Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1981.09.28CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 28, 1981 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Chairman Jacobs on Monday, September 28, 1981 at 7:32 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Garcia, Graham, Harvey, Jacobs„ Leahy, Mink Absent: Commissioner Cistulli (excused) Staff Present: Acting City Planner Margaret Monroe; City Engineer Frank C. Erbacher MINUTES - The minutes of the September 14, 1981 meeting were unanimously approved and adopted. AGENDA - Order of the agenda unanimously approved. ITEMS FOR ACTION 1. VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO THE EXISTING HOME AT 1221 CORTEZ AVENUE ACP Monroe reviewed this application for an addition to an existing home that will maintain a 3'-0" side yard rather than 4'-0" as required by code. Reference staff report dated 9/22/81; Project Application & CEQA Assessment; aerial photograph of the site; 9/1/81 memo from the Fire Marshal; 9/1/81 memo from the City Engineer; 9/18/81 memo from the Chief Building Inspector; August 25 and 28, 1981 letters from the applicant, John E. Gibbons; September 22, 1981 letter in support from Timothy F. Foley, 1211 Cortez Avenue; and plans date stamped September 1.4, 1981. ACP discussed code requirements, staff comments and justification for the variance. Staff recommended approval with one condition as listed in the staff report. John Gibbons, the applicant, was present. He advised that he and his neighbor at 1211 Cortez Avenue were willing to accept the fence between their properties as the legal property line; therefore, he requested staff's requirement for a survey of the property be waived. A letter from Louis A. Arata, Civil Engineer and Surveyor, dated September 25, 1981 was presented with the estimated cost of such a. survey. Mr. Gibbons also noted the existing garage encroaches farther into the side yard than the new proposal and expressed his desire to retain the present backyard. Chm. Jacobs opened the public hearing. There were no comments and the hearing was closed. For the record, Secy. Harvey noted petition in support from the property owners at 1225, 1220 and 1216 Cortez Avenue and September 25, 1981 letter from Tim Foley, 1211 Cortez Avenue attesting to his acceptance of the side yard fence as the legal property line. Commission discussion: minimum width for a single car garage possible alternatives for the location of the garage detached from the house; the necessity of a survey of the property. City Engineer was asked to comment on the reasons for requiring a survey, when structure is attached to the house it is considered to be a part of the fixed footprint of the house. One Commissioner stated his difficulty in finding exceptional circumstances to support the variance because the proposal appeared to be a desire of the applicant, not a need. Page 2 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes September 28, 1981 Following further discussion, C. Harvey found there were exceptional and extraordinary circumstances with this established home in an established neighborhood, because the backyard of this home is such that it would not be the best use to move the garage as proposed; that the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the owner's property rights because he is entitled to a garage and, if he were required to move it back, he would suffer the loss of the use of his rear yard; that the proposal would not be detrimental to the neighbors and would not affect the comprehensive zoning plan of the City. C. Harvey then moved for approval of this variance with the condition that a survey of the property be completed subject to inspection by the City Engineer; if the City Engineer found the survey was not required, the condition could be deleted. Second C. Graham; motion approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Cistulli absent: Appeal procedures were advised. 2. VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO THE HOME AT 1009 DRAKE AVENUE ACP Monroe reviewed this application to allow a 617 SF bedroom, bathroom and family room addition to an existing home which exceeds two zoning requirements, parking and lot coverage. Reference staff report for Item #2; Project Application & CEQA Assessment accepted as complete 9/14/81; aerial photograph of the site; 9/17/81 memo from the Fire Marshal; "no comments" memo from the City Engineer; September 18, 1981 memo from the Chief Building Inspector; applicant's letter date stamped September 10, 1981 including signed approval from the neighbors at 1005 Drake Avenue, 1008 Bernal Avenue and 1011 Drake Avenue; and plans date stamped September 10, 1981. ACP discussed code requirements, staff comments and justification for this variance. Planning staff recommended approval with one condition as listed in the staff report. Dean Rowell, the applicant, was present and confirmed there would be no problem in complying with the CBI's requirements. The size of the lot, -front and rear yards were noted. Chm. Jacobs opened the public hearing. There were no comments and the hearing was closed. C. Mink found there were exceptional circumstances with this house as -built, that it would be extremely difficult to enlarge the size of the garage or move it back farther; that the addition would be necessary for preservation of the property rights of the owner because he needs more space and it would improve the housing stock of the City while retaining a low profile; that it would not be materially detrimental to the neighbors nor adversely affect the comprehensive zoning plan of the City. C. Mink then moved for approval with the stipulation that the existing rear bedroom And kitchen be provided with additional window area to meet the requirements of the Chief Building Inspector. Second C. Graham; motion approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Cistulli absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 3. CONDOMINIUM PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A 6 UNIT PROJECT AT 1008 EL CAMINO REAL ACP Monroe reviewed this application to construct a six unit, two story structure. Reference staff report dated 9/23/81; Project Application & CE:QA Assessment; aeri.al photograph of the site; September 21, 1981 memo from the Zoning Aide, subject parking requirements; September 22, 1981 memo from the City Engineer; September 4, 1981 memo from the Chief Building Inspector; 8/25/81 memo from the Fire Marshal; memo received September 8, 1981 from the Director of Parks; arid plans date stamped August 12, 1981. ACP discussed the permit approved for this six unit project in 1979 which has now expired; the present plans; compliance with code requirements and the condominium guidelines; applicant's confirmation that the parking plans would meet present code on the working drawings; and staff comments and concerns. Staff recommended approval with four conditions as listed in the staff report. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 September 28, 1981 Discussion: the floor slab elevation; guest parking. (Chm. Jacobs requested that staff study guest parking requirements and bring a recommendation to the next Commission meeting.) John Brosnan, the applicant, was presenia. CE confirmed the present plans meet all previous conditions or exceed them and can be adjusted to meet the new parking requirements. Chm. Jacobs opened the public hearing. There were no comments and the hearing was closed. C. Graham moved for approval of this condominium permit with the following conditions: (1) that the final working drawings be consistent with the plans date stamped August 12, 1981 filed with this application; (2) that the conditions recommended by the City Engineer in his September 22, 1981 memo, the Chief Building Inspector in his September 4, 1981 memo and the Park Director in his September 4, 1981 memo be met satisfactorily; (3) that the final working drawings reflect current parking standards for 10'-0" widths for confined stalls; and (4) that the landscaping and irrigation pians be approved by the Park Director prior to issuance of a building permit. Second C. Garcia; motion approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Cistulli absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 4. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR A 6 UNIT•CONDOMINIUM PROJECT AT 1008 EL CAMINO REAL Reference City Engineer's memo dated September 23, 1981. CE Erbacher recommended approval. C. Mink moved for approval and recommendation to City Council of this tentative subdivision map. Second C. Graham; motion approved unanimously on voice vote. 5. EXTENSION OF NOVEMBER 24, 1980 SPECIAL PERMIT CONDITION FOR A TEMPORARY BANKING OFFICE AT 360 PRIMROSE ROAD ACP Monroe reviewed this request for an extension of the temporary banking use at 360 Primrose Road by Pacific Union Bank & Trust Company. Reference staff report dated 9/22/81; September 22, 1981 memo from the City Engineer; August 24, 1981 Planning Commission Minutes at which time a 30 day extension was granted; August 11 and September 10, 1981 letters from Lynn S. Pomeroy, Foothill Design Group; August 16, 1981 letter from Roger Nye, President and Chief Executive Officer, Pacific Union Bank; December 2, 1980 letter of action from the City Planner to Pacific Union Bank; and Planning Commission minutes for the November 24, 1980 meeting. ACP discussed correspondence received, the Commission's desire to have a representative of the applicant present when considering this request, the special permit granted in November, 1980 and staff comments. Planning staff recommended ,approval of the extension with four conditions as listed in the staff report. Roger Nye, President of Pacific Union Bank & Trust Company, confirmed acceptance of the four suggested conditions with a requested change in Condition #1 from "30 days" to "60 days" for purchase of a building permit. Chm. Jacobs opened the public hearing. There were no comments and the hearing was closed. CE advised the change to "60 days" would be acceptable to Engineering. C. Mink moved for approval of this extension with the following conditions: (1) that within 60 days the applicant make all building plan changes and purchase a building permit; (2) that the applicant within 60 days commence construction; (3) that the temporary structure be removed within 30 days of completion and occupancy of the main building; and (4) that should the applicant fail to comply with Conditions #1 or #2 the temporary building be removed within 30 days of the expiration date of the above periods and that the area occupied by the building be returned to a safe condition which would not create a hazard on the adjacent property or the street right-of-way. Second C. Graham; motion approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Cistulli absent. Appeal procedures were advised. Page 4 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes September 28, 1981 6. REVIEW OF SEPTEMBER 22, 1980 SPECIAL PERMIT APPROVED FOR GARDNER'S 4 -WHEEL DRIVE AT 1745 ADRIAN ROAD Reference memo from the Zoning Aide reporting on this operation. ACP Monroe advised the applicant has complied with all conditions of his special permit and no complaints have been received. C. Mink moved that Commission accept the staff report and no further annual review be required. Second C. Leahy; all aye voice vote. 7. REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP AND CONDOMINIUM PERMIT FOR A 4 UNIT PROJECT AT 27 EL CAMINO REAL Reference City Engineer's memo dated September 22, 1981 with attached letter from Barry Smith, architect. .CE Erbacher reviewed City approval of this project in 1980 and the applicant's request for extension. Staff had no objection to a one year extension. C. Graham moved for approval of this request. Second C. Mink; motion approved unanimously on voice vote. 8. FINAL CONDOMINIUM MAP FOR AN 18 UNIT PROJECT AT 15.00 WILLOW AVENUE Reference City Engineer's memo received September 24, 1981. Due to unresolved technical questions, CE Erbacher requested this item be removed from the agenda. The Chair so ordered. STIInY TTFMS 9. CONDOMINIUM PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A 4 UNIT PROJECT AT 620 PENINSULA AVENUE 10. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR THE ABOVE Items continued for study at a future meeting. 11. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW RETAIL SALES IN THE M-1 DISTRICT AT 856 MITTEN ROAD FOR TRAVEL GEAR INC. Reference letter from Travel Gear dated September 25, 1981 advising that retail sales at this location will be discontinued. Application withdrawn from the agenda at the request of the applicant. Recess 8:27 P.M.; reconvene 8:55 P.M. CITY PLANNER REPORTS 12. BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION (BCDC) PROPOSED GUIDELINES FOR THE ANZA AREA Reference staff report for this item with attachments: BCDC's proposed Master Plan for Anza Property, Burlingame (September 11, 1981); Anza Public Access Plan (graphic) dated September 11, 1981; and City of Burlingame Design Guidelines for Bayfront Development. The Chair advised this item was informational only to review the guidelines, particularly as they relate to one another. Commission comments were invited. Frank Broadheadof BCDC staff summarized BCDC's major concerns: controlling fill in the bay and maximum feasible public access in the shoreline band. He discussed the major public access areas and BCDC's preliminary guidelines for each area. Key Page 5 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes September 28, 1981 points in Mr. Broadhead's presentation regarding the BCDC open space guidelines for the Burlingame Anza area included: (1) objective is to see a coherent consistent open space system in the area; (2) BCDC's adoption of open space guidelines for the Anza area does not waive the requirement that proposed development receive a permit from both the City and BCDC when a specific project is proposed; (3) these guidelines are preliminary, BCDC staff wants to coordinate with City staff; (4) along the bay BCDC is considering a clustered approach to development, drawn back from the shoreline (Exhibit A) or lower height closer to the shoreline (Exhibit B); (5) the written guidelines generally apply to the remainder of the area excepting Exhibits A and B; (6) guidelines include (a) along Sanchez Creek (inner lagoon) height gradient from 25' at State Parcel 1 to 55' at northern and southern extremities, with the exception of higher buildings at the southern end if pulled back from the shoreline; (b) want the eucalyptus grove on the east side of 101 retained as a public access area; (c) view corridors should be arranged so that they are aligned throughout the area; (d) major public access areas should be located at points where there is water on two sides; (e) landscaping along the BCDC corridors should be consistent. Finally Mr. Broadhead pointed out that BCDC has scheduled a public hearing on these guidelines for October 15 in order to give the City of Burlingame an opportunity to comment on them. Mr. Broadhead suggested that the Commission would entertain an extension of more time if it was needed for the two staffs to get together and coordinate. BCDC staff hopes to work closely with City staff. With the use of an overlay map, CP Monroe discussed Burlingame's Bayfront Design Guidelines which vary somewhat from those of BCDC. She referred to height, clustering, view corridors, setbacks and side yards, standards for apparent width, roadway alternatives, preservation of the eucalyptus grove; and expressed her desire to work with BCDC. Discussion: in response to questions by Commissioners about control along Sanchez Creek (inner lagoon) Mr. Broadhead commented: BCDC would like to see development along the creek which includes public access, height limits related to access, coherent arrangement of buildings. He indicated he was not sure how to accomplish that and needed to work with City staff. It could be, he pointed out, that it would be too difficult to arrive at specific guidelines that could be agreed to by all parties. Mr. Broadhead also pointed out that it was BCDC's position that it is the responsibility of the applicant to improve and maintain all required park areas. When BCDC placed an asterisk on the map indicating a focal point for public access it did not,necessarily mean a large open park area. Other alternatives could also be entertained. Commissioners also commented that it was desirable to begin to deal with conceptual ideas so that there was a better understanding of what "reasonable" access is. Also mentioned in the discussion between Mr. Broadhead and the Planning Commission were the plans for the City sanitary land fill area and BCDC's policy on bay fill. It was felt the two sets of guidelines, the City's and BCDC's, were similar and the two agencies could work together. 13. CLARIFICATION OF OFFICE USE - CABLE TV Reference Planner Report. CP Monroe discussed Cable TV's inquiry regarding a central location for their operation in a commercial area designated for office use. This use would include rental of equipment and a studio for local programming. Planning staff requested guidance regarding studio use in an office area. Commission consensus was that a TV studio would be suitable in an office area. Page 6 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes September 28, 1981 CP reported City Council actions at its September 21 meeting. - Special Permit for a garage/workshop at 728-730 Laurel Avenue: Council reversed Commission's denial and granted the special permit for a 998 SF garage. - Special Permit - Tropical Rent-A-Car - 1328 Marsten Road: Council reversed Commission's denial with conditions in the staff report and the following: that tickets be written at the Burlingame site, and 80% of the cars be licensed in Burlingame. - Bud's Ice Cream sign appeal was withdrawn by the applicant:. - Council approved an addenda to the contract for preparation of an EIR for 1800 E1 Camino Real to complete a Noise Study required by the Office of Noise Control. - Urgency Interim Ordinance imposing a moratorium on permits for new construction in the Downtown Parking District was extended for 90 days. - Ordinance Establishing Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area, Auto Row Area and Regulations Therefor was introduced. - Council approved amendment of Mike Harvey Oldsmobile special permits to require 25 on-site employee parking spaces. - Council requested a report on options available for conservation of historic buildings in Burlingame. An.1ni 1RNMFNT The meeting adjourned at 9:45 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Joseph E. Harvey Secretary