Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1982.03.08CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 8, 1982 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Chairman Jacobs on Monday, March 8, 1982 at 7:32 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Cistulli, Garcia, Graham, Harvey, Jacobs, Leahy, Mink Learning Member Giomi Absent: None Staff Present: City Planner Margaret Monroe; City Attorney Jerome F. Coleman; City Engineer Frank C. Erbacher MINUTES - The minutes of the February 22, 1982 meeting were unanimously approved and adopted. AGENDA - Order of the agenda approved with the following additions: discussion of study meeting procedure; report on the Planning Commissioners Institute, San Diego. ITEMS FOR ACTION 1. PUBLIC FORUM ON THE PROPOSED ANZA OFFICE PARK AT 477 AIRPORT BOULEVARD CP Monroe noted this forum is to allow the public and Commission to express concerns about the project in order that these concerns can be addressed in the Draft EIR. She then introduced Kevin Garrett of Environmental Science Associates, consultant preparing the EIR. Mr. Garrett discussed this proposal for three 8 -story office buildings on a 13.2 acre site in the Anza area east and north of Highway 101. Parking will be provided in a five level parking structure in the center portion of the site as well as parking at grade. He noted adjacent sites, existing development in this area, and discussed a cross section showing the proposed building, parking structure and existing structures. Landscaping is proposed around the parking structure to screen it from public view. Following Mr. Garrett's presentation Chm. Jacobs opened the public forum for audience comments. David Keyston, Anza Shareholders' Liquidating Trust stated his pleasure with the proposed design and his feeling the developer had complied with the intent of the city for this area. There were no further audience comments and the public forum was closed. Commission discussion and comments: project meets the city's parking requirements; amount of city revenue expected to be generated by this development; the city's zoning code requirements and site designation in the Special Area Plan; address view corridors, including an aerial view of the Anza area with existing buildings and proposed buildings; include additional information on the parking structure, particularly to consideration of depressing it, its overall height and reasons why this structure was designed as it is; include details of the landscaping proposed to screen the parking Page 2 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1982 and discuss the entire landscaping plans in detail; include information on grading, information with regard to the proposed treatment of the outside of the building to mitigate the appearance of bulk, and information with regard to public access to the lagoon (bicycle/walkway paths, parking spaces for the public). There being no further comments, Chm. Jacobs thanked Mr. Garrett for his participation this evening. 2. RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF EIR-54P FOR A HOTEL PROJECT BY THE MARRIOTT CORPORATION Reference Final Environmental Impact Report dated March, 1982 containing responses to comments on the Draft EIR, and Planning Commission Resolution No. 2-82 recommending this EIR to the City Council with Exhibit A attached listing impacts, mitigations and findings. CP Monroe advised if Commission found the responses to be adequate the Final EIR should be recommended to City Council. Responding to the Chairman, CP confirmed she found the responses adequate. Paul Holley, De Leuw, Cather & Company, consultant preparing the EIR, was present. Discussion: consultant advised none of the traffic assumptions in the DEIR had been changed; CP explained a more detailed traffic analysis will be made when the specific project is considered; she also noted the EIR is a disclosure document demonstrating a "worst case"; the suggested mitigation of lowering the 15' berm to 8' was noted; CP advised the applicant would be required to submit a landscape plan and had been asked to discuss plans for the shoreline with BCDC. C. Mink moved for adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2-82 recommending EIR-54P to the City Council. Second C. Cistulli; motion approved on a 7-0 roll call vote. Staff will transmit to Council. 3. AMENDMENT TO THE CONDOMINIUM PERMIT FOR A 9 UNIT PROJECT AT 616 ANSEL AVENUE TO RELOCATE THE REAR YARD SPA TO THE THIRD FLOOR (CONTINUED FROM 2/22/82) CP Monroe reviewed this request for amendment of the condominium permit. Reference staff report dated 3/3/82; Planning Commission Minutes of February 8 and February 22, 1982; original Project Application & CEQA Assessment accepted by staff 5/28/80; aerial photograph; February 16, 1982 letter from Edward Ausiello, Environmental Planning & Project Management; March 2, 1982 letter from Wm. Jay Hammond, Civil Engineer; 3/2/82 memo from the Chief Building Inspector; 3/3/82 memo from the Fire Marshal; 3/2/82 memo from the City Engineer; and plans date stamped March 2, 1982. CP discussed details of the original permit, additional information requested by Commission at its February 22 meeting as shown on the revised plans, staff comments and possible impact upon adjacent properties. If approved, three conditions were suggested as listed in the staff report. Commission discussion: the vents normally in the roof top area would be placed in the parapet walls extending 6' above the top of the parapet; concern about the effect of earthquake movement on the spa; possibility of moving the spa further away from the parapet wall to mitigate noise and visual impacts. Mike Monte, project manager, Environmental Planning & Project Management, was present and discussed the proposed location of the spa. He confirmed the structures on adjacent properties were approxi- mately the same height as this project, and noted the roof top location would provide privacy for the tenants using the spa. He also felt noise impacts from a ground level spa would be greater on surrounding structures than from this roof top location. A concern was expressed about safety and the belief that the roof top spa would not get as much tenant useage as a spa at ground level. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 March 8, 1982 Chm. Jacobs opened the public hearing. Nannette Giomi, 1600 Forest View Avenue asked if consideration had been given to a ground level spa, screening it from the neighbors and enclosing it from the elements. Mr. Monte advised they had not considered enclosing the spa at ground level. There were no further audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Commission concerns and comments: privacy of the neighbors; a question was raised about the spa's effect on the height measurements of the structure and the height of the proposed spa plus decking; concern that approval would set a precedent for future projects. One Commissioner did not feel the noise and privacy impacts would be any greater from the roof top than from grade. C. Harvey moved that the amendment to this condominium permit be denied. Second C. Cistulli; motion approved on a 5-2 roll call vote, Cers Graham and Leahy dissenting. Appeal procedures were advised. 4. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT - MIXED RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION Reference staff report dated 3/3/82 with attachments: General Plan map indicating areas under discussion, maps showing existing land uses and existing zoning of the two areas, and staff memo for the 2/8/82 Planning Commission meeting detailing staff study of a mixed commercial/residential district. Further reference: EIR-56P for the proposed condominiums at 1800 E1 Camino Real and environmental assessment for the proposed Village Condominiums at 211 Myrtle Road. CP Monroe discussed the boundaries of the two areas under consideration for a change in land use, a proposed wording to describe this land use designation, compatibility with the adopted policies and provisions of Burlingame's general plan. Staff recommended the Land Use Element of the General Plan be amended with the proposed definition of mixed residential/commercial use, and that a special permit be required if commercial and residential uses are mixed within a single structure (this would require a zoning ordinance amendment). Chm. Jacobs opened the public hearing. George Sinclair, architect, Panko/Sinclair Associates, Inc., San Mateo stated he was involved in designing a condominium project located in Area 2 at Myrtle Road and East Lane. He made a slide presentation in support of staff's recommendations, indicating existing development and environmental conditions. There were no further audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Commission discussion: clarification of the extent of Area 2; Chm. Jacobs expressed a concern about mixed residential/commercial use in Burlingame and suggested that only one block (the Myrtle -Burlingame -Howard -East Lane block) be redesignated initially; the present mix of uses was noted and that presently there may be more nonconforming uses in Area 2 than there are conforming; possibilities of development with mixed use were discussed; the proposed designation would benefit the city and provide more residential potential. Staff's proposed requirement for a special permit when there is mixed use in a single structure met with favorable Commission comment. During discussion regarding Area 2 the Chair expressed concern about mixed residential/ commercial in this area and what might happen in the future if this area were built up with no land left for larger office buildings near Peninsula Hospital. It was felt by other Commissioners that the proposed mix would provide efficiency of service in a subregion of the city and that there is other space in the general area which would be available for hospital related offices when the need might occur. Further, that mixed use at this location close to shopping and transportation would help address the lack of housing in the city. There was a consensus to support staff's proposal. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 March 8, 1982 C. Mink moved that Commission go on record as requesting staff to prepare the proper general plan amendments to deal with Area 1 and Area 2 as discussed this evening and to formalize this with a resolution. Second C. Graham; motion approved on a 6-1 roll call vote, Chm. Jacobs dissenting. Recess 9:17 P.M.; reconvene 9:30 P.M. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS - Memo from City Planner to Planning Commission - subject: Zoning by Acreage in City of Burlingame. - 4 March 1982 letter from George Sinclair, AIA, Panko/Sinclair Associates, Inc., San Mateo urging prompt processing of the proposed condominium project at 211 Myrtle Road. CITY PLANNER REPORT CP Monroe reported the following Council actions: - Certification of EIR-56P, 44 unit apartment building, 1800 El Camino Real. - Upheld Planning Commission action denying a fence exception at 1272 Oak Grove Avenue. - Made a determination on P.M. peak hour traffic allocations in the Anza area. - Adopted a resolution supporting Planning Commission action on ABAG housing need methodology with a modification in the vacancy rate figure. CP also reported that Star Excavation has withdrawn its application to park trucks overnight on unclassified lands at Broadway and California Drive. CA discussed hearing scheduled before Council March 15, 1982 on a modification of 1976 judgment for 1510 Newlands Avenue. DISCUSSION OF STUDY MEETING PROCEDURES Several Commissioners requested more in-depth study sessions on applications with more opportunity to request information. The difficulty in gathering information at a study session without getting into actual testimony was pointed out. The possibility of receiving at the study session a full description of a project as the developer sees it was discussed. Staff noted further information could be supplied in the study session packet and noted applicants' objections to processing delays as well as time limits in staff processing. Following considerable discussion it was agreed all applicants would be asked to attend the study session and give an objective presenta- tion of their project. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS INSTITUTE, SAN DIEGO, FEBRUARY 24-26, 1982 Cers Garcia and Leahy reported on their attendance at this conference. an.1nl10MMrMT The meeting adjourned at 10:20 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Joseph E. Harvey Secretary