Loading...
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