Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1984.04.09CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 9, 1984 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Chairman Graham on Monday, April 9, 1984 at 7:32 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Cistulli, Garcia, Giomi, Graham, Leahy, Schwalm, Taylor Absent: None Staff Present: City Planner Margaret Monroe; City Attorney Jerome F. Coleman; City Engineer Frank C. Erbacher MINUTES - The minutes of the March 26, 1984 meeting were unanimously approved. AGENDA - Order of the agenda unanimously approved. ITEMS FOR ACTION 1. CONDOMINIUM PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A SIX UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM AT 1114 PALOMA AVENUE, BY DIXON/KAINDL ASSOCIATES FOR PALOMA ASSOCIATES CP Monroe reviewed this request for six one -bedroom condominium units. Reference staff report, 4/9/84; March 26, 1984 Commission minutes; March 12, 1984 study meeting minutes; Project Application & CEQA Assessment received 2/15/84; staff review: City Engineer (March 13, 1984), Fire Marshal (February 29, 1984) and Director of Parks (February 27, 1984); August 22, 1983 Commission minutes denying a previous proposal for this site; October 3, 1983 City Council appeal hearing minutes; aerial photograph; Notice of Hearing mailed March 30, 1984; and plans date stamped February 15, 1984 as revised April 3, 1984. CP discussed details of the project, code requirements, staff review, study meeting requests, previous proposal for the site. Three conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. It was determined the present plans do not show any designated guest parking spaces. Chm. Graham opened the public hearing. Michael Kaindl, architect representing the applicants, stated his understanding was that Commission policy regarding designated visitor parking applied only to projects on El Camino Real. He discussed the total redesign of this project including underground parking and compliance with the zoning code, condominium guidelines and staff requirements; the new design has increased open space for the residents, increased setbacks and decreased the bulk of the building; the applicants feel this New England design will create a residential atmosphere and enhance the area. There were no audience comments and the hearing was closed. Commission discussion: redesign will be an asset to the neighborhood; would like one or two of the nine parking spaces designated for guest parking; second stairway exit from the garage is an improvement with no significant impact on landscaping along the driveway. Page 2 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes April 9, 1984 C. Giomi moved to grant this condominium permit with the following conditions: (1) that the project be developed consistent with the plans submitted and date stamped February 15, 1984 as revised April 3, 1984; (2) that the conditions of the City Engineer's memo of March 13, 1984 and the Fire Marshal's memo of February 29, 1984 be met; (3) that the final landscape plans for the project be approved by the Parks Department before a building permit is issued; and (4) that two of the nine parking spaces be designated as guest parking. Second C. Garcia. Comment on the motion: city does not require guest parking spaces in addition to the code requirement for a project. Motion approved on a 5-1-1 roll call vote, C. Leahy dissenting, C. Cistulli abstaining. C. Leahy wished the record to show he did not object to the project but to the parking condition in the motion. Appeal procedures were advised. 2. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR A SIX UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 1114 PALOMA AVENUE CE advised map may be recommended to Council. C. Giomi moved for approval and recommendation to City Council of this tentative subdivision map. Second C. Garcia; motion approved 6-1 on voice vote, C. Cistulli abstaining. 3. TWO VARIANCES TO DIVIDE AN EXISTING TWO-BEDROOM UNIT INTO TWO ONE -BEDROOM UNITS AT 1466 BELLEVUE AVENUE. BY ROBISON CONSTRUCTION FOR CAROLYN MEISWINKEL CP Monroe reviewed this request to divide a large apartment in the existing 14 unit building into two one -bedroom apartments. Reference staff report, 4/9/84; Commission minutes 3/26/84; letter from the applicant, March 27, 1984; Planning Commission staff report, 3/26/84 with attachments. CP discussed details of the request, code requirements, continuance of this item from the March 26 meeting in order to allow applicant to supply more information. Affirmative action on the variances will require the making of findings. Chm. Graham opened the public hearing. Chuck Freitas, electrical contractor, discussed his inspection of the building: structure is quite old as is all wiring; there are minor problems which have been taken care of; all is now legal; no problem with any of the electrical service. Carolyn Meiswinkel, applicant, stated her husband is a building contractor, any work on this building would be by a contractor and to code; hope to convert to two units since there is so much work to do on that particular unit. There were no further audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Commission/applicant discussion: fully complying fire alarm system will be installed in the building as required; applicant wishes to divide this one unit since it is in disrepair and so large there is a lot of wasted space; code does not address smaller car spaces for residential structures; if approved, recently asphalted area would have to be changed as appropriate to meet current code even if it meant removal of trees; expense sheet received from the applicant following the last Commission meeting covers repairs to the entire structure; have no objection to renovating the structure but have difficulty finding exceptional circumstances or a hardship to justify granting the variances. C. Schwalm moved to deny the two variances. Second C. Cistulli. Comment on the motion: possibility of enlarging some of the existing units, making parking space requirements fewer. C. Giomi found there were exceptional circumstances in that this building is an older structure constructed prior to present codes, that the owner is attempting to renovate the building; that it will increase the housing stock in the city and will add more parking than is presently on site; that the new units will meet current Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 April 9, 1984 parking requirements; that a full fire alarm system will be required throughout the building which would not be required for a residential structure under 15 units. C. Giomi asked that Commission reconsider the motion on the floor since housing is being increased and fire code will be met if approved. Applicant advised the two bedroom unit on the third floor might not be converted in future, approval procedures being so complicated. Further Commission comment: by turning down this application Commission would be discouraging others from upgrading older structures; the fundamental issue is adding to a nonconforming structure; if variances are denied only the present parking will be provided, approval would provide an improvement in parking from the redesign. Motion to deny was defeated on a 6-1 roll call vote, Cers Cistulli, Garcia, Giomi, Leahy, Taylor and Graham dissenting. Incorporating her previous findings, C. Giomi moved to grant the two variances with the following conditions: (1) that the conditions of the Fire Marshal's memo of March 16, 1984 be met; and (2) that the project be built and parking provided as shown in the plans submitted and date stamped March 5, 1984. Second C. Cistulli; motion approved on a 7-0 roll call vote. Appeal procedures were advised. 4. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW OFFICE EXPANSION IN THE C-4 DISTRICT AT 1650 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY, BY SCOTT ADAMS REPRESENTING AVIS RENT -A -CAR CP Monroe reviewed this request to allow a 4,400 SF expansion of office area within the existing office and maintenance structure. Reference staff report, 4/9/84; Commission study meeting minutes, March 26, 1984; Project Application & CEQA Assessment received 2/15/84; Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. letter, February 28, 1984; letter from Scott Adams, Architect dated February 8, 1984; staff review: Fire Marshal (2/29/84), City Engineer (2/27/84) and Director of Public Works (2/21/84); Towber letter to Avis, March 5, 1984; Towber memo to City Planner, March 9, 1984; aerial photograph; Notice of Hearing mailed March 30, 1984; plans date stamped February 15, 1984 with replacement sheet A-4. CP discussed details of the request, code require- ments; staff review; negotiations with applicant regarding posting of a construction bond in order to ensure the city's requirement for installation of a permanent levee along the bay's edge of this property; applicant's and architect's letters; Commission concern about public access to the bay and current C-4 zone regulations which require a 25' setback from top of berm along the bay. Four conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Chm. Graham opened the public hearing. Scott Adams, architect, discussed the requirement for permanent levee installation; planning for this has been allocated by Avis and engineering work has been started, they are in the process of arranging for the bond and completing the engineering work; expect to complete the levee prior to the next wet season. There were no audience comments and the hearing was closed. Commission discussion: public access areas along the bay are provided by adjacent properties; find this a significant application because in order to expand office space with a small increase in number of employees and minor impact on parking we have an opportunity to expand public access to the bay; would like to add a condition requiring the applicant provide a public access pathway as a part of this project. C. Taylor moved to approve this application with the following conditions: (1) that the remodeling conform with the plans submitted and date stamped February 15, 1984 with replacement sheet A-4; (2) that prior to receiving a building permit the applicant post a bond for the maximum value of levee improvement, value to be based on the highest cost alternative with the time frame of the bond to be one year; Page 4 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes April 9, 1984 (3) if the permanent levee construction cannot be completed for the 1984-85 wet season, then the applicant will at his own expense rebuild the existing temporary levee so that it can withstand another season, the temporary levee shall be required to have appropriate BCDC and U. S. Army Corps of Engineers permits; (4) that this permit be reviewed in one year's time to determine that the levee improvements have been completed; and (5) that there be committed a 25' public unencumbered access on the bay side of this property from the top of the berm with landscaping to meet requirements of the Director of Parks, and that this public access be maintained by the applicant. Second C. Schwalm; motion approved unanimously on roll call vote. Appeal procedures were advised. 5. SPECIAL PERMIT AMENDMENT TO MODIFY REQUIRED ON-SITE EMPLOYEE PARKING AT 1007-1025 ROLLINS ROAD, BY MICHAEL R. HARVEY FOR MIKE HARVEY OLDSMOBILE CP Monroe reviewed this request to provide the required 25 on-site employee parking spaces off site. Reference staff report, 4/9/84; Project Application & CEQA Assessment received 3/2/84; memo from Fire Marshal (3/12/84); memo from Mike Ellis, Chairman, Traffic, Safety & Parking Commission dated March 14, 1984; Mike Harvey letter, March 1, 1984; site drawings; Monroe letter to Michael R. Harvey, January 12, 1984; Monroe letter of action to Harvey, September 22, 1981; Harvey letters: September 10, 1981 and January 30, 1984 with attachment (payable accounts in Burlingame); Monroe letter to Harvey, January 31, 1984; Commission study meeting minutes, March 26, 1984; Yost letter of action to Harvey, May 8, 1979; aerial photographs; Notice of Hearing mailed March 30, 1984; month to month lease, Mike Harvey Automobile Dealership/Northpark beginning August 9, 1983; and plans date stamped March 2, 1984. CP discussed history of the use permit, details of the current proposal, neighborhood complaints, staff site surveys, applicant's letters, study meeting comments/requests, staff comment on the code. Five conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Secy. Giomi read letter in opposition dated April 7, 1984 from Roy and Mary Damonte, 1001 Toyon Drive. Chm. Graham opened the public hearing. Michael R. Harvey, applicant, discussed history of his business on this site and problems encountered; since this permit was approved has moved two service operations from Burlingame Avenue to this site, thus eliminating impact on the tennis courts near Burlingame Avenue; has moved service from former Arata Pontiac site to the Rollins Road site; built service doors on California Drive, but bus stop with bench has since been put directly in front of showroom window; street fronting used car lot has been redirected and made one way; have tried to mitigate impacts and limit employee parking on Toyon; since permit was approved had to accommodate Chevrolet on this site which also provides tax revenue to the city; asked for parking on the west side of Carolan but never heard back from the city; if provide parking for employees on site, service parking would have to go somewhere else; think proposed shuttle is a viable alternative until able to conclude the Bekins building proposal; there will always be some impact, think most of our employees have been cooperative and impact could be from other businesses in the area. There were no audience comments in favor. Those speaking in opposition: Maurice Gentleman, 929 Linden Avenue; Serge Coutant, 1616 Ralston Avenue (owner of the property at 908 Toyon); William Jans, 933 Linden Avenue; Charles Bettencourt, 921 Azalea Avenue; Ann Erickson, Toyon Drive; Joe Merics, 1537 Carol Avenue (own property on Toyon); Ted Farley (owner of property in the area). Their comments/concerns: excessive traffic; sales cars parked on residential streets; cars parked right up to the corner of Linden and Toyon; concerns about speeding and Page 5 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes April 9, 1984 safety hazards; streets in this residential area are very narrow, with cars parked on either side these streets become one way; visibility of traffic on Carolan is blocked; think city should monitor the area, it's dangerous; suggest paint the curbs red to keep cars from parking up to the corner; can't enjoy our yard any more, burglar once gained entry to property on Toyon through Mike Harvey's property; requirements for fencing have never been met by the applicant; applicant's business may be providing tax revenue to the city but property values on Toyon have declined; applicant's proposal should be tabled until city takes action to alleviate the problems; if applicant did not fulfill previous parking requirements, how will this amendment help the traffic which now exists on Toyon, think off-site parking should not be allowed; if applicant has 300 employees and provides only 40 parking spaces, as proposed, where do the 260 other people park; would like to see businesses in the area provide enough on-site parking for their employees, perhaps this would keep congestion down; why not lease property from Southern Pacific. There were no further audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Commission comment and discussion with applicant: business has a total of 300 employees, not all on site, 180 full time and 120 part time, two shifts, some work on weekends; employees have been told not to park on Toyon; a maximum of 15 spaces was all that Northpark would lease to this business; have researched possibility of parking on Southern Pacific property, after 7-8 years still not successful; applicant requested two hour parking on Carolan so that customers would be able to park near the retail location; manufacturers want service facilities closer to sales location, applicant has tried to buy more property but land available is limited; Bekins building proposal won't help much with the present problem; applicant is clearly in violation of his special permit, feel he should provide parking for employees on site but this proposal may be the best temporary solution; would not like to see off-site parking become common in the city; think a long range permanent solution should be looked at; there will always be conflicts between residential and commercial, would like to see the shuttle proposal given a chance; regarding using Southern Pacific land, would be costly to develop, drainage needs to be improved; there seem to be three alternatives one, revoke special permit; two, ignore comments in opposition and leave the situation as it is; three, grant the application for amendment; feel granting this request is a better solution than the present condition. C. Taylor moved that this special permit amendment be approved subject to the five conditions in the staff report; second C. Cistulli. C. Giomi requested "and Saturday" be added to Condition #2; C. Taylor amended his motion, C. Cistulli amended his second. Motion approved on a 6-1 roll call vote, C. Leahy dissenting, with the following conditions: (1) that Conditions 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the April 28, 1979 use permit be met; (2) that 15 parking spaces be provided during the weekday and Saturday in the Northpark Apartments visitor parking area for Mike Harvey employees; (3) that 25 parking spaces striped and designated for employee parking be provided in the automobile storage lot next to 220 East Lane; (4) that a continuous shuttle service from 7:30 A.M. to 9:30 A.M. and 3:30 P.M. to 6:00 P.M. be provided for employees and patrons from the East Lane site to the Rollins Road site by way of Burlingame Railroad station each weekday; and (5) that this entire parking program be instituted within 30 days (May 7, 1984) and the permit as amended be reviewed in six months (October 7, 1984) for compliance. Appeal procedures were advised. 6. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A CAR RENTAL AGENCY IN THE M-1 DISTRICT AT 824 COWAN ROAD, BY JAMES S. TENNANT REPRESENTING HOLIDAY-PAYLESS RENT -A -CAR Item withdrawn. Page 6 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes April 9, 1984 RETIREMENT - COMMISSIONER CISTULLI At this point in the meeting (9:40 P.M.) Chm. Graham announced a recess to honor retiring Commissioner Frank Cistulli. He recognized in the audience Mayor Irving Amstrup, Councilman David Martin, Councilwoman Gloria Barton, former Planning Commissioner Joseph Harvey, City Manager Dennis Argyres and Planner Helen Towber. Secy. Giomi presented Mr. Cistulli with framed Planning Commission and City Council resolutions of commendation. She read Commission resolution and Mayor Amstrup expressed Council's appreciation for Mr. Cistulli's long service to the city. Mr. Cistulli introduced his wife and daughter who were in the audience, thanked Council for appointing and reappointing him to the Commission and expressed his pleasure in working for the city and watching it grow. All present adjourned to the City Hall lobby for champagne and cake The meeting reconvened at 10:10 P.M.; Ruth Jacobs, newly appointed Commissioner, was seated. ITEMS FOR STUDY 7. SPECIAL PERMIT AMENDMENT - SPORTS THERAPY CLINIC - 888 HINCKLEY ROAD Requests: percentage of patients from the area; type of injuries treated; is part time employee a licensed therapist; number of businesses in the building and number of employees; type of advertising to be used. Item set for hearing April 23, 1984. 8. CONDOMINIUM PERMIT - 1233 BELLEVUE AVENUE Requests: description of the third floor units; location of call button for the security gate; clarify front setback measurement. Item set for hearing April 23, 1984. 9. TENTATIVE MAP FOR THE ABOVE Set for hearing April 23, 1984. 10. CONDOMINIUM PERMIT - 1508 FLORIBUNDA AVENUE 11. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR THE ABOVE Requests: clarify front setback measurement. Items set for hearing April 23, 1984. 12. CONDOMINIUM PERMIT - 1119 CHULA VISTA AVENUE 13. VARIANCE FOR THE ABOVE PROJECT 14. TENTATIVE MAP FOR THE ABOVE Requests: letter addressing the four legal requirements for variance approval; distance of structural overhang above driveway; will the rear yard be fenced. Items set for hearing April 23, 1984. 15. PARCEL MAP FOR RESUBDIVISION OF LAND AT 2840 CANYON ROAD Set for hearing April 23, 1984. Page 7 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes April 9, 1984 16. PARCEL MAP TO ALLOW REALIGNING OF COMMON LOT LINE BETWEEN 2616 AND 2620 SUMMIT DRIVE Set for hearing April 23, 1984. 17. PARCEL MAP FOR RESUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY AT 1470 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY Set for hearing April 23, 1984. CITY PLANNER REPORT CP Monroe reviewed Council actions at its April 2, 1984 regular meeting and April 4, 1984 study meeting. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS - March 28, 1984 letter from Robert A. Molthen, D.D.S. - Copy of letter to Council, March 28, 1984, from Paul J. Constantino, Esq. nn lnlfnkl\IrkM The meeting adjourned at 10:50 P.M.