Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1983.02.28CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 28, 1983 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Chairman Mink on Monday, February 28, 1983 at 7:32 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Cistulli, Garcia, Giomi, Graham, Leahy, Mink, Schwalm Absent: None Staff Present: City Planner Margaret Monroe; City Attorney Jerome F. Coleman; City Engineer Frank C. Erbacher MINUTES - The minutes of the February 14, 1983 meeting were unanimously approved and adopted. AGENDA - Order of the agenda unanimously approved with one change: Item #3, Amendment of Sign Exception, 800 Airport Boulevard, continued to the meeting of March 14, 1983 at the request of the applicant. ITEMS FOR ACTION 1. VARIANCE TO ALLOW A PORCH ADDITION TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AT 116 CENTRAL AVENUE, BY KATRINA AND RICHARD LANTOS-SWETT CP Monroe reviewed this application to allow a 40 SF porch addition which will extend into the front setback area. Reference staff report dated 2/22/83; Project Application & CEQA Assessment..received 2/2/83; letter of explanation from the applicants dated February 2, 1983; table indicating average front setback; plans date stamped February 2, 1983; "no comments/objections" memos from the Chief Building Inspector (2/17/83), Fire Marshal (2/14/83) and City Engineer (2/14/83); and aerial photograph. CP discussed details of the request, code requirements, staff review, applicants' justification, Planning staff comments on average front setback calculation, physical conditions of the site and area. One condition was suggested in the staff report for Commission consideration. Richard Lantos -Swett, the applicant, was present. He advised the house at 116 Central Avenue is currently being rented but he and his wife plan to move in as of April 15, 1983. It was determined the addition would be a fully enclosed porch with entrance- way and closet. Chm. Mink opened the public hearing. There were no audience comments and the hearing was declared closed. C. Graham found there were exceptional and extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property in that any R-1 residence should have a porch, it would upgrade the existing home, the variance to the front setback requirement was negligible and, with the porch, the setback would be 15' which is the minimum required by code; that the addition of a porch would be a necessary convenience for the property owner, adding to his enjoyment of the home; that it would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare but would enhance the neighborhood and bring the home more into conformance with the city's R-1 standards; and that it would not affect the comprehensive Page 2 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 28, 1983 zoning plan of the city since the home would remain R-1. C. Graham then moved to approve this variance application with the following condition: (1) that the addition built be consistent with the plans date stamped February 2, 1983. Second C. Cistulli; motion approved on a 7-0 roll call vote. Chm. Mink commented on the city's desire to upgrade this area and this addition was an improvement toward that end. Appeal procedures were advised. 2. SIGN EXCEPTION TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF SIGNAGE PERMITTED FOR THE SITE AT 1205 BROADWAY, BY ROBERT MARTINEZ FOR FLAMINGO FLOWERS CP Monroe discussed this request for two wall signs. Reference staff report dated 2/22/83; Sign Permit Application filed 1/10/83; Sign Exception Application filed 1/10/83; sign drawings and photograph received February 18, 1983; aerial photograph; "no comments/ requirements" memos from the City Engineer (1/12/83), Fire Marshal (1/12/83) and Chief Building Inspector (1/14/83); Planning Commission minutes covering requests for similar graphics: July 13, 1973 and January 28, 1974 (Beardsley's Bar and Restaurant, 1445 Broadway), August 13, 1973 and February 25, 1974 (Penguin Lounge, 261 California Drive), February 25, 1974 (Dick Bullis Chevrolet, 100 California Drive), October 28, 1975 (The Four Car Garage, 927 Howard Avenue). CP discussed details of this request; code requirements; staff review; applicants' reasons/justification for the request; response to study meeting questions, noting the minutes included with the staff report for previous years' consideration of graphic designs were all prior to the current sign ordinance. One condition was suggested for consideration. Robert Martinez and Clark Hutchings, the applicants, were present. Mr. Martinez discussed their efforts to upgrade the area, increase their competitiveness with Burlingame Avenue and the need to identify the change in this business from a florist shop to a shop retailing flowers and gifts. He presented a petition in support of the application signed by 47 Broadway merchants and adjacent residents. Chm. Mink opened the public hearing. There were no audience comments and the hearing was closed. Commission discussion: graphics under present Sign Code are clearly a sign; the status of the existing window signs; suggest a six month permit in order to allow time to receive community reaction; sign is acceptable, will upgrade the area; sympathize with the need for more signage but don't believe applicants have given evidence to support a grant of special privilege, as required by the code, to show their circumstances different from their neighbors; in favor, it's not a sign, it's a mural, if any neighbors on the street would like to do the same they could apply for a sign exception; on wall sign the flamingo is a symbol only, not the name of the business, it is difficult to determine what is being sold, therefore seems more a mural than a sign; window signage allowed on Auto Row; as long as the signage is permanent and maintained it would upgrade the neighborhood. C. Schwalm found the signs attractive, that they would not be a grant of special privilege as long as they were not offensive to the senses and maintained; and that upgrading of this property is a special circumstance to support a sign exception. C. Schwalm then moved to approve this Sign Exception with the condition that the signage be maintained by the applicants and not be allowed to deteriorate. Second C. Cistulli; motion failed on a 3-4 roll call vote, Cers Giomi, Graham, Leahy and Mink dissenting. Appeal procedures were advised. 3. AMENDMENT TO SIGN EXCEPTION FOR THE LA BAIE RESTAURANT WALL SIGNS, 800 AIRPORT BOULEVARD, BY STANLEY LO Application continued to the meeting of March 14, 1983 at the request of the applicant. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 February 28, 1983 4. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW A PHOTOGRAPHY STUDIO IN SUB -AREA D AT 210 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, BY DAVID A. DORNLAS CP Monroe reviewed this request to allow a non -automotive use in Sub -Area D, the area designated for Auto Row. Reference staff report dated 2/22/83; Project Application & CEQA Assessment received 1/18%83; January 31, 1983 memo from the City Engineer; January 20, 1983 memo from the Fire Marshal; January 28, 1983 memo from the Chief Building Inspector; February 14, 1983 memo from David A. Dornlas; February 14, 1983 Planning Commission study session minutes; aerial photograph; and plans date stamped January 18, 1983. CP discussed details of the proposal, code requirements, staff review, applicant's comments -and study session request. Three conditions were suggested in the staff report for Commission consideration. David Dornlas, the applicant, was present. Chm. Mink opened the public hearing. There were no audience comments and the hearing was closed. During discussion two changes to the conditions were suggested: modify Condition #1 to read "No processing of film or prints . . .", and add Condition #4, "that retail sales beyond the primary purpose of selling photographs be limited to frames and photo albums." Further discussion: film will be developed in a commercial laboratory; Commission's concern about the use of chemicals on site and parking in the area; applicant's understanding that there is a master sign program for this building. C. Giomi moved to approve this Special Permit with the following conditions: (1) that no processing of film or prints should occur on this site; (2) that the conditions of the Chief Building Inspector's memo of January 28, 1983 and the Fire Marshal's memo of January 20, 1983 be met; (3) that at a minimum the conditions of the City Engineer's memo of January 31, 1983 be met should a request for photo processing or photo enlargement be made for this site; and (4) that retail sales beyond the primary purpose of selling photographs be limited to frames and photo albums. Second C. Leahy; motion approved on a 7-0 roll call vote. Appeal procedures were advised. 5. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW A CONVERSION OF WAREHOUSE SPACE TO OFFICE SPACE IN THE M-1 DISTRICT AT 840 MAHLER ROAD, BY GEORGE DOLIM FOR 840 MAHLER BURLINGAME ASSOCIATES CP Monroe discussed this application to allow conversion of 56% of warehouse to office use. Reference staff report dated 2/23/83; Project Application & CEQA Assessment received 1/19/83 with Supplemental Information received 1/19/83; January 28, 1983 memo from the Chief Building Inspector; January 31, 1983 memo from the City Engineer; January 26, 1983 memo from the Fire Marshal; aerial photograph; February 14, 1983 study meeting minutes; February 23, 1983 memo from the Fire Marshal; and plans date stamped January 19, 1983. CP discussed details of the request, code requirements, staff review, Planning staff comments, study meeting concerns regarding handicap access, sprinkling and landscaping. Three conditions were suggested in the staff report for Commission consideration. George Dolim, architect representing the applicant, was present and presented a graphic indicating existing and proposed landscaping. He advised that since discussion at the study session the landscaping had been increased to about 10% of the total site area, some of which is between the property line and the sidewalk, i.e. on city property. Discussion: a requirement that no more square footage be added than there is parking to code provided; property owner will maintain the landscaping on public property. Chm. Mink opened the public hearing. There were no audience comments and the hearing was closed. Further discussion: Fire Code requirements with regard to sprinkling a structure; applicant advised all office areas would be one hour construction and they ,rlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 February 28, 1983 felt this area would be less hazardous than warehouse use; means of including this type of project in the traffic allocation calculations; suspended ceilings are proposed, applicant will be required to comply with all Fire standards of the city; suggest that 10% landscaping be required, that with 56% office space, the building be sprinkled and office space should be determined by the available parking; concern about traffic in an area where there already is a problem and about loss of tax money by converting warehouse to office space. C. Giomi moved to approve this Special Permit with the following conditions: (1) that the conditions of the Chief Building Inspector's memo of January 28, 1983, the City Engineer's memo of January 31, 1983 and the Fire Marshal's memo of January 26, 1983 be met; (2) that the final plans be found to be consistent with the plans date stamped January 19, 1983; (3) that the final landscaping plans meet the approval of the Director of Parks; (4) that no less than 10% of the property be landscaped and the applicant be allowed to consider public area in this 10%; (5) that the total building be sprinkled; and (6) that any change in the plans date stamped January 19, 1983 be determined by the available parking. Second C. Graham; motion approved on a 6-1 roll call vote, C. Leahy dissenting. Appeal procedures were advised. 6. REQUEST FOR 12 MONTH EXTENSION OF TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP, 1277 EL CAMINO REAL CE Erbacher reviewed this request for tentative map extension for a 6 unit condominium development. Reference City Engineer's memo of February 22, 1983 and February 15, 1983 letter from John Rahimzadeh, Agent for Mr. Dai-Javad. CE discussed tentative map extension granted in December, 1981; applicant's receipt of Building Permit which is valid until May, 1983; and applicant's request for a six month extension. CE recommended a 12 month extension be approved and recommended to Council. } Discussion: CA confirmed that since the Building Permit is now valid, the Condominium Permit also granted and extended in 1981, is valid as long as a Building Permit is in force; CE estimated 8-9 months for completion of this project. C. Schwalm moved to approve and recommend to City Council a 12 month extension, until December 7, 1983, of this tentative condominium map. Second C. Cistulli; motion approved unanimously on voice vote. ITEMS FOR STUDY 7. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW A THREE CAR GARAGE AT 1215 VANCOUVER AVENUE, BY MR. AND MRS. DAN ROSENBLEDT Requests: how was the plate line measured; what portion of the area in the attic would be useable; is this lot subdividable; if so, what would lot coverage be if it were subdivided; can lot be subdivided and maintain proper setbacks; direction of drainage runoff. Item set for hearing March 14, 1983. 8. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW A DONUT SHOP WITHIN SUB -AREA D AT 212_ CALIFORNIA DRIVE, BY ARTURO MORALES 9. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW A RETAIL HOME AND AUTO STEREO SHOP WITHIN SUB -AREA D AT 214 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, BY ARTURO MORALES Requests: comparison of present/proposed use of this building with previous use; traffic generation of the total building; problem with handicapped access to central restrooms. Items #8 and #9 were set for hearing March 14, 1983. Page 5 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 28, 1983 CITY PLANNER REPORTS CP Monroe reviewed Council actions at its February 16, 1983 study meeting and February 22, 1983 regular meeting. CP advised the Ramada Inn expansion would be before Commission in the near future. Commission consensus was to hold a special study session on this project; the Chair requested staff also provide general information on the Hyatt and Sheraton projects at that time. DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR REGULATING GROCERY, DRUG AND DEPARTMENT STORE USES IN THE C-1 AND C-2 DISTRICTS Reference staff report dated 2/23/83 with draft ordinance attached. CP noted the draft is based on Commission's direction that the regulation be use specific and incorporates the major concerns expressed by Commission in its recent discussions. Chm. Mink suggested one minor change in the draft: add the word "or" to Item #1 under Sec. 25.36.036. Discussion: desirability of keeping special permit applications to a minimum; this is an effort to control location of businesses and protect residential areas; it provides Commission review protection. There was considerable discussion regarding the time limits of the review line for hours of operation. C. Leahy moved to recommend this draft Ordinance Requiring Special Permit for Certain Grocery, Drug and Department Stores to the City Council with one minor change as suggested during Commission's discussion. Second C. Garcia; motion approved on a 5-2 roll call vote, Cers Giomi and Graham dissenting. REGULATION ALTERNATIVES FOR SNACK BARS/COFFEE SHOPS IN THE M-1 DISTRICT Reference staff report dated 2/22/83. CP Monroe referred to the 120 day moratorium imposed by Council and discussed existing coffee shops; recent requests for customer oriented uses in the M-1 district; the need to address concerns regarding density, size and retail sales; and suggested code revisions. Commission comments were requested. Discussion: staff's suggestion to allow snack bars/coffee shops based on square footage within blocks, areas bounded by streets; other options include prohibiting them or placing no limitations on them; cafeterias should be included, located within the office structure to serve building employees; suggest a maximum and minimum square footage in relation to building occupancy; approve regulation prohibiting off -sales of alcoholic beverages; desire to provide pedestrian access to local employees; specify minimum amount of seating; would like to include maximum number of tables and maximum square footage; location measure could be based on parking; concern about location on the edge of the zone, protect C-4 from M-1 and pedestrians from heavily traveled arterials; use street frontages rather than square footage of blocks. Staff will prepare a subsequent report for further discussion by the Commission. C. Graham requested an item be added to a future agenda regarding new restaurants and bars in Sub -Area A. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting adjourned at 10:05 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Nannette Giomi Secretary