HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1983.03.14CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 14, 1983
CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order
by Chairman Mink on Monday, March 14, 1983 at 7:33 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 28, 1983 meeting were unanimously approved and
adopted.
AGENDA - Order of the agenda unanimously approved.
ITEMS FOR ACTION
1. REVIEW OF 2/8/82 SPECIAL PERMIT FOR AN INDUSTRIAL -MEDICAL CLINIC AT 1657 ROLLINS ROAD
CP Monroe reviewed this item. Reference staff report dated 3/8/83; February 18, 1983
memo from Helen Towber, Planner; March 1, 1983 memo from the Fire Marshal; February 8,
1982 Planni.ng Commission minutes; January 5, 1982 letter from the applicant, David
Arrowsmith, M.D.; January 11, 1982 memo from the Fire Marshal; January 12, 1982 memo
from the Chief Building Inspector; and aerial photograph of the site. CP discussed
conditions of approval for this clinic and staff inspection/review. In the absence
of complaints staff suggested extension of the permit with review in two years.
C. Giomi moved to extend this special permit for two years with review in March, 1985.
Second C. Graham; motion approved unanimously on voice vote.
2. REVIEW OF 2/8/82 SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A DELI IN THE M-1 DISTRICT AT 840 STANTON ROAD
CP Monroe reviewed this item. Reference staff report dated 3/8/83; February 17, 1983
memo from the Planner; Project Application & CEQA Assessment received 1/5/82; February 8,
1982 Planning Commission minutes; memos from the Fire Marshal dated February 24, 1983
and January 11, 1982; January 12, 1982 memo from the Chief Building Inspector; and
aerial photograph of the site. CP discussed conditions of approval for this deli, site
inspection by Planning staff and comments of the Fire Marshal. Staff recommended a
continuance to the April 11, 1983 meeting to allow time for compliance with the
requirements of the Fire Department.
Discussion: inspections by the County Health Department are made on a regularly scheduled
basis but are not a part of the Planning Commission review process; requirement of the
Fire Marshal that an approved hood be installed over the cooking stove and a fire
extinguishing system be installed in the hood. The Chair pointed out the issue this
evening was a determination by Commission to either proceed with the item this evening
or continue it until the April 11 meeting and, if the requirements of the Fire Department
have not been met, start revocation proceedings at that time.
f
z
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 2
March 14, 1983
C. Graham moved that action on this item be continued to the meeting of April 11, 1983
and, if the requirements of the Fire Department have not been met at that time,
revocation proceedings be initiated. Second C. Schwalm; motion approved unanimously
on voice vote.
C. Leahy asked staff to discuss procedures for issuing occupancy permits at a later
meeting.
3. SPECIAL PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A THREE CAR GARAGE AT 1215 VANCOUVER AVENUE, BY ROBERT
LINDSTROM FOR MR. AND MRS. DAN ROSENBLEDT
CP Monroe reviewed this application to allow a 726 SF garage which exceeds three of the
accessory structure review criteria. Reference staff report dated 3/8/83; Project
Application & CEQA Assessment received 1/28/83; applicants' letter dated February 22,
1983; "no comments/objections/conditions" memos from the Chief Building Inspector
(2/22/83); Fire Marshal (2/14/83) and City Engineer (2/10/83); February 28, 1983
study meeting minutes; copy of Assessor's Parcel Map of the site; aerial photograph;
and plans date stamped January 28, 1983. CP discussed details of the request; code
requirements; staff review; applicant's reasons for this request; study session questions
regarding plate line measurement, possibility of creating habitable area in the attic,
subdivision of this lot and drainage; Planning staff comments concerning calculation
of height and plate line. One condition for Commission consideration was suggested in
the staff report.
Discussion: intent of the limitations placed on accessory buildings was mainly
Commission's concern about blocking views and casting shadows on adjacent lots; this
flag lot could not be subdivided without a variance from the City of Burlingame. The
applicant was present. Chm. Mink opened the public hearing. There were no audience
comments and the hearing was closed.
Further discussion: the wide portion of this flag lot is adjacent to Armsby Drive in
Hillsborough and applicant has requested an encroachment permit from the Town of
Hillsborough for a curb cut to provide access off Armsby Drive; proposal would not
impact neighbors, it is upgrading existing housing and a three car garage should
compensate for no on -street parking; a flag lot has no curb parking, thus this is
justification for an oversized garage. A concern was expressed that since the plans
were drawn without benefit of a survey to establish grade, the conditions should
include the maximum front plate line and the distance from the roof peak to plate line;
it was also suggested the gross square footage be added to the conditions of approval.
The applicant explained the 15' garage door was for two cars, the 8' door for one car.
C. Leahy moved to grant this special permit with the following conditions: (1) that
the project be built according to the plans date stamped January 28, 1983 with a
maximum plate line of 13'-2" and a maximum height of 19'-8"; (2) that the plate line
in the front of the garage not exceed 9'-2"; (3) that the distance between the peak
of the roof and the plate line not exceed 6'-6"; and (4) that the gross square footage
of the garage not exceed 726 SF. Second C. Schwalm; motion approved unanimously on
roll call vote. Appeal procedures were advised.
4. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW A DONUT SHOP WITHIN SUB -AREA D OF THE BURLINGAME AVENUE
COMMERCIAL AREA AT 212 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, BY ARTURO MORALES
CP Monroe reviewed this request to allow a donut/pastry shop in Sub -Area D. Reference
staff report dated 3/8/83; Project Application & CEQA Assessment received 2/2/83;
February 14, 1983 memo from the Fire Marshal; February 14, 1983 memo from the City
Page 3
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 14, 1983
Engineer; February 22, 1983 memo from the Chief Building Inspector; applicant's project
description date stamped February 8, 1983; February 28, 1983 study meeting minutes;
cumulative traffic impact table, 210-218 California Drive dated 3/7/83; aerial
photograph; and plans date stamped February 2, 1983. CP discussed details of the
request; code requirements; staff review; applicant's description of this proposed use;
answers to study meeting questions: comparison with previous use of this building,
traffic generation, handicapped access; Planning staff concerns. Three conditions
were suggested in the staff report for Commission consideration.
Concern was expressed about traffic generation. CP explained staff's method of
calculating traffic generation as well as parking space requirements for this building.
Arturo Morales, the applicant, was present. Chm. Mink opened the public hearing.
There were no audience comments. Letter dated March 7, 1983 from W. Berry Hurley
Corp., Burlingame expressing concern about this proposal was noted for the record.
The Chair then declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Morales discussed parking
concerns, noting the busiest hours of the donut shop would be 6:00-10:00 A.M. and
6:00-10:00 P.M. when most of the establishments in the area would be closed. He
advised the shop would serve specialty donuts as well as other specialty products
such as pies and pastries.
Commission discussion: it was suggested the landlord of this building should attempt to
rent to auto related uses; several Commissioners expressed concern about traffic;
another concern was the 16 chair seating area which would tend to lengthen the time
customers would be using parking spaces. Further concern: division of this building
into small parcels which might set a precedent for substandard areas. It was suggested
Condition #1 be modified to read: "that before the permit for occupancy be issued the
conditions of . . . . be met."
C. Schwalm moved to continue this item for two weeks to the meeting of March 28, 1983.
Second C. Garcia; motion defeated on a 3-4 roll call vote, Cers Giomi, Graham, Leahy
and Mink dissenting.
C. Giomi then moved to deny this special permit. Second C. Leahy; application was
denied on a 6-1 roll call vote, C. Garcia dissenting. Appeal procedures were advised.
5. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW A RETAIL HOME AND AUTO STEREO SHOP IN SUB -AREA D OF THE
BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA AT 214 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, BY ARTURO MORALES
CP Monroe reviewed this application for a home and car stereo retail store which would
occupy the rear half of an approximate 1,000 SF area with the donut shop (Item #4).
Reference staff report dated 3/8/83; Project Application & CEQA Assessment received
2/2/83; applicant's project description date stamped February 8, 1983; February 22, 1983
memo from the Chief Building Inspector; February 14, 1983 memo from the Fire Marshal;
"no comments" note from the City Engineer (2/14/83); February 28, 1983 study session
minutes; cumulative traffic impact table, 210-218 California Drive dated 3/7/83; aerial
photograph; and plans date stamped February 2, 1983. CP discussed details of the
proposal; code requirements; staff review; applicant's description of the business;
answers to study meeting questions: parking requirements, traffic generation, handicapped
access; Planning staff concerns. Three conditions were suggested in the staff report
for Commission consideration.
Arturo Morales, the applicant, explained his reasons for proposing the two businesses
at this location, particularly the lower rental than his present location and to make
space for a donut shop or some other business that he could operate. He advised he
wished to proceed with the hearing on the stereo shop this evening.
Page 4
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 14, 1983
Chm. Mink opened the public hearing. There were no audience comments and the hearing
was closed. During discussion Mr. Morales advised the shop would sell specialty
equipment, there would be no installation on site and that an installation company
would be recommended should the customer need its services. Further discussion:
staff's recommendation that this retail area not be further divided and no more than
seven businesses be allowed in future; this business would not generate as much traffic
as a donut shop; concern about substandard retail spaces. It was recommended
Condition #1 be amended to read: "that before the permit for occupancy be issued the
conditions of the . . . . be met."
C. Graham commented that this use would generate a minor amount of traffic, that it
was an auto related use and a proper site for this type of business. C. Graham then
moved to approve this special permit with the following conditions: (1) that before
the permit for occupancy be issued the conditions of the Fire Marshal's memo of
February 14, 1983 and the Chief Building Inspector's memo of February 22, 1983 be met;
(2) that this retail area not be further divided in the future and that no more than
seven businesses be allowed in this structure in the future; and (3) that this business
be operated on the basis described in the applicant's letter date stamped February 8,
1983 with the clarifying notes added by the Planning staff. Second C. Garcia; motion
approved on a 5-2 roll call vote, Cers Giomi and Leahy dissenting. Appeal procedures
were advised.
6. SIGN EXCEPTION TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM NUMBER AND AMOUNT OF SIGNAGE PERMITTED AT
100 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, BY WILLIAM MEADE FOR ARATA PONTIAC-GMC
CP Monroe reviewed this request to exceed code requirements for signage in the Auto Row
area. Reference staff report dated 3/8/83; Sign Permit Application filed 2/17/83;
Sign Exception Application received February 25, 1983; photographs of pole signs D, E
and F which are to be removed; summary of the sign exception request; "no requirements/
comments" memos from the Fire Marshal (2/22/83) and City Engineer (2/22/83); March 7,
1983 memo from the Chief Building Inspector; aerial photograph; table giving a comparison
of existing signage on Auto Row and Rollins Road auto uses to city code standards;
and plans date stamped February 17, 1983. CP discussed details of the request; code
requirements; staff review; applicant's justification; existing Auto Row signage.
One condition was suggested in the staff report for Commission consideration.
William A. Meade, American Neon Displays Inc., representing Arata Pontiac -GMC, and
David James Arata were present. Chm. Mink opened the public hearing. There were no
audience comments and the hearing was closed.
Discussion: there will be no exposed lighting, signs will have interior lamps; no
signage is proposed on the railroad side of this property; the long, one block street
frontage on California Drive was noted; the proposal will be a total signage program
for this site.
C. Graham found there were special circumstances applicable to this property in that
there are four businesses on the site: Arata Pontiac, GMC trucks, -a service facility
and used car sales; that these signs are specific and necessary for each business;
that this is not a standard type of operation with a single business/single site;
and, therefore, approval would not constitute a grant of special privilege. Chm. Mink
added that this property is one of the longest lots in the zone. C. Graham then moved
to approve this sign exception with the following condition: (1) that the signage
program implemented shall be consistent with the Chief Building Inspector's memo of
March 7, 1983, with the plans date stamped February 17, 1983 and the sign permit date
stamped February 17, 1983. Second C. Cistulli; motion approved unanimously on roll
call vote. Appeal procedures were advised.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 5
March 14, 1983
7. AMENDMENT TO SIGN EXCEPTION FOR LA BAIE RESTAURANT AT FOUR SEAS CENTER,
800 AIRPORT BOULEVARD, BY STANLEY LO (CONTINUED FROM 2/28/83)
Application dropped from the agenda at the request of the applicant (see letters on file
with staff report for this item).
8. AMENDMENT TO SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED THE FROG POND HOT TUB AND SAUNA CLUB AT
1302 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY TO ALLOW A MASSEUSE SERVICE ON SITE, BY NATASHA SHIH
CP Monroe reviewed this request to amend the December 6, 1977 special permit issued to
The Frog Pond. Reference staff report dated 3/8/83; Project Application & CEQA Assessment
received 2/25/83; "no requirements/comments" memos from the Fire Marshal (3/2/83),
City Engineer (3/1/83) and Chief Building Inspector (3/7/83); Police Department
memorandum dated March 2, 1983; applicant's project description received 2/25/83; and
March 1, 1983 letter from the Planner to the property owner.
CP discussed details of the request; applicant's description of her by -appointment only
massage service; staff review; and read into the record March 10, 1983 letter from the
property owner, received this evening, giving consent to the application. Two conditions
for Commission consideration were suggested in the staff report.
Natasha Shih, the applicant, was present. Chm. Mink opened the public hearing. There
were no audience comments and the hearing was closed. CP and CA explained city
requirements for this use on the site of The Frog Pond, specifically that this is a
permit for masseuse service at the location and that whether it was by employees or
contractors did not affect the permit. It was noted the Police Department had found
no problems with the applicant.
C. Giomi moved to amend this special permit to allow a masseuse service on-site at
1302 Bayshore Highway with the following conditions: (1) that the proposed massage
business be limited to one masseuse operating on an appointment only basis from
11:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M., Monday through Friday; and (2) that this permit be reviewed
in six months time. Second C. Schwalm; motion approved unanimously on roll call vote.
Appeal procedures were advised.
9. FINAL CONDOMINIUM MAP FOR THE 4 -UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 1219 PALOMA AVENUE, BY LOUIS
ARATA FOR ALBERY INCORPORATED
Reference City Engineer's March 9, 1983 memo and Final Condominium Map date stamped
March 7, 1983. CE Erbacher advised the final map is substantially in conformance with
the tentative map and condominium permit plans. Staff found it ready to forward to
City Council. C. Schwalm moved for approval and recommendation to City Council of
this final condominium map. Second C. Leahy; motion approved unanimously on roll call
vote.
10. DISPOSAL OF CITY PROPERTY
CA Coleman advised the city is initiating the process of selling two parcels of property:
one adjacent to Cuernavaca Park on Hunt Drive (given to the city for city use, possibly
a fire station) and the other the present police station. As part of the disposal
process Government Code requires the Planning Commission approve disposition of these
properties as being in conformity with the adopted general plan.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 6
March 14, 1983
Discussion: present zoning of the sites; the bidding process; possibility of the
Hunt Drive site being added to Cuernavaca Park; city will give notice of these sales
in the newspapers.
C. Graham moved that Commission has studied these two parcels and found they conform
to the adopted general plan. Second C. Cistulli; motion approved unanimously on
voice vote.
CITY PLANNER REPORTS
- Review of Council Meetinqs
CP Monroe reviewed Council meeting of March 5, 1983 and Council actions at its
March 7, 1983 meeting.
- Annual Tour of Projects
This tour was tentatively set for Saturday, May 21, 1983, staff to communicate with
City Council regarding this date for a joint meeting of Commission and Council.
- Other
It was suggested Commission again study guest parking requirements for condominiums.
Ramada Inn expansion environmental assessment and project will be reviewed at a special
study session the week of April 18, 1983.
C. Giomi commented that the League of California Cities Planning Commissioners Institute
held in Monterey, March 2-4, 1983, and attended by five Commissioners, was extremely
worthwhile and informative.
An.1ni 1RNMPNT
The meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Nannette Giomi
Secretary