Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1974.05.29THE CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS PRESENT Francard Jacobs Kind ig Mink Norberg Sine Taylor CALL TO ORDER May 29, 1974 COMMISSIONERS ABSENT None OTHERS PRESENT city Planner Swan City Engineer Davidson City Attorney Karmel A regular meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission was called to order on the above date at 7:35 P.M. ROLL CALL The above named members were present. MINUTES The minutes of the regular meeting of April 22, 1974 were approved and adopted with the following correction of first line, Page 7, "Commissioner Jacobs seconded . . ." Minutes of the special study meeting of May 4, 1974 were approved and adopted with the following addition: Page 2, 5th paragraph, "However, City Engineer Davidson did question the statement that indicated there was minor impact on the capacity of the d wage treatment plant, and stated that additional pumping capacity would be necessary." The minutes of the study meeting of May 13, 1974 were approved and adopted. HEARINGS 1. PARCEL MAP, BEING A RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 2B, 2C, 3A, 3B AND 3D, BIACK 3, TOWN OF BURLINGAME, FOR BURLINGAME CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATES Copies of this map were distributed to Commission members. City Planner Swan explained this parcel map was for the condominium project on which reclassification had recently been approved, and that the map could not realistically be presented until all five lots were in the R-3 District. City Engineer Davidson enumerated some technical requirements: a street tree planting program must be submitted; there must be indication of grading plan to take care of drainage; there must be specification of width of E1 Camino. He stated these requirements had been communicated to the applicant, and he would be satisfied with the map if they were satisfied. - 2 - Mr. Ron Phillips, representing the applicant, stated these require- ments'would be met. Chairman Mink requested comment from the audience. There was none, and the public hearing was declared closed. Commissioner Kindig moved this parcel map be approved with the conditions that a street tree planting program be submitted, as well as a grading plan, and that the width of E1 Camino at this point be specified. Commissioner Sine seconded the motion and it carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FRANCARD,KINDIG,NORBERG,SINE,TAYLOR,MINK NAYES: COMMISSIONERS: JACOBS 2. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, LOTS 3, 4 AND A PORTION OF IAT 2, BLOCK 50, MAP OF EASTON ADDITION TO BURLINGAME NO. 4 (EL CAMINO REAL NEAR ADELINE DR2V$) , BY ,-RQFjRT E i, CHEJ80 Copies of this tentative map were distributed to the Commission. At the request of the Chair, City Engineer Davidson informed them the map is for the purpose of deleting a line to combine two lots into one lot. He recommended this map be conditionally approved with the agreement that certain public improvements be installed according to City requirements. Mr. Church had no comment on the map. Commissioner Francard questioned if these conditions included sidewalk placement. The City Engineer verified, but comwented this would be a meandering surface sidewalk because of the trees. Chairman Mink requested audience comment. There was none. The public hearing was declared closed. Commissioner Jacobs questioned what the development would be -and was informed it was to be an apartment building of conforming height with the frontage on E1 Camino. Commissioner Kindig questioned if the City Council must also hear this. The City Planner reported that the 35' height limit does not apply in this R-3 district, and Mr. Church affirmed the building will be 35.4" tall, with the garage at ground level. Commissioner Taylor questioned if maps must be approved as a matter of policy, remarking he felt that application for a map such as this should include a proposal for the building at the same time. He questioned Mr. Church's interest in the property. City Attorney Karmel stated that maps are approved under a City ordinance under the Map Act. At the time building permit is issued the building must conform to zoning ordinances. He reported that the applicant must have an interest in the property or be an agent of the owner. Mr. Church protested he was the secretary of a family corporation which has purhased the property. He said the application was first made and accepted by the City on December 28. Commissioner - 3 - Taylor affirmed he had seen no evidence of such ownership or identi- fiable interest in the property, and he felt.the application should not be entertained until -this was established. City'Engineer Davidson reported that evidence of ownership is required on the final map, but not on this tentative map. He cautioned there have been several revisions to this map, and any motion should refer to the revision date of May 14. He went on to say that the Public Works department had no written application for a map, showing ownership, but Mr. Church had informed him verbally that he was representing a potential buyer. When application for building permit is made, a verbal statement of ownership is accepted. The City Attorney repeated that some evidence of ownership or agency should be shown, suggesting that a conditional contract of purchase is enforceable and presents sufficient interest. Mr. Church stated. he could get verification from the Safeco Title Insurance Company, Redwood City, that the property was in escrow and he is an officer of the corporation purchasing. Commissioner Taylor again stated he did not consider the Commission should consider this until the facts of ownership Were established. Chairman Mink addressed Mr. Church, stating the Commission did not question his work, but that Commissioner Taylor and the City Attorney had an understandable concern. The Chairman suggested continuance of this application pending receipt of ownership. Mr. Church protested that this project had been programmed to start within thirty days and the parcel map was a condition of financing. He suggested approval be conditioned upon satisfactory establishment of ownership. Commissioner Taylor at this pointiold the Commission his concern was based on some past applications which the Planning Commission had considered for a person other than the owner, with a later development that the owner did not agree with the application. The City Attorney suggested approval conditional upon proof to his satisfaction of an interest in the property by this applicant. After considerable further discussion, Commissioner Norberg moved approval of this revised map dated May 14, 1974 subject to proof of ownership being established= satisfaction of legal requirements of public improvements, and with the understanding that this map will be submitted to the City Council along with proof of ownership. Commissioner Sine seconded the motion and it carried on the following roll call votes AYES: COMMISSIONERSs FRANCARD,KINDIG,NORBERG,SINE,MINK NAPES: COMMISSIONERS: TAYLOR ABSTAINS COMMISSIONERS: JACOBS - 4 - 3. FINAL SUBDIVISION MAP FOR CONDOMINIUM APARTMENT BUILDING AT 1477 FIARIBUNDA AVENUE Copies of this map were distributed for Commission inspection. Mr. R. W. Barton was present•as representative of the applicant. Chairman Mink requested City Engineer Davidson to initiate discussion. The City Engineer reported this was the final map for the condominium project, and that the tentative map had been approved at a previous date. He noted receipt of correct proposal calculations, but stated he had not yet received requested evidence of ownership, and payment of special assessments and taxes. He recommended approval of the map conditional upon receipt of this Oftvmentation. Mr. Barton presented to the City Attorney letter from Western Title Insurance Company dated May 29, 1974 indicating ownership of the project is vested in John M. Johnson and Ruth A. Johnson, and a receipted tax bill, showing the first installment paid on this property. The City Attorney indicated these papers were in order. On question by the Chairman, Mr. Barton stated he was the authorized representative of Mr. and Mrs. Johnson. There was no response to the Chair's request for audience comment and the public hearing was declared closed. Commissioner Taylor moved this final subdivision map be approved. Commissioner Francard seconded the motion, and it carried on the following roll call votes AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FRANCARD,JACOBS,KINDIG,NORBERG,TAYLOR,MINK NAPES: COMMISSIONERS: SINE 4. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP, COLONIAL TWELVE, BEING A RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 28 AND 29, BLACK NO. 1, MAP OF SUBDIVISION NO. 4 OF W IAMS PARK, BY TRANSWESI'ERN BUILDERS. S. - VARIANCE FROM LOT DIMENSIONS AND LOT REQUIREMENTS OF THE R-3 DISTRICT AT 735 EL CAMINO REAL BY TRANSWESTERN BUILDERS, INC. (ND -35P POSTED APRIL 19, 1974) Chairman Mink explained that these two items are concerning the same property and questioned if the Commission would prefer to consider theta together rather than separately. It was agreed discussion would cover both applications at one time. At the request of the Chair, City Engineer Davidson gave his comments. He recommended approval of the map on these conditions: variance be granted for lot dimensions and lot requirements; the right-of-way width of E1 Camino be shown; a contribution be made to the City Water Sinking Fund to pay for a pro -rata share of water main to supply adequate water for this project. in reviewing this development, City Planner Swan termed it, "a linear apartment" and a totally new concept for the City of Burlingame. Each buyer would own a plot of land on which there would be a three-level townhouse. There would be a double garage at grade plus two levels of living space on a 2515" x 3716" lot, about 950 square - 5 - feet in area. The lots do not front on a street but rather on a private access drive called Parcels A and B. This is common to the six townhouse lots on each side. The variance would be for lots of less than 50' in width, not fronting on a public street and with no side yard between townhouses... He suggested approval be conditioned upon written provision that there would be an adequate egress -ingress easement so that all owners could get into their garagesf and specification of landscaping in the front 201. The City Planner summed up the development as two buildings on 12 lots with a common area in between for access. For purposes of record, Chairman Mink announced Commission receipt of negative declaration signed by City Planner and Environmental Assessment evaluated by the City Planner. Mr. Philip Karp was invited to address the Commission. He stated the contribution to the City's water sinking fund had been discussed and was agreeable to him. He added there would be no problem with the right-of-way dimensions for El Camino. With reference to the City Planner's recommendations, he stated there was adequate ingress - egress and the landscaping would be as specified. Chairman Mink requested audience reaction to these applications. Mrs. Adele Adler of the Peninsula Conservatory of Music told the commission she was concerned with the effect stusical students would have on the residents in the neighboring townhouses. She neither wished to hamper the students nor disturb the neighbors. However, she noted the Conservatory had been granted a permit a number of years previously. There was no other comment and the public hearing was declared closed. Cownissioner Jacobs questioned if these structures met the specifications for townhouses. The City Attorney replied. the City did not have specifications for townhouses. However, the map provided -for the variance does meet the State Map Act and the structures must meet only the requirements of the building and safety codes. Commissioner Kindig was concerned with the fact there were no common amenfti*s for these townhouses and minimal shrubbery. He thought the project would be most unattractive. Commissioner Norberg endorsed this opinions thought the project had the makings of a "slum" and objected to lot size and the density. Chairman Mink considered density low for this R-3 area. The City Planner confirmed this fact. Commissioner Taylor was concerned that this type of lot subdivision would set a precedent for other applicants which conceivably could affect even R-1 areas. He also noted recent newspaper reports of the breakup of condominium associations with subsequent loss of control over the site. Mr. Karp protested that the publicity about condominium associations referred to a project in the East which had not yet been dissolved. He declared the financier of his development insisted on an association for his protection and would not allow any dissolution. He stated the alternatives to townhouses in this area would be a large apartment building or a condominium, both of which would be less attractive - 6 - and of greater density. He added townhouses are ideal for people who do not wish to buy a house or condominium, and he had several inqui:jes from prospective purchasers. He presented a large rendering of the front view of the townhouses, stating the landscaping was a condition of the lender and must be maintained. Mr. Karp cited the advantages of his project: private garage, private back yard, fireplace, 2'h baths, etc. He termed a townhouse "a little house", an alternative to a condominium. He compared a condominium, a subdivision of air space, and a townhouse, a subdivision of land; and questioned why one would be permitted and the other not. He stated this type of subdivision could not affect an R-1 lot steed for only one family. He compared his private parking with condominium parking and cited San Mateo townhouse developments. Chairman Mink then reviewed points of concern to the commissions substandard lots; control of substandard lots; maintenance of exterior. He questioned if each individual would be responsible for maintenance of his own building. Mr. Karp said not...The Chairman stated another crucial point was the egress -ingress driveway over which the City might lose control. He added if substandard lot size were condoned, it would be difficult to deny similar applications. Mr. Karp insisted each buyer would have an undivided interest in the -driveway so that the property could never be separated. Commissioner Sine was concerned with the substandard lot size and disliked setting a precedent which -would bring up future problems. He would accept what is regular for R-3, and would prefer this application be withdrawn without prejudice. Commissioner Taylor cited two standards for granting of a variance: extraordinary circumstances resulting in property loss; right of owner to enjoyment of his own property. He stated the applicant had no evidence to support.either of these. Mr. Karp stated extraordinary circumstances would involve the alternative of a 25 -unit apartment house with twice the density and no open area. Following more discussion, commissioner Taylor moved the application for variance from lot dimensions and lot requirements of R-3 district at 735 E1 Camino be denied.: Commissioner Kindig seconded the motion and it carried on unanimous -roll call v4t.b Chairman Mink informed theapplicant this action was subject to appeal to the City council. H Discussion followed as to.whether or not a vote on Item 4, Tentative Subdivision Map, would be._redundant. Mr. Karp requested a vote'bn.�this application so that it, too, could be appealed to Council. Chairman Mink reminded the Commission that technically the map meets the requirements of the State Map Act. Commissioner Taylor moved the -tentative subdivision map be approved. Commissioner Sine seconded the motion, with the comment he intended to vote against his own second. Motion failed on the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: TAYLOR NAYES: COMMISSIONERS:=FRANCARD;JACOBS,KINDIG,NORBERG,SINE,MINK - 7 - 6. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR MINIWAREHOUSING SERVICE IN M-1 DISTRICT AT L339 MARSTEN ROAD BY OSCAR F. PERSON (ND -36P POSTED MAY 17, 1974) Chairman Mink announced consideration of this application. Site plans were distributed to the Commission. At the request of the Chair, City Planner Swan reviewed this project. He noted it must also go before the City Council because the building covers more than 30% of the lot. Project plans were received on May 28, and had not been thoroughly evaluated, but he enumerated major changes made. These include: There will be only one sliding, opening gate on Rollins Road. There will be two gates on Marsten Road to a U-shaped driveway. Traffic would enter from Marsten Road, go through the project, make a 180 degree turn and exit on Marsten. The project may be constructed in phases. The Rollins Road frontage will be landscaped. The City Planner suggested conditions of approval such as prohibition of open storage in unfinished areas of project; prohibition of such activities as washing, repairing and painting of vehicles; and specification of hours of operation. Mr. Person was invited to comment. He stated he had worked with the Planning and Engineering Department in revising plans. At their request he had located only one gate on Rollins Road. All gates would close at 5:00 P.M. for security. He pointed out the better architectural treatment of the Rollins Road frontage. In response to questions from Chairman Mink, he stated that the project would be built of masonry with concrete roof and concrete slab; interior walls are masonry; driveway would be concrete or asphaltic concrete. Attendance at this area would be controlled by personnel at the Person plant directly across Marsten Road. After hours entrance to gates would be given only to trustworthy persons. Commissioner Taylor questioned the use of the gate on Rollins Road and was informed this would be normally locked and used only for the passage of large vehicles which could not make the turn -around. Mr. Person informed him the larger warehouse units had been designed for unusually large items of storage. ' Commissioner Francard questioned the width of the public right of way from the curb. The City Engineer left the meeting to obtain this information from public works -maps. Commissioner Kindig questioned the extent of Phase 1 construction. This was explained. Commissioner Norberg conceded the improved architectural treatment on Rollins Road, and questioned the Marsten frontage. Mr. Person stated the Marsten facade would be split -face concrete blocks which would be suitable for this industrial street. Commissioner Norberg thought both entrances should be attractive and questioned the type of gate. Mr. Person stated this would be the same type of metal gate as on the opposite Marsten property, noting the Police Department disapproves of solid fences or gates in this area for reasons of visibility. - 8 - City Engineer Davidson returned to the meeting with information that right of way on Rollins Road is 5Y from face of curb; on Marsten Road it is 5' from the face of the curb. In response to questions from Commissioner Sine, Mr. Person stated there would be standard metal warehouse type doors on the units and the roof would be concrete tongue and groove plank set in place (Span -Crete). The Commissioner did not consider that asphalt concrete driveways would be sufficient for heavy rigs, but Mr. Person affirmed it would. Commissioner Sine cautioned that separate application must be submitted for signs on this project. Mr. Person affirmed there would be only one small sign on the side of the, warehouse which would conform to City regulations. In response to further questioning Mr. Person verified there would be planting in the 2' strip on Marsten Road; landscaping on the Rollins Road frontage; there was water service to the property for maintenance of landscaping, and drainage would meet engineering department requirements as to sump, etc. He stated he would agree to restriction of types of uses for this warehouse. Chairman Mink requested audience comment on this application. There was none and the public hearing was declared closed. Commissioner xindig moved this special permit be approved in accordance with plans received by the City of Burlingame May 28, 1974 with the conditions that landscaping as shown be carried out, including planting on 2' space on Marsten Road, that there be no washing, repairing and painting permitted, and no outdoor storage permitted while project is under construction; that the hours shall be 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. unless by special arrangement; and that warehousing shall be the only use permitted. Commissioner Norberg seconded the motion, and it carried on unanimous roll call vote. 7. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR OFFICE BUILDING IN M-1 DISTRICT ON ADRIAN COURT BY ASSOCIATED CONSTRUCTION AND ENGINEERING COMPANY FOR SEQUOIA PACIFIC (ND -37P POSTED MAY 17, 1974) Chairman Mink announced this application for hearing. City Planner Swan reported on recommendations received from the Fire Department for this project: The building must be sprinklered and supervised. There must be a permit from the Fire Prevention Bureau for underground flammable liquid tank. Bay Area Air Pollution Control District regulations must be met for underground flammable liquid tank,containing more than 254 gallons. Plans indicate the 80' transmission tower has been moved from the S.E. corner of the site to a position near the SE corner of the building itself. In the corner where the tower had been there is a gas pump which will likely have a storage tank. There is a security fence around the parking area of the "finished" portion of the building to be occupied by Sequoia Pacific. The City Planner suggested the fencing be explained because enclosure of 42 parking spaces by Sequoia Pacific unbalances parking 9 _ for the unfinished portion of the building to be leased. He recommended the landscaping plan be subject to approval of the Park Director. He suggested that a total signage program be submitted in the future. He noted this office building will require a special permit from. -the City Council since the project covers more than 30% of the lot: they will consider this on Monday, June 3. Upon invitation of the Chair, Mr. Walter Bearden presented a colored rendering of the building and addressed the Commission. He stated Sequoia Pacific felt the fence was necessary primarily to keep people from climbing the tower. This fence is 6' high with 3 strands of barbed wire on top. He said it could be moved if necessary. The transmission tower had been moved near the building to reduce the length of cable for better transmission. The gas: pump is for company.vehicles. He had no objections to the Fire Department recommendations, noting the building will be fully sprinklered. Chairman Mink requested audience comments. Mr. Richard Lavenstein said his company is developing the property across the street with low profile warehouses. Because the Sequoia Pacific site has high visibility, he suggested the planning commission require that air conditioning equipment (ducts,. etc.) on the roof be completely screened. He also suggested that the parking be screened from the street and that colors and architectural treatment be as restrained as indicated on the elevation of the building. There were no further comments and the public hearing was declared closed. Commissioner Sine wanted more information on the security fence. Mr. Bearden reported it would be a chain: link fence with redwood or metal slats. The security gate would be open during normal hours of operation and locked at night. Night workers would have a key to the gate. The "unfinished" portion of the building will be on a short term lease after which Sequoia Pacific will move into it. Until that time the fence will remain. Commissioner Francard questioned the landscaping and Mr. Bearden explained this on the plans. Mr. Bearden went on to say the front unfinished portion would have no ceiling, minimal lighting and no plumbing. There will be a concrete slab and underground plumbing only until a tenant occupies. The City Planner commented that the 26 spaces outside the security fence might not be enough for both the short and long term needs of the tenant. Mr. Bearden considered there would be adequate parking for a short term lease of a warehouse. He thought there would be no problem since they could put another gate in the security fence and leave it unlocked for daytime parking. The question was raised if the tenant might require a loading dock. The representative did not forsee this possibility. It was also suggested that the fence be continued to Adrian Road which would then encompass more parking. Mr. Bearden then introduced a Mr. Small, vice president of Sequoia Pacific to resolve some questions. Mr. Small indicated this - 10 - entire building would be.the Western headquarters of Sequoia Pacific. He was amenable to moving the security fence back from the Adrian Court entrance to the east side of the building, since night occupancy would be only about 10 persons. Commissioner Taylor felt the Commission was being asked to consider a proposal which was incomplete. Commissioner Jacobs questioned if there were a way to fence just the tower and pump and not the other areas. Mr. small repeated there would be no problem in moving the fence and putting in another gate. Commissioners suggested to Mr. Bearden that consideration be given to placing landscaping so that the building and parking is screened from Adrian Court. Mr. Bearden confirmed there would be no signs on the tower and agreed to bring in a complete signage program when the building is completed. Commissioner Taylor moved that this special permit be approved subject to Commission re-evaluation of final plans -relating to location of security fence. Further conditions weres no signs on the tower= complete signage program is to be presented to the Commission before building is completed; landscaping is to be submitted to the Park Director for approval.; mechanical equipment on roof is to be screened; there shall be no transmission interference with equipment in the surrounding area; building is to be completely sprinklered and supervised; permit shall be obtained from Fire Prevention Bureau for underground flammable liquid tank; Bay Area Air Pollution Control District regulations shall be met for underground flammable liquid tank, containing more than 250 gallons. Commissioner Sine seconded the motion and it carried unanimously on roll call vote. 8. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR TAKING TERMINAL IN M-1 DISTRICT AT 1344 MARSTEN ROAD FOR HORN M TRUCK SERVICE BY WILLIAM E. MANNING. LND-►3SP, POSTED MAY1?, 1934) Chairman Mink announced this application for hearing,,noting that the Commission had previously received the plot plan and. a Negative Declaratio had been prepared by the City Planner. City Planner Swan summariaeds the use will not have i significant impact; this location had previously been used for a trucking terminal; 8 - 10 trucks would be operated; and there was ample parking space. The applicant, Mr. William Manning, had nothing to add to these comments. There was no response to the Chair's request for audience comment and the public hearing was declared closed. commissioner Sine queried Mr. Manning on a number of new cars he had seen at the site, and asked if this was used as a storage.lot. Mr. Manning replied one of his employees had been doing some work on cars for a Dodge dealer preparatory to their being moved to another state. In response to further Commission questions he affirmed that this use was not a part of his applications; no repair work is done on his own trucks; and he was permitting this use only because there was sufficient room. The matter of washing cars was explored, and Mr. Manning was questioned if he would be willing to make separate appli- cation for this repair use if he desired to continue it. The applicant was agreeable to this condition. Col issioner Sine moved this special permit for trucking terminal only be approved. commissioner Jacobs seconded the motion and it carriedon unanimous roll call vote. Chairman Mink cautioned Mr. Manning that if he permitted another use except trucking on this site, his special permit for trucking terminal could be rescinded. • 9. REQUEST -FOR ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF SPECIAL PERMIT UN L AUGUST 7, 1975- FOR THE BUBBLE MACHINE AND FOR ONVWEAR EXTENSION OF SIGN PREWT MIL MMME 5 1975 Richard A. Rieber of Standard Oil.Caspany and Thomas C. Thatcher of The Bubble Machin, were present'at this meeting. Secretary Jacobs read letter of April 22, 1974 frau Thomas C. Tither, Vice President of The Bubble Machine requesting this extension. In his letter Mr. Thatcher noted there was no intention of changing building plans, and they expected to have the building permit extended also. Upon inquiry by the Chair, he stated he had nothing to add to the facts in the letter. City Planner Swan commented that the Burlingame City Building Inspector had advised the City must adapt the 1973 Building Code by January 4, 1975. The present building permit could be extended until that timet but thereafter new plan check and building permit fees would be required. Upon inquiry, Mr. Rieber indicated he understood this. Mwever, he stated they intended to start construction before that date. Chairman Mink questioned Mr. Thatcher if gasoline would be a one price item and price would not vary if a car was washed or not.' Mr. Thatcher stated this would be a one -price item. Commissioner Jacobs moved this special permit be extended until, August 7, 1975 and the sign permit be extended until September 5, 1975, with the provision that the applicant must come in for a new building permit on January 5, 1975. commissioner Taylor seconded the motion and it carried on voice vote, Cannissioner Sine opposed. 10. REQUEST FOR ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF SPECIAL PERMIT UNTIL JULY 3, 1975 FOR THE ARM GAS wA AT WAY AND LL S ROAD Chairman Mink noted receipt of letter dated May 10, 1974 from Atlantic Richfield Company requesting extension of this permit at a hearing of the Planning Commission. He also noted receipt of a subsequent letter dated May 28, 1974 in which Atlantic Richfield advised that due to vacation schedules and other matters they would not be able to send a representative to a meeting until the June regular - 12 - hearing meeting. With the Commission's concurrence the Chairman announced this item would be placed on the agenda for the June 24, 1974 meeting. 11. REVIEW OF LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR OFFICE BUILDING PROJECT AT 1633 _ -PAT =RE MG„Y. Chairman Mink noted consideration of this landscaping plan at the last study session, and reminded the Commission of memo dated April 18, 1974 from Park Director John Hoffman containing recommen- dations. At the request of the Chair, City Planner Swan commented on this landscaping. He indicated that insufficient information had been receivedt the staff had not seen the plans nor had there been any further communication with the Park Director by the applicant. The City Planner voiced several concerns in the two areas of the site as yet unaved.. The grading plan indicates portions of the site would be higher than neighboring properties. When landscaping is watered, drainage would be on to the adjacent properties. Another problem is the overhang of cars along planted areas. Upon checking, it was ascertained the applicant was not in the audience. In view of the uncertainties of the landscaping application, City Planner Swan suggested that the balance of the unapproved landscaping be held in abeyance until the building is occupied. The two narrow unapproved portions contain a minimal amount of planting. He suggested considering vertical screening of the parking areas behind the office building. Commissioner Kindig suggested that the Park Director be contacted for direction on this landscaping problem. The Commission requested the City Planner contact the Park Director to discuss alternatives and a report back before the building is fully occupied. 12. SIGN PERMIT FOR TWO WALL SIGNS AT 1841 EL CAMINO REAL FOR BELL SAVINGS AND IRAN ASSOCIATION. Chairman Mink announced this application for hearing. Drawings were distributed for Commission inspection. Mr. Gene Barbour of Ad -Art Signs and Tom Newman, president of Bell Savings and Loan Association were present. At the invitation of the Chair, Mr. Barbour addressed the Commission. He told them a new facade was being put on the building in line with the reAvvation of Burlingame Plaza. These two wall signs, one on each side of the building, will have a background of off-white with wine colored letters. only the letters will be illuminated from the interior. Sign material is metal and plastic. Commissioner Jacobs questioned the disposition of the revolving pole sign presently on the property. Mr. Newman stated it is leased. There is one year to go on the lease at a monthly rental of $289.00. He would agree to remove the pole sign at the end of the lease. Commissioner Kindig thought the sign could be made stationary instead of revolving, and Commissioner Taylor questioned if the lease could be bought off - 13 - and the sign removed. Mr. Newman replied the Association did not wish to pay and get nothing. Commissioner Sine remarked on the many small interior signs cluttering the building, and questioned the need for the exterior sign on the north wall. Mr. Barbour stated the interior signs would be renovated during the remodeling of the building and the north wall sign was necessary for identification to the clients approaching from the north side of the parking lot. The City Planner coaamented that the bronze sign for Bell Savings, 4th and El Caminb in San Mateo, seemed much more appropriates and questioned why these could not be similar. Mr. Barbour replied that the building color was different in this case, and bronze could not be used. There was considerable discussion of the total proposed signage impact of this building and the effects of lighting and colors. Mr. Barbour declared the final exterior signage would be only these two large signs and two small !!i`C logos on the exterior walls. He was asked tb work up a total signage program for the building for presentation at the June 10 study meeting. Mr. Barbour agreed to come back with additional sketches including signage in windows. 13. RE VEST CO I.TANT RVICEE FOR =VIEW OF &M MASTER LAN EIR-28P Chairman Mink opened discussion of the possibility of expediting Anza Master Plan by having consultant services available to the City for evaluation of EZRS. He remarked that request must be made to the City Council and questioned procedure. The City Planner stated that a revolving fund could be used for retaining services and suggested that a joint payment by the City and applicant might be appropriate. There was Commission suggestion that a letter be written to Council expressing need for assistance in evaluation, particularly of this EIR. There was some discussion of independent firms which could handle this work. David Keyston addressed the C-1-ission, urging them to make a selection of the firm this evening in the interest of time. He stated modifica- tions and additions to the EIR are in the process of being completed and there will be need for evaluation in the very near future. Discussion followed of whether or not to recommend a particular firm. Charles Eley was suggested because of the excellence of his prior work with the City. The City Attorney suggested that request could be made to the Couneil that the Commission assist in screening appropriate firms. He thought it in order for the Commission and the Council to get professional guidance in evaluating Anza's EIR. Mr. Keyston then stated that Anza would be willing to pay a reasonable - 14 - share of the cost of such an evaluation. Chairman Mink suggested a letter be drafted to immediate transmission; and he also stated he members personally. The Commission agreed to SIGN FOR GENSRAZ �iSINESS SYSTEMS the City Council for would contact some Council this course of action. The City Planner acknowledged receipt of letter of May 24 from Lawrence G. Finch of this company. Mr. Finch was present and told the Commission that this firm as of June 1 will be located at 895 Stanton Road, where a competitor previously had an office. Application is being made to change the wording on the competitor's sign before the first of the month, if possible. There was some discussion of this 250 square foot sign, but the C, mission felt this was a new application and Mr. Finch did not bring sufficient information. He was requested to return at the study meeting of June 10, 1974 with a diagram of the signs and information on colors, type of illumination, etc. There was Commission suggestion that the sign be made more modest, but Mr. Finch replied he was a sub -tenant and did not have the right to alter the existing sign. PLANNER'S REPORT The City Planner reported on two major accomplishments of the past months the hiring of an assistant City Planner, and the implementation of a city bus system. He told the Commission only one bus had yet been received. It has been placed in service on a route from Burlingame downtown to Burlingame Plaza. ADJOU MMENT The meeting regularly adjourned at 12:10 A.M. Respectfully submitted, Ruth E. Jacobs Secretary