Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1976.08.23THE CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS PRESENT Cistulli Francard Kindig Mink Sine Taylor CALL TO ORDER August 23, 1976 COMMISSIONERS ABSENT Jacobs OTHERS PRESENT City Planner Swan Asst. City Planner Yost City Engineer Kirkup A regular meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission was called to order by Chm. Taylor at 7:36 P.M. ROLL CALL The above named members were present, C. Jacobs having been excused. MINUTES C. Kindig requested a change under Item 5A, page 5, third paragraph, last phrase. Change this to read: "people who come in with their own trucks to pick up supplies will not average more than two or three times a month." The minutes were then approved as mailed and corrected. ITEMS FOR ACTION 1. COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: PENINSULA AVENUE REZONING STUDY. Asst. C.P. Yost reviewed this item, noting that at the study meeting two weeks ago Commission had reviewed a preliminary report on the possible rezoning of 25 R-1 lots on Peninsula Avenue. At that time a number of concerns were expressed: although 25 property owners were questioned, a rezoning would affect a larger area, and this impact should be studied; existing water supply and wastewater collection systems will require upgrading for any significant change in land use; unless lots are consolidated, they are not appropriate for apartments; vehicular traffic on Peninsula Avenue has increased to over 17,000 cars per day, and widening will be necessary when the Peninsula Avenue interchange is improved.. During discussion of these points it appeared that the general consensus of the P.C. was that a General Plan study would be more appropriate than a rezoning study; time is needed for physical improvements, and immediate rezoning is not a reasonable option. The Asst. C.P. advised that Commission report should be forwarded to City Council later this week. There was general consensus that a letter be sent to Council signed by Chm. Taylor expressing the views of the Commission. A preliminary draft of this letter was discussed. C. Kindig felt this draft covered the Commission's thinking on the matter. C. Mink believed P.C. concerns indicated a broader view of possible land use options and asked that item 3 under the concerns strike the word "apartment" and substitute "more intensive use." He stressed the Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 August 23, 1976 Commission's feeling that in considering any kind of use at all, it should not be done in haste. He also requested, in the last paragraph of the preliminary draft, that the wording "it is moved that" be changed to "it: is recommended that." C. Francard stated his concern regarding parking and the traffic hazard on Peninsula Avenue. C. Cistulli commented that consolidating lots doesn't solve the problem; consolidation could only be considered if Peninsula Avenue were widened. C. Sine expressed his To -ng held belief that the only way rezoning would ever work would be to widen Peninsula Avenue by 10 feet, and this would make all houses untenable for residential use. He furtherstated he agreed with previous Council directive to maintain R-1 as R-1, and saw no reason for any further study or review. With the consent of the Commission, and assistance from the C.P., Chm. Taylor will prepare a letter to Council as stated in the preliminary draft and in accordance with views expressed at this meeting. 2. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, BEING A RESUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 65 AND 0.686 Ac. MOL PORTION OF PARCEL 56, ASSESSOR'S MAP B16 (APN 026-131-020 AND -090) AT 1221-1281 WHITETHORN WAY, ZONED M-1, BY WILLIAM WRIGHT FOR NICHOLAS CRISAFI (BUYER) WITH INDUSTRIAL REALTY COMPANY (SELLER). C.P. Swan distributed maps and explained there have been three different tentative parcel maps. The first map relocated the property line around the metal building in order to have all of the building located on one parcel. This became a problem with building code regulations and fire resistance of the exterior wall. A second approach was to remove the property line and create one parcel for all of the property. The latest parcel map locates the property line down the middle of Kemp Road, which is a 48 foot wide access driveway between two buildings, all within the subject property. The C.P. noted one personal concern: the property is not owned in fee by Mr. Crisafi; there is a conditional stales agreement indicating closure could occur in the week following August 27, and there is no certification on the parcel map for the owner to sign. Technically, Mr. Crisafi is not yet the property owner. C. E. Kirkup referred to the memo of August 20 to the C.P. and Commission written by the Asst. C.E. He noted the current property line runs through the existing metal building; therefore, it was suggested that both lots be combined or the line be moved over. Concerns were: building codes require 4 hour fire resistive walls; drainage may not be allowed to cross property line to adjoining property without adequate legal and physical provisions for drainage. In order to eliminate these two conditions the property line could be relocated. The.C..E. noted that the Planning Department is working with the applicant regarding parking requirements. Item #4 of the Asst. C.E.'s memo mentioned the existing metal buildings are non- conforming and, in connection with a new use permit or remodeling, special conditions must be met; this may not affect the adequacy of the tentative parcel map. The C.E. would leave it up to the applicant which of the two options he wishes to take. Mr. Crisafi addressed the Commission stating the original application for mini storage was made before the property transaction was closed in hopes of saving time; the problem of the parcel reap came up at the study meeting; his main concern was to get the special permit so he could get started on the plans. He mentioned his discussions with Chief B.I. Calwell and stated he had agreed to keep separate addresses which would maintain the present status quo of the buildings. C.P. Swan understood that Mr. Crisafi was proposing the map containing Parcel 1 and Parcel 2. This would permit a later development of a rear portion of Parcel 2. He added Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 August 23, 1976 there is 57% coverage of Parcel 1; present buildings do not conform with present zoning code and do not have frontage on a street, this property having been developed a long time ago under a different set of rules. C. Sine ascertained that the buildings are at present fire sprinklered and Mr. Crisafi advised he had agreed with F.I. Pearson that he would run sprinklers into each cubicle. The Commissioner noted the applicant would have to meet code when building the cubicles. C. E. Kirkup confirmed this map meets the requirements for it tentative parcel map and he would recommend approval subject to the following conditions: that Mr. Crisafi be a legal owner before signature of the final map, and that: Mr. Crisafi execute an agreement with the City stating that each building will be treated as a separate structure for purposes of reconstruction in the event of fire or other damage. C. Francard was concerned about the provision for some trees or landscaping. The applicant noted construction would be all interior alterations; he would also like to do some cosmetic type cleaning up of the exterior, repave and in general make it attractive. C. Mink moved approval of this tentative parcel map, per the map revision dated 8/23/76, with the two conditions as stated by the City Engineer. Second C. Kindig and carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CISTULLI, FRANCARD, KINDIG, MINK, SINE, TAYLOR NAYES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: JACOBS Chm. Taylor advised the applicant it would be necessary that: C.A. Coleman approve the agreement when he returns from vacation. 3. SPECIAL PERMIT TO OPERATE A MINI STORAGE WAREHOUSE AT 1241 WHITETHORN WAY (PORTION OF APN 026-131-020 AND -090), ZONED M-1, BY NICHOLAS CRISAFI (BUYER) WITH INDUSTRIAL REALTY COMPANY (SELLER). (ND -91P POSTED 8/11/76) C.P. Swan introduced this special permit application, stating that the draft negative declaration which was presented prior to the study meeting had been amended slightly and posted. Staff did not know how many cubicles will be constructed, but this would depend on the number of sprinkler heads that can be put in. The use is still the same: storage cubicles within the existing building. It is a service to customers; a retail service needing a special permit in the M-1 District. He noted some discrepancy about the size of the building; the application indicated a 100' x 100' building and just recently it was brought to staff's attention that it would be 12,000 SF. This would affect the number of parking spaces needed. With access from a private easement, the amount of parking to be allocated to this building and the other buildings would depend upon a parking layout for total ownership. The C.P. continued, since the tentative map has been approved for two separate parcels, it would seem there should be a review of each parcel. This business would have one employee and persons using it for storage would come infrequently and seldom at the same time. This being true, the parking would be adequate; perhaps Commission could specify a certain minimum number of parking spaces. Until the number of cubicles is known, staff would be guessing at the number of people at one time. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 August 23, 1976 Discussion ensued regarding parking, the other tenants in this area and the use of this private street. Mr. Crisafi stated it was his hope the Police Department would agree to making the street a one way street, and indicated only two buildings have right of ingress and egress at present. The applicant is proposing parking on the eastern side of Whitethorn Way. It was agreed by the Commission that more definitive information was needed for evaluation before a decision could be made on this special permit application. There are no specific plans; the building is an older, non -conforming building; since the tentative parcel map has been approved by the Commission, P.C. should allow Mr. Crisafi to proceed by presenting more specific plans at a future meeting. C. Mink moved that Commission postpone this hearing until the applicant submits interior plans which have been checked by the Fire and Building Departments; that he submit parking, traffic and paving plans; that the applicant demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Attorney that his proposal -for control of the space on Whitethorn Way meets all conditions for recording of legal agreements covering ingress, egress and parking, and that this information be communicated to other property owners; that the applicant submit to Commission a more specific plan for exterior visual treatment of the subject building, not just indicating cosmetic work in general. The Commissioner then proposed that this item be placed on the agenda in one month's time at the meeting of September 27. Second by C. Cistulli, and all aye by voice vote. 4. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR AUTO DEALER'S USE OF EXISTING GARAGE IN M-1 DISTRICT AT 1100 CAROLAN AVENUE (APN 026-233-100) BY RECTOR CADILLAC (APPLICANT) AND DONALD TATEOSIAN (PROPERTY OWNER). (ND -90P POSTED 8/11/76). Chm. Taylor ascertained that Donald Tateosian was present at this meeting, and then asked for review of the application by Asst. C.P. Yost. The Asst. C.P. stated the property at 1100 Carolan has approximately 14,725 SF. The site plan distributed to the Commission shows two separate buildings on the property. The smaller of the two is occupied by Quality Polishing and Grannis Warehouse. Hauffman Enter- prises, which is an office use, occupies 618 SF of the larger building. It is the remainder of this building, 5,004 SF, which Rector Cadillac is proposing to use for new car preparation. He noted Mr. Tateosian has reported six people would be employed, give or take one, and over a five day week suggests that about 35-40 cars could be serviced. The proposed use of this space would be less than the intensity of the use from the previous tenant, CB Center of America. This company specialized in catalog sales of Citizen Band radio equipment:, and also had some retail sales on the premises. At its peak, the company had 21 employees. Immediate on -street parking conditions would be considerably improved with the new tenancy. Mr. Yost noted one possible concern with this property is on-site parking. The rear parking lot off Cadillac Way can hold 10 cars to .code standard. An 11th parking space might be counted in front of the roll -up door to the Grannis Warehouse. The three existing businesses on this site have a code requirement of five parking spaces. The Cadillac "get ready" shop has a requirement of seven spaces. No spaces have been striped on the property or assigned to separate tenants; should spaces in this lot be striped and identified for the use of each tenant? The Asst. C.P. advised no other significant problems are anticipated should this application be approved. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 August 23, 1976 Mr. Tateosian said that Hauffman Enterprises does have two parking spaces in the back lot; the Carolan Avenue side will be closed off and vehicle access to the building will be from the parking lot; it will not be a garage open to the public. Chm. Taylor asked for any audience comment and, there being none, declared the public hearing closed. Further Commission discussion established that there would be no additional noise as this is merely a shop for complete new car check; it will be separate from the main shop; regarding building alterations, staff advised all work will be done to code. Mr. Tateosian told Commission that Grannis Warehouse has moved out and this space is to be used strictly for sheet metal storage. C. Kindig moved approval of this special permit; second C. Cistulli and carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CISTULLI, FRANCARD, KINDIG, SINE, TAYLOR NAYES: COMMISSIONERS: MINK ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: JACOBS Chm. Taylor told the applicant this special permit would become effective September 8 unless appealed to City Council. 5. SPECIAL PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING GARAGE AS A RUMPUS ROOM AT 1520 VANCOUVER AVENUE (APN 026-034-180), ZONED R-1, BY WILLIAM J. KIRCHEN. Chm. Taylor determined that Mr. Kirchen was in the audience this evening, and requested review of the application by Asst. C.P. Yost. Mr. Yost advised that within the last two months the two car garage at 1520 Vancouver had been remodeled: fully paneled, carpeted and rewired; sliding glass doors cut into the sidewall and the car door no longer can be opened. A neighbor inquiry brought this to the attention of the Building Department and the Chief B.I. confirmed no permit was issued for this work. The Asst. C.P. drew Commission's attention to the photographs distributed this evening, and went on to say that the present application is to permit this room to be used as a rumpus room with the family's 18 year old boy sleeping in a built-in bunk in one corner. No plumbing or cooking facilities have been installed. To replace the garage, a building permit for a new carport was issued August 18, and copies of these plans have been circulated to the Commission. Mr. Yost noted that the use of an accessory building for storage purposes is a permitted use in an R-1 District. Once the new carport is constructed, the converted garage can be used as a storeroom and be within code. However, this application is to extend the permitted use and allow the storeroom to be used as a rumpus room and accessory sleeping quarters. Mr. Kirchen addressed the Commission, stating that his mother, grandmother and sister are living in the house while his brother is sleeping in the converted garage (which contains no sink or plumbing). Commission and staff discussion indicated: it seemed fair to call this building accessory sleeping quarters; it will be used by the 18 year old young man for other things such as T.V. viewing; it appeared the garage was capable of being reconverted into a garage. Chm. Taylor asked for audience comments in favor; there were none. He then asked for comments in opposition. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 August 23, 1976 Mrs. Florence Cole, next door neighbor at 1524 Vancouver Avenue, spoke in opposition. She noted the owner does not live at this address; the garage in question faces her kitchen and breakfast room, and she enumerated many noisy, disrupting, offensive and untidy impacts from the occupancy of the building by the 18 year old boy. She said cars are parked in the driveway or against the fence between the two properties, and two or three cars are for sale all the time. It was her hope that the teenager, who now has a job at the airport, would not entertain both day and night from now on, and that the carport would help keep can away from the fence. Mrs. Cole said they had assumed, when buying their home, the neighborhood was quiet and dignified; she felt setting a precedent like this would soon make the area into a tenement. She was also unhappy about the possibility of selling their, house at a good price when they might need the money in their later years. There being no further comments in opposition, Chm. Taylor declared the public hearing closed. C. Kindig agreed that perhaps if the carport is built it will eliminate cars parking in the yard close to Mrs. Cole's lot. However, he wished in some way the Commission could prohibit the converted garage from becoming a separate rental unit if and when the house is sold, and wondered what assurance there was that the carport would be built under the recently issued building permit. The A6st. C.P. said if the carport were not built Mr. Kirchen would be in violation of City code since the property would not have covered parking. It was determined that notices were sent to all people within a 300 foot radius; and plans show the required four foot separation between house and accessory building would be maintained when the carport is built. C. Cistulli wished for comments from some of the other neighbors so that he could react to what Mrs. Cole had said. C. Sine asked the applicant why he had not taken out a building permit for the conversion. Mr. Kirchen replied he had thought merely filling in the garage would not require one since no changes were made to the structure. Remodeling had been done by a carpenter; no contractor. The applicant felt Mrs. Cole might have complained in the beginning, rather than after the fact. During further discussion C. Sine stated his main concern was remodeling the garage so that it lends itself for future owners to have a mother-in-law apartment; the P.C. is being asked to legalize what is in essence an illegal structure. He advised Commission he had visited the property. C. Mink determined the applicant's mother wrote the handwritten letter attached to the application and Mr. Kirchen had signed it. The Commissioner thought detached living quarters on the property line were bad.' As far as the other matters mentioned by Mrs. Cole, these might be matters for the Sanitation, Health or Police Departments. C. Kindig agreed that many of the problems Mrs. Cole mentioned were not pertinent to the P.C. Chm. Taylor thought the room seemed to comply with the code as a rumpus room, but admittedly it did invade Mrs. Cole's privacy. C. Sine moved denial of this special permit; second C. Cistulli, and the application was denied by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CISTULLI, FRANCARD, MINK, SINE NAYES: COMMISSIONERS: KINDIG, TAYLOR ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: JACOBS Chm. Taylor informed the applicant of the right of appeal to the City Council. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 August 23, 1976 6. FENCE EXCEPTION TO MAINTAIN AN EXISTING 10' HIGH FENCE BETWEEN HOUSE AND GARAGE, 13 HUMBOLDT ROAD (APN 029-305-250), ZONED R-1, BY CARL CARING. C.P. Swan informed Commission the City Attorney had been in communication with Mr. and Mrs. Carino's attorney; before leaving on vacation he asked that this matter be continued to work out legal matters. Five property owners were noticed on this application,.three to the rear and one on either side. Chm. Taylor ascertained there were two people in the audience who did not wish to speak and were merely in attendance as interested parties. With no objection from Commission members, he then continued this item to the meeting of September 27. A brief recess was declared at 9:20 P.M. after which the meeting reconvened at 9:30 P.M. 7. PROPOSED FORMULA FOR DETERMINING THE CONTRIBUTION TO PROVIDE OFF-STREET PARKING. Chm. Taylor asked C. Sine for comments, explaining the Planning Commission had been directed by Council to recommend with regard to a new formula for future projects in the Burlingame Avenue Area Off -Street Parking District. The P.C. felt it needed the expertise of Traffic, Safety & Parking Commission, and subsequently a sub- committee was appointed from each Commission to study this matter. C. Sine told Commission three meetings had been held and, after discussion at the final meeting, this Joint Committee adopted his suggestion that 2/3 of the calculated current cost per parking space be charged to a specific project. It had been pointed out at that time that the formula could always be amended. C.P. Swan stated that the Traffic, Safety & Parking Commission is now in a position to recommend to the Planning Commission that the proposal be adopted by the Planning Commission and Planning Commission, in turn, can recommend its adoption to the Council. The C.P. gave a detailed explanation of the proposed formula presented in the August 5 memo marked "Preliminary Draft for Study Purposes Only," and noted that Councilman Martin had been present and expressed his verbal approval of C. Sine's suggestion. C. Mink wanted the net number of parking spaces clarified. There was Commission consensus that a resolution should be prepared for transmittal to Council. C. Mink moved that the Planning Commission adopt the staff report in essence and direct staff to prepare a resolution for transmittal to Council incorporating the recommendations. Second C. Cistulli, all aye voice vote. CITY PLANNER REPORT There was some discussion regarding attendance at the League of California Cities Conference to be held in San Diego in October this year. C. Mink moved that staff be directed to inquire if there were funds to support attendance of at least three Commissioners at the San Diego Conference, attendance to be contingent upon review of the conference agenda. Second C. Cistulli, and all aye voice vote. C.P. Swan reported to P.C. he had learned that Mrs. Vella, applicant for variance at 822 Crossway Road, is endeavoring to obtain revised plans for submittal to Commission. The C.P. had also talked to Sol and Hope Gittelsohn regarding preparation of the requested parcel map. Recent code enforcement activity by Planning staff includes: accessory buildings at 2405 Hillside Drive; letter request to D&M Auto Repair at 1213 Rollins Road that they adhere to the condition of their special permit which does not allow cars to be parked outside at night; Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 August 23, 1976 effort to remove the wagon from the Exxon service station roof as the property has been sold; and successful removal of the Cole's Coffee Cup sign. The C.P. advised the Aircraft Noise Abatement Task Force of City Planners is preparing a report to City Managers. It will include several ideas for reducing loud noises from airplanes. He also noted reports had been made to the County regarding bike routes in Burlingame, a report to the County on Burlingame trails, and that bus stop pads are to be constructed and benches installed using encumbered transit funds from FY 75-76. ADJOURNMENT The meeting regularly adjourned at 10:02 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Thomas W. Sine Secretary