would not require a report, providing there is some public
input. Actually, the public must have an opportunity to comment and
make themselves known on all construction matters.
City Attorney Karmel stated he had prepared a resolution for adoption
by the City Council which will establish procedures. This will be
distributed to the Council on Wednesday, November 1, and possibly
adopted by them at their regular meeting on Monday, November 6.
Construction projects in Burlingame then would be put under way.
He said he would appreciate the Planning Commission considering this
resolution for recommendation to the City Council. Copies of this reso-
lution were distributed. Commission members then read and considered
both the resolution and the E.I.R. questionaire.
The City Attorney explained that this resolution is limited to the
fact that Burlingame is a city which does not have a conservation
element in its general plan. When it does, we will modify our pro-
cedures and they will be easier. These are rules which apply to a
private applicant. We do not yet have rules for situations where
the City itself is involved, such as participation with Millbrae
in the sewer outfall project. There was Commission discussion on
agencies such as School Districts filing reports.
The City Attorney went on to say that within Burlingame the
applications could be divided between, those necessary for Planning
Commission consideration and those which were not. When the planner
processes the use permit, he could also process the E.I.R. report.
In the case of the building inspector or fire chief who issue
certain permits, these will go directly to the City Council to make
the E.I.R. Work will be done by the department head. He noted the
negative declaration stating that a project will not have any
significant impact upon the environment. Upon receipt of the
completed questionaire, if it is determined by the department head
that there is no impact, he completes the negative declaration and
sends it on to the planning commission. In the case of applications
for building permits, the negative declaration is made by the building
inspector who posts it at the chamber doors for a period of seven days.
If no protest is received, the permit is issued. The City Attorney
expressed the desire that the Commission approve substantially
the procedures outlined.
There was commission: -discussion of the various points covered in
the questionaire. The question was raised of who should prepare
the report. The City Attorney stated that the report is to be
the local agencies' report and not the report of the developer.
However, if the developer should submit a written report and it
were thoroughly discussed and examined by the agency, there is no
reason why it should be rewritten. He told the Commission they had
the option of recommending a resolution or an ordinance. However,
a resolution would become effective immediately, and then Council could
change it from week to week in accordance with further court findings.
Commissioner Taylor moved that the Commission concur with the City
Attorney and recommend to the City Council that procedures submitted
for the environmental impact report be adopted. Commissioner Kindig
seconded the motion, and it passed unanimously on roll call vote.
Commissioner Sine commented his approval was reluctant since he
felt the law should be rescinded and rewritten.
Scheduling of Special Meetings:
City Planner Swan reported to the Commission that he would be on
vacation the last two weeks of December. The 4th Monday of December
is Christmas -Day, December 25, and another day must be selected for
the regular meeting. The date will be determined later.
There was Commission discussion of special meetings to be scheduled
for discussion of these four items:
1. R-2A District Regulations.
2. C-4 District Regulations
3. Site Plan and appearance review
4. Parking requirements for apartments
It was decided to hold special meetings on November 8 and November 29,
making the November meeting schedule November 8, 13, 27, and 29.
It was suggested the meeting of the 8th could be a study meeting,
then November 13 could be an action meeting. With property notice,
the special meeting on Wednesday, November 29 could be a meeting
for hearing and action on the code amendments.
Planner Report
The City Planner suggested that a committee of two be appointed to
review the Consultants' proposals to update the General Plan.
Chairman Cistulli suggested Commissioners Sine and Kindig. They
agreed to serve on this committee with a meeting Wednesday afternoon
with the City Planner.
GENERAL
Commissioner Sine brought up the subject of the special permit
granted to General Tire Company at 1028 Carolan Avenue. He noted
- 10 -
this permit had been granted subject to the storage area being
cleaned up and maintained -free and clear. He stated this definitely
had not been done; additional material had been moved in and a
concrete wall had been built with no footings. He noted that the
owner was now on vacation. Commissioner Sine suggested that the
Planning Commission exercise its option to call the applicant in
for a hearing, and.if necessary, revoke the special permit. The
City Planner indicated he would be willing on act on the Commission's
direction. The Commission agreed by voice vote to schedule a hearing
to revoke this special permit.
The City Planner distributed a letter from Stanford University
Medical Center expressing their concern about new home and apartment
construction now being allowed along freeways, and the resultant
danger from lead emissions and noise pollution. They suggested
standards of construction distance from freeways.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Kindig moved the meeting be adjourned to the meeting
of November 13. Commissioner Jacobs seconded the motion and it
carried by voice vote.
The meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Malcolm M. Jacobs
Secretary