Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1980.03.24CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 24, 1980 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Chairman Jacobs on Monday, March 24, 1980 at 7:33 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Cistulli, Harvey, Jacobs, Mink, Sine, Taylor Absent: Commissioner Francard (excused) Staff Present: John R. Yost, City Planner; Ralph E. Kirkup, Director of Public Works; Jerome F. Coleman, City Attorney MINUTES - The minutes of the March 10, 1980 meeting were approved as mailed. AGENDA - Approved upon motion by C. Taylor with the addition of items 2a and 5a. APPLICATIONS FOR ACTION 1. PECKS GOURMET COOKWARE, 275/277 PRIMROSE ROAD: USE DETERMINATION CP Yost reviewed this application to allow a cooking school and equipment demonstrations in Pecks' enlarged quarters at 275/277 Primrose Road. Reference staff report dated 3/18/80; Project Application & CEQA Assessment accepted by staff 3/4/80; February 28, 1980 letter from Jane D. Kisner, owner of Pecks; drawing showing site location; aerial photograph of the site; site plan for the proposed enlargement; March 10, 1980 memo from the Chief Fire Inspector; and copy of the permitted uses in the C-1 District. Staff believed findings could be made to support the conclusion that the cooking school would be similar in character to other permitted uses in the district, but noted the possible adverse impact on downtown parking that might result. If this latter issue could be resolved, staff had no objection to approval of this application within the hours of operation specified and with a maximum enrollment of a specific number of students. At the request of the Chair, CP read the list of permitted uses in the C-1 District. Jane Kisner, the applicant, was present. She discussed the proposed use of her expanded location to demonstrate equipment sold by Pecks, her feeling the use was compatible with the district (similar to the permitted use of dancing academy), and her belief the school would not require more parking spaces than the previous use, a beauty shop. She also advised the food used in the classes would be sampled, not sold. Chm. Jacobs opened the public hearing. There were no comments and the hearing was closed. During discussion it was determined that in the normal course of business, if there were no cooking school, the store would average more than 10 customers per day; the application requests approval of daytime classes for not more than 10 persons, four times per week. There was a concern expressed about the impact on parking. Page 2 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 24, 1980 C. Harvey found the cooking school's impact on the area would be no greater than some of the listed permitted uses such as a bank, creamery or antique shop. On that basis he moved to find this use similar in character to those uses permitted in the C-1 District, and that within the hours of 10:00 A.M. to 12:00 Noon, with a maximum enrollment of not more than 10 persons per class, four days per week, the use would not be obnoxious or detrimental to the neighborhood. Second C. Cistulli. After a question on the motion, C. Mink found that if a business is selling equipment for cooking, training of people to use this equipment is consistent with Item 21 "uses customarily incidental to the above uses". With the consent of Cers Harvey and Cistulli this finding was added to the motion. Motion approved 6-0 on roll call vote, C. Francard absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 2. SPECIAL PERMIT TO OPERATE A CAR RENTAL AGENCY IN THE C-4 DISTRICT AT 1470 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY IN THE C-4 DISTRICT, BY CALL -A -CAR RENTAL COMPANY CP Yost reviewed this proposal to operate a small rent -a -car agency and a separate auto servicing/detailing company from an existing 14,400 SF warehouse. Reference staff report dated 3/18/80; Project Application and CEQA Assessment accepted by staff 3/5/80; March 6, 1980 letter from David M. King of Call -A -Car Rental Co.; site plan received March 7, 1980; aerial photograph of the site; March 18, 1980 memo from the Director of Public Works; and March 12, 1980 memo from the Chief Building Inspector. CP noted technical concerns of staff as well as several arguments in favor of allowing the use for an interim period. If approved, five conditions were recommended. David King, the applicant, was present. He advised his lease would be for two years with option for an additional two years, and expressed some concern about the cost of the site improvements recommended by staff for this interim use of the site. He agreed to change his statement regarding fleet vehicles used from "1977-78 cars" to "2-3 year old cars". During further discussion Mr. King explained the detailing business and the number of trip ends per day his operation would generate, noting most of the vehicles would be parked inside the building. Chm. Jacobs opened the public hearing. There were no comments and the hearing was closed. Comments and concerns: appearance of the property; the opportunity to upgrade.this site with a compatible C-4 District use; a request for more information about the proposed site improvements; incompatibility of the proposed auto detailing with other uses in the C-4 zone. C. Mink found that the use proposed by the applicant was inconsistent with the C-4 zone and therefore moved for denial. Second C. Sine; motion to deny approved 6-0, C. Francard absent. Appeal procedures were advised. Recess 8:20 P.M.; reconvene 8:35 P.M. 2a. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, 800 AIRPORT BOULEVARD DPW Kirkup reviewed this request for a four month extension for approval of the tentative parcel map. Reference March 21, 1980 memo from the Director of Public Works; March 11, 1980 letter from Joseph Kent, Raiser Architectural Group requesting the extension; and photo copy of the parcel map. The map erases a lot line across which a building has been constructed. There were no staff objections to granting this request. Chm. Jacobs opened the public hearing. There were no comments and the hearing was closed. C. Sine moved to grant the 4 month extension as requested. Second C. Cistulli and approved unanimously on voice vote. Page 3 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 24, 1980 C. Mink was excused from the meeting at 8:40 P.M. OTHER BUSINESS 3. OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR MEDICAL/DENTAL OFFICE BUILDINGS: RECOMMENDED TITLE 25 CODE AMENDMENTS CP Yost noted previous Commission discussion and staff study regarding parking requirements for medical/dental office buildings. Reference staff report dated 3/17/80 with attachments: Exhibit A and Exhibit B detailing California Department of Transportation studies; and draft ordinance amending off-street parking standards for medical and dental offices. Staff recommended a standard of 1 space for each 250 SF of floor area be adopted. During discussion it was noted that most medical buildings in Burlingame do not have the required parking; that any new code requirement would not affect existing medical buildings; is 1:250 SF enough?; that there is a variety of types of doctors in any medical building; that medical/dental office building parking requirements for growing communities versus built -out communities might vary. There was general consensus that 1 space : 250 SF was an equitable figure. C. Taylor moved that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council "An Ordinance Amending Off -Street Parking Standards for Medical and Dental Offices". Second C. Cistulli and approved 5-0 on roll call vote, Cers Francard and Mink absent. 4. SIGNS AND MERCHANDISE DISPLAYS ON CITY SIDEWALKS: FEBRUARY 25, 1980 MEMO FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY WITH DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR COMMISSION STUDY CP Yost noted the increasing number of A -board and sidewalk signs in the downtown area and referenced the City Attorney's memo detailing pertinent sections of the code, issues raised, and suggesting an encroachment permit process be utilized to regulate sidewalk displays. A draft ordinance providing for sidewalk encroachment permits was attached.for Commission review. Discussion included: A -board signs, merchandise displays, displays by produce stores, possible sanitary or fire hazards, the length of time for which an encroachment permit is issued, fees for encroachment permits, the encroachment process itself, regulation of trash cans and bicycle racks on public property. C. Taylor moved that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council an ordinance providing for sidewalk encroachment permits as set forth in the February 25, 1980 memo from the City Attorney. Motion approved unanimously on voice vote, Cers Francard and Mink absent. 5. ACCESSORY BUILDINGS IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS: REVIEW OF PRESENT REGULATIONS Reference staff report dated 3/17/80 with Exhibits A -F covering problems and responses, construction regulations, use regulations, garage diagram, 40% lot coverage diagrams and 1975-76 agenda items involving accessory buildings. Further reference: record of Commission discussion of accessory buildings in residential districts, January 12 - September 13, 1976. Initial discussion included height of garages and utilities. Exhibits B and C of the staff report dated 3/17/80 were then discussed in detail. Staff was requested to prepare a draft code amendment for the April 14, 1980 Commission meeting. Pa ge 4 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 24, 1980 5a. 3' MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR FENCES CONSTRUCTED ON EL CAMINO REAL: RECOMMENDED CODE AMENDMENT CP Yost referenced the recent draft code amendment considered by the Planning Commission requiring 3' fences along E1 Camino Real. He noted that Mills Creek is the northerly boundary of the R-3 district; from that point north it is R-1 and R-2, and a 3' maximum fence height would create a hardship for homes on Westmoor Road and Albemarle Way. Staff suggested therefore the 3' maximum only apply along El Camino Real from Barroilhet Avenue up to Mills Creek. Commission agreed that the basis for a fence height limitation on E1 Camino Real did not apply to the Westmoor Road and Albemarle Way properties. Staff was requested to transmit an ordinance to City Council incorporating Planning Commission recommendations and to advise the newspapers of this change in the recommended ordinance. APPLICATION FOR STUDY 6. AMENDMENT OF TWO 11/27/78 VARIANCE CONDITIONS TO ALLOW CURLEY-BATES COMPANY TO SUBLEASE 14,000 SF OF WAREHOUSE SPACE; PROPERTY AT 860 STANTON ROAD Set for hearing April 14, 1980. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS March 13, 1980 memo from the City Attorney; subject: "Compromises". March 10, 1980 letter from the Director of Public Works and Traffic/Civil Engineer to John V. O'Brien, 2816 Hillside Drive, Burlingame; subject: traffic control devices, parking and roadway improvements on Hillside Drive. CITY PLANNER REPORT Commission breakfast meeting/field trip, April 12, 1980. Staff studies: condominium conversion and planned unit development regulations. An.1ni IRNMFNT The meeting adjourned at 10:11 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Charles W. Mink Secretary