HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1977.08.22COMMISSIONERS PRESENT
Cistulli
Francard
Jacobs
Kindig
Mink
Sine
Taylor
CALL TO ORDER
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
August 22, 1977
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
None
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 Chairman
Taylor at 7:37 P.M.
ROLL CALL
The above named members were present.
MINUTES
The minutes of the August 8, 1977 meeting were approved as mailed.
MEETING ITEMS FOR ACTION
1. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR TRUCK RENTAL AGENCY IN THE M-1 DISTRICT AT 808 BURLWAY ROAD
(APN 026-111-120) AND TRUCK STORAGE AT 855 MAHLER ROAD (APN 026-322-190), BY
DARYL NICK FOR AZTEC RENT-A-CAR/RYDER TRUCK RENTALS (ND -117P POSTED 6/17/77)
(CONTINUED FROM JULY 25, 1977)
Asst. C. P. Yost reviewed this application, a request by Aztec Rent-A-Car to add Ryder
Truck Rentals to their business. The matter had been studied June 13, set for public
hearing June 27, continued to July 25 and August 22 for additional information.
Referring to the July 25 minutes, he noted several Commissioners had agreed there were
concerns regarding sufficient parking, car washing and servicing of vehicles. At that
time C. Sine had moved to continue this item for approximately 30 days to permit the
applicant to comply with all requirements of the 1975 permit and with the condition
that all servicing cease immediately. The motion was approved unanimously by vote of
those members present. Mr. Yost reported that no further information had since been
received from the applicant.
Daryl Nick of Aztec Rent-A-Car was present and read two letters which he had brought
to the meeting. One letter dated August 19, 1977 from Howard L. Richardson, Agent for
Vorelco, indicated Aztec has increased its present parking at 855 Mahler by 18 spaces;
the agreement is on a month to month basis and can be canceled by either party upon 60
day written notice. Mr. Nick believed that these 18 additional spaces, with the seven
stalls already leased, would comply with the 25 spaces specified in the original special
permit. A second letter, an Agreement dated 8/15/77 between Airport Mobil, 1200 Bayshore
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 2
August 22, 1977
Boulevard and Aztec Rent-A-Car,- provided for Airport Mobil to do servicing and
washing of Aztec vehicles and mentioned the availability to Aztec of up to 45
additional parking spaces.. The applicant believed these two documents would help
clarify Aztec's good intentions in attempting to comply with the City's requirements.
Considerable Commission discussion ensued regarding parking and other concerns of the
P.C. Mr. Nick confirmed that seven spaces at 855 Mahler are included in the lease of
the office space at 808 Burlway; the letter from Mr. Richardson indicates another 18
spaces would be available at that location. The company name has been painted on the
spaces but they have not been lined as yet. The additional spaces at 855 Mahler are
included in the lease for office space at 808 Burlway and the total price is included
in Aztec's monthly rental. Mr. Yost confirmed that the owner of 808 Burlway now holds
a lease for the seven parking spaces at 855 Mahler.
Chm. Taylor preferred to have a single lease agreement for the Mahler Road and Burlway
Road properties. There was some doubt that car washing and servicing had been approved
by Commission for 1200 Bayshore Boulevard. C. Jacobs questioned whether 25 spaces
would be adequate for the expanded business. The applicant confirmed that Aztec was
a franchise operation and there were no conditions in the franchise agreement relating
to parking. Chm. Taylor suggested the use of an attorney to put together an agreement
with which Commission could work. C. Kindig agreed, stating he believed an attorney
could handle the entire matter for the applicant, including the servicing of vehicles.
C. Mink suggested a permit be granted for 60 days, with 8 parking spaces at 808 Burlway,
25 at 855 Mahler, no washing or servicing to take place at either location. He felt
Commission was using up valuable time in discussing this matter further.
Chm. Taylor requested audience comments in favor or opposed; there were none and he
declared the public hearing closed. C. Jacobs again questioned only 25 parking spaces
required for this growing business. C. Mink moved approval of this special permit to
Daryl Nick for Aztec Rent-A-Car/Ryder Truck Rentals with the following conditions:
that no more than four trucks be stored over any 24 hour period; that there be a single
lease agreement with the landowners of 808 Burlway Road and 855 Mahler Road which
includes no less than eight parking spaces at 808 Burlway and 25 at 855 Mahler for
the exclusive use of Aztec Rent-A-Car/Ryder Truck Rentals; that these spaces be
properly striped and marked; that no servicing or washing of vehicles take place at
either location; the lease to be subject to approval of the City Attorney; and the
special permit not to take effect until these conditions are met. Second C. Sine and
unanimously approved on roll call vote.
2. VARIANCE FROM CODE SEC. 25.66.050 TO PERMIT POOL EQUIPMENT AND TOILET ROOMS TO
BE CONSTRUCTED ON A SIDE PROPERTY LINE AT 2525 POPPY DRIVE (APN 027-172-300),
ZONED R-1, BY JOHN AND PATRICIA CASEY
Asst. C. P. Yost explained this application to construct a 6' x 12' building adjacent
from the side property line at 2525 Poppy Drive. Copies of the site plan had been sent
to Commission. The accessory building would have a 6' x 6' pump room and 6' x 6' washroom
with toilet. Four points were noted by Mr. Yost: (1) Sec. 25.66.060 permits construction
to the side property line if located within the rear 30% of the lot; the proposed
location is about 10 feet forward of that imaginary line. (2) The fan shape of this
lot gives a wider than average sideyard adjacent to the Casey's house. (3) A 10 foot
wide public alley runs along the entire length of this side property line. (4) The
neighbors' house at 2521 Poppy Drive has a 6 foot sideyard and this, together with
the 10 foot alley, would keep the accessory building not less than 16 feet from the
neighbors' house. He noted colored photos which show the change in contour along the
alley and between the proposed accessory building and the neighbors' house. Staff had
no serious concerns with this application.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 3
August 22, 1977
John Casey, the applicant, told Commission he did not believe the proposed structure
would affect the aesthetic value of his or his neighbors' property. He said the
neighbors did not have any objection. Commission determined from the applicant that
the structure would conform to all City codes; it would be fully insulated; there is
a six foot fence of cedar pickets around the entire lot at the present time. It was
further determined the four foot space between the applicant's house and the pump
house would be open, and there would be a self-locking gate which the Building Code
requires. C. Sine noted substantial remodeling and was told a building permit had
been obtained for this as well as for the concrete block footing and fence. There
were no audience comments in favor or opposed and Chm. Taylor declared the public
hearing closed.
C. Jacobs found this to be an unusual lot with the 10 foot easement on the side and a
deep slope; the variance would enable the applicant to use his yard much more
effectively; the structure would not disturb or be injurious to the neighbors, and
would not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. C. Mink found that excessive
intrusion of the present house into the backyard does present a hardship to the
applicant and there were unusual circumstances in that the 10 foot easement provides
the necessary and proper separations between dwelling units and other structures.
C. Jacobs moved approval of the findings and granting of the variance. Second
C. Francard and approved unanimously on roll call vote.
3. CONDOMINIUM PERMIT FOR THE BELLEVUE CONDOMINIUMS, A 25 -UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT
1210 BELLEVUE AVENUE (APN 029-133-210/220), ZONED R-4, BY JACK A. WOODSON OF
LAW/WOODSON/BARKSDALE (ARCHITECTS) FOR THOMAS J. GLYNN (PROPERTY OWNER)
(ND -122P POSTED 8/12/77)
Asst. C. P. Yost discussed this application to construct a 4 -story condominium with
25 units. The present property has an average width of 200 feet and an average depth
of only 122 feet. The architect has designed a thin, rectangular building and placed
it parallel to, and 20 feet away from, the back property line. The front elevation has
been broken up into a series of balconies and staggered setbacks. The front of the
building is also set at about a 30 degree angle from the front property line. A full
basement will be excavated for 28 parking spaces; there will be a security gate, and
each condominiun.owner will be assigned one space in this area, leaving three spaces
unassigned. At ground level there will be an additional 19 parking spaces. All
47 spaces, which is the code requirement, will be covered. The ground floor will also
have one 2 -bedroom unit plus a common lounge and kitchen and, directly in front of
the lounge, a 32 foot long swimming pool. The three floors above grade will have six
2 -bedroom units and two 1 -bedroom units per floor. Total building height would be
35 feet and maximum lot coverage 50%. Mr. Yost advised the proposal meets all zoning
regulations. He referred to the City Planner's evaluation in the negative declaration
posted August 12, 1977 and to the July 29, 1977 statement of overall impacts prepared
by the architect, Jack Woodson. The drawings presented for this hearing were somewhat
different than those presented for the study meeting, the changes being mainly to
preserve existing City street trees.
Jack Woodson, architect, was present to answer Commission questions. C. Jacobs commented
on the design which has one unit next to parking on the ground floor. Mr. Woodson
advised an eight inch concrete block wall is planned for the area between the parking
and this one unit. C. Mink established from the architect and staff that the drawings
are complete with the recent changes, the condominium plans meet City of Burlingame
code requirements and the condominium project guidelines. Asst. C.P. Yost told C. Jacobs
that after review of the Environmental Assessment Form staff had determined that an
EIR was not required. Therefore, a negative declaration had been filed to comply with
CEQA requirements.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 4
August 22, 1977
Chm. Taylor requested audience comments, Juliette Lenkert, 1137 Douglas Avenue, was
concerned with the possibility of the condominium becoming an apartment building at
some future time. Chm. Taylor told her it would always be a condominium; however,
any owner of an individual unit could rent or lease to someone of his choice. He
also told her that requirements for a condominium appear to be more stringent than
lease requirements for an apartment building. Mr. Yost observed that the off-street
parking requirements for a condominium are the same as required by code for any new
apartment building.
Secy. Sine read a letter dated August 18, 1977 from Harry M. L.ehrfeld of Burlingame
Realty Company supporting the granting of this condominium permit; this letter suggested
that some form of soundproofing be recommended by Commission. There were no further
audience comments and Chm. Taylor declared the public hearing closed. C. Mink was in
favor of granting this condominium permit: in view of Chapter 26.30 of the Ordinance
Code, Condominium Subdivisions; and in view of the plans dated July 29, 1977 and
revised 17 August, 1977 and documents submitted by Architect Woodson and others; he
noted that the project complies with all requirements of the City and is an attractive
design.
C. Mink moved approval of the condominium permit to be built in conformance with the
plans dated 17 August, 1977 and the stipulations submitted in Architect Woodson's
letter dated 17 August, 1977. Second C. Cistulli, and approved unanimously on roll
call vote.
4. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR 25 CONDOMINIUM UNITS AT 1210 BELLEVUE AVENUE
(APN 029-133-210/220), ZONED R-4, BY LOUIS ARATA FOR THOMAS J. GLYNN
C. E. Kirkup reported on areas of engineering concern as listed in August 17, 1977
memo from the Asst. City Engineer to City Planner: (1) that the utility mains within
the building, serving the units, be in common areas; (2) that flood protection be
provided for this building to a minimum elevation of six inches above top of curb;
(3) no overhead utility wire service connections; (4) regarding the location of sidewalk,
street curb and street trees, amended plans have subsequently been submitted which are
satisfactory to the Park Dept. (C.E. recommends waiver of this previously suggested
condition); (5) provide detailed site plan including utilities in easements and street
frontage adjoining and serving this property; (6) parking layout has been changed and
Engineering is satisfied (suggest waiver of this condition); (7) water and sewer
service as shown on the plan. Mr. Kirkup then recommended approval of this tentative
subdivision map subject to these conditions.
Lou Arata, Civil Engineer, Millbrae, told Commission he had read the conditions,
discussed them with the Engineering Dept. and architect, and all conditions would be
satisfied. C. Sine moved approval of the tentative subdivision map with the conditions
as outlined in the memo of August 17, 1977 from Assistant City Engineer to the City
Planner. Second C. Kindig and unanimously approved on voice vote.
Chm. Taylor declared a recess at 8:45 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 8:57 P.M.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 5
August 22, 1977
5. CONDOMINIUM PERMIT FOR CASITAS D'ORO, A 15 -UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 1209 OAK GROVE
AVENUE (APN 029-131-130), ZONED R-3, BY FRANK DONAHUE/JOHN GIANNETTO/J. J. QUILL
(APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS) (ND -123P POSTED 8/12/77)
Asst. C. P. Yost reviewed this application to construct a 3 -story condominium on an
R-3 lot that presently has two single family homes. The lot is narrow in front, wider
in back. Along the western side there is an open, unimproved creekbed. An L-shaped
building has been proposed, with the inside angle of the L facing the creek and an
existing 33 inch acacia. The ground floor has one 2 -bedroom unit and 18 covered parking
spaces. Two detached carports cover six additional cars and six cars are parked in the
open along the back property line. There are seven 2 -bedroom units on the second floor
and seven 2 -bedroom units on the third floor. The building would be approximately
30 feet in height and lot coverage is 50%. City. Planner's evaluation in the negative
declaration was that the project would not have a significant effect on the
environment and it is in conformity with the General Plan. The Park Director found
the landscaping plan satisfactory with one suggestion, that the Bermuda grass be
replaced with a Kentucky Bluegrass mixture. Mr. Yost advised of one parking change
worked out with the architect. Presently there are two parking spaces immediately off
Oak Grove in front of the security gate; one of these spaces will be moved to the
back of the property adjacent to the back property line which will leave one guest
space outside the security fence.
During Commission discussion Neil Vannucci, designer of the project, advised that the
engineer had calculated the lot size to be exactly 20,222 SF, and that they would make
the landscaping change in accordance with the Park Director's suggestion. He commented
on the difficult configuration of the lot. It was noted all units were 2 -bedroom
and Mr. Vannucci advised the smallest is 1,053 SF, the largest 1,176 SF. C. Mink
determined the applicants and architect had read Burlingame code requirements for a
condominium and in Mr. Vannucci's professional opinion the plans meet code. Staff
confirmed the plans meet the requirements of the code and the condominium project
guidelines had been satisfied. There were no audience comments in favor or opposed
and Chm. Taylor declared the public hearing closed.
C. Mink questioned how much of the 20,222 SF lot would be covered by the building and
pavement. He had no objection to the number of units and.understood the difficulty
of the shape of the lot; however, it appeared that the actual covering of this lot
with impervious materials was not consistent with the General Plan or with the intent
of the Zoning Ordinance. It was noted that the zoning of the property behind this
development was also R-3, and concern was expressed over the possibility of a similar
development there with excessive pavement in the entire area. C. Kindig was concerned
about the appearance of the front of the building and wished there were a larger front
setback.
C. Mink discussed the wording of the code which states no more than 50% of the lot may
be covered. He suggested this wording might be improved since the intent is to
maintain open space, setbacks and an uncluttered look. Chm. Taylor believed the intent
of the April, 1975 amendment to Code Sec. 25.66.010 had.been to exclude patios, low
decks, etc. and that parking was not actually considered. C. Kindig was told that the
Fire Dept. had seen the plans and approved them. C. E. Kirkup stated his concern that
the building and creekbank be engineered for stability since there was a chance of
an overflow with a large storm; the culvert under Oak Grove is not engineered to take
a 100 year storm. Mr. Vannucci advised this had been reviewed with Engineering and
the applicants would comply.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 6
August 22, 1977
C. Sine moved approval of this condominium permit. Second C. Cistulli and approved
on the following roll call vote.--
AYES:
oterAYES: COMMISSIONERS: Cistulli, Francard, Jacobs, Kindig, Sine, Taylor
NAYES: COMMISSIONERS: Mink
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
6. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR 15 CONDOMINIUM UNITS AT 1209 OAK GROVE AVENUE
(APN 029-131-130), ZONED R-3, BY EDWARD W. BACA FOR MESSRS. DONAHUE, GIANNETTO
AND OUILL
C. E. Kirkup stated most of the items that concerned Engineering with regard to this
condominium map had been covered. Parking had been discussed and it is now satisfactory.
The creekbank and Engineering concerns in this regard had also been discussed.
Mr. Kirkup reported a meeting with the architect last week which resulted in
satisfactory conditions to both parties. City Engineer recommended approval
conditioned by: (1).flood protection be provided to the minimum elevation determined
by engineering design for construction of the creekbank; (2) utility services be placed
underground and in a common area; (3) sidewalk and street trees to be to the satisfaction
of the Park Director and the City Engineer.
C. Kindig moved approval of the tentative subdivision map with the three requirements
outlined by the City Engineer in his August 19, 1977 memo to the City Planner. Second
C. Francard and unanimously approved on voice vote.
7. SPECIAL PERMIT TO SELL HIDE -AWAY BEDS AND MATTRESSES AT RETAIL IN THE M-1 DISTRICT
AT 1333 MARSTEN ROAD (PORTION OF APN 026-133-010), BY RALEIGH M. EiIERETT OF
RESTINGHOUSE SOFA BEDS (APPLICANT) WITH OSCAR PERSON (PROPERTY OWNER)
(ND -124P POSTED 8/12/77)
Asst. C. P. Yost reviewed this application. Mr. Everett proposes to sublease approximately
3,600 SF of warehouse space at 1333 Marsten Road from the present tenant, Caulking and
Waterproofing Corporation. At the back along Rollins Road a new gate would be cut
through between Rollins Road and the present paved service yard. This new gate would
serve as the principal delivery and customer parking area. The applicant estimates
that of his total sales volume 20% would be retail. Beds would be shipped from Los
Angeles by truck and would be advertised in local newspapers. Staff has concerns:
(1) No off-street parking is available from Marsten Road; parking would be limited to
the Rollins Road service yard. (2) The new customer parking area off Rollins Road
would necessitate a curb cut which would be placed where the street has a pronounced
curvature, and possibly resulting in a higher accident risk because of short sight
lines. (3) If the application is approved, it would introduce a new retail use into
this area. The compatibility of this type of use with those existing on Rollins Road
should be explored. Why was this particular location chosen? What is the likely retail
sales volume? When would these sales occur - during the week or on weekends?
The applicant, Raleigh Everett, told Commission it was his plan to bring in truckloads
of beds most of which would be immediately turned out to dealers. He felt the location
a good one for retail on a 10-20% basis. Parking had not been arranged as yet but
Mr. Everett believed it would be sufficient for himself and the other tenant. The
maximum cars on any given day would be 15.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 7
August 22, 1977
Commission discussion followed with concerns expressed about parking; the ability to
turn around in the small service yard, the number of parking spaces the applicant
actually could be guaranteed, the amount of parking used by the present lessee, lack
of a specific loading/unloading plan and a parking plan. Mr. Everett advised
his sublease would be coexistent with the master lease, or five years. He was aware
of Commission policy on retail sales in this area. The drawing submitted by the
applicant was discussed and Commission found it was not clear or final. Oscar Person,
.the property owner, was present and was requested to clear up some of the matters of
concern. He was unable to do so, stating the discussion this evening was completely
new to him.
C. Mink moved this item be continued until there is a joint proposal from the applicant,
Caulking and Waterproofing Corporation and the property owner; that proposal to be
checked by staff for completeness and to ensure it meets the requirements of the code.
This item will be placed on the agenda and re -noticed at the discretion of the City
Planner. Second C. Cistulli; motion unanimously approved on voice vote. C. P. Swan
determined it was Commission's intention that a new site plan drawn to scale would be
necessary.
8. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, BEING A RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 7, 10 AND PORTIONS OF LOTS 11
AND 12, BLOCK 2, WITH PORTIONS OF LOTS 12 AND 13, BLOCK 1, DE COULON SUBDIVISION;
PROPERTY AT 751 CALIFORNIA DRIVE (APN 029-053-110) AND 741 SAN MATEO AVENUE
(APN 029-053-200), BY WILLIAM WRIGHT FOR OSCAR PERSON
C. E. Kirkup noted that at previous hearings on this matter Engineering recommended an
easement be given to the City from San Mateo Avenue to California Drive; this proposed
easement would be on the easterly side. C. E. recommended approval of the tentative
parcel map subject to the two conditions in Engineering's August 18, 1977 memo:
(1) the driveway be relocated to line up with the easement; (2) an easement for access
from the end of San Mateo Avenue to California Drive be granted to the City on the map.
C. Jacobs moved approval of the tentative parcel map subject to the conditions in
August 18, 1977 memo from Asst. City Engineer to City Planner. Second C. Kindig.
Unanimously approved on voice vote.
9. SIGN EXCEPTION TO PERMIT AN EXISTING POLE SIGN WITH 72 SF OF COPY TO BE ENLARGED
TO 136 SF; PROPERTY AT 777 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-2, BY NANCY ALTIERI OF A&D
TIRE WHOLESALE BROKERS
Asst. C. P. Yost reviewed this application to allow two 4' x 8' sheets of plywood to
remain as installed. Photographs of the sign were circulated to Commission. A former.
sign exception application was made in March of this year for a pole sign with.an
advertising area 4' x 18'. This would have been 72 SF per face or 144 SF total signage.
Commission had concluded a 3' x 12' sign would be sufficient for identification
purposes and the application was denied. Ten weeks later a new 'Michelin' sign of
the smaller size was received by A&D Tire and a building permit issued June 7, 1977
for its installation. Within a month the new sign had been altered with the illegal
addition of two plywood sheets; an abatement notice was sent and this application is
in response to that notice. The two new panels would add 64 SF of new signage to the
present 72 SF of the Michelin sign, for a new total of 136 SF. This is 32 SF over the
code maximum allowed. The applicant feels the permitted signage is sufficient.
Mr. Yost called Commission's attention to Sec. 22.06.110 Exceptions, Title 22 Signs,
relating to the conditions which must be found if a sign exception is granted. If
these conditions are not found to apply, the application should be denied.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 8
August 22, 1977
Mrs. Nancy Altieri told Commission the reason for her request was identification for
A&D Tire; many of her customers could not locate her business. C. Jacobs suggested
putting the name of the business on the building, but the applicant felt this could
not be seen while driving along California Drive. C. Sine commented that Commission
was being asked to approve an illegal sign that was put up without benefit of a permit
and did not come to Commission at all. C. Kindig believed that Mrs. Altieri did need
signage. He suggested a new sign be designed with the A&D Tire name which, combined
with the Michelin sign, would meet code. C. Sine suggested the Michelin sign be
removed and the A&D Tire sign be put in its place. The applicant told C. Cistulli
she was the owner of the business, not the property.
Chm. Taylor requested audience comments in favor of this application. Kenneth Ayoob
who owns property next to AAD Tire stated he would have no objection to this sign.
Buel G. Proffitt, owner of the property, urged Commission approve this small sign for
identification of the business. Chm. Taylor then requested audience comments in
opposition. There were none and he declared the public hearing closed. C. Mink agreed
that A&D Tire needed an identification sign; the Michelin sign only identifies a
product. He suggested reducing the present plywood signs by cutting each of them
in half; this would add 32 SF of advertising area and still remain within the signage
limits of the C-2 zoning district. The applicant objected to this in that it would cut
out the lower part of the sign which advertises the services of the company.
For the record, C. Mink stated that a motion to deny this sign application would not
be a motion to deny additional signage which is less than or equal to 105 SF, but a
denial of the proposed 136 SF sign. C. Mink moved this sign exception be denied.
Second C. Jacobs and denied on .unanimous roll call vote. Chm. Taylor advised the
applicant of her right of appeal to the City Council.
Later in the meeting Buel Proffitt asked for clarification regarding what would be
allowed. He was told the recommendation of C. Mink regarding halving the sign could
be done with a building permit; the proposed double sign facing both directions was
too much square footage. Another alternative might be to use one of the panels and
mount it on the building, which also could be done with a building permit.
CITY PLANNER REPORT
C. P. Swan reported that the City Council has a heavy schedule for their September 6
meeting. Three important decisions were on the agenda: (1) extension of Emergency
Ordinance No. 1100; (2) the Charles King office project; (3) an appeal by Joseph Karp
for the Fox Mall project. He advised that a Steering Committee has been established
by the Mayor to schedule reports from the two consultants for the bayfront studies.
In order to get Commission and Council input and distribute information in a timely
manner, the Steering Committee will meet before the end of the month. He reported
that there will be three EIRs coming to Planning Commission in September, namely,
(1) Westates Park, an office building and park and fly operation located north of Avis;
(2) a major policy decision for rezoning of C-4 to R-4 to permit a condominium project;
(3) the Zev Ben -Simon property at 911/915 El Camino Real to rezone a portion at the
rear from R-1 to R-3. It is expected the John Blayney Associates' 30 day report will
be received by the City late next week.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 9
August 22, 1977
The League of California Cities Annual Conference, September 25-28 in San Francisco,
was announced as well as a seminar designed for Planning Commissioners to be held
Saturday, September 10 in Berkeley. Mr. Swan believed Commission could approve this
budget amount of $50.00 per official for continuing education. C. Mink and Chm. Taylor
indicated interest in the seminar.
C. Jacobs spoke of her concern over parking with projects that appear to be all concrete.
C. Mink suggested that perhaps her concerns could be incorporated in Commission's
discussion of the Fire Department's request to consider the use of sideyards; rear
yard considerations might also be discussed.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 10:34 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Thomas W. Sine
Secretary