HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1984.10.22CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 22, 1984
CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was
called to order by Chairman Graham on Monday, October 22, 1984_ at
7:31 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Garcia, Giomi, Graham, Leahy,
Schwalm, Taylor
Absent: Commissioner Jacobs (excused)
Staff Present: Margaret Monroe, City Planner; Jerome F. Coleman,
City Attorney; Frank C. Erbacher, City Engineer
MINUTES - The minutes of the October 9, 1984 meeting were unanimously
approved.
AGENDA - Order of the agenda approved with the following changes:
Item #2 to be heard first; wording of this item, first line,
to read: "Variance to parking dimension rE!quirements ."
ITEMS FOR ACTION
2. VARIANCE TO PARKING DIMENSION REQUIREMENTS AT NORTHPARK
APARTMENTS, 1080 CAROLAN AVENUE, BY CNR ASSOCIATES FOR
NORTHPARK PROPERTIES
CP Monroe reviewed this request for a variance to parking dimension
requirements on a residential site in order to recoup four spaces lost
by the relocation of the maintenance facility. Reference staff
report, 10/22/84; Project Application & CEQA Assessment received
9/5/84; existing parking/apartment units summary, 9/5/84; statement of
materials stored at the maintenance facility, 9/5/84; preliminary
sketch, new maintenance facility, date stamped 9/5/84; letters from
Richard Coxall, September 21 and August 30, 1984; staff review: Fire
Marshal (9/20/84), Chief Building Inspector (9/19/84), City Engineer
(10/1/84); Monroe letter of action on a previous application which was
denied without prejudice, 8/23/84; Planning Commission minutes,
8/13/84; Coxall letter to Towber, 9/1/84, with attached vacant parking
space summary; study meeting minutes, 10/9/84; aerial photograph;
notice of hearing mailed 10/12/84; and plans date stamped 9/5/84. CP
discussed details of the request, previous application, staff review,
applicant's letters and justification for variance, study meeting
questions. 'Three conditions were suggested for consideration at the
public hearing.
Discussion: CE's requirement that the compact stall: be distributed
more evenly on site. Chm. Graham opened the public hearing. Richard
Coxall, applicant, was present. There were no audience comments and
the public hearing was closed.
Page 2
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes October 22, 1984
Discussion: desirability of distributing compact stalls throughout the
complex; parking stall sizes and CE's concern that larger cars would
use two spaces if the compact spaces were not distributed around the
site; applicant advised he had no problem with the suggested
conditions, spaces could be assigned to tenants, they are currently
unassigned. _
C. Giomi found there were exceptional circumstances in the need for
an on-site maintenance facility for this large complex, that if it
were put elsewhere on site existing landscaping would have to be
removed, that this is a single site and would not affect any other
site in the city and that it would not affect the zoning plan of the
city. C. Giomi moved for approval of this variance to parking
standards with the following conditions: (1) that the conditions of
the Chief Building Inspector's memo of September 19, 1984 and the City
Engineer's memo of October 1, 1984 be met; (2) that the maintenance
facility as built be placed under Building B and conform to the
alternate one wall position shown in the plans submitted to the
Planning Department and date stamped September 5, 1984 so that no more
than four parking stalls would be removed; (3) that the final plans
shall meet all the requirements of the Uniform Building and Uniform
Fire Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame before any building
permit is issued; and (4) that the substandard stalls be marked "small
cars only". Second C. Schwalm.
Comment on the motion: would not want approval of this application to
set a precedent for allowing compact parking in residential areas.
Motion approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Jacobs absent. Appeal
procedures were advised.
1. SIGN EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A GROUND SIGN AT 1881 RO.LLINS ROAD WHICH
CAUSES TOTAL SIGNAGE TO EXCEED PERMITTED LIMITS, BY JULIE
DEKELAITA WITH S. J. AMOROSO PROPERTIES
CP Monroe reviewed this request to raise the height of the large
directory sign for the three businesses located at 1,881 Rollins Road
from 5' to 91. Reference staff report, 10/22/84; Sign Permit
application filed 9/12/84; Sign Exception application filed 9/12/84;
sign drawing date stamped 9/12/84; site drawing, 1873-1881 Rollins,
indicating placement of signage; staff review: City :Engineer
(9/24/84 and 5/16/84), Fire Marshal (9/20/84), Chief Building
Inspector (9/19/84); letters in support from Maurice Rosen, House of
Stools IN Bars, 1881 Rollins and Lawrence J. Lombard, Barker
Industrial and Foundry Supply, 1881 Rollins; photographs of the site;
material documenting the history of signage/signage ,requests on this
site: Commission minutes (6/11/84 and 5/29/84), staff report
(6/11/84), Commission minutes (12/14/81), staff report (12/14/81),
letter of action to The Magic Press Corporation (12/22/81), site
drawing date stamped 11/13/81, Sign Permit application filed 11/13/81,
and Commission minutes (4/12/76, 4/26/76); study meeting minutes,
10/9/84; aerial photograph; notice of hearing mailed 10/12/84; letter
in opposition from Roger C. Weiner, The Magic Press Corporation (10/
12/84); letter (10/1/84) from Gilbert J. Amoroso, property owner,
Page 3
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes October 22, 1984
acknowledging he is aware of the application. CP discussed details of
the request, staff review, applicant's justification., letters in
support, history of signage on the site, letter in opposition,
property owner's October 1, 1984 letter. Two conditions were
suggested for consideration at the public hearing.
Chm. Graham opened the public hearing. Michael Nave, attorney
representing the applicant, addressed Commission: the deli is located
on the Millbrae city line, trees and vegetation in Millbrae block view
of the sign (photos were presented illustrating this); existing sign
was constructed 1 SF larger than the previous permit authorized, this
application will reduce its size to that approved in 1981; applicant's
previous request was for a 12' sign which Magic Press, located on the
Rollins Road frontage of the site, felt would cast shadows; have spent
an afternoon observing the site and no shadows were cast on Magic
Press by the present sign; the deli serves businesses in the area,
many come from the direction of Millbrae Avenue and the business
cannot be seen from the intersection roughly 100' to the north; some
reference has been made that the Backalley Deli is up for sale, that
is not the applicant's intention.
There were no audience comments in favor. Speaking in opposition:
Merlin Newkirk, The Magic Press, 1877 Rollins Road who presented
photographs of the sign in question. His comments: we have Rollins
Road frontage and our problem is identification; the deli sign is so
large it obstructs our sign; this is a neighborhood of mostly small
signs; the present sign appears to identify Magic Press at 1877
Rollins as the deli; if sign were moved to the north side of the
driveway adjacent to the chain link fence it would not be a problem;
raising the sign to 9' at its present location would obstruct our
business more.
Attorney Nave responded: referring to page 2 of the :staff report,
Magic Press in 1981 requested its sign be reduced, we are not here
this evening to determine if Magic Press is entitled to a larger sign;
there are signs on Rollins Road not unlike the one we are requesting
and each of these businesses have frontage on Rollins, the applicant
does not; we are willing to accept the conditions listed in the staff
report. There were no further audience comments and the public
hearing was closed.
Commission discussion: it would appear if the sign is raised Magic
Press' sign would be more visible, city approved a deli on this site
and it needs identification; a small restaurant was approved at this
location in the M-1 district to meet the needs of nearby businesses,
the original applicant said word of mouth advertising would be
sufficient, seems applicant is requesting a larger sign to draw trade
from outside the immediate neighborhood; the sign as it exists is a
drawback to Magic Press, think raising it would compound the
situation; when located on a site that is hard to find, people can be
told what to look for.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 4
October 22, 1984
Staff comment: location of signs on a site is a matter between the
landlord and the tenants; if the application is not approved, we could
receive another application from the remaining two tenants at 1881
Rollins Road; the sign must be changed in any event to the 72 SF
approved in 1981.
Further Commission comment: only the chain link fence is obstructing
the sign, as one enters the alley shrubs have been removed and the
sign is visible; a solution might be for all tenants and the landlord
to come in with a total sign package for the site; support previous
comments, intent of delis in the M-1 zone was to serve local people in
that area, see no reason for any signage; do not feel a business can
operate with no identification.
C. Schwalm moved to grant this sign exception. Motion died for lack
of a second.
C. Taylor moved that this sign exception be rejected; second C. Giomi.
Motion approved on a 5-1 roll call vote, C. Schwalm dissenting, C.
Jacobs absent. Appeal procedures were advised.
3. AMENDMENT OF THE 3/20/72 SPECIAL PERMIT TO CHANGE THE OPERATING
HOURS FOR THE CAR WASH AT 1095 CAROLAN AVENUE, BY WILLIAM STORUM
WITH SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY
CP Monroe reviewed this request to change the hours of this service
station and car wash business. Reference staff report, 10/22/84;
Project Application & CEQA Assessment received 9/11/84; staff review:
Fire Marshal (9/12/84), Chief Building Inspector (9/17/84), City
Engineer (10/2/84); Coleman letter to the applicant (8/31/84); City
Council minutes, March 20, 1972; applicant's letter, 9/8/84; study
meeting minutes, 10/9/84; aerial photograph; notice of hearing mailed
10/12/84. CP discussed details of the request, staff review, CA's
letter regarding use permit amendment and noise complaints,
applicant's reasons for the request and discussion of his business.
Two conditions were suggested for consideration at the public
hearing. CP advised notices were mailed to all property owners within
300 feet of the site and posted on utility poles near the Northpark
Apartments across the street.
Comment: would suggest a third condition be added to require review in
six months; CA advised he had not received any complaints since his
letter in August, 1984. CP related her telephone conversation with
the manager's office of Northpark asking for permission to post
notices in the lobbies at this complex. She was advised any notice
regarding Northpark property could be posted but none for other
properties.
Chm. Graham opened the public hearing. William Storum, applicant,
discussed a traffic survey he conducted on Tuesday, October 16, which
indicated people are out and on the road early in the morning with
peak car counts between 8:00 and 9:00 A.M.; with the 8:00 A.M. to
8:00 P.M. hours he would be open during the busier hours of the day
Page 5
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes October 22, 1984
when people are more apt to want the services he offers; his studies
have shown there seems to be no seasonal variation.
There were no audience comments in favor. The following spoke in
opposition. Theodora Schrader, 1045 Cadillac Way: live across the
street; this operation is noisy, not only the car wash but vacuuming
with radios turned on full blast; this noise affects almost two dozen
apartments across the street, opening at 8:00 A.M. would be worse; if
applicant is concerned about his clientele there are other car washes
nearby which do not face residential facilities. Elaine Cadmore, 1080
Carolan Avenue, property manager for Northpark Apartments: have
received many complaints about the car wash and there is a large
turnover of those units which are affected; it is particularly bad in
the warm months when windows are open.
Mr. Storum spoke in rebuttal: have been here since November, 1981;
when I am notified of a problem I do correct it, the leaf blower was
removed after complaints were received; have posted my phone number on
the site and would be happy to work with anyone to try to resolve any
problems. There were no further audience comments and the public
hearing was closed.
Commission/staff discussion: Northpark was built to code at the time
of construction, probably today they would be required to have a much
higher level of insulation for sound; would like to include a
condition requiring review in six months or on a complaint basis; car
wash service seems to be desired by Burlingame residents at an early
hour but would prefer an opening time of 10:00 A.M. on Sunday; concern
about the noise created by dropping the pit covers, applicant advised
he could find a better time than Sunday for cleaning the pits;
regarding radio noise at the drying station, this could be mitigated
by posting notices or telling customers verbally to turn off their
radios; responding to Commission question, the property manager of
Northpark advised she testified this evening in her capacity as
property manager, that she had not contacted the applicant regarding
noise complaints and she was not aware of the city's request to post
notices about this hearing.
C. Giomi moved to grant this special permit amendment with the
following conditions: (1) that the hours of operation be changed to
8:00 A.M. - 8:00 P.M. Monday through Saturday and 10:00 A.M. to
6:00 P.M. Sunday; (2) that all five of the other conditions of the
March 20, 1972 use permit shall be in effect and complied with:
(a) the use to be restricted to an area 600' in length south from
Broadway and west from Carolan Avenue; (b) Southern Pacific Company to
pay the city a sum of $6,000 for its share of street improvements on
Carolan Avenue; (c) 40' of the Carolan Avenue frontage, measured from
Broadway, to be landscaped to conform to Park Department requirements
and to be maintained; the driveway to be relocated south of the
landscaped strip; (d) improvements to conform to the plans submitted;
(e) a fence 4' in height to be placed along the west property line;
and (3) that this permit be reviewed in six months time or upon
receipt of a complaint. Second C. Taylor.
Page 6
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes October 22, 1984
Comment on the motion: will vote no on the application because of
noise generated in a residential area; would applicant be willing to
install a noise barrier around this operation; applicant advised he
could not totally enclose the operation at this time but has been
installing low energy drying units when possible, he could do
something to mitigate the pit cover and radio noise; share
Commission's concerns but based on the testimony this evening -and lack
of complaints received by the applicant from Northpark management will
vote to approve; applicant is under obligation to mitigate the noise,.
there should be communication between the applicant and Northpark
management; feel applicant is dealing in good faith and the new hours
should be given a try for six months.
Motion approved on a 4-2 roll call vote, Cers Schwalm and Graham
dissenting, C. Jacobs absent. Appeal procedures were advised.
4. AMENDMENT OF 7/5/83 SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW AMFAC HOTEL TO CONTINUE
TO USE A PORTION OF THE FUTURE ALAMO RENT A CAR HEADQUARTERS SITE
AT 778 BURLWAY ROAD, BY ALAMO RENT A CAR WITH DKBERT ASSOCIATES
CP Monroe reviewed this request to allow Amfac to continue to lease
part of an existing warehouse building on the Alamo site in exchange
for leased parking space on Amfac's supplemental lot. Reference staff
report, 10/22/84; Project Application & CEQA Assessment received
9/7/84; Salisbury letter to Monroe, 9/7/84; staff review: Chief
Building Inspector (9/17/84), City Engineer (9/17/84), Fire Marshal
(9/18/84); study meeting minutes, 10/9/84; Monroe letter of action to
National Car Rental System, 40 Edwards Court; Planning Commission
minutes, National Car Rental application, 7/9 and 7/23/84; Commission
minutes, Alamo Rent A Car application, 6/13/83; aerial photograph;
notice of hearing mailed 10/12/84; and plans date stamped September 17
and October 9, 1984. CP discussed details of the request, staff
review, applicant's letter and referenced study meeting questions
reviewed in the staff report. Two conditions were suggested for
consideration at the public hearing.
Commission discussion/comment: separation between the LPG tank and
parked cars meets Fire Department requirements; feel that public
access to the bay and Amfac surplus parking are related, where is the
25' public access strip behind Amfac, believe when the LeBaron hotel
was approved for this site a 25' strip was required; can Commission
deny Alamo's request in order to gain something from Amfac; think this
matter should be studied further to see if parking requirements can be
met and provide the 25' strip; need history and/or minutes covering
the original permit; if this is required of every other project along
the bayshore, why not this one; possibility of acquiring the strip by
eminent domain (staff advised it has not been city policy to acquire
these strips because then the city would have to plan, improve and
maintain them).
The Chair continued this item to the meeting of November 13, 1984;
staff will research the original permit.
Page 7
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes October 22, 1984
Recess 9:10 P.M.; reconvene 9:22 P.M.
5. CONDOMINIUM PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A 12 UNIT PROJECT
AT 623 ANSEL AVENUE, BY PANKO/SINCLAIR FOR ROBERT BERRYMAN
CP Monroe reviewed this request to build a 12 unit residential
condominium. Reference staff report, 10/22/84; Project Application &
CEQA Assessment received 8/15/84; Negative Declaration ND -364P posted
October 3, 1984; staff review: City Engineer (10/2/84), Fire Marshal
(9/28/84), City Attorney (10/16/84), Chief Building Inspector
(9/6/84), Director of Parks (10/16/84 with attached Minimum Standards
for Landscaping); Panko/Sinclair letters, September 6 and 24, 1984;
George Rosekrans, 720 Farringdon Lane letter, October 13, 1984,
protesting the construction unless adequate parking is provided; study
meeting minutes, 10/9/84; drawings date stamped 10/9/84; aerial
photograph; notice of hearing mailed 10/12/84; and plans date stamped
September 24, 1984. CP discussed details of the request, staff
review, applicant's letters, study meeting concerns. Two conditions
were suggested for consideration at the public hearing.
Chm. Graham opened the public hearing. Niles Tanakatsubo of Panko/
Sinclair, Architects told Commission they were asking only for a
condominium permit, no variances or special permits were required, the
project meets or exceeds all planning codes. Azkanaz Mackitarian,
1438 Floribunda Avenue spoke in favor. There were no further audience
comments and the public hearing was closed.
C. Taylor moved for approval of this condominium permit with the
following conditions: (1) that the conditions of the City Engineer's
October 2, 1984 memo, the Fire Marshal's September 28, 1984 memo and
the Director of Parks' October 16, 1984 memo be met; and (2) that the
project as built shall conform to the plans submitted to the Planning
Department and date stamped September 24, 1984. Second C. Leahy;
motion approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Jacobs absent. Appeal
procedures were advised.
6. TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP TO COMBINE LOTS AND TENTATIVE
CONDOMINIUM MAP FOR A 12 UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 623 ANSEL AVENUE,
BY WM. JAY HAMMOND (SURVEYOR) FOR ROBERT BERRYMAN (PROPERTY OWNER)
CE Erbacher recommended these maps be sent forward to Council for
approval with one condition as listed in his agenda memo of 10/17/84.
C. Giomi moved for approval and recommendation to City Council of the
tentative and final parcel map and tentative condominium map with the
following condition: (1) at least one of the existing dwelling
structures be removed prior to the filing of the lot combination
parcel map. Second C. Garcia; all aye voice vote.
7. THREE SPECIAL PERMITS TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A 1.559 ROOM HOTEL
AT 350 AIRPORT BOULEVARD, BY CARRUF CORPORATION
CP Monroe reviewed this request for three special permits: to exceed
35' in height (97'-8" proposed), to exceed 1.0 Floor Area Ratio (1.36
Page 8
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes October 22, 1984
proposed) and to exceed the Design Guidelines for setbacks, apparent
width and view corridors. Reference staff report, 10/22/84; Project
Application and CEQA Assessment received 9/26/84; copy of the Design
Guidelines referenced for this project; Council Resolution 68-84
certifying the environmental impact report for the proposed hotel with
attached Exhibit A, Significant Effects, Mitigations and Findings;
staff review: Chief Building Inspector (10/13/84), Fire Marshal
(9/5/84 and 9/26/84), City Engineer (9/17/84), Director of Parks
(9/26/84); letter from the architect, Mark Hornberger, 10/7/84; letter
to BCDC from David A. Christy, Parks and Recreation, County of San
Mateo, 9/17/84, supporting the plans for Fishermen's Park; Shadow
Patterns received 10/3/84; memo from the Fire Chief, 10/12/84; study
meeting minutes, 10/9/84; and plans date stamped 9/26/84.
CP discussed details of the proposed project, special permits
required, staff review and noted minor changes to the suggested
conditions of approval in the staff report.
Chm. Graham opened the public hearing. Mark Hornberger, architect,
presented the project with the aid of slides. He discussed this
unusual site surrounded on three sides by water, the design which
incorporates two room towers joined by a clear glass mini atrium,
elevations, setbacks, lot coverage, landscaping, redevelopment of
Fishermen's Park which will include 18 parking spaces solely for its
use, structured parking which would appear as parking at grade, view
corridors, public access, amenities included in the hotel design,
typical room floors, project viewed from Airport Boulevard and from
the bay, fire access completely around the building .and fire safety
measures for the structure. Slides were shown to illustrate
alternative projects if the height were reduced.
Discussion: staff explained the status of Fishermen's Park which is a
part of the total site; the 18 parking spaces for this park are
separate and not included in the total 590 spaces for the project;
compliance with all fire codes, local and state, has been confirmed by
the Fire Chief, hand laddering where necessary is acceptable; business
communication facilities are planned, the possibility of a satellite
dish has not yet been addressed; at the time of roadway realignment
the two contiguous properties will comply with landscaping
requirements; applicant has not yet submitted plans for signage;
discussing setbacks, architect stated if the towers were measured
individually without the atrium front setbacks were close to the
design guidelines; on-site parking during construction can be easily
handled on this large site; concern about noise levels in the atrium
area, architect advised extensive acoustical studies will be made in
advance of construction and any necessary adjustments to the design
will be made if noise levels do not meet state CNEL standards.
There were no audience comments and -the public hearing was closed.
Page 9
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes October 22, 1984
C. Taylor commented that Commission had seen this project as one of
the alternatives when reviewing the EIR, that he diel not object to the
proposed height, that the design justified exceeding the 1.0 Floor
Area Ratio, that the developers have taken special pains to mitigate
exceeding the apparent width, i.e., calling the atrium a view corridor
and that the relation of setback to the height of the building is more
than offset by the project design. C. Taylor then moved for approval
of the three special permits with staff's 17 conditions as amended.
CE requested a further condition: that a tentative and final parcel
map be submitted to combine parcels if required by the City Engineer.
This condition was incorporated into C. Taylor's motion. Motion
seconded by C. Garcia and approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Jacobs
absent. Appeal procedures were advised. The conditions follow:
1. that the conditions of the Chief Building Inspector's memo of
September 13, 1984, the City Engineer's memo of September 17,
1984, the Fire Marshal's memos of September 5 and 26, 1984 and
the Director of Parks' memo of September 26, 1984 are met;
2. that the project be developed consistent with the plans submitted
to the Planning Department and date stamped September 26, 1984;
3. that no room in the hotel shall be leased by a single individual,
company or corporate entity for more than 29 consecutive days and
no rooms or portions of the building shall be leased for
permanent residential purposes; patrons, visitors or employees
may not be charged for the use of on-site parking without review
and permission of the city and none of the on-site parking may be
leased or dedicated to any hotel related use such as car rental
without permission of the city;
4. that the project receive all necessary permits required by
regulatory agencies having jurisdiction over this site including,
but not limited to, the Bay Conservation and Development
Commission, San Mateo County regarding Fishermen's Park, the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers;
5. that any pedestrian or mixed use bridge crossing the mouth or
near the mouth of Sanchez Channel be a private :bridge and be
designed so that it can be removed at the request of the city as
needed for dredging or other channel improvements or as needed by
adjacent property owners for property maintenance or
improvements;
6. that Fishermen's Park be improved to the standards required by
San Mateo County and BCDC and that the property owner shall be
responsible for the operation, maintenance and policing of the
developed park and that these responsibilities :shall be exercised
to the standards established by the County of San Mateo Parks
Department and safety standards of the City of Burlingame;
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 10
October 22, 1984
7. to perpetuate the existing shellfish resource on the east side of
the site (by Fishermen's Park) the property owner/developer shall
restore the beds, if seawall refurbishing is necessary, or shall
protect the beds by measures identified by a recognized shellfish
expert and approved by the city prior to the initiation of any
work on the site or to receiving a grading permit which would
affect runoff into the bay; in addition a habitat protection plan
shall be developed, reviewed and approved by the city so that the
shellfish habitat and potential habitat on all water frontages
shall not be affected by construction activities, landscaping
installation or future landscaping irrigation, fertilization or
maintenance, or levee maintenance;
8. that the noise levels inside the completed structure shall meet
the general criteria of Title 25 as well as modifications to
structure and building materials so that the average event will
not be heard in a guest sleeping room at a level above 45 dBA;
9. that during renovation Fishermen's Park be closed to public use
for the minimum amount of time and that it be fenced off from the
main project so it can continue to be used during construction of
the hotel and its site improvements, if possible renovation of
Fishermen's Park should take place during the lowest use season;
10. that traffic to and from the site shall be managed by providing a
bus stop and encouraging mass transit service, by employing a
traffic coordinator at least part time who will encourage
employees to ride share and use available mass transit, and
provide shuttle service to San Francisco International Airport;
11. that roadway improvements required by the city shall be provided
including installing a median strip on Airport Boulevard, paying
their proportionate share with the Burlingame Group project and
future project at the drive-in theater site of widening of the
roadway/pedestrian bridge across Sanchez Channel; provide new
sidewalk and curb and gutter along Airport Boulevard where the
roadway is realigned, provide an interim adjustment to the curve
on Airport Boulevard as it turns west until the roadway
realignment can be completed, in the future participate
proportionately in the cost of the realignment of the curve going
westerly on Airport Boulevard; provide directional signage on the
hotel site into Fishermen's Park;
12. that an on-site security patrol shall be responsible for
enforcement of any operating hours established by the county for
Fishermen's Park and shall patrol the hotel, its; grounds and
Fishermen's Park;
13. that the project developer shall contribute the project's
proportional share to the cost of providing an additional water
main connection under 101 and to the expansion of the Rollins
Road sewage pump station and sewer main, low flow water fixtures
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
:Page 11
October 22, 1984
and drought resistant plants shall be used to conserve water;
on-site pretreatment for sewage from all areas where food is
prepared shall be provided;
14. that final design shall be preceded by a complete soils study
including the levee structures, minimum final elevation of the
site shall be 9' with the elevations of all entryways into
structures at least 91, skin friction piles shall be used for
structural support, there shall be no organic material in the
required fill, fill shall be well compacted and existing fill on
site shall be recompacted; all utilities shall have flexible
joints and be made of noncorrosive materials; if required,
excavation pit wall shall be 1:1; the outboard face of the levee
shall be stabilized and protected and levee design shall consider
effects of subsidence over time;
15. that the existing storm water and collection system shall be
redesigned to reduce runoff from paved areas, oil separating
traps shall be installed and regularly maintained by the
developer/operator on a schedule reviewed and approved by the
city, measures shall be taken to protect the bay from siltation
during construction;
16. that construction shall be limited to the hours established by
the city, portable shrouds shall be placed around pile drivers
and the construction site shall be enclosed by a solid fence as
determined by city staff, during construction demolition areas
shall be continuously sprinkled, stockpiled and construction
materials shall be covered and streets in the construction area,
as determined by the city, shall be swept once a day;
17. that a tentative and final parcel map be submitted to combine
parcels if required by the City Engineer; and
18. that the applicant shall abide by the following project
completion/construction table:
BCDC application December 1, 1984
Submit final plans June 1, 1985
Pick up building permit September 1, 1985
Final foundation inspection March 1, 1986
Final framing inspection February 1, 1987
Final inspection/occupancy September 1, 1987
ITEMS FOR STUDY
8. SPECIAL PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE AT 708 WINCHESTER DRIVE
Requests: what utilities are proposed for the garage,; would applicant
be willing to widen the garage to 201; dimensions of the pull-down
stair. Item set for hearing November 13, 1984.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 12
October 22, 1984
9. SPECIAL PERMIT TO CONDUCT A DAY CARE PROGRAM FOR. DEVELOPMENTALLY
DISABLED YOUNG ADULTS AT 1131 VANCOUVER AVENUE
Requests: research previous use and compare with this proposal; are
there bathroom facilities for the handicapped. Item. set for hearing
November 13, 1984. -
10. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW AN OFFICE/COMPUTER PROCESSING/STORAGE
EXPANSION IN AN EXISTING STRUCTURE AT 1811 ADRIAN ROAD
CP •advised accurate square footage figures will be provided for the
public hearing and noted the mitigated negative declaration, these
mitigations will appear as conditions on the project. Requests:
existing employee traffic generation figures; clarification of
pedestrian walkway connection; will the existing spur track be used.
Item set for hearing November 13, 1984.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
- Review of Special Permit - truck storage - 1645 Rollins Road
- Review of Special Permit - office expansion - 1657-63 Rollins Road
- Review of Special Permit - sports therapy clinic - 888 Hinckley Road
- Review of Special Permit - Showcase Rent A Car - 826 Cowan Road
- CE's letter, October 16, 1984 - subject: reopening of City Council
public hearing on limiting access to Fairfield Road.
CITY PLANNER REPORT
CP Monroe reviewed Council's actions at its October 15, 1984 meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 10:25 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Nannette M. Giomi
Secretary