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