Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1980.11.10CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 10, 1980 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Chairman Sine on Monday, November 10, 1980 at 7:33 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Cistulli, Graham, Harvey, Jacobs, Mink, Sine Absent: Commissioner Taylor (excused) Staff Present: City Planner John R. Yost; City Attorney Jerome F. Coleman; City Engineer Frank C. Erbacher MINUTES - Upon motion of C. Jacobs, second C. Graham, the minutes of the October 29, 1980 meeting were approved and adopted. AGENDA - Upon motion of C. Jacobs, second C. Cistulli, order of the agenda approved. Chm. Sine introduced A. M. (Bill) Garcia, newly appointed apprentice Commissioner, whose term will become effective in April, 1981. APPLICATIONS FOR ACTION 1. VARIANCE TO REPLACE A 670 SF GARAGE AND PATIO SHELTER WITH A 684 SF CARPORT AND STORAGE ROOM; AND SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY BUILDING WITH MORE THAN 500 SF; PROPERTY AT 125 CHANNING ROAD, ZONED R-1, BY MIGUEL POLCHOWSKI (CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 29, 1980) CP Yost reviewed this application to demolish an older garage and patio shelter and replace them at the same location with a new carport and storage room. Reference staff report dated 10/23/80; site plan indicating the original and current proposals; 9/30/80 letter from Miguel and Helena Polchowski; Planning Commission October 15, 1980 minutes; staff report for the October 15, 1980 meeting; and Project Application & CEQA Assessment accepted by staff 10/6/80. CP reviewed the original proposal, the modified design for an 18' x 28' garage, and permits required. Staff believed the new plans were substantially closer to current code and recommended the amended application be approved. Miguel Polchowski, the applicant was present and noted he had amended his plans as agreed at the October 15 meeting; he had nothing to add to Mr. Yost's comments. There was some discussion as to the amount of space to be allocated for storage. Chm. Sine opened the public hearing, There were no comments and the hearing was closed. Commission comments and discussion: the amended plans will improve the property and not be detrimental to the neighborhood; there would be a hardship to the applicant if his proposal is not allowed; the proposal is reasonable since it is now very close to current code requirements. C. Mink discussed findings with the applicant: that there were exceptional and extraor- dinary circumstances relating to the property, particularly in that the existing garage had been damaged by a storm; that denial would deprive the applicant of the right to continue to enjoy his home as he had in the past; and that granting of the variance Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 November 10, 1980 would not be detrimental to the neighborhood. Based on these findings of fact and testimony of the applicant, C. Mink then moved for approval of this variance and special permit. Second C. Graham; motion approved 6-0 on roll call vote, C. Taylor absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 2. SPECIAL PERMIT TO OPERATE A RESTAURANT IN THE M-1 DISTRICT AT 819 MITTEN ROAD, BY SARKIS KULLUKIAN OF "CAFE EXPRESS" (CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 29. 1980) CP Yost reviewed this application to operate a restaurant in the M-1 District. Reference staff report for the 10/29/80 meeting dated 10/20/80; Project Application & CEQA Assessment accepted by staff 9/29/80; aerial photograph of the site; September 25, 1980 letter from Sarkis Kullukian; site drawing indicating location of existing shop; October 14, 1980 memo from the Chief Fire Inspector; December 26, 1973 Planning Commission minutes when a restaurant was first approved for this location; June 26, 1978 Planning Commission minutes amending the December, 1973 permit; and map of existing coffee shops in the M-1 District. CP discussed the previous permits, staff comments and possible findings. Staff recommended approval with two conditions as listed in the staff report. Sarkis Kullukian, the applicant was present. He requested approval of this existing business, with operation of the restaurant to be similar to the one approved in 1973. Commission comments and discussion: the coffee shop appears to fill a need in the area; the number of coffee shops in the M-1 District; there were no objections to approval. C. Jacobs moved for approval of this special permit with the following conditions: (1) that the permit be issued to Mr. Sarkis Kullukian, and be nontransferable; (2) that the operation of the restaurant be consistent with the September 25, 1980 letter from Mr. Kullukian. Second C. Cistulli; motion approved 6-0 on roll call vote, C. Taylor absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 3. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW EXCURSIONS IN LEARNING TO OPERATE A TRAINING PROGRAM FOR HANDICAPPED CHILDREN AT ROOSEVELT SCHOOL, 1151 VANCOUVER AVENUE; BY KRISTEN SANTIN In the absence of the applicant, this application was continued to the meeting of November 24, 1980. 4. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW DANCE MOVEMENT TO OPERATE AN EDUCATION PROGRAM FOR CHILDREN AND ADULTS AT HOOVER SCHOOL, 2220 SUMMIT DRIVE; BY CLAUDIA BAKER CP Yost reviewed this application to use two rooms on the ground floor of the main school building for a dance and movement education program for children and adults. Reference staff report dated 11/6/80; Project Application & CEQA Assessment accepted by staff 10/20/80; site drawing, Hoover School, first floor; description of the proposed program and credentials of the applicant; site location drawings; October 7, 1980 letter from James E. Black, School District Superintendent with Exhibit A - Parking Layout, Hoover School, Exhibit B - Easement Parking, Hoover School and Exhibit C - Hoover School, Tentative Time Schedule; Guidelines for Leasing Hoover School dated 9/9/80; Hoover School Interior Dimensions dated 3/16/79; October 21, 1980 letter from Glenn A. Stewart, Director of Business Services, Burlingame School District; School District Bid Proposal Form filed by Dance Movement, dated 10/14/80; 11/3/80 memo from the City Engineer; October 29, 1980 memo from the Chief Fire Inspector; October 15, 1980 Planning Commission minutes approving special permits to the Chinese Bible Evangel and Hoover Children's Center. CP discussed the combined vehicle trips/parking required by the three programs at this school. Staff had no objection to approval with review in five months (corresponding with the required review of the other two programs on the site). If approved, 10 conditions were suggested in the staff report. Page 3 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 1980 Discussion: who will police the "no parking" and "no stopping" requirements?; concern about peak afternoon traffic congestion. Claudia Baker, the applicant was present. She discussed her program, noting it would help to keep the school occupied, rather than vacant; the cultural and physical development program she would be offering, giving school children something to interest them after school; classes would be small and it was expected many participants would be from the nearby area; "would like to stay in my own community with this program". The proposed hours and participants in the various classes were discussed as well as the applicant's discussions with the School Board. Chm. Sine opened the public hearing. The following spoke in support: - Susan Rodgers, 2701 Easton Drive - a participant and neighbor of the school; unique program; will walk to the classes. - Chris Cannon, 1304 Bernal Avenue - my children and myself have taken these classes; a service to the community and the only one of its kind in Burlingame; live in the area and will walk. - Jane Prewett, 2973 Arguello Drive - have been involved with PTA and education in Burlingame; this type of activity has been diminishing in the schools and think it a service the community might well provide; exceptional classes; have participated with one of my children. - Norine Nicolson, 154 Los Robles Drive - have participated in the program; a constructive, creative program conducted with integrity for the benefit of the community. There were no further comments in favor. Valija Hutnick, 2202 Summit Drive spoke in opposition expressing concern about traffic congestion and the possibility of accidents. There were no further comments and the hearing was closed. Secretary Harvey read letters in support received today from: Mr. and Mrs. John S. Root, 1407 Montero Avenue and Mrs. Carol M. Wood, 615 Bayswater Avenue. There was Commission concern about peak afternoon traffic congestion. Discussion included: unanimous approval of the use; suggestion that the three programs work closely to mitigate traffic problems; need for full review in five months; difficulty in making a judgment with little data as to the traffic impacts; widening of the school driveway; limit Hoover School applications to these three. CE Erbacher dfd not believe that morning traffic would be a problem; however, afternoon traffic would create congestion, and early review was suggested. CA Coleman advised that if there were severe problems before the five month review date, the applications could be reconsidered sooner with a noticed public hearing. In view of the review requirement which would allow limitation or amendment of the permits at Hoover School and the fact that the three applicants appear to be cooperating to mitigate the problems, C. Jacobs moved for approval of this special permit with the following conditions: (1) that the permit be approved to Claudia Baker, dba Dance Movement and be nontransferable; (2) that the operation of the dance program be consistent with the materials filed with this application; (3) that no parking be allowed on the Hutnick easement on the north side of the school; (4) that all staff and student parking be on-site in parking spaces 1-8/42-64, such spaces to be marked by either pavement striping or signs, the plans for which shall be subject to the approval of the Department of Public Works; (5) that the center of the playground be Page 4 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 1980 kept free of vehicles; (6) that a system of markers or paving striping be prepared for peak event parking, the plans for which shall be subject to the approval of the Department of Public Works; (7) that a 20' fire lane across the playground be kept clear at all times, such fire lane to be identified on-site to the satisfaction of the Fire Department; (8) that Summit Drive and the approach road from Summit Drive to the playground be posted with "no parking" and "no stopping at any time" signs, and that a sign be posted on the schoolyard gate: "Fire Lane - no parking at any time" and "no stopping at any time"; (9) that the conditions of the October 29, 1980 memo from the Chief Fire Inspector be met satisfactorily; and (10) that this permit be reviewed in 5 months, and be subject to amendment at that time if problems have been observed. Second C. Graham; motion failed to pass on a 3-3 roll call vote, Cers. Cistulli, Harvey and Mink dissenting, C. Taylor absent. Appeal procedures were advised. Recess 8:50 P.M.; reconvene 9:05 P.M. 5. RESOLUTION NO. 4-80 RECOMMENDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EIR-53P FOR THE PROPOSED INTERTELEPHON OFFICE DEVELOPMENT AT 700 AIRPORT BOULEVARD CP Yost reviewed this resolution with Exhibit A attached detailing impacts, mitigations and findings and the Final EIR Addendum prepared for the City.by Torrey & Torrey Inc., dated November 5, 1980. Staff found the Final EIR to be legally adequate and recommended adoption of the resolution. There was some discussion regarding information included in Tables 1 and 2 of the Addendum and parking accumulation figures for selected office buildings. Based on the finding that the Final EIR is legally adequate in its present form, C. Harvey moved for adoption of Resolution No. 4-80 Recommending Environmental Impact Report EIR-53P for the Intertelephon Office Development in Burlingame - 700 Airport Boulevard. Second C. Cistulli; motion approved 6-0 on roll call vote, C. Taylor absent. 6. SPECIAL PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A 127,000 SF OFFICE BUILDING IN THE C-4 DISTRICT AT 700 AIRPORT BOULEVARD, BY JOSEPH KENT OF RAISER ARCHITECTURAL GROUP FOR INTER- TELEPHON N.V. 7. VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT THE INTERTELEPHON PROJECT WITH 339 ON-SITE PARKING SPACES (RATHER THAN THE 423 SPACES REQUIRED BY CODE), BY JOSEPH KENT OF RAISER ARCHITECTURAL GROUP CP Yost reviewed these applications for construction of a 126,830 SF office building in the C-4 District. Reference staff report dated 11/5/80; Project Application & CEQA Assessment accepted by staff 9/5/80; October 27, 1980 letter from Joseph Kent, AIA, Raiser Architectural Group; plans date stamped September 15, 1980 and modified October 28, 1980. Further reference EIR-53P for this project prepared by Torrey & Torrey Inc. and Final EIR Addendum dated November 5, 1980. CP discussed permits required. Staff recommended approval of the special permit with six conditions as listed in the staff report. CP noted the City's parking standard for office buildings; J. D. Drachman Associates' parking surveys of three existing buildings; possible alternatives; and issues involved. Staff recommended the variance be denied; if approved, it was suggested safeguards be established to allow the City to require future installation of additional parking. Joseph Kent, Director of Architecture, Raiser Architectural Group gave a slide presenta- tion depicting the Anza area and the proposed project, noting in particular the unusual configuration of the property, its location on Airport Boulevard, provisions for public Page 5 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 1980 access, its relation to existing buildings in the area, view corridors, landscaping and open space, screening of automobiles, aesthetics of the proposed design. Addressing the variance application, Mr. Kent contended, from studies of other buildings in the area, that parking utilization averages from 70%-80% at peak hours; that the variance was requested to develop a larger percentage of landscaping as opposed to unused asphalt along Airport Boulevard; that it appears the trend in future will be to fewer cars; that the project would benefit the City by providing more open space and a more aesthetic project. Commission discussion: possible findings to support exceptional circumstances, i.e., the project is required to provide public access to the lagoon, the property has an unusual configuration, there is an unusually long frontage on Airport Boulevard. Chm. Sine opened the public hearing. There were no audience comments and the hearing was closed. Further discussion: code requirements for landscaping; Design Guidelines standards; concern for parking needs in the future if substandard parking is allowed; suggestion that a 10% parking variance might be appropriate; if problems arise in the future, how would the landscaping be converted back to parking?; "parking for office buildings fluctuates with the tenants". There was Commission consensus to approve the special permit but concern expressed about granting a 20% variance. C. Mink then moved that the special permit to construct an office building be approved with the following conditions: (1) that the permit be approved to Raiser Architectural Group for Intertelephon N.V.; (2) that all construction and site improvements be consistent with the plans filed with this application (date stamped September 15, 1980 and modified October 28, 1980); (3) that the mitigation measures identified in Exhibit A of;Planning Commission Resolution No. 4-80 be implemented by the project sponsor; (4) that the improvements recommended by the October 15, 1980 memo from the Chief Fire Inspector be completed satisfactorily; (5) that a development fee consistent with Ordinance No. 1151 be paid; such fee is presently estimated to be $31,070; (6) that prior to the issuance of a building permit by the City of Burlingame the following requirements be met: (a) all permits required from other responsible agencies be obtained, such permits to include (but not be limited to) the Bay Conservation and Development Commission and State Lands Commission (for improvements on adjacent State owned parcels); (b) a design for the modification of the center islands of the Airport Boulevard median strip be approved by the City; construction to be at the expense of the project sponsor; and (c) all landscaping and irrigation systems be approved by the City, and so designed that the maximum feasible on-site parking spaces are screened from adjacent roads and State lands. Second C. Harvey; motion approved 6-0 on roll call vote, C. Taylor absent. Appeal procedures were advised. Discussion continued and C. Harvey commented that the intent of the variance appeared to be to provide, in the opinion of a professional architect, a better project for the City of Burlingame. He then moved for approval of a variance to construct the Inter- telephon project with 380 parking spaces (a 10% deficiency), with the following findings: that there are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances due to the physical make-up of the property; that the variance was necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the property rights of the owner; that it would not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to other property owners; that the developer has demonstrated by his traffic surveys that the proposal is adequate and would not affect the public welfare; and that the granting of this variance would not adversely affect the comprehensive zoning plan of the City. Second C. Cistulli. In a question on the motion C. Jacobs asked how the shape of a lot would make a difference in the parking requirement. C. Harvey responded that this is a lot,with an extremely long frontage and in an area that will have a significant visual impact on Airport Boulevard, that the applicant is trying to present a better project to the City and, to do so, a variance is required. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 November 10, 1980 Replying to a question from the Chair, CA Coleman advised it is within the rights of the Planning Commission to grant a lesser variance than requested by the applicant. Following roll call, the motion failed on a 3-3 vote, Cers Graham, Jacobs and Sine dissenting, C. Taylor absent. C. Mink then moved for approval of the variance as submitted, based on the same findings of fact. Second C. Cistulli; motion denied on a 5-1 roll call vote, Cers Graham, Harvey, Jacobs, Mink, Sine dissenting, C. Taylor absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 8. APPEAL FROM BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENT WHICH PROHIBITS THE USE OF ARMORED CABLE AS A "RACEWAY" IN THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME AT 109 CHANNING ROAD, BY CECELIA AND JOHNNY FONG Reference November 3, 1980 memo from the Chief Building Inspector; October 20, 1980 letter from Cecilia and Johnny Fong with attachments: pages 70-178 through 70-187 from the National Electrical Code. Chm. Sine advised of a possible conflict of interest since his property abuts 109 Channing Road, and designated Vice Chairman Mink to chair this item. CA Coleman explained the Uniform Building Code provisions for appeal from decisions of the building official, the Planning Commission being the appeal body whose decision is final. Chm. Mink then announced that the purpose of the hearing was to determine if there had been a misinterpretation or misapplication of the Burlingame Building Code. CE Erbacher reviewed the appeal, discussions with staff and code definitions, requirements and violations. It had been the Chief Building Inspector's determination that the use of armored cable (installed in the applicant's addition to his home) was not an approved raceway and could not be approved by the Building Department. The CBI recommended denial since approval would establish a precedent. Johnny Fong, the appellant was present. He discussed his interpretation of the National Code, his contacts with Burlingame staff and his survey of this type of regulation in several Bay Area cities. Mr. Fong confirmed that armored cable had been installed in the addition to his home and that he had employed a licensed contractor for the work. Following discussion it was found that no testimony had been submitted this evening to support a Commission decision to allow alternate materials. C. Jacobs then moved to deny this appeal. Second C. Graham; motion to deny approved 5-0, C. Taylor absent. Commission requested that in order to avoid misunderstandings in future telephone inquiries, staff should advise that copies of the pertinent code sections were available at cost. Chm. Sine returned to preside over the remainder of the meeting. The following applications were set for public hearing November 24, 1980. 9. SPECIAL PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AN 8,100 SF CHURCH IN THE R-3 DISTRICT AT 701 FAIRFIELD ROAD, BY RECTOR JOHN T. CAHOON OF CHRIST CHURCH Requests: information concerning traffic impact in the area on Sundays; a survey of existing parking for all Burlingame churches constructed in the last 20 years. 10. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW A PORTION OF THE ROOF OF THE ABOVE CHURCH TO BE 47' ABOVE STREET GRADE (WITH A BELL TOWER OF 691) 11. VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT THE CHURCH AT 701 FAIRFIELD ROAD WITHOUT ON-SITE PARKING Page 7 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 1980 12. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A BANK AT 360 PRIMROSE ROAD, BY ROGER NYE OF PACIFIC UNION BANK Staff will request data from the applicant establishing the need for a bank in the downtown area, i.e., a market survey. Requests: more complete details of the project, including planters and overhangs; information on this property pertaining to the Burlingame Avenue Off -Street Parking District. 13. SPECIAL PERMIT TO OPERATE A MEDICAL CLINIC IN THE M-1 DISTRICT AT 839 HINCKLEY ROAD, BY TERRY SMITH OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICAL SERVICES 14. CONDOMINIUM PERMIT FOR BELLEVUE PLACE, A 7 UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT AT 1244 BELLEVUE AVENUE; BY THEODORE E. FARLEY 15. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW THE FOUR STORY BELLEVUE PLACE CONDOMINIUM PROJECT TO HAVE A 36' MAXIMUM ROOF HEIGHT; PROPERTY AT 1244 BELLEVUE AVENUE 16. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR 7 CONDOMINIUM UNITS AT 1244 BELLEVUE AVENUE REVOCATION HEARING SET Conditions of the May, 1979 special permit granted Munkdale Bros, Inc. have not yet been met. Revocation hearing scheduled for November 24, 1980. ACKNOWLEDGMENT October 24, 1980 letter from Mervin R. Francies, 729 Acacia Drive, Burlingame, re: additions to homes in residential districts. CITY PLANNER REPORT CP Yost reported on the following November 3, 1980 Council hearings: - Days Inn of America, 777 Airport Boulevard - amended plans approved conditionally. - Chinese Bible Evangel, Inc., Hoover School - approved conditionally. - Hoover Children's Center, Hoover School - approved conditionally. - Ordinance No. 1188 "Establishing Rental Housing Replacement Standards and Tenant Protection Measures on Condominium Conversions" - motion to approve failed to pass; urgency ordinance prohibiting residential condominium conversions adopted. An.ini IRNMFNT The meeting adjourned at 11:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Joseph E. Harvey Secretary