Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1973.01.08THE CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS PRESENT Cistulli Jacobs Kindig Mink Norberg Sine Taylor CALL TO ORDER January 8, 1973 COMMISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT None City Planner Swan City Engineer Marr City Attorney Karmel An adjourned meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission, from the regular meeting of December 11, 1972, was called to order at 8:00 P.M. by Chairman Cistulli. ROLL CALL The above -named members were present. At the onset of the meeting Commissioner Sine indicated he would abstain from voting on the hearing items. He questioned if the public hearing were being conducted in compliance with the Braun Act. City Attorney Karmel noted that this present meeting was adjourned from the meeting of December 11, 1972 which was both a regular meeting and a study meeting. He considered these items were set for hearing and properly noticed at that meeting$ conditions were met. He thought frequent adjourned meetings presented problems for the Commission. 1. RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 15 WITH PORTIONS OF LOTS 16 AND 17, BLOCK 6, TOWN OF BURLINGAME MAP NO. 1 TO COMBI.NE APN 029-204-140 AND -1501 BY 200 PARK ROAD COMPANY Chairman Cistulli announced this application for hearing. City Engineer Marr, addressing the Chair, stated Mr. Blumberg, the representative for 200 Park Road Company, would arrive late. The City Engineer stated the resubdivision map met with his approval. There were no audience comments, and the public hearing was declared closed. Commissioner Kindig questioned if this map should be approved before the Council had finalized action on the project. The City Engineer indicated there would be no problem if the applicant performed as proposed. There was no other Commission comment. Commissioner Mink moved that this resubdivision of Lot 15 with portions of Lots 16 and 17, Block 6, Town of Burlingame Map No. 1 be approved. Commissioner Kindig seconded the motion and it carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: JACOBS,KINDIG,MINK,NORBERG,TAYLOR,CISTULLI NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: SINE - 2 - 2. RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 18-22, BLOCK 7, TOWN OF BURLINGAME, TO COMBINE APN 029-224-170 THROUGH -220 INCL. INTO ONE PARCEL FOR PARK PLAZA TOWERS CONDOMINIUM APARTMENTS BY PACIFIC WESTERN CONTRACTORS INC. Chairman Cistulli announced this application for hearing. The City Engineer announced that he wished this application to be held over because the map had not been corrected to his satisfaction. Mr. Robert Church, representative of Pacific Western, commented he knew of no revisions necessary, and the City Engineer informed him that a letter so stating had been mailed to his organization, requesting that this map be held up until after the 15th of January. Mr. Church stated he would check with his engineer.. Commissioner Mink moved that this resubdivision map be placed on the agenda for the regular meeting of January 22, 1973. Commissioner Taylor seconded the motion and it carried on voice vote. 3. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO EXISTING STRUCTURE FOR A CAR RENTAL OFFICE IN AN M-1 DISTRICT AT 1338 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY BY CALIFORNIA HYATT CORPORATION. Chairman Cistulli announced this application for hearing. Attorney Cyrus McMillan, applicant's representative, apologized for the fact that no one from the Hyatt House was present. The Hyatt House had an emergency situation with non-functioning equipment. Mr. McMillan went on to say there were no changes in facts from the December meeting. The Hertz Corporation proposes to build a very small addition onto the building, adjoining the banquet room, to house a rental desk. This would release needed space in the hotel lobby,, and no parking spaces would be lost. He submitted that this is not a change of use, since all it involves is construction of a small building addition for new desk space at another location. The attorney reported that because of the new location there would be a gain of three usable parking spaces. Commissioner Taylor questioned the area of the building and was informed by the City Planner that it was 16' x 281, requiring two additional parking spaces. Commissioner Kindig recalled that there had been some restrictions by the Hyatt House of total number of cars and questioned if these would be still in effect. Attorney McMillan replied that Hyatt Corporation will not allow any more cars, and wish they had more space. There was no audience comment either for or against. The public hearing was declared closed. Commissioners Taylor, Mink, Norberg, Sine, and Kindig had no comment. C m nissioner Jacobs approved, providing the only change was moving the desk from one location to another. Commissioner Taylor moved the application for special permit be approved, with the stipulation that all conditions remain the same as on the pre-existing permit. Commissioner Jacobs seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: JACOBS, KINDIG,MINK,NORBERG,TAYLOR,CISTULLI NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: SINE 3 - The adjourned meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. to the regular study meeting of January 8, 1973. STUDY MEETING All Commissioners as shown above were present. APPLICATIONS 4. R'EVISED PLANS FOR GTE SYLVANIA ROOF SIGN AT 1811 ADRIAN ROAD, VARIANCE APPLICATION CONTINUED TO JANUARY 22, 1973 Chairman Cistulli introduced this application. City Planner Swan announced that Fred Brown, manager of Sylvania, was present for inquiries. He went on to say that this application had previously been continued to January 22 and request made to the applicant that they reduce the gross size of the sign to be in keeping with the existing sign. The purpose for having it on the study meeting agenda is that a revised application has been received for a sign 50' x 719", with a height of 209. During the following discussion it was established that only the letters on the sign will be interior lighted on the two faces. The sign face area would be approximately 388 square feet, actually under the 390 square footage of the existing sign. This application was scheduled for hearing on January 22, 1973. 5. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW HOBBY ROOMS IN EXISTING ACCESSORY BUILDING AND NEW CARPORT IN R-1 DISTRICT AT 333 CHAPIN LANE BEING LOT 6, BLOCK 11, BURLINGAME PARK NO. 2 BY LESTER C. GUNTHER JR. Chairman Cistulli announced this application for study. City Planner Swan read excerpts from Lester C. Gunther's letter of application dated December 20, 1972, and went on to explain that it concerns addition of a carport and the remodeling of an existing structure. This structure is a long tandem garage located along the property line, in line with a general improvement of the property which includes the addition of a swimming pool, Mr. Gunther wishes to create a changing room and a bath within the existing garage. The City Planner noted that in the R-1 district it is permissible to have a hobby room within an existing building. The Gunthers also wish to construct a carport. However, there is a requirement that an accessory building should not be erected within 4' of any existing structure. This carport is apparently less than that distance from the existing house. Plot plans were distributed to the Commissioners. It was noted by the City Planner that the applicant's letter states they believe this construction would be within the building code but they understood the carport might require a variance. Mrs. Gunther indicated carport clearance was about 18". During Commission discussion which followed it was brought out that the lot is 50' x 1941, the 4-bedroom house on the lot is 32' x 841, the garage is 49' x 10'-110. The carport would add another approximately 200 square feet to the lot coverage. The City Planner commented that even with this additional coverage, the - 4 - total lot coverage would be within the 40% limitation. The Gunthers stated that the garage is approximately 11' wide and the front portion will continue to be used as a garage. When remodeled the garage and carport will provide two covered parking spaces. There was Commission question if it would not be necessary to have both a special permit for the garage and a variance for the carport. The City Attorney commented that it is possible the Gunthers may be applying for a variance in addition to the special permit. If it is necessary to have a variance, action may be delayed unless variance application is in and is noticed. City Planner Swan stated that a map drawn to scale was a minimum requirement for the hearing, and questioned the distance between the house and the carport. Mrs. Gunther replied she thought it was about 180. Chairman Cistulli set the application for hearing at the regular meeting of January 22. 6. SIGN VARIANCE OF 10 FEET ADDITIONAL HEIGHT FOR ONE DOUBLE FACED INTERIOR ILLUMINATED ROOF SIGN AT 1095 ROLLINS ROAD (APN 026-231-250, -260) ZONED R-4 BY HEATH AND COMPANY, AGENTS FOR VELVET TURTLE Chairman Cistulli announced that Saga Enterprises had requested that this item be withdrawn from the agenda, per their :Letter of January 8, 1973 from Jay C. Mundhenk, Vice President, Secretary Jacobs read this letter and discussion followed. It was noted that a sign was already up and that it met the coder but Commissioner Sine questioned if it were not a condition of granting of the original permit that the sign appear before the Planning Commission before it was erected. He stated he did not think the present sign was legal in that respect, and requested the City Planner to check this for a report at the next study meeting. 7. SIGN VARIANCE FOR A TEMPORARY 8' X 16" DOUBLE FACED REAL ESTATE SIGN AND 6 SMALL DIRECTIONAL SIGNS AT NORTHPARR APARTMENTS _(APN 026-231-280) ZONED R-4 BY HILLS SIGNS AND DISPLAYS The City Planner presented Mr. Tom Snyder of Hill Signs and Displays who told the Commission their plans for the signs. He stated there would be one large 8' x 16' double-faced "Now Renting" sign and six small 2' x 3' directional signs for directing visitors and tenants to locations within the complex. The large sign is temporary, the others permanent. He noted that the -apartments are now complete and about 1/3 occupied, and the builder estimates 18 months before their full occupancy. The small signs would indicate "Visitor Parking", "Pool Rules", "Tennis Court," etc. The Commission discussed whether or not it was necessary to include the small signs on the application. The City Planner commented that there was no reference in the sign code to pedestrian signs, and that the Commission could create its own policy. They could be defined --as groundsigns of some sort. He stated the variance was requested for the large sign because it exceeds the maximum size of 80 square feet for a tract sign. Commissioner Sine requested a representative of the J. H. Snyder Company be presentAt ;the regular meeting. This application was set for hearing on January 22, 1973. - 5 - 8. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW TRANS RENT -A -CAR IN THE WATERFRONT COMMERCIAL (C-4) DISTRICT AT 1540 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY (APN 026-113-400) BY CYRUS_MCMILLAN, AGENT FOR OWNER, RICHARD O'HARA Attorney McMillan addressed the Commission on this application. He stated that Mr. O'Hara wishes to remodel a portion of the existing building, an area 100 x 20' adjacent to the driveway to the Fisherman, for a car rental office. Cars for this rental business would be stored in the large fenced area at the rear of the building. He estimated there would be 15 cars in addition to the ambulances which are there now. All vehicles would be stored in the rear. A sign would be required and would be erected in conformance with the sign code. The question of responsibility for street improvements was brought up, and the City Engineer stated that all of the owners involved have agreed to pay, but that Mr. McClenahan has not yet complied. He cr mented this instance may have to be brought up to the Commission. Mr. McMillan stated he felt this use was within the scope of the C-4 district since regulations do have a general coverage for uses desirable and compatible to this district. He cited the other car rental agencies in this area. The car rental agency involved in this case handles Government contracts for car tentals to servicemen at Moffat Field, Treasure Island, and Mare Island. The use at this particular location would be primarily for the convenience of airport customers. He went on to state the Fisherman driveway would not be used for entry but the area between the O'Hara building and the driveway. In response to the Chairman, he stated he would determine the number of ambulances presently accommodated on the lot. It is the opinion of the City Planner that this use is not permitted in the Waterfront Commercial District. Other car rental businesses, Avis etc., were approved before the C-4 District regulations were adopted, and are now non -conforming uses. The City Planner cautioned that the applicant may wish to check on the question of BCDC jurisdiction, since this agency had claimed jurisdiction on a previous application by Mr. O'Hara. This application was scheduled for hearing on January 22, 1973. IRESUBDIVISION MAP, ANZA PACIFIC OFFICE BUILDING, AIRPORT BOULEVARD Mr. David Reyston requested permission to address the Commission. He stated he had been asked by the City Engineer to file a resub map eliminating three lot lines on the four lots allocated to this project, a portion of Block 8, Anza Airport Park #6. He presented the resub map and asked consideration on this study meeting. After some discussion, the resubdivision map was placed on the agenda for the January 22 meeting. 9a. JOINT MEETING WITH CITY COUNCIL. The City Planner informed the Commission that the City Council had - 6 - suggested during their December study meeting that a joint meeting be held in the latter part of January. He asked the Commission for their opinions on the date, reminding them that the 29th of January was a tentative date for the presentation on General Plan Studies by Spangle and Associates. During the course of the discussion it was brought out that the February study meeting of the Planning Commission would be on the 14th because of holidays. The Commission agreed that either the 29th or 31st of January would be desirable for the joint meeting with the Council. 9b. REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION ANNUAL DINNER JANUARY 24, 1973. The City Planner reminded Coi issioners of this date, and stated he would make reservations. Commissioners Sine, Cistulli, Norberg, Kindig, and Taylor indicated they would be present„ 9c. SCHEDULE SPECIAL MEETING JANUARY 29 FOR PRESENTATION OF REPORT NOS. 1 AND 2 BY WILLIAM SPANGLE AND ASSOCIATES. City Planner Swan distributed excerpt of text from agreement between the City and the consultant, Spangle and Associates. He commented that generally the reports are scheduled for submittal about three weeks previous to hearing, so that they will be available for distribution and review. There was discussion of responsibility for updating the residential portion of the General Plan. The City Planner reported that staff would prepare the residential scope. It is not included in the Spangle report. Mr. William Spangle was invited by Chairman Cistulli to address the Commission. He reviewed the general aspects of the proposed work. Mr. Spangle specified the three major areas of the project. First is a comparison of the design framework of the city, with particular attention to the waterfront area and the problem of the high rise buildings. Special emphasis will be placed on the visual features of the city, with attention to insure that the good features remain. Second is the development of a conservation element, and third, development of an open space element. The open space system and the conservation plans are necessary to insure that a good balance exists. Conservation is mainly concerned with the preservation of natural resources. He noted, however, that this is a very urban and highly developed community with not much open space left, and open space as such must also be considered in terms of streets, streams, building otbacks. He noted he is working on a visual analysis, and as part of that has been photographing the City so that there will be a visual record of what assets are there now. Slides will be available for the meeting on the 29th of January. He stated that visual analysis would be considered in the light of how the city has changed since 1969, with the goal of having Burlingame a well -oriented city with a range of uses. He noted possibility of conflict areas between residents and business people. Another goal is to maintain and enhance present assets. He spoke of dominant features of a city with relation to buildings and gave I - 7 - as an illustration a line of tall buildings on the waterfront could screen the Bay completely even from the top of the hill. Hwinoted the screen for the drive-in theatre as being a dominant feature and cautioned that interim uses must be watched since they sometimes endure for a long time. Mr. Spangle stated that Report No. 1 would be a summary and evaluation of the visual analysis. Report No. 2 will include a summary of the inventory of open space, an outline for open space and conservation elements and some preliminary ideas about open space proposals. He told the Commission his presentations would be a preliminary urban design framework, not intended to be complete early in the project, in order to utilize public and commission input and suggestions. Commission discussion followed. Parking Regulations The City Planner stated the City Council had held a hearing on the Planning Commission Resolution No. 10-72 Recoxrmnending Amendment Of The Off-street Parking Regulations For Apartments and Apartment Hotels. The matter was referred back to the Planning Commission and continued to the Council hearing of February 5. He suggested Commission members might consider this matter at the meeting of January 22 so that staff would have time to make a report to the Council for their February 5 meeting. The Commission agreed. This item will be placed on the January 22 agenda. Pending Actions Commissioner Sine told the Commission he was most dissatisfied with the fact that several cases of violations of special permit conditions had remained unresolved for a long period of time. He felt there was a lack of staff cooperation. He gave as an instance the D & M Garage on Rollins Road, stating they had been given a special permit which did not allow any parking in front of their establishment, but vehicles were continually parked there. He requested Commission cooperation to have either the City Planner or the City Attorney directed to take definite action. He commented on one instance which would have taken only a letter. Commission discussion followed concerning lack of staff and staff time both in the Legal and the Planning Department., The City Attorney commented that both he and the City Planner are already involved in more violation followups than they can handle. There was Commission suggestion that an additional amount be requested in the next budget for additional staff for enforcement purposes. There was further discussion ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:25 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Malcolm M. Jacobs Secretary