HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1985.08.12CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 12, 1985
CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was
called to order by Chairman Garcia on Monday, August 12, 1985 at
7:32 P.M.
nnT.T. (21T.T.
Present: Commissioners Garcia, Giomi, Graham, Jacobs,
Leahy, Schwalm
Absent: Commissioner Taylor
Staff Present: Helen Towber, Planner; Ralph Kirkup, Director of
Public Works; Sue Case, Acting Attorney
MINUTES - The minutes of the July 22, 1985 meeting were unanimously
approved.
AGENDA - Item #8 postponed at the request of the applicant. Order of
the agenda was then approved.
ITEMS FOR ACTION
1. RECOMMENDATION OF FEIR-63P FOR OFFICE/AUTO RETAIL CONVERSION OF
THE WAREHOUSE STRUCTURE AT 1070 BROADWAY
Planner Towber introduced Yane Nordhav, principal, Baseline
Environmental Consulting, the firm preparing this EIR. Ms. Nordhav
discussed responses contained in the Final EIR to comments received at
the public hearing and to written comments received during the public
review period. Commission asked for clarification on who would pay the
cost (in excess of $100,000) if a signal were required at the
Broadway/Carolan intersection. Consultant advised CE would expect the
applicant to pay, no final decision has been made at this point.
Planner Towber confirmed the FEIR has been reviewed by the City Planner
and found to be adequate.
C. Graham found FEIR-63P to be adequate and moved to recommend the
environmental document to City Council for consideration. Second
C. Schwalm; motion approved unanimously on voice vote, C. Taylor
absent.
2. VARIANCE TO RECONSTRUCT A GARAGE AT 309 CHAPIN LANE
Reference staff report, 8/12/85, with attachments. Planner Towber
reviewed the item: details of the request, applicants' letter,
neighbors' letter in support, Planning staff comment. Two conditions
were suggested for consideration at the public hearing.
Page 2
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 1985
Chm. Garcia opened the public hearing. The applicants were present.
There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed.
Dennis -Loucks, applicant, commented on their desire to replace their
old garage which is in poor condition with a slightly larger structure
at the same location, they do not wish to put the new garage at the
rear of the lot because the driveway would be unreasonably long and
would result in loss of some landscaping, the present location provides
a screen for sound and view for the applicants and their neighbors.
Responding to Commission question, applicant advised roll -up doors at
each end of the garage are proposed to allow movement of gardening
vehicles without disturbing existing landscaping.
Commission discussion: existing garage foundation will be replaced;
possibility of moving the structure farther back and applicants' desire
to retain useable open space behind the house; drainage.
C. Jacobs found there were exceptional circumstances in that the garage
and house have been in their present location for many years; the
applicants are replacing an existing garage with only a minor
variation; the variance would not be detrimental to the neighbors, no
neighbor complaints have been received; and it would not adversely
affect the zoning plan of the city. C. Graham added a finding that
this lot is exceptionally deep, if it were a standard sized lot the
garage would be in the rear 30% of the lot and could be built to the
side property line without a variance.
C. Jacobs moved for approval of this variance with the following
conditions: (1) that the conditions of the Fire Marshal's July 19, 1985
memo shall be met; and (2) that the project as built shall be
consistent with the plans submitted to the Planning Department as
annotated by the Planner and date stamped July 30, 1985. Second C.
Graham. Comment on the motion: this actually violates one of the
principles of good zoning, it continues a nonconforming situation,
making it permanent; however, mitigating circumstances exist in that it
does not detract from the neighborhood and no neighbor objections have
been received. Motion approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Taylor
absent. Appeal procedures were advised.
3. VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A SECOND REQUIRED PARKING SPACE (A CARPORT)
ALONG THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE AT 1469 BENITO AVENUE
Reference staff report, 8/12/85, with attachments. Planner Towber
reviewed this item: details of the request, staff review, Planning
staff comment, applicants' letter. Three conditions were suggested for
consideration at the public hearing.
Discussion: extent of additional paving required in the front yard for
driveway access (a second required space is proposed in the front of
the home in the basement below the first floor); possibility of
conditioning approval to require landscape softening in this area;
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 3
August 12, 1985
concern about meeting UBC and UFC requirements for the front and back
stairs; many homes in this area were built with only a 3' side yard,
code now requires a 4' side setback.
Chm. Garcia opened the public hearing. The applicants were present.
There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed.
During further discussion Randy Gibbs, applicant, advised he had
revised plans with him this evening and discussed them with staff and
Commission; he stated that putting the carport in the backyard would
eliminate vegetation and that they hoped in the future to add a pool.
Commmission comment: this is a typical lot for the city, many residents
have long driveways to garages in the rear and still are able to
provide open space for their families, difficult to find exceptional
circumstances exist in this case; possibility of putting a two car
garage under the home.
There was Commission consensus that action could not be taken on the
revised plans this evening. C. Jacobs moved to continue the item to
the meeting of August 26, 1985 if complete plans are received. Second
C. Graham; motion approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Taylor absent.
4. PARKING VARIANCE TO ALLOW A 4,040 SF TWO STORY ADDITION TO THE
ATHLETIC CLUB AT 1730 ROLLINS ROAD
5. SPECIAL PERMIT AMENDMENT TO CONSTRUCT A 4,040 SF TWO STORY
ADDITION TO THE ATHLETIC CLUB AT 1730 ROLLINS ROAD
Reference staff report,
reviewed this request to
Prime Time Athletic Club
on a nearby drainage eas
rights from the club sit
She discussed details of
of Public Works' concern
questions. Seven condit
public hearing.
8/12/85, with attachments. Planner Towber
expand the weight room and aerobics room at
and to allow 14 of the required parking spaces
ement (owned by the applicant) with access
e by a Southern Pacific spur right-of-way.
the request, parking requirement, Department
/policy, applicant's letters, study meeting
ions were suggested for consideration at the
Commission/staff discussion: the traffic model which regulates impacts
of development on the Broadway interchange was based on the assumption
that no use would be placed on drainage easements which generated
additional peak hour trips; parking of recreational vehicles, tennis
court, etc. have been allowed on the easement but any use which would
result in intensification of uses on adjacent properties has not been
allowed. The Department of Public Works has been concerned this would
be precedent setting and double the traffic impact. DPW Kirkup
discussed history of the drainage easement. Acting CA Case commented
on the legality/practical enforcement of suggested conditions #2 and #3
addressing parking on the drainage easement, access over the S.P. spur
and sale by the applicant of his portion of the drainage easement.
Page 4
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 1985
Commissioner comment: it would seem that the key to this whole proposal
is whether the applicant can acquire the connecting S.P. right of way.
Arthur Michael, applicant, was present. His comments: Southern
Pacific's attorney has determined offer for the full 700' of the
drainage frontage will be made to Prime Time first, they have the
funds, it is merely a matter of formalities; they have been leasing the
spur right-of-way since 1977. They will not disturb any portion of the
drainage ditch, pavement is already in place; presently there are
campers and auto rentals parked on this easement; Prime Time is asking
for vehicle parking which will move within an hour's time, not
overnight parking.
Chm. Garcia opened the public hearing. There were no audience
comments. Two letters expressing concern about the proposal were
noted from: J. J. Riggs, R & K Distributors, 1701 Rollins Road (August
1, 1985) and Stuart Beattie, R & K Distributors (August 1, 1985). The
public hearing was declared closed.
Applicant commented he is not in favor of adding more vehicles in the
street and Prime Time has asked their members not to park on other
properties. This proposal provides parking to code. He suggested a
condition could be attached that if the S.P. right-of-way were not
purchased the permit would be invalid; applicant accepted all seven
conditions in the staff report.
Commission concerns: impacted parking in the area, applicant has not
shown he will alleviate the situation, the problem of enforcement with
off-site parking; this application is premature, applicant would be in
a better position if he owned the spur before presenting his proposal.
Mr. Michael advised of his plan to use half of the easement for parking
and lease half to an auto rental agency for storage of vehicles (which
would require another application for special permit amendment).
Further Commissioner comment: proposal would be precedent setting,
concern about traffic impacts on Rollins Road and intersections and
safety. Applicant did not believe the addition would intensify the
number of people coming to the club; the activities of this type of
business change as members' activities change. One Commissioner felt
the request was reasonable, applicant will provide more parking,
wants to improve service to present club members and does want to
purchase the right-of-way rather than lease it.
With the finding that there were no exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances applicable to this property, C. Jacobs moved to deny the
variance. Second C. Graham. Comment on the motion: not opposed to an
increase of activity on this site but have concern about parking off
site; would not object when the applicant owns the S.P. right-of-way.
C. Jacobs amended her motion to deny the variance without prejudice; C.
Graham amended his second. Motion approved on a 4-2 roll call vote,
Cers Schwalm and Garcia dissenting, C. Taylor absent.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 5
August 12, 1985
C. Jacobs moved to deny the special permit amendment without prejudice.
Second C. Graham; motion approved on a 4-2 roll call vote, Cers Schwalm
and Garcia dissenting, C. Taylor absent. Appeal procedures were
advised.
Recess 9:00 P.M.; reconvene 9:10 P.M.
6. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW A POLYGRAPH EXAMINER SCHOOL AT 1209
DONNELLY AVENUE, SUB -AREA A, BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA
Reference staff report, 8/12/85, with attachments.
Planner Towber reviewed this request to operate a polygraph examiner
school which does not operate outside of normal retail hours as
required: details of the request, staff review, Planning staff comment,
applicant's letter, study meeting concerns. Five conditions were
suggested for consideration at the public hearing.
Commission concern: difficulty of enforcing condition #3, that students
who drive to class be required to park in the all day parking adjacent
to the S.P. right-of-way. Staff advised this was a code enforcement
item, business has been operating for some time.
The applicant was not present. Chm. Garcia opened the public hearing.
There were no audience comments and the hearing was closed.
Commenting that it appears most students would be from out of town and
would not have cars to impact parking in the area, C. Graham moved for
approval of this special permit and for adoption of Commission
Resolution Approving Special Permits with the following conditions: (1)
that the conditions of the Fire Marshal's June 18, 1985 memo and the
Building Inspector's June 20, 1985 memo shall be met; (2) that classes
offered from this site shall be limited to 10 people and one instructor
between the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M.; (3) that students who
drive to class shall be required to park in the all day parking
adjacent to the S.P. right-of-way; (4) that for any changes to the
operation the business owner shall be required to obtain an amendment
to this use permit; and (5) that this use permit shall be reviewed for
compliance with all its conditions in six months (February 1986).
Second C. Leahy.
Comment on the motion: since the staff report indicates there has been
little cooperation from the applicant previously, how can compliance
with the conditions of approval be assured; applicant has not stated he
would drive students to and from the site, would anticipate out of town
students would use rental cars and impact the downtown area.
Motion approved on a 4-2 roll call vote, Cers Giomi and Jacobs
dissenting, C. Taylor absent. Appeal procedures were advised.
7. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW A BALLOON/GIFT SHOP AT 1199 BROADWAY
Reference staff report, 8/12/85, with attachments.
Planner Towber reviewed this request to operate a balloon/gift shop in
the new commercial building at the corner of Laguna and Broadway. She
Page 6
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 1985
discussed details of the request, staff review, applicant's letter,
study meeting questions. Five conditions were suggested for
consideration at the public hearing.
Discussion: this structure meets UBC requirements for restrooms;
concern about condition #5 which makes issuance of a building permit
for tenant improvements contingent upon landscape plans for the
building being'submitted, approved and installed, is this fair to an
applicant; Commission felt a more equitable approach would be to deal
with the property owner rather than the lessee.
Chm. Garcia opened the public hearing. Casey Wulfert, applicant, was
present. He stated he was hoping to start tenant improvements
September 1 and already had a substantial investment in inventory.
There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed.
Commenting that this is a retail use, C. Jacobs moved for approval of
this special permit and for adoption of Commission Resolution Approving
Special Permits with the following conditions: (1) that the condition
of the Fire Marshal's memo of July 5, 1985 shall be met; (2) that the
business selling balloons and gifts shall operate in an 850 SF area
from 8:00 A.M. to 6:30 P.M. seven days a week with two people on site,
the owner and one full time employee; (3) that at night the company
delivery vehicle shall be parked at the rear of the building; and (4)
that any changes to the conditions of this permit shall require
application to the Planning Commission. C. Jacobs further requested
that a letter be sent to the property owner from the City Attorney
advising that no more leasing of space in this building shall be done
until landscaping is installed. Second C. Graham. Comment on the
motion: requirements for parking of the company vehicle were clarified.
Motion approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Taylor absent. Appeal
procedures were advised.
8. SPECIAL PERMIT TO CONVERT AN EXISTING 10,000 SF BUILDING AT
1722 GILBRETH ROAD FROM LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO OFFICE SPACE
This item was postponed indefinitely at the request of the applicant.
Reference August 9, 1985 letter from Robert H. Brown.
9. MINOR MODIFICATION FOR A BEDROOM/BATH ADDITION TO A RESIDENCE
WITH AN EXISTING SUBSTANDARD GARAGE AT 1905 RAY DRIVE
Reference staff report, 8/12/85 with findings by City Planner. Item
has been reviewed by City Council and noticed to adjacent property
owners; there were no comments. Commission had no comments and this
minor modification was approved.
Page 7
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 1985
ITEMS FOR STUDY
10. CONDOMINIUM PERMIT - 137 ANITA ROAD
11. TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP - 137 ANITA ROAD
Requests: will the guest parking spaces be marked for guests? will the
garage be enclosed? will additional lighting be used for security
purposes? Items set for hearing August 26, 1985.
12. CONDOMINIUM PERMIT - 1444 EL CAMINO REAL
13. TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP - 1444 EL CAMINO REAL
Requests: will the two unsecured parking spaces at the front of the
building be designated for guests only? clarify the direction of travel
for the stairway between the second and third floors. Items set for
hearing August 26, 1985.
14. VARIANCE FROM MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS FOR TWO OF FIVE
PROPOSED LOTS: RESUBDIVISION OF 2720 MARIPOSA DRIVE
15. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP - 2720 MARIPOSA DRIVE
Requests: can heights be limited to one story? where is front setback
measured from? does the Commission have authority to designate setback
off a private road? what addresses will be used? isn't a private
drive an unusual situation? location of seismic area; are traffic
impacts consistent with surrounding area and previous church use? what
is buildable area of these lots? why no sidewalks? is lot size
comparable to other lots in the area? Items set for hearing August 26,
1985.
16. SPECIAL PERMIT - AFTERSCHOOL CHILDCARE PROGRAM - HOOVER SCHOOL
BUILDING - 2220 SUMMIT DRIVE
Requests: note this business starts at 11:00 A.M., define
"afterschool"; is hallway included in the lease, if it is going to be
used for other than a hallway would like comments from the Fire
Marshal; review total trip impact of all current tenants; think there
was concern previously that site was fully utilized, could this be
checked out in some way? Item set for hearing August 26, 1985.
17. MASTER SIGN PROGRAM - 1500-1508 ADELINE DRIVE
Requests: details on height and method of support for Sign A-1;
applicant's intentions regarding window signs; add condition that all
existing signs be removed prior to issuance of permits on the sign
program; provide detail of how proposal exceeds code limits; how will
applicant assure that tenants comply with the master sign program?
Item set for hearing August 26, 1985.
Page 8
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 1985
18. SPECIAL PERMIT AMENDMENT - AMFAC HOTEL - 1380 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY
Item set for hearing August 26, 1985.
19. SPECIAL PERMIT - INSURANCE REPLACEMENT AUTO RENTAL
AGENCY - 851 BURLWAY ROAD
Requests: what does applicant propose to do with five rental and two
staff cars if there is no designated on-site parking? what are the
operating conditions of this company at other locations outside
Burlingame? would like to see lease regarding assigned on-site
parking, if any. Item set for hearing August 26, 1985.
20. SPECIAL PERMIT - DRY CLEANING SERVICE - 327-329 LORTON AVENUE
Requests: does applicant realize there is no immediate parking for
drop-off customers, how do they propose to accept cleaning from
customers? will they use a van for pickup and delivery? Item set for
hearing August 26, 1985.
COMMISSIONER REQUEST
Two Commissioners suggested a study of parking for athletic clubs since
it seems present parking is inadequate.
PLANNER REPORT
Planner Towber noted recent inquiries about modification of private
balcony railings to provide a 6' enclosure. Commission discussed
briefly: at one location balconies have been enclosed completely; is
latticework as serious as enclosing with glass; condominium requirement
is for,private open space, but if it's open it's not private; a 6'
railing doesn't give ventilation or light to the room it serves. One
Commissioner stated he would prefer to look at each request
individually rather than change the ordinance. Consensus was to study
the issue, see what other cities do and research why Burlingame's
ordinance was written as it is.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
August 2, 1985 letter from the Chief Building Inspector to Nick Genner,
1128 Oxford Road - subject: wall construction.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 10:30 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Robert J. Leahy, Secretary