Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1974.09.23THE CITY OF BU RLI NGAME PLANNING COMMISSION September 23, 1974 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT Jacobs Francard City Planner Swan Kindig Asst.City Planner Yost Mink City Engineer Davidson Norberg City Attorney Karmel Sine Taylor CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission was called to order on the above date at 7:35 P.M. by Chairman Mink. ROLL CALL The atm named members were present. MINUTES The minutes of the meeting of August 26, 1974 were approved and adopted. The minutes of the meeting of September 11, 1974 were approved and adopted after addition of notation that City Engineer Davidson was present during part of the meeting. 1. ANZA MASTER PLAN - DRAFT TENTATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EIR-29P - HEIGHT,BULK,CAVERAGE,LANDSCAPING AND AESTHETICS. David Keyston of Anza Pacific; Robert Spunk of Blunk Associates; and Peter Callender, Landscape Architect, were present. Chairman Mink announced consideration of these aspects of the Anaa Master Plan. He acknowledged Commission receipt of Memo Report #2 from Charles D. Bigelow with specific recommendations. At his request Commissioner Kindig read summary sheet of the report which states that demographic, transportation and economic assessments need to be supplemented and secondary and regional impacts,, a "no project" alternative, and additional social and economic assessments appear to be required before a legally adequate EIR can be prepared. The Chairman asked City Planner Swan to begin this presentation and requested a period for questions and comments after each topic. HEIGHT City Planner Swan reviewed the City's concern about: building height particularly in C-4, and especially with Airport Marina and the 16 - story King building, noting that after these projects policy determination was made with the passing of an emergency ordinance which required special permit to exceed 350. Code amendment now under consideration would make this a permanent regulation in C-4, with the addition that 50' height would be allowed if project was more than 100' from the shore, and special permit for anything over that. He called attention to various exhibits including colored renderings - 2 - ok total Anza Master Plan, a plan with landscaping, longitudinal profile, cross section profile, and a large model. He pointed out the many different building heights, stating there was an average floor height of 12' per floor. On a chart he illustrated the State of California land and showed that Anza-awned land is in two distinct areas. He illustrated the slope intercept principle, showing that at a point 100' back from shoreline the point would be 50' abort the ground. He added that on Anza plan the rear yard is 25' back from the property line and stated this 25' should be retained as public access area and free of all buildings. Noting the Spangle report recommendation of clustering tall buildings, he pointed out the first two office buildings follow this principle. A longitudinal elevation view of the project from Bayshore Freeway was of particular interest to the Cission, since it showed more than one building in a continuous line. Mr. Keyston said this was due to putting buildings behind each other with open space between. Mr. Robert Blunk responded to Commission questions and reviewed entire profile of buildings with their height and use, and pointed out those now under construction. He commented that the taller buildings, such as the 15 story, would have exteriors of mirrored glass which would tend to lessen bulk. There was no response to Chairman Mink's request for audience comment on height presentation of this project. Chairman Mink requested Commission comment on the slope intercept ratio, the 35'. height and the 50' height at 100' back from shore. After some Commission discussion, the Chairman announced Commission consensus that recommendation should be in EIR that slope intercept guideline and special permit for height limits be .included. In addition, the cluster concept of buildings is approved. 10W Assistant City Planner Yost illustrated coverage of this project by means of charts and diagrams. The main point of his presentation was the fait that "coverage" should not be measured merely in terms of building coverage but in terms of "hard" coverage of useable space. This would include parking lots which do take up land and do have visual impact. He ented that Hauch of the "open space" on the Anza Master Plan is actually devoted to cars. On a chart he illustrated areas which could be landscaped and areas devoted -to hard surface treatment. Another chart illustrated the basement level which is underground parking under the entire project. He emphasized the implication of these large parking areas on landscaping which would be relegated to areas not covered either by buildings or parking lots. He introduced a definition of open space as "useable open space for people" and noted staff recommendation that hard coverage on this project be limited to 80%. There is also staff concern about the preservation of open areas around the inner lagoon. Open space should be provided for outdoor recreation on the land for public access and regulations of BCDC should be adhered to. - 3 - In response to Commission questions, Mr. Blunk stated that buildings occupy roughly 14% of the project; parking, driveways, plazas and walks occupy about 53%; leaving a total of 33% of planting on the entire site. of this percentage, he estimated one-half would be landscaping on parking decks. Mr. Keyston confirmed this percentage. He commented that some surface parking could be eliminated by adding stories to the planned parking structures which contain about 100 cars per floor. Mr. Blunk informed the Commission investigation was being made of a device to provide double deck parking underground, which he estimated could eliminate both parking structures. In summation, chairman Mink restated staff recommendations as limitation of lot hard coverage; preservation of open space for public recreational areas; adhes4wice to guidelines of BCDC. There was no response to his request for audience comment, and he _announced consideration of the aspect of bulk. BULK City Planner Swan presented the concypt of FAR as employed to measure bulk by comparing building floor area with lot area. This project has buildings which cover 14% of land area and the FAR is 1.15 exclusive of parking. Noting that the existing C-1 District Regulations permit a FAR of 3.6 in downtown Burlingame, he stated that the Commission has recommended we establish'a FAR of 2.0 for the C-4 District and that a Special Permit be required for any project with a FAR of more than 1.0. Jb went on to say that the aspect of building bulk depends upon where the observer is located. The bW of buildings on this project would look much different town autoist on Bayshore than t�•a pedestrian on a project walkway. Any guidelines must recognize this. He commented that the State agreement for these lands contains a provision that a 750' strip be preserved so that there is an open view toward the central lagoon. Noting that there will be review of individual buildings for bulk, he stated there is also need for review of bulk of clusters of buildings. In response to questions, Mr. Blunk stated that 1.15 FAR did not include the parking structures; with their inclusion the FAR would be 1.3. Chairman Mink questioned if Messrs. Myston.and Blunk agreed with the idea of considering each -cluster of buildings as an entity in considering height, coverage and bulk. Mr.-Keyston stated he felt that was in accordance with his intention when he cane to the City for this project. The Chairman then questioned if it would be possible for the developer to begin to outline what he considered the reasonable increments of development and growth, for inclusion in the EIR of a statement of incremental growth. Mr. Keyston stated he would work up a tentative schedule of how he would like to see the project developed incrementally. Chairman Mink suggested that within the next 30 days the developer confer with staff on incremental growth. There was no public comment. The next phase of the project was then considered. - 4 - XJMSCAPING City Planner Swan reported it should be anticipated that all public access areas along the shoreline, along the inner lagoon and along the central lagoon would be landscaped. He noted the Anza landscaping plan and the presence of landscaping architect Peter Callender. Mr. David Keyston stated they had first asked Callender to develop a street tree planting plan. Later, major planting around the lagoon had been added, but the landscaping plan is not yet complete. He went on to say that Anza has.an obligation to install and landscape all of the pathway areas, and they are looking for, guidelines. Continuity along the shoreline is needed, -and they, have not been able to get a guideline from BCDC. Mr. Callender thought landscaping should tie the major buildings and open spaces together. Larger landscaping units, such as trees, would act as a buffer to building bulk and also as a buffer to winds. Over a period of time, wind patterns within the project could be altered to add to the comfort of those working there. Chairman Mink questioned if detailed landscaping could be furnished for increments as each was planned; and if shoreline landscaping could be furnished when the City .completes its shoreline program. Mr. Callendar said both these objectives could be met. He then explained in detail landscaping plan now av"lable. AESTHETICS In the interest of time it was decided to forego lengthy presentation on this subject. Instead the;City Planner's recommendations were referenced. These include pra)&Wtion of roof signs, prohibition of illuminated signs more than 208 above grade, preservation of visual quality of waterfrmrt commercial improvements, protection against excessive noise undergrounding of all utilities, and establishment of an urban design theme. Mr. David Keyston stated he agreed with these recommendations. However, he specified under - grounding of all future utilities, since some present utilities have not been undergrounded ecause of PUC shortage of materials. City Planner Saran referenced communications from the State Lands Division, S.M.County Park Director, and B.C.D.C. on this project. The County letter Wave particular reference to bike and pedestrian paths, with desire to cooperate. He acknowledged receipt of communication from State Department of Transportation requestinq an evaluation of the project impact on Bayshore Freeway. The City Planner and Assistant City Planner then presented diagrams showing different roadway locations for access to the Anza project area. of particular mention was anew Broadway interchange with two one-way bridgesf the westbound bridge would cross over Rollins Road and the S.P. railroad to connect with California Drive opposite Lincoln Avenue. Chairman Mink notified Commission of forthcoming joint study session - 5 - with the City Council on traffic on and off Anza site. There followed a period of general discussion during which Commissioner Ki.ndig recommended inclusion in the EIR of statement that parking garage structures could be increased one story if surface parking was eliminated. Commissioner Sine wanted stipulation that all signs on structures should -be eliminated and ground identity signs used instead. Mr. Keyston agreed to this theory but thought it should be applied to all Burlingame businesses and suggested a new sign ordinance. chairman Mink summed up accomplishments of the meeting, noting this was the first discussion of the concept of incremental growth. He declared this section of the Aria hearings closed until the final public hearing on October 30,-1974. The meeting reconvened after a short recess at 9:30 P.M. Chairman Mink announced Item #6 would be considered out of sequence since many in the audience were,waking for it. 6. VARIANCE FROM USE REGULATIONS FOR HAPPINESS IS, A NURSERY SCHOOL, IN R-1 DIS'RICT, AT 1.560 HOWARD AVENUE. MY STEVEN CO!URTHEYN. This application was announced for hearing and review requested from City Planner Swan. The city Planner- told the Commission this nursery school came under the classification of.a home occupation and required a business license whereas a private school would require a special permit. Steven Courtheyn`s nursery school application came before the Commission for review as a variance from use regulations. He noted the application had received major neighborhood opposition and acknowledged receipt of petitions. The City Planner reported he and the Assistant City Planner had inspected the house and talked to present owner Mrs. Dagmar Wiltsie. She had -until recently conducted a physical therapy business in the residence, which was built in 1950. After inspection, the City Planner thought the property provided adequate spaces for the instruction of small children. He noted Fire inspector's inspection of the house as well as the Department of Public Health. This latter entity had requested only the removal of two non-bearing walls to create a large room. The City Planner noted location of the house as one block from El Camino and only 230' from Pershing School, formerly an active grade school. He went on to state that in his,,opinion the current use of the property in this area w$s not strictly R-1, and cited from phis own observations and from 1964 report of former City Planner George Mann several specific multi -family dwellings. With respect to traffic and parking problems, he asked Mrs. Wiltsie about the ownership of the parked cars, 17 in this one block. Mrs. Wiltsie said she thought most of them belonged to people working - 6 - downtown. The City Planner concluded present uses in this area are not those of first residential, although it is zoned R-1. He recommended that if the application were approved the curb space between two existing driveways on the property be painted as a loading zone. He then submitted to Chairman Mink a colored address map indicating the location of all petition signers, Some were outside the 500' radius. It was noted that none of the contiguous property owners had signed. Secretary Jacobs read letter of application dated August 7, 1974 in which Mr. Courtheyn stated his desire to use this house as combined residence and nursery school. She then read letter of August 6, 1974 from Mrs. Dagmar Wiltsie acknowledging that Mr. Courtheyn intended buying the property and giving her approval of his venture. In response to a question from the Chairman, Mr. Courtheyn stated the number of children at the school for one session would. be 10i total number for one day would be 20. He then presented to the Commission a statement giving his qualifications as a teacher and his plans for an exclusive pre-school for children from 2 to 6 years old. Secretary Jacobs then read the following Communications, all objecting to the proposed use: Petition with 38 signatures Petition with 13 signatures Petition with 30 signatures Note of phone call from Mrs. Eugene Leggoro, 1509 ;Howard Note of phone call from Isabel Larsen - 1508 Howard Letter dated 8/26/74 from Mr. and Mrs. Fred Andersen, 1545 Howard Letter dated 9/22/74 from Mr. & Mrs. Joseph Zuzek, 1520 Howard Letter from Elizabeth Hayes, 260 Crescent Avenue Chairman Mink then laid ground rules for audience participation requested comment. There followed a period of sometimes unruly audience reaction. All participants spoke in opposition. They Kenneth Johnson, 1601 Howard Fred Anderson, 1545 Howard Paul Sterner, 1565 Newlands Angela Johnson Sandra Bolus, 136 Occidental Robert Vogel, 1585 Cypress R. Cavalieri, 1617 Howard Clara Watson, 1561 Ralston Louis Malaspina, 1537 Howard Margaret Brooker, 1528 Ralston W. E. Jensen, 1529 Howard Bernice Gumbel,, 1528 Howard Jas. Poulton, 1625 Howard Robert Craig, 157 Occidental and were: Objections ranged through traffic hazards, increased noise, danger because of creek; "fine idea but don't want in our neighborhood," already illegal buildings in the area, must keep commercial activities - 7 - out, "I was.denied a variance. Why should I approve this?", other nursery schools in area already, house damaged by autos 3 times in last 5-6 years, character of neighborhood has changed for better - must be kept R-1. Mr. -Steven Covrtheyn then spoke as a participant in favor of the application, rebutting some objections and stating his conviction that this school would be proper in this neighborhood. There were no further audience comments and the public hearing was declared closed. Commissioner Taylor requested further information on the City Planner's tabulation of petitioners$ residences. He then asked if it were not a residence, would it be a permitted use. The City Planner replied that a non-profit school requires special permit in R-lt a nursery school operated as a business requires a variance. Commissioners Kindig and Sine questioned the use specified on the original building permit. It was established it had not been specified but that this was an R-1 area at that time. However, later records indicate it was more than a one -family dwelling. There was little Commission discussion. Chairman Mink requested motion be couched in the affirmative since full commission was not in attendance. Commissioner Taylor moved this application be granted= Commissioner Sine seconded the motion with the understanding he would vote against his second. The motion failed on the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: TAYLOR NAYES: COMMISSIONERSt JACOBS,KINDIG,MINK,NORBERG, SINE ABSENT= COMMISSIONERSt FRANCARD Mr. Courtheyn was informed by the Chair that he had the right of appeal to the City Council. RECONVENE: The meeting reconvened after a short recess at 10:30. 2. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, BEING A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, MILLS ESTATE NO. 1 (APN 025-161-010) PROPERTY AT 1766 EL CAMINO REAL, ZONED C-1, BY FRANK R. KROHN FOR PACIFIC STANDARD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY After announcing hearing on this application, Chairman Mink requested comment from the City Engineer. city Engineer Davidson deferred to the City Planner on the parking problem, stating requirements were not met unless easement onto Parcel B was feasible. However, he stated the map conforms with the exception of 4" drainage stub from Parcel A to Parcel B which should be terminated; and he suggested that the two driveways on Trousdale should be separated as a safety measure. City Attorney Karmel reported draft easement agreement had been received from the applicant and was a type he would recommend. He noted this is a shifting easement and the location can be fixed when Parcel B plans are developed. He am no objection, provided the correct number of parking spaces was specified, and with a provision the easement location shall not be changed without: the City's compliance. He noted this easement must be approved by the City Council. City Planner Swan commented the building on Parcel. A was constructed when leas parking was required:.one space to 400 SF of gross floor area. Required parking is now one space per 300 SF. The Chairman noted that the plan layout shows the parking on Parcel A and no less than 63 spaces on the easement. Mr. Frank Krohn, present at this hearing, stated that there could be 45 spaces on Parcel A and 65 on Parcel B. In response to questions from Commissioner Jacobs, Mr. Krohn stated the building is partly empty and is now leased to SAFECO pending completion of their building. His associate told the Commission there is present parking of 45 spaces on Parcel A and 43 on the easement on Parcel t for a total of 88. With regard to the driveway on Trousdale, Mr. noted the existence of the same type on California Drive. Commissioner Sine asked how they planned to handle the parking on Parcel B when the need arose for the balance of 38,000 SF of the lot. The reply was this would be dealt with when the time came, and alternatives were suggested sudh as underground parking or a parking ramp. Mr. Krohn and his associates felt the present plan offered the greatest flexibility in solving this problem. Commissioner Jacobs noted a problem could be created if the easement stayed with Parcel A since there could be rezoning in the future and a greater need for parking on B. Chairman Mink received verification from the City Planner that FAR for this area is 3.6, and feared the erection of a monolith -type structure on B if the plan were carried out. Commissioner Kindig felt the problem lay with the purchaser of A who did not wish to buy enough land for his parking. There was no audience comment for or against, and the public hearing was declared closed. Commissioner Sine moved this tentative parcel map be denied. Commissioner Taylor seconded, and the motion carried on unanimous roll call vote. 3. THE SANDPIPER WEST CONDOMINIUM TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP, PROPERTY AT 525 AIMR ROAD, ZONED R-3, BY ART DUDIEY Oy ARZR ASSOCIATES Mr. Arthur Dudley was present at the hearing. City Engineer Davidson reviewed the map, noting he had the developer's request to consider this as both a tentative and final map. He commented this is the first condominium subdivision map reviewed under the new City condominium ordinance. He noted that requested title sheet with signatures had been received as well as landscaping plans. However, the Park Director does not feel the landscaping plans are complete since they do not show irrigation. He recommended that landscaping plans be subject to firm approval of the Park Director. In addition, the lighting plan required does not show intensity. The City Engineer then reviewed the condominium ordinance in terms of over all impact. At the Chair's request, City Attorney Karmel stated he had reviewed the CC and R and wished to withhold his signature on the map until the applicant furnished a certification that the names of the Board of.Directors for the corporation had been recorded. He explained this would be for the City's convenience in giving public notices. The Board could be notified instead of all indi*idual owners. Or; a question from the Chair. the City Engineer confirmed that all requirements had been complied with except lighting plan; landscaping, and CC & R. Mr. Dudley had no further comment on his application. He agreed that signatures on the map could be withheld until, requirements of landscaping, CC & R and lighting were fulfilled. He reaffirmed this would be both a tentative and final map. Commissioner Taylor moved that tentative and final subdivision map be approved for the Sandpiper West Condominium property at 525 Almer Road, subject to submission and approval of lighting plan by the City Engineers landscaping plan approval by the Park Director, and CC & R approval by the City Attorney. Commissioner Kindig seconded the motion, and it carried on the following roll call votes AYES: COMMISSIONERS: KINDS©,WORBERG,SINE,TAYLOR,MINK NAYS S t COMMI SSIO=W t JACOBS ABSENTS COMMISSIONERS: FRANCARD 4. TENTATIVE PAACEL MAP, BEING A RESUBDIVISIOX OF PARCEL 5, ASSESSOR'S MAP 816 CITY OP BURLINGAME (APN 026-121--040) PROPERTY AT 1327-47 NORTH CAROLAN AVENUE, ZONED M-1, BY BLOMQUIST ENGINEERING INC. FOR KAREN FOLDING COMPANY Chairman Mink called on City Engineer Davidson fox- comments on this map. The City Engineer reviewed his concerns with the map previously submitted but indicated a revised map had been received which corrects error in property line and shows setbacks. Also there had been verbal comment from the surveyor that site is flat and all elevations are the same, which would indicate parcels do not drain onto each other. The P.T. & T. easement shows recording information but does not show width. Mr. Frank Blomquist, engineer who had surveyed the site, addressed the Commission, confirming there were no drainage problems. He agreed to confirm this by letter and stated he would show dimension on the P.T. & T. easement on the iip The City Engineer indicated - 10 - the tentative map would then meet all requirements. Commissioner Kindig moved this tentative map be approved contingent upon receipt of letter verifying drainage and indication of 10' width on P.T.& T. easement. Commissioner Sine seconded the motion and it carried on unanimous roll call vote. 5. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL. RECREATION FACILITIES IN M-1 DISTRICT AT 1.730 ROLLINS ROAD, BY PENINSULA SPORTS CENTER (ND -43P ) - rri�.w ........ter • r� r.r�. ra...� Assistant City Planner Yost reviewed this application which is for the addition of four outdoor tennis courts and one indoor handball court to this existing facility. He noted concerns at a previous study session as being authorization to cross.,S.P. tracks, pff-street parking, and P.G.E. authorizatimn to use their easement. He noted the existence.of 36 parking spaces and stated that most of.the issues had been dealt with except authorization frons P.G. & E. He recommended approval of this special permit subject to receipt of written authorization from property owners, approval of landscaping by the Park Director, and receipt of necessary City permits. Miss Ann Mori, of Peninsula Sports Center, agreed to these conditions. Commissioner Jacobs moved this special permit be granted contingent upon receipt of letters of authorizationfrom affected property owners and approval of landscaping,plan by the_::Park Director. Commissioner Taylor seconded the motion and it carried on unanimous roll call vote. 7. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW PENINSULA ART ASSOCIATION TO HOLD ART CLASSES AT 1045 EL CAMINO REAL, ZONED R-3.- AY FRANCES H. MILLIKEN At the request of the Chair, City Planner -Swan -reviewed this applica- tion., It is submitted by the property owner for use of the rear. portion of her apartment building by the;Peninsula Art Association for private classes in several types.of creative arts. Hours of classes vary on different weekdays from approximately 9:00 A.M. to early evening. The City Planner had two concerns - parking and the Fire Inspector's report which specified.installation of solid core doors and stated that housekeeping created a fire hazard. Secretary Jacobs read report -dated September 23, 1974 from Fire Inspector Howard Pearson. Mrs. Milliken was accorded the floor. ;She told Commissioners she would comply with all requirements of the Fire Department by the end of the year and clean-up work had already started. There would be a maximum of 5-10 students, and she saw no difficulty with parking since, while there was no on-site parking available, it was available on side streets. She commented the karate studio formerly in this building had found adequate off-site parking. She described the interior layout of the studio and submitted brochure to Commission specifying exact hours of classes. Chairman Mink requested audience comments. George Golding of the San Mateo Times spoke in favor as a former director of this non- profit organization. Mr. J. E. Harvey, 1412 Sanchez, was opposed because it would. cause congestion of parking on his street. Mrs. Claire McNeil, 1411 Sanchez, approved the use but was opposed because of parking. The public hearing was declared closed. After some Commission discussion Commissioner Taylor moved this special permit be granted subject to the requirements of the Fire Inspector being accomplished prior to December 31, 1974. Commissioner Kindig seconded the motion and it carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: JACOHS,KINDIG,NOREERG,TAYLOR,MINK NAPES: COMMISSIONERS: SINE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: FRANCARD 8. SIGN VARIANCE FOR 38'6" HIGH POLE SIGN HAVING 92 SF OF FACE AREA AND SIGN PERMIT FOR 108 Sig' WALL SIGN AT 925 BAYSWATER FOR PUTNAM DODGE BY COAST/QlK$ OWNS. Commissioner Mink announced consideration of this sign application. Messrs. Joseph Putnam and Geo. Britt of Coast/QRS Signs were present. Assistant City Planner Yost reviewed this application, starting with the p0146 sign. He stated this sign has been reduced in size from an original 212 SF to 78 SF plus a "star" logo. However, the original height of 2816" has been increased to 3816" in order to be visible over Kohlenberg Ford. Drawings -of the signs were distributed. The Assistant City Planner told the Commission that the 38'64 height of the sign would make it visible to R -1,R-3 and R-4 properties in the surrounding area. He noted the "star" would be visible over Kohlenberg Ford at the original height of 28'6". During discussion which followed it was discovered that the sign is shown at two different locations on the plans. The applicant and sign representative were informed that plan showing exact location was necessary, and this sign was deferred to another meeting. The discussion continued with consideration of the application for wall sign. It was established this sign is 27' wide x 4' high with a total area of 108 SF. It has white letters on red background and is not illuminated. There was no response to the Chair's request for audience comments. The public meeting was declared closed: Following some Commission discussion, Commissioner Kindig moved the wail sign be approved as per drawings submitted for non -illuminated sign. Commissioner Sine seconded the motion and it carried on unanimous roll call vote. The applicant was instructed to resubmit pole sign with proper drawings. - 12 - 9. SIGN VARIANCES FOR BROADWAY ARCADE PROJECT AT 1050 BROADWAY FOR N. CRISAFI BY J/W DESIGN ASSOCIATES Assistant City Planner Yost reviewed the eight signs in the sign program.,submitted by this applicant. Sign A requires variances because it is a wooden sign more than 40 SF and projects out from the face of the building more than 9% In staff's opinion this was dangerous due to possible effect of seismic forces and City angineer required structural analysis before building permit could be issued. Structural analysis dated 9/17/74 has been received. Sign B, 5 SF, requires variance since it is less than 10' above the ground. Signs C,D,E, and G are less than 4 SF. Sign 'F, 7h SF, needs variance because it, too, is less than 10' frown the ground. Sign H is 34 SF and encroaches on adjacent ARCO property 133% its projection from the wall of the Crisafi building. Letter has been received from ARCO advising they have no objection to this encroachment. The Assistant City Planner stressed, h9wever,r, that there are discrepancies between the dimensions shown on the drawing for this sign H and the diagram supplied. Height td bottom of -letters is shown in one instance as 8160, in the other as 6'90. He also questioned if wall plaque displaying directory -of offices -should be considered a sign. Jack Webb of J/W Design told the Commission the 2411 projection of Sign°A was necessary because of the supports for the trellis behind it, which he considered necessary for aesthetics. With regard to apparent misrepresentation of dimensions on Sign H, he told the Commission this was because of ars error in scale. There followed Commission discussion, particularly of Sign A and the discrepancy on Sign H. They agreed the applicant should consider a different method of attaching Sign A and the location of Sign H should be resolved. Mr. Crisafi requested Comaaission approval of address signs C and G. Commissioner Jacobs moved signs C and G-be,approved as submitted in drawing with attachments: Commissioner Kindig seconded the motion and it carried on unanimous xoll call vote. Chairman Mink requested that the applicant-resubmitplans of sign program with consideration.of moving sign A back against the buildings and showing dimensions of side wall sign H to scale. 10. APPLICATION OF MAURY KOLOS FOR CRILTMAD, DEVELOPMENT COMPANY. SPECIAL PERMIT TO EXCEED 309E IAT CMRAGE PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE BUILDING, ROLLINS ROAD AND NORTH CAROLAN AVENUE (REFERRED BY COUNCIL SEPTEM.SER 16� 1974 Chairman Mink announced this item, noting it had been referred to the Planning Commission for consideration of developmental difficulties. He cited one of these as'being the interpretation of parking spaces for the combined warehouse -office building, but noted receipt of a new plan. City Planner Swan was requested to report. The City Planner confirmed that a revised plan.had been received September 20, 1974. It incorporates changes which alleviate many - 13 - previous concerns. Landscaping has been increased to 941°x'.. There is better sight distance for the turn.at the corner of the site. Office space has been eliminated from the frontage on Marsten Road. He noted the issue of a 4.' wide corridor in the building and its use for either office or warehouse had been resolved, but thought future building partitions should,be regulated. Required parking is satisfied by 19 spaces for warehouse and 16 for office. 35 on-site parking spaces satisfy that.regulation. This was the 7th set of plans, and the.City Planner thought it could now be recommesa"to the City Council. He noted the absence of landscaping requirements in the M-1 district.and suggested future regulations of 109E-15% land- scaping. He asked that the Planning Commission consider recommending no parking on North Carolan, He described the area as a bad situation because of the constant truck traffic. Mr..Buel Proffitt,addressed.the Commission. He agreed with the City Planner's remarks about traffic and:_on-street parking, and state4 that even a'cul-de-sac on -N. Carolan would h6lp. As it is, truckW must go down-.N.-Carolan to:.the=end, and then turn around and go back up the street, which -doubles traffic He commented he was veryinterested in getting N. Carolan opened up (cut through to Rollins Road?) There followed Commission discussion of the facts that trucks on the site must back out'into N. Carolan, that parking -on Rollins Road will overhang the landscaping and that -safety vehicles would have difficult access to NiCarolan. Chairman Mink noted that the=property directly across N Carolan has large -trucks which project into the street when they are unloading. 'Commissioner Kindig suggested recommending that on-site parking is adequate, but that on -street parking and traffic -should be dealt with. City Engineer Davidson questioned if site parking did meet the requirements of Section B of Definitions of Parking Spaces, which he quoted ­as "Required parking spaces in parking lots, parking areas . . . shall open directly upon an aisle or.driveway of such width and design as to provide safe and convenient access and egress for vehicles. Commissioner Sine tbought.the-developer should eliminate curb and gutter on the N. Carolan side for.better parking and exit. Mr. Proffitt again emphasised the need for a "loop" off N. Carolan. After further discussion Commissioner:Taylor moved the Planning Commission recommend to the City;Council that while this project on-site technically meets the requirements of zoning, it should not be considered until there is another,way off N. Carolan because of the traffic problem, in addition, the Commission feels the parking is unsatisfactory as.presently.designed. Commissioner Kindig seconded the motion and it carried on voice vote. . PXMER' S REPORT, City Planner Swan notified the Commission of an upcoming citizens' meeting to upgradeSouthern Pacific to'be'held at the Millbrae Recreation Center. - 14 - He noted the recent request to LAFCO for annexation of two Burlingame Hills lots to the City of Burlingame. He asked that Commissioners notify him of their plane -for the League of California Cities Conference. RETI MM Commissioners joined in expressing appreciation, affection,and respect to City Attorney Burress Karmel on the occasion of his retirement from duty with the City. ADJOURNMENT The melting regularly adjourned at ls10 A.M. Respectfully submitted, Ruth E. Jacobs Secretary