HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1979.02.08CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 8, 1979
[IJ, 4 KIII ' 1
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order
by Chairman Jacobs on Thursday, February 8, 1979 at 7:33 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Francard, Kindig, Sine, Taylor, Jacobs
Absent: Commissioners Cistulli, Mink
Staff Present: John R. Yost, Assistant City Planner; Ralph E. Kirkup,
City Engineer; Jerome F. Coleman, City Attorney
MINUTES
The minutes of the January 22, 1979 meeting were approved as mailed.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The order of the agenda was approved.
MEETING ITEMS FOR ACTION
1. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, EIR-50P, FOR THE RECLASSIFICATION TO THE
R-3 DISTRICT OF THOSE R-1 PORTIONS OF PROPERTY AT 911/915/927 EL CAMINO REAL,
PREPARED BY CHARLES ELEY ASSOCIATES FOR CITY OF BURLINGAME
Chairman Jacobs announced the item and explained procedures for the first four related
items on the agenda. Terrill Timberlake, 1609 Forest View Avenue presented a petition
with 202 signatures in opposition "to the reclassification and development of an
apartment project with a projection of 16-20 units at 911/915/927 E1 Camino Real,
Burlingame, California". Assistant City Planner Yost advised that an EIR is required
for all rezoning applications; it is an informational document only and Commission
action is to certify that it is accurate and complete. He then introduced Charles
Eley, consultant who prepared the draft EIR. Mr. Eley discussed this document, and
advised that it responds to the proposed rezoning and maximum feasible development
permitted within present zoning regulations; the EIR does not describe a specific
condominium project. (Reference EIR-50P received by the City of Burlingame
January 5, 1979). He briefly discussed the development potential of this property
under existing zoning, and the several alternatives to the lot consolidation as
proposed by the applicant; unavoidable adverse impacts and possible mitigation
measures were also reviewed.
Chairman Jacobs opened the public hearing. The following members of the audience
voiced concerns about the project and were of the opinion that the EIR was incomplete
and inaccurate: Nannette Giomi, 1600 Forest View Avenue; Richard Varni, 1617 Sanchez
Avenue; Lana Appenrodt, 1040 Balboa Avenue; the resident at 1020 Cortez Avenue;
Eugene Hannon, 1400 Edgehill Drive; Ralph Fitzgerald, 1442 Edgehill Drive; Henry
Hinds, 860 Paloma Avenue; Terrence Giomi, 1600 Forest View Avenue; and Steven Ercolini,
1000 Balboa Avenue. Concerns specifically mentioned were: traffic and circulation,
especially on Sanchez Avenue; long term population and fiscal impacts on the area
Page 2
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 8, 1979
and on the City; a feeling the impacts were not "insignificant"; incompleteness of
the EIR's final summation; erroneous and unsubstantiated assumptions; the statements
on growth inducing impact had not been proven; objection to -the use of the word
"could" in many sections of the report, but especially under "Cumulative Impact -
A Summary"; on -street parking problems; impact on adjacent sewer system and storm
drainage facilities; a belief the EIR should address a specific condominium design;
a feeling the 'no action' proposal of the EIR minimizes the negative impacts; a
possible problem with safety for school children crossing El Camino to McKinley
school now that two schools are closed on the west side of E1 Camino Real.
Mr. Johnson whose parents live at 1506 Forest View Avenue spoke in favor of the
applicant's proposed 18 unit condominium project. He noted the new plans would leave
about 20' to the back property line of residents on Forest View; with no rezoning
the project would of necessity have to be placed much closer to those homes on Forest
View.
Some responses by consultant, Commission and staff follow. It was the consultant's
judgement that a 1% increase in traffic would not increase the area's traffic
problems. City Attorney Coleman advised the law requires an EIR for reclassification
but not that it be related to a specific building design; also, the EIR need only
refer to the significant effects of this project and not the future development of
other R-3 properties in the City. Consultant Eley advised the reason for the "coulds"
was that the proposed project was a rezoning, not a condominium application; it was
noted, however, that the applicant does plan to make such an application in two to
three months. Commissioner Sine noted Commission's policy in not allowing access to
El Camino Real for commercial property, as well as a recent condominium project
that was not allowed access on El Camino. Regarding fiscal impact, Mr. Eley advised
that for an urban infill site such as this with only perhaps 20 units being added,
the extra demand for City services can be accommodated by existing personnel and
facilities.
Albert E. Polonsky, attorney for the applicant, determined from the consultant
that the impacts described in the EIR were based upon a "worst: case" of 26-36 units
on the new lot; he noted the condominium design prepared by Onorato Associates is
for 18 units, which would significantly lower the figures. The traffic impact and
the difference between number of trip ends and number of cars was discussed. It
was mentioned that CalTrans average figures are usually used in EIRs.
Commission requests follow. Chairman Jacobs stated her concern about traffic. She
referred to the term "insignificant" under the "Traffic and Circulation" impact on
page 30 and requested clarification of this section in the final EIR. The Chairman
also stated her preference that an EIR address a specific project. Commissioner
Taylor requested that the impact of on -street parking be included, and felt the
draft ETR did not deal adequately with.the problems of storm drainage. He noted
the language used in stating there is an implied loss to the City of $8,230 for
additional services and requested consideration of the possibility that there will
be income from the property to offset this loss.
Procedures were discussed. City Attorney Coleman stated he would prefer action be
taken on the reclassification after certification of the Final ETR. Attorney Polonsky
and his client concurred. Mr. Polonsky also advised the applicant would be willing
to have the rezoning approved subject to the City's approval of a condominium permit
consistent with the draft plans received February 1, 1979, and that there were no
objections to any of the conditions recommended by the Assistant City Engineer in
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 3
February 8, 1979
his February 1, 1979 memo concerning the Tentative Parcel Map. Assistant City Planner
Yost advised the condominium design does meet code except for the requested variance.
In response to City Engineer Kirkup, it was Commission consensus that the EIR not
address a specific plan; however, in considering Items 2, 3 and 4 (the reclassification,
tentative parcel map and variance) specific plans will be rE!quired.
Chairman Jacobs announced Items 1, 2 (Reclassification of a portion of Lots 2 and 3,
and all of Lot 23, Burlingame Subdivision No. 5 from the R -I. to R-3 District),
3 (Tentative Parcel Map, being a merger of Lots 22, 23 and 2'4 and a portion of
Lots 1, 2 and 3) and 4 (Variance to allow a building to be constructed 15' behind
the front property line adjacent to Sanchez Avenue, property at 911/915/927 E1 Camino
Real) continued to the meeting of March 12, 1979, the consultant to prepare an
addendum to the EIR addressing concerns expressed this evening. Attorney Polonsky
requested that the record show Mr. Ben -Simon concurred in the continuation. A recess
was called at 9:40 P.M.; reconvene 10:00 P.M.
5. SPECIAL PERMIT TO PAVE AND FENCE ONE ACRE IN THE M-1 DISTRICT AT 840 COWAN ROAD
AND USE THE SITE TO RECEIVE AND STORE RENTAL CARS AND EMPLOYEE VEHICLES FOR THE
DOLLAR RENT -A -CAR AGENCY AT 1815 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY
Assistant City Planner Yost reviewed the special 'permit granted Dollar Rent-A-Car
at 1815 Bayshore Highway in January, 1978 and the conditions of that permit. This
application is to use one acre of the property at 84.0 Cowan Road with the remaining
12 acres to be vacant until negotiations with San Francisco Airport are concluded.
If this present proposal were approved, the applicant would then be in compliance
with conditions 4 and 5 of the 1978 special permit. Reference staff report dated
1/18/79; Project Assessment form revised 1/18/79; December 4, 1978 letters from
S. E. Rondon of Dollar Rent-A-Car and January 18, 1979 memo from the Director of
Public Works. Staff recommended approval of this special permit with 9 conditions
as listed in the staff report.
Mr. Rondon, the applicant, was present and noted the considerable investment his
company would be making. During discussion.it was confirmed the property at 840
Cowan Road would be fenced and landscaped. With the installation of the car wash
at 1815 Bayshore Highway, the 7th condition of the January, 1978 permit would be
met and 1815 Bayshore would be the main place of business of the company. It was
confirmed that the applicant was aware of the recommended conditions of approval.
Chairman Jacobs opened the public hearing. There were no audience comments and the
public hearing was closed. During further discussion the review period of three
years was questioned but consensus reached that this would give the applicant time
to come back with a more conclusive plan for the remainder of the land. It was
confirmed a parcel map was not required at present to combine the several lots
which constitute this property since no improvements except paving and fencing are
proposed.
Commissioner Taylor moved for approval of this application with the following
conditions: (1) that the permit for the improvements and use of this property
be approved to Dollar Rent-A-Car of San Francisco, Inc. and be non -transferable;
(2) that the use of 840 Cowan Road be consistent with the December 4, 1978 letter
from S. E. Rondon of Dollar Rent-A-Car, and any changes shall require approval by
the City; (3) that all site improvements (in the one acre, phase one portion of the
site) be in conformance with the site plan date stamped December 14, 1978; (4) that
prior to the approval of a building permit, a landscape and irrigation plan be
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 4
February 8, 1979
prepared to the satisfaction of the City; (5) that the street light post shown
adjacent to the entrance driveway be relocated at the applicant's expense to a
location satisfactory to the City; (6) that no vehicles be parked or stored on the
access easement between Cowan Road and the City's storm drainage pumping station;
(7) that all auto transports be loaded/unloaded on this property or 1815 Bayshore
Highway, and not use the public streets for this purpose; (8) that this permit be
subject to review and possible amendment or cancellation in three (3) years time;
and (9) that any additional improvements to this site (beyond the one acre, phase
one portion of the property) shall require a new application, review and approval
by the City. Second Commissioner Sine and approved 5-0, Commissioners Cistulli and
Mink absent. Appeal procedures were advised.
6. REVOCATION OF SPECIAL PERMIT APPROVED JANUARY 23, 1978 TO OPERATE A CAR RENTAL
AGENCY AT 1815 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY; DOLLAR RENT -A -CAR OF SAN FRANCISCO, INC.
Commissioner Taylor moved to table this item. Second Commissioner Kindig and
unanimously approved on voice vote.
MEETING ITEM FOR STUDY
7. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ADD 1,482 SF OF OFFICE AND PARTS STORAGE SPACE TO THE BUILDING
AT 200 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-2, BY ARATA PONTIAC
Assistant City Planner Yost reviewed this proposal to remodel the second floor;
there would be no exterior alterations. The property is located in the Burlingame
Avenue Area Off -Street Parking District. Commissioner Sine questioned escape access
from the proposed offices. Item set for hearing February 26„ 1979.
OTHER BUSINESS
8. SPECIFIC PLAN FOR ANZA AREA: PROGRESS REPORT, JANUARY 10, 1979
Staff advised the City Council considered the January 10 progress report on February 7
and had selected an amended Plan 4 which has 60% of the sites: reserved for public
oriented uses on the bay side of Airport Boulevard and 40% of the sites designated
for private commercial uses, generally on the southerly side.
An,1ni IRNMFNT
The meeting adjourned at 10:30 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Everett K. Kindig
Secretary