Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1977.07.25COMMISSIONERS PRESENT Cistulli Francard Jacobs Sine Taylor CALL TO ORDER CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 25, 1977 COMMISSIONERS ABSENT Mink Kindig City Attorney Coleman OTHERS PRESENT City Planner Swan Asst. City Planner Yost City Attorney Coleman Asst. City Eng. Rebarchik A regular meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission was called to order by Chrm. Taylor at 7:35 p.m. ROLL CALL The above-named members were present. with excused absences. MINUTES Commissioners Mink and Kindig were not present The minutes of the meeting of July 11, 1977, were approved as mailed. ITEMS FOR ACTION 1. Draft Environmental Impact Report, EIR-40P, for proposed 127 foot high office building at 1350 Bayshore Highway (APN 026-113-430), zoned C-4; prepared by Del Davis Associates, Inc. for City of Burlingame (continued from May 25, 1977). -Resolution 5-77- C.P. Swan reviewed the application, noting the project, as currently proposed, is much different than the one discussed in April and May. He stated that the EIR reflects extensive revisions and editing, and recommended approval of the EIR. Chrm. Taylor asked if the Commission had any questions and then explained that adoption or rejection of the EIR would not indicate the Commissions feelings about the project and would not constitute denial or approval of the project itself; approval of the EIR would only indicate that the Commission finds the report adequate. He then opened the public hearing and asked if anyone would care to speak for or against the EIR. There being no one who wished to speak, the public hearing was declared closed. Asst. C. E. Rebarchik reported that City Traffic Engineer Moore had made some findings regarding the AM and PM peak hours, and ingress and egress patterns to and from the project. Chrm. Taylor asked if the peak hour of traffic would be such that the construction of the building would generate traffic which is in excess of the street's capacity to handle. Asst. C.E. Rebarchik stated that Moore felt there could be future problems. Referring to possible problems that might be brought about by future developments, Chairman Taylor stated that the Commission is not considering these problems at this time. The Commission agreed that adequate time had been given for findings on this problem and felt that the finding could be made that the project would not generate traffic in excess of the street's capacity C. Jacobs expressed concern about present utilities and asked if public utilities in the area were adequate to handle the project. Del Davis, whose firm prepared the EIR, stated that page 63 of the EIR does mention the possible problem if infiltration with the sewage system. He stated that it may be necessary to provide supplemental lines, but that determination would come at a later date. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 July 25, 1977 Chrm. Taylor summarized the Commission's findings, that the purpose of the EIR is to determine adverse impacts that the proposed project might cause and that the EIR did, in fact, study the impact of a 10 -story office building, as opposed to a 7 -story building which was previously proposed, and that the street's capacity is sufficient to accommodate the traffic generated from the project. C. Jacobs moved for the adoption of Resolution 5-77, together with Exhibit "A" -Findings EIR 47P, recommending certification of the EIR by the City Council. C.P. Swan recommended that a revision of Finding number 5, the street's capacity to accommodate the traffic, be included in the motion. C. Jacobs amended the motion, including the above-mentioned revision to Finding number 5. Second C. Cistulli and approved unanimously on roll call vote of members present (5-0). C. Jacobs complimented everyone who worked on the EIR, stating it was.easy to read and well organized, and generally a well-done report. The Commission joined C. Jacobs in her commendations. 2. Variance from Code Chapter 25.70, which specifies off-street parking standards, to permit 20% compact car spaces; property at 1350 Bayshore Highway (APN 026-113-430), zoned C-4, by Gensler & Associates (architects) for Charles King & Associates (property owner). C.P. Swan reviewed the application, stating that the applicants were originally seeking a variance to provide less than the required parking; however, this current variance, if granted, would permit applicant to provide more than the required number of parking spaces because 20% of the spaces would be for compact cars. He added that the applicants have provided extensive information about automobile sizes, use of small cars, information from other cities where similar allowances have been permitted, and that based on this information and the information contained in the EIR just approved by the Commission, C.P. Swan stated that staff would have no questions about recommending approval of the Variance. Responding to C. Jacobs inquiries, C.P. Swan explained that when considering parking for projects of this size the Commission might want to establish new guidelines in the City's parking specifications. C. Jacobs felt this was certainly something that should be studied by the Commission and Chrm. Taylor advised that this be brought up under' new business. Steve Wintner addressed the Commission explaining that the findings supporting the Variance are results of parking studies which were submitted with the original application. He cited examples in other cities, i.e. Larkspur and Berkeley, and said there was further documentation contained in the EIR, which is part of the application and would be on record. Responding to C. Frankard's concerns regarding signing and marking for the compact spaces, Mr. Wintner indicated that there would be some type of graphic indications and that the compact spaces would be grouped together or in small groups so that they could be easily found. The signing or painting would be provided by the applicants and not the concern of the City. Upon the request of the Chairman, C. A. Coleman recited the conditions of granting a Variance from Section 25.54.020 of the City's Code. There being no further discussion, Chrm. Taylor opened the public hearing to the public to speak for or against the Variance. Mr. Keyston, 433 Airport Blvd., spoke in support of the Variance in view of the fact that adequate spaces would be provided. Page 3 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes July 25, 1977 Victor Subbotin, 2519 Hale Drive_, addressed the Commission, not speaking in favor or in opposition to the Variance. He asked what the Commission's objectives were - land use planning or items beyond land use planning. He felt the Health, Safety and Parking Commission should review the EIR though he was not against compact car parking spaces. He made specific reference to statements in the EIR Page ii which stated the project would generate approximately 1937 trips daily (2,900 as corrected by addendum). He felt specific conditions should be made to the Variance and asked the Commission to support this. There being no one else wishing to speak, Chrm. Taylor closed the public hearing. Responding to C. Jacobs concerns about the legality of granting the Variance, C.A. Coleman stated.that the Commission has the legal authority to make findings and approve such a variance. Chrm. Taylor reviewed the findings, stating that the Variance allowing for 20% compact parking spaces would provide more than the required number of spaces. Granting of the Variance as currently proposed, would allow the applicant to make better use of the land to provide a more aesthetic development. C. Jacobs moved that the Commission approve the variance, with the following findings: 1) this is the largest building to be constructed in Burlingame; 2) there has been a noted increase in the use of compact cars, and 3) approval of this variance would give the applicant more flexibility to make better use of his land and provide a more aesthetic development for the City, and 4) that the development would not have an adverse effect on the surrounding area. Second C. Cistulli and approved unanimously on roll call vote of members present (5-0). 3. Special Permit to construct a 127' high office building and to allow retail sales and a financial institution at 1350 Bayshore Highway (APN 026-113-430), zoned C-4, by Gensler & Associates (architects) for Charles King & Associates (property owner). C.P. Swan reviewed the application indicating that it is a revised application for a 127' high office building with a savings and loan or financial institution and those retail sales which after public hearing are found compatible with the purpose of the district. Responding to concerns of C.A. Coleman, Mr. Wintner explained that the proposed retail uses would be primarily for the use of the buildings occupants. He stated that the project would not create a shopping district for the area and he cited several uses that might be included, i.e. a beauty shop, barber shop, general merchandise or drug store with soft drinks, etc. C. Cistulli was very concerned about the retail sales establishments that would be permitted in the complex. He said that a drug store might carry certain food or drink items, then would add to those items, and soon there would be a grocery store or eating establishment. The Commission discussed, at length, with staff and the applicant what would be permitted in the retail sales section. Several Commissioners felt that the entire ground floor uses should come in for.separate special permits to operate in the complex. In this way, the Commission could keep tight control on the types of businesses permitted. The applicant requested that the Commission consider approving the financial institution use along with the 127' high building at this time and several uses that the Commission deems proper for the complex. C. Jacobs felt that a listing might be established at this time and then any uses not including in the listing come before the Commission for special permit. C. Cistulli and C. Sine were very concerned about the retail uses, C. Sine specifically indicated tha Burlingame has had problems in the past and felt the Commission should keep strict controls through the special permit process. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 July 25, 1977 Chrm. Taylor opened the public hearing and asked for public comment for or against the special permit for the office building of 127' and a financial institution. Victor Subbotin felt that the special permit should be withheld and felt the EIR contains unqualified opinions on the capability of city facilities to handle increased traffic loads, sewage, etc. He stated that the citizens have contributed through taxes (property and sales), to construct the facilities that exist and the development could impose a burden on those facilities. Chrm. Taylor stated that the Commission had already approved the EIR and based on staff recommendation found the facilities to be adequate. Mr. Keyston stated that the City of Burlingame (general citizenship) has not paid for the utilities in the Bayshore Highway area, with the exception of the undergrounding project. There being no one else who wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Sine stated that he could not see traffic problems in the area at this time, and that he knew in the future there could be problems. However, he did not feel that one project should be jeopardized because of a problem that might result from a series of projects. He felt that a'=traffic signal would eventually be required, but it is not up to one developer for one project to provide this for everyone. In response to C. Jacob's inquiry regarding developer contributions to alleviate future traffic problems, i.e. possible signalization, Mr. Wintner indicated that $5,000 had already been contributed for this purpose. This statement was confirmed by staff. Chrm. Taylor reviewed past actions on projects at this site, stating that the City Council had, in the past, approved a permit for a 16 -story building and this April a permit for a 7 -story building with more floor area had also been considered. This project offers more parking spaces and is aesthetically more compatible with the surrounding area than those previously approved or proposed. C. Sine moved that the special permit for a building more than 50', specifically 127', in height be approved (ref. Sec. 25.41.05 required special permit for anything over 50'). Second C. Cistulli and approved unanimously on roll call vote of those present (5-0). The Commission then considered a special permit for retail sales and a financial institution at the same location. Chrm. Taylor opened the public hearing. Mr. Wintner requested that the financial institution and retail sales uses be considered separately, and indicated that no contacts had been made as to possible tenants. A brief discussion followed. C. Sine noted that the plans would have to be changed to accommodate a vault and he felt every use on the ground floor should be considered separately by the Planning Commission through special permit. C. Jacobs did not. agree and reiterated her earlier comments as to certain retail uses and the financial institution being approved at this time. C. Cistulli felt that with the exception of the financial institution every- thing on the ground floor should come before the Commission. C. Sine felt this would be acceptable. Victor Subbotin addressed the Commission, discussing traffic a.nd.parking, making specific reference to the Commission using information provided in the EIR as the basis of their concerns. Chrm. Taylor stated that the items being discussed had been acted upon earlier under the EIR and were not pertinent to the special permit being discussed at this time. He asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition or in favor of the application. There being no one who wished to address the Commission or ask: questions, the public hearing was declared closed. Page 5 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes July 25, 1977 C. Frankard agreed with C. Sine and Cistulli, that a blanket approval of the retail sales area would open the door to a larger problem. C. Sine moved that the special permit for retail sales and a financial institution be approved with the condition that each usage come before the Planning Commission for a special permit. C.A. Coleman advised that the motion would, in essence, deny the special permit application. He said the Commission could approve the financial institution and deny the retail sales portion. C. Sine amended his motion to approve the special permit for a financial institution at 1350 Bayshore Highway. Second C. Cistulli and approved unanimously on a roll call vote of those present (5-0). Mr. Wintner thanked the Commission for their time in getting the project through to this point. Chrm. Taylor declared a 10 minute recess; the meeting reconvened at 9:25 p.m. 4. Final Environmental Impact Report, EIR-41E, for proposed Broadway/Southern Pacific grade separation project; prepared by De Leuw, Cather & Company for City of Burlingame. -Resolution 11-77- C.P. Swan reviewed the application and previous meetings on the subject, advising that the Commission could approve the EIR and recommend it to the City Council for certification. C.P. Swan read findings contained Exhibit A of the Resolution approving the EIR. Chrm. Taylor verified the role of the Planning Commission in the adoption of the resolution, stating that such action would not indicate the Commission's feelings about the project itself, but instead deals only with the report and its adequacy as to describing possible impacts. He then opened the public hearing. Ralph.Ready of the Broadway Merchants' Association addressed the Commission indicating that the report fairly states the comments made and the impacts of the various alternatives, and spoke in favor of the Planning Commission submitting the EIR to the City Council. There being no one else wishing to speak, Chrm. Taylor closed the public hearing. C. Sine felt the record should show that a number of years ago San Mateo County voted not to participate in the formation of BART, and that the present legislation requires that BART expand to some six other cities, including Livermore, before extending a line down the peninsula. He felt BART offers irregular service and noted that users of BART must first have transportation to get to a BART station and storage areas for luggage are not provided. He also stated that if San Mateo County by a vote of the people, votes to get into BART, they must pick up 30% of the bonded indeptedness for BART. In view of these facts, C. Sine spoke in favor of the EIR. C. Jacobs moved that EIR-41E and Resolution 11-77 be approved and sent to the City Council. Second C. Cistulli and approved unanimously on a roll call vote of those present (5-0). Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 July 25, 1977 5. Draft Environmental Impact Report, EIR-47P, for proposed reclassification from R-3 to C-2 of 12,920 SF of property at the terminus of San Mateo Avenue; prepared by Reimer Associates for City of Burlingame. -Resolution 12 -77 - Asst. C.P. Yost reviewed the history of the area being considered, referring to City Council actions in the 1940's and early 1950's. He referred to page 3 of the EIR on which a diagram of the present zoning in the area is indicated, stating that the present R3 area on San Mate( Avenue creates a wedge or buffer zone between the commercial and R1 residential areas. Mr. Stephen Brothers, of Reimer & Associates, gave a synopsis of the EIR, explaining it was a brief report which he felt adequately discussed the concerns' of a zoning reclassification such as that being proposed. C. Jacobs asked how many apartment units could be constructed on this property as presently zoned. Asst. C.P. Yost, directing himself to the concerns of C. Jacobs, indicated that no precise answer could be given. The number would depend on the size of the units, the number of bedrooms in each unit and how much the applicant could spend on off-street parking. However, on a 50'x 200' lot about 8 to 12 units are typical. Chrm. Taylor felt the EIR was well done as it was in keeping with the extent of the reclassification. Mr. Brothers stated it was a result of working closely with City staff. Chrm. Taylor stated that the Commission would only be considering the adequacy of the EIR report and declared the public hearing open. There being no speakers, the public hearing was closed. C. Frankard questioned the traffic impact and circulation plan. Asst. C.P. Yost indicated that the Traffic Engineer had considered this and saw no reason to limit the traffic passing over the property or change the circulation pattern. A brief discussion followed concerning the dead-end street, traffic circulation and access. C. Jacob indicated some concern for the adjacent R1 property and whether there would be open space. Asst. C.P. Yost indicated that it is unlikely that a two-story commercial building would be constructed on the property because of the amount of off-street parking that would be required. C. Jacobs moved that EIR-47P and Resolution 12-77 be recommended for approval, including some indication as to the number of units permitted and including, by reference, findings for adoption of the resolution. Second C. Cistulli and carried unanimously on a roll call vote of those present (5-0). 6. Reclassification of two parcels on San Mateo Avenue from R-3 to C-2; Parcel A (APN 029-053-110) being SWLY 43.33 feet of Lots 12 and 13, Block 1 and adjoining portion of San Mateo Avenue with NELY 75 feet of Lots 11 and lw, Block 2, De Coulon Subdivision; Parcel B (APN 029-053-200) being Lots 9 and 10, Block 2, De Coulon Subdivision; application by Oscar F. Person, property owner. -Resolution 13-77- Chrm. Taylor introduced the item and Oscar F. Person, applicant, explained that a reclassification was being requested, based on staff's recommendations. He further stated that a one-story commercial building was planned, and that the site plan will provide adequate access for the Police and Fire Departments. Chrm. Taylor opened the public hearing and asked for speakers for or against the application. There being no one who wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 July 25, 1977 C. Jacobs moved the adoption of Resolution 13-77, recommending Council adoption of an ordinance instituting the above-mentioned reclassification. Second, C. Frankard and carried unanimously on a roll call vote of those present (5-0). 7. Tentative and Final Parcel Map, being a resubdivision of Lot 21 (APN 027-223-060) and a portion of Lot 20 (APN 027-223-070), E1 Quanito Acres, Zoned R1, by Hugh Anton for Melvin Scheinman at 2703 E1 Prado Road and Calvin Larsen at 8 E1 Quanito Way. Asst. C.E. Rebarchik stated that this item is ready for approval. There being no conditions, C. Jacobs moved that the above-mentioned Tentative and Final Map be approved. Second, Frankard and carried by a unanimous vote of shote present (5-0). 8. Tentative and Final Parcel Map, being a resubdivision to combine Lots 15 and 16,. Block 1, East Millsdale Industrial Park Unit No. 1 (APN 024-390-160/170); property at 890 Cowan Road, zoned M-1, by Kier & Wright for Crow-Spieker-Hosford, a limited partnership. Asst. C.E. Rebarchik stated that there were no conditions and recommended approval of the tentative and final parcel map. C. Sine moved for approval of the above-mentioned tentative and final parcel maps. Second, C. Cistulli and carried by a unanimous vote of those present (5-0). 9. Tentative Parcel Map, being a resubdivision to combine Lot 15 (APN 029-121-060/070) and a portion of Lot 16 (APN 029-121-080), Block 10, Burlingame Land Company; property at (1429/1433/1435 Bellevue Avenue, zoned R -4, -by William A. Bartlett for D.A. Nicolaides et al. Asst. C.E. Rebarchik briefly summarized the application to combine 3 existing properties into a single one. He recommended approval of the application subject to the condition that the existing buildings be removed. C. Jacobs moved that the tentative parcel map be approved subject to the recommended condition that the existing buildings be removed for construction of the condominium project. Dave Nicolaides, the applicant, indicated that he would comply with the condition. Second C. Frankard and carried by a unanimous ,that of those present (5-0). 10. Tentative Subdivision Map for the Parkwood Court, a 16 unit condominium at 33 Park Road, zoned R-3, by William A. Bartlett for Morris Singer and Theodore Farely. Asst. C.E. Rebarchik reviewed the application stating that the proposal is in accordance with a previously approved condominium permit. He recommended approval of the application subject to the conditions outlined in a memorandum dated July '18. Upon the request of the Chairman, he recited the conditions. There were some questions as to whether all of the conditions pertained to the map and should be on the map being presented and considered at this time. Asst. C.E. explained that not all the conditions should be shown on the map, however, the Commission could act upon the request and the conditions, and indicated that the map was ready for approval. Chrm. Taylor had questions on Condition Item 10 and Asst. C.E. Rebarchik explained that rather than usual residential driveway, curbs were being required and he stated that the private street could be narrower than 25' in some places to avoid damaging trees. C.A. Coleman advised that any changes to the previously approved condominium permit must be brought up as a separate item amending that permit. Asst. C.P. Yost noted a minor change Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 July 25, 1977 to include a balcony which would provide legal exits to third floor bedrooms and which now satisfy the requirements of the Chief Building Inspector. C.A. Coleman advised that the Engineer's conditions would have to be met or included on the final map when that is submitted to the City Council. C. Jacobs moved to approve the tentative subdivision map noted in the above heading, subject to the conditions set forth in a memo from the C.E., dated July 18, 1977 (attached and incorporated with these minutes). Second, C. Cistulli and passed unanimously of those present (5-0). 11. Final Parcel Map to resubidvide the Lands of Kilbourne (APN 027-022-370/380) and Lot 8 Viewland Estates (APN 027-022-460), zoned R-1, by Peter Royce for Florin Rhoads and Thomas Leutzinger. Asst. C.E. Rebarchik indicated that the Final Parcel Map is ready for approval and that all conditions have been met on the map or they are bonded. There being no questions, C. Jacobs moved that the final parcel map for the above -noted subdivision be approved. Second, C. Cistulli and carried by a unanimous vote of those present (5-0). 12. Final Parcel Map, being a resubdivision of Parcels l and 2, Lot 2, Edwards Industrial Park (APN 026-102-080/090) at 50 Edwards Court, zoned M-1, by Wm. A. Bartlett for Robert F. Edwards and National Car Rental System. Asst. C.E. Rebarchik stated that the conditions of the tentative map approval have been met and the final map is ready for action. C. Cistulli moved to approve the above -noted Final Parcel Map. Second, C. Sine. Responding to C. Jacob's inquiry, Asst. C.E. Rebarchik stated that two easements are shown on the map. There being no further questions, the motion for approval passed by a unanimous vote of those present (5-0). 13. Special Permit to restore classic cars in the M-1 District at 1557 Bayshore Highway (APN 026-321-370), by Lew Kumetat and Robert Taylor of Concours, Inc. (applicants) with V&T Investments (property owner) (ND -118P posted 7/15/77). Chrm. Taylor introduced the application and Robert Taylor, one of the applicants was present to answer questions concerning the proposal. Asst. C.P. Yost reviewed the application and noted that the applicants are aware of and have agreed to meet six conditions set forth in a memorandum dated July 15; 1977,,froffi 0. Fred Fricke, Fire Chief, to C.P. Swan (memo attached). Mr. Robert Taylor, representing Concours, Inc., read a statement to the Commission to describe the establishment and made the following points: It is a small two-man staff and is a well-financed operation. The special service shop will cater to the owners of fine antique, classic and sports cars, offering hand detailing of the entire car, polishing, wood refinishing, minor repairs and touch-up.. Arrangements could be made for full restoration, however, no major body or paint work will take place on the premises. No mechanical work or welding services will take place on the premises. The outside advertisinc will be approximately 1'x3' and advertising will be very low profile as most customers would know of the services offered. No cars would be allowed to sit outside, nor would ther( be any litter on the property. This is requested at this particular location because the services are not those of a body and fender shop and this type of work will not be accepted. Generally, the operation would be that of a small exclusive shop. Mr. Taylor then presented pictures of some of the types of cars that the shop would service. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Chrm. Taylor opened the public hearing. hearing was declared closed. Page 9 July 25, 1977 There being no one wishing to speak, the public C. Frankard asked if fire extinguishers would be required. It was noted that such a condition is included in the July 15 memorandum from the Fire Chief. Mr. Taylor stated that he accepted and would meet all conditions imposed by the Fire Department. C. Jacobs moved that the special permit be approved subject to the conditions from the Fire Chief and subject to the statements contained in the applicants' letter. received by the Planning Department July 14, 1977. The Commission agreed that the applicant had adequately described the types of vehicles that would be serviced, as per C. Mink's concerns expressed in an earlier study session. Second C. Sine, and unanimously passed by a roll call vote of those present (5-0). 14. 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 June 27, 1977). Asst. C.P. Yost reviewed the application and previous concerns of the Commission. He noted that.there are actually several items contained in the Special Permit: 1) modificatio of the January 1975 special permit and 2) the addition of a truck rental agency at 808 Burlway Road, and 3) truck storage at.a second location, 855 Mahler Road. It was determined that the original special permit was issued to another party and Mr. Nick of Aztec Rent-A-Car/Ryder Truck Rentals, purchased the franchise, holding the original special permit and its conditions. A lengthy discussion took place between staff, Mr. Nick and the Commission, during which the following concerns were discussed: even with the Lease Mr. Nick currently has, he cannot insure that he will always have the required number of parking spaces as the lease includes a 48-hour cancellation notice; service and washing facilities are not available and Mr. Nick is currently making oil changes and doing some washing in the parking lot. Asst. C.E...Rebarchik advised that there could be problems with the oil and water on the lot, as it is doubtful that it would evaporate quickly enough to avoid damage; he also felt some would to into the City's catch basins, which is not in conformance with City ordinances. He stated that facilities for washing cars could be installed. Several commissioners agreed that they would hate to put someone out of business, however, approval of the request could not be justified. Mr. Nick asked that the Commission consider several alternatives, i.e. Aztec could look into the possibility of installing proper washing facilities, a permanent lease of parking spaces, or even finding another location where adequate parking is available. He said he might arrangE! to have all washing and oil changes performed at a different location. The Commission agreed that an extension to the special permit might be considered, however, they felt cE?rtain activities not in keeping with the City's ordinances should cease immediately. The truck storage item would not be considered until these other problems are solved. Chrm. Taylor opened the public hearing. There being no one who wished to speak, the public hearing was declared closed. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 10 July 25, 1977 C. Mink arrived at the meeting, -however, he abstained from taking part in the discussion and action on the item. He felt the Commission was aware of his concerns discussed at previous study meetings. C. Sine moved that this item be continued to the next regular meeting (approximately 30 days), permitting the applicant to fully comply with all 1975 permit requirements and to research alternative arrangements for parking, servicing arid washing of vehicles and other possible locations with adequate provisions in the areas discussed, this 30 -day extension to be granted only with the condition that all servicing, including oil changes and washing, in'the parking lot area or on premises to cease iimmediately, as such activity is not permitted in City ordinances. C.A. Coleman advised that proof of the property owners' permission must be submitted with regard to long-term parking space leasing. Second, C. Cistulli and passed by a unanimous vote of those present (5-0). At this time Chrm. Taylor expressed the Commission's sympathy to fellow -commissioner Mink whose wife had recently passed away. He extended this sympathy to Commissioner Frankarc whose sister had also passed away. Both Commissioners thanked the Chairman and the Commission. C. Mink presented a brief letter, dated July 25, to the Commission Members and Staff from himself and his family thanking them for their kindness and the floral gift. Secretary Sine read the letter. C. Mink then excused himself from the meeting. Commissioner Cistulli requested a staff report on construction plans for the building at 1329/1333 E1 Camino Real. He felt the Building Inspector and staff members should look into the matter as it appears that the off-street parking iri riot to code standards. C. Jacobs stated she would like the Commission to study a parking ordinance amendment with regard to compact car spaces, as per discussion in Item #2. C.P. Swan briefly reported on the proposed land use/bay front traffic studies and upcoming planning items. He stated that many projects could be on ground as soon as 1980. He made a verbal progress report on the status of environmental impact reports (subsequent written report is attached). ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 11:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, THOMAS W. SINE, SECRETARY BURLINGAME CITY PLANNING COMMISSION WS:TS:nf July 25, 1977 Staff Report - Status of Environmental Impact Reports In addition to the three environmental impact reports approved by the Commisison July 25, 1977, these EIRs are in process: EIR-42P Legaspi Towers, 500 Airport Blvd. EIR by project architect received 7/26/77 and forwarded to Council for information. EIR-43P Bayside Redevelopment Project, 1177 Airport: Blvd. Draft EIR received from HKS July 29, 1977, for distribution to Council (8/1/77 and to commission 8/2/77) EIR-44P Burlingame Bay Club Condominiums, 600 Airport Blvd. Agreement with Torrey & Torrey, Inc. (Authorized by Council 8/1/77 and scheduled for study by Commission in Sept.) EIR-45P One Waterfront Place, 78000 sq.ft. office building at 700 Airport Blvd. Agreement with Madrone Associates (authorized by Council 8/1/77 and to -Commission in October) EIR-46P "Westaur Park", Park and fly and office building at 1750-1850 Airport Blvd. Agreement July 6, 1977, with Earth Metrics executed July 1977. Draft of EIR scheduled for study by Commission in September. EIR-48P Reclassification from R-1 to R-3 of Zev Ben Simon property at 911/915 E1 Camino. (Agreement will be executed with Charles Eley Jr. Draft EIR scheduled for commission study in September. EIR-49P Jilly's West showroom and specialty restaurant on Anza Pacific Place. Upon receipt of Environmental Assessment Forms, staff will send out RFP to prepare EIR.