HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1985.04.22G
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 22, 1985
CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was
called to order by Chairman Garcia on Monday, April 22, 1985 at
7:31 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Garcia, Giomi, Jacobs, Leahy,
Schwalm, Taylor
Absent: Commissioner Graham
Staff Present: City Planner Margaret Monroe; City Attorney Jerome
Coleman; City Engineer Frank Erbacher
MINUTES - The minutes of the April 8, 1985 meeting were unanimously
approved.
AGENDA - Order of the agenda approved.
PUBLIC FORUM
1. PUBLIC FORUM, WINDMARK HOTEL PROJECT NOTICE OF PREPARATION,
620 AIRPORT BOULEVARD
CP briefly discussed the proposed project. Reference staff report,
4/22/85; Notice of Preparation dated April 1, 1985 with attached
Initial Study including City Planner's determination that an
environmental impact report is required (March 26, 1985). Commission
and members of the public were encouraged to comment on any items they
would like to see addressed in the Draft EIR.
Commission requests: will the small launch ramp into the lagoon be
eliminated; when will traffic allocation be available for Phase II;
discuss noise impacts of airplane overflights; detailed traffic
analysis of regional access. Chm. Garcia opened a public hearing for
audience comments. There were none and the hearing was closed.
Further Commission requests: address exterior finish of the building
and design of the windows, light and glare impacts; public access/
recreation area along the lagoon; drainage. There were no further
comments and the public forum was closed.
2. PUBLIC FORUM, NOTICE OF PREPARATION FOR STRUCTURAL REMODELING
AND OFFICE CONVERSION, 1070 BROADWAY, ZONED M-1
CP discussed the proposed project. Reference staff report, 4/22/85;
Notice of Preparation dated April 1, 1985 with attached Initial Study
and staff's determination an environmental impact report is required
(March 26, 1985).
Page 2
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes April 22, 1985
Commission requests: can signalization be changed to prevent backup;
does site fall within the flood zone; number of employees and number of
customers based on square footage of other car dealerships in area;
traffic analysis with full buildout of the Anza Area; cumulative effect
on police and fire services at buildout; will Traffic, Safety & Parking
Commission review the traffic analysis; does traffic study address
movement during critical hours; will building be fully sprinkled;
address present CalTrain movement and proposed increase in train use.
Chm. Garcia opened a public hearing for audience comments. Alan Horn,
1325 Paloma Avenue: lives three blocks from the site, concerned about
expansion of this large building and the visual addition of a three
story parking structure at the rear. There were no other audience
comments and the hearing was closed.
Further Commission requests: address pedestrian safety; discuss visual
appearance of the building; would like written engineer's report
regarding cuts in the wall; will existing roof sign be removed;
alternate means of access to Broadway; need for interconnection of
traffic signals; would like a master sign program to be proposed at the
EIR stage of processing. There were no further comments and the public
forum was closed.
CONSENT ITEM
3. MINOR MODIFICATION TO ALLOW A 793 SF BEDROOM/STUDY/BATH ADDITION
AT 1612 CORONADO WAY, ZONED R-1, BY J. FRANK MC DERMOTT
Reference staff report, 4/22/85; Notice of Findings, City Planner,
mailed April 11, 1985; Project Application & CEQA Assessment received
4/8/85; staff comment: Fire Marshal (4/9/85), City Engineer (4/11/85),
Chief Building Inspector (4/15/85).
C. Schwalm moved for approval of the consent calendar. Second C.
Giomi; motion approved unanimously on voice vote.
ITEMS FOR ACTION
4. CONDOMINIUM PERMIT TO ALLOW A 15 UNIT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT AT
30 LORTON AVENUE, ZONED R-4, BY KENT BRANDT FOR BRIAN CASSIDY
CONSTRUC'T'ION COMPANY (APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER)
CP Monroe reviewed this request. Reference staff report, 4/22/85;
study meeting minutes, 4/8/85; Project Application & CEQA Assessment
received 1/15/85; staff review: City Engineer (4/15/85), Chief Building
Inspector (1/28/85), Fire Marshal (1/23/85), Director of Parks
(3/15/85); aerial photograph; Monroe letter of action, 9/10/81;
Planning Commission minutes, 8/23/82; Monroe letter of action, 1/5/84;
notice of hearing mailed April 12, 1985; Commission Resolution
Approving Condominium Permits; and plans date stamped April 2, 1985.
CP discussed details of the request, history of the site and previous
applications approved for condominium projects, staff review, study
meeting questions. Four conditions were suggested for consideration at
the public hearing.
Page 3
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes April 22, 1985
Discussion: advisability of a condition which would warn future owners
of condominium units of potential water problems within the garage
since landscaping will overlay the garage slab.
William Heijn, architect, advised the applicant has no objection to two
designated guest parking spaces. He discussed financial difficulties
encountered by the property owner in developing the site after the 1981
approval and some redesign of the plans in subsequent reapplication and
extension. The designated guest parking would eliminate the ability to
install a security gate in the garage for owners of the units.
Chm. Garcia opened the public hearing. Letter in opposition from
George Adams, property owner, 12 Lorton Avenue (April 18, 1985) was
noted. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was
closed.
Commission comment: concern about the lack of a security gate, this
will detract from the project; there is a common maneuvering area at
the bottom of the ramp which leads into the garage, a gate at this
location would cause problems for all parts of the garage. Staff
pointed out that wiring for a voice box cannot be installed after
construction, a decision should be made now regarding a security gate.
Concern was expressed about the proposed density on this site, if
number of units were reduced the developer would be able to include
guest parking and a security gate. Staff discussed code parking
requirements which in general determine the number of units which can
be put on a parcel.
C. Giomi commented that although she would prefer a smaller project on
this site, there are no special permits or variances required. She
then moved for approval of the condominium permit and for adoption of
Resolution Approving Condominium Permits with the following conditions:
(1) that the conditions of the City Engineer's memo of April 15, 1985,
the Chief Building Inspector's memo of January 28, 1985 and the Fire
Marshal's memo of January 23, 1985 be met; (2) that two parking stalls
in the underground garage be designated visitor/guest parking and not
assigned to specific units and that no security gate be installed on
this site; (3) that the Parks Department approve all landscaping and
irrigation plans prior to issuance of a final building permit; (4) that
future property owners be made aware that since landscaping is
overlaying the garage slab there could be potential water problems
within the garage; and (5) that the final plans be consistent with the
plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped April 2,
1985 as modified to meet all requirements of the Uniform Building Code
and Uniform Fire Code. Second C. Leahy; motion approved on a 4-2 roll
call vote, Cers Jacobs and Taylor dissenting, C. Graham absent. Appeal
procedures were advised.
5. TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP AND TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP FOR
15 CONDOMINIUM UNITS, 30 LORTON AVENUE
CE Erbacher recommended these maps be transmitted to Council for
approval. Reference CE's agenda memo, April 16, 1985. C. Taylor moved
that the Tentative Condominium Map and Tentative and Final Parcel Map
be recommended to City Council for approval. Second C. Giomi; motion
approved 5-1 on voice vote, C. Jacobs dissenting, C. Graham absent.
Page 4
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes April 22, 1985
6. VARIANCE FROM FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION
18.22, BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE, FOR REPLACEMENT STRUCTURE
AT 909 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, BY RICHARD MAJOULET (PROPERTY OWNER)
CE Erbacher reviewed this flood hazard variance request. Reference
Agenda Memo, 4/22/85; site plan; site survey; flood insurance rate map;
aerial photo; applicant's letter received 4/15/85; Project Application
& CEQA Assessment date stamped 3/27/85; copy of Chap. 18.22 Flood
Damage Prevention, Burlingame Municipal Code. CE discussed the Flood
Insurance Rate Map, the city's Flood Damage Prevention ordinance,
applicant's almost completed reconstruction at this site and staff's
recent discovery that it was located in a zone "A" flood rating area.
Applicant's letter addresses findings to support the variance request.
Comment: flood zone status is a part of any title report; Commision's
concern appears to be whether the contents of the building are subject
to flotation.
Richard Majoulet, property owner, was present. Chm. Garcia opened the
public hearing. There were no audience comments and the hearing was
closed.
C. Jacobs found this reconstruction to be an improvement for the site,
that it would better the health and safety of the community and would
not be detrimental; reference applicant's letter date stamped April 15,
1985 with findings in support of the variance. C. Jacobs moved to
grant the variance and for adoption of Planning Commission Resolution
No. 11-85 with the condition that the applicant follow the requirements
of Section 18.22.520 as follows: (a) the storage or processing of
materials that are in time of flooding buoyant, flammable, explosive or
could be injurious to human, animal or plant life is prohibited; (b)
storage of other material or equipment may be allowed if not subject to
major damage by floods and firmly anchored to prevent flotation or if
readily removable from the area within the time available after flood
warning. Second C. Giomi.
Comment on the motion: this is a low spot in the city and was subject
to flooding prior to installation of a new storm sewer; federal
standards must be addressed and applicant's findings support approval
of the variance; federal government does check the city's records,
city should be very careful about granting such variances, future
insurance rates might go up if this becomes common practice and the
applicant's insurance rates may be higher than others in the area
because of the variance.
Motion approved 6-0 on roll call vote, C. Graham absent. Appeal
procedures were advised.
7. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW INSTALLATION OF TWO 10' ROOFTOP
TELECOMMUNICATION ANTENNAS AT 330 PRIMROSE ROAD, BY WESTERN
TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. WI'T'H EDWARD KEITH (PROPERTY OWNER)
CP Monroe reviewed this request to place two telecommunication antennas
on the roof of 330 Primrose. Reference staff report, 4/22/85; study
meeting minutes, 4/8/85; Project Application & CEQA Assessment received
3/15/85; applicant's project description; copy of Ordinance No. 1260,
Page 5
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes April 22, 1985
Controlling the Location and Installation of Dish Antennas, adopted
November 7, 1983; staff review: Chief Building Inspector (3/21/85),
Fire Marshal (3/28/85), City Engineer (3/28/85); antenna drawings and
data date stamped 3/15/85; applicant's letters (4/1 and 4/15/85); Plate
1, 4/16/85; aerial photograph; notice of hearing mailed 4/12/85;
Commission resolution approving special permit. CP discussed -details
of the request, staff review, applicant's letters. A book submitted by
the applicant analyzing visibility from adjacent streets was circulated
to Commission. Three conditions were suggested for consideration at
the public hearing.
Comment: total weight of the two antennas; staff did not feel it
necessary to check the effect on the whole building, only on the
mounting structures and roof. Ken Bakken, applicant, was present. His
comments: this is the final link in a multi -state installation, need to
interconnect with Bell at E1 Camino Real and Burlingame Avenue to use
their new fiber optic system; regarding concerns about visual impact,
they have brought the height down from 15' to 10' above top of parapet
and will do everything possible to mitigate impact; there will be no
interference with any other communication or radio signal in the area,
the system is on common carrier frequency.
Chm. Garcia opened the public hearing. There were no audience comments
and the hearing was closed.
Commission/applicant discussion: a location this close to Bell will
reduce applicant's cost; one antenna will transmit, the other receive;
do not plan on adding to this equipment (special permit amendment would
be required in that case); there are no alternatives to this location
since they must cable to Bell; air conditioning system on the roof will
not be over 4' x 8' x 5' tall, it would be smaller than and set against
the existing mechanical structure and would not be visible from the
street.
C. Schwalm stated that in today's technology this installation will
help businesses, individuals and competition in the communication
field; he felt visual impact would be minor. C. Schwalm moved for
approval of the special permit and for adoption of PC Res. Approvinq
Special Permits with the following conditions: (1) that the conditions
of the Chief Building Inspector's memo of March 21, 1985 be met; (2)
that the antenna support structure and face (front and rear) of the
dish be colored to blend into the sky and roof and be nonreflective,
and a galvanized steel roof mount as shown in Plate 1 (4/16/85) shall
be used to hold the dish and this mount shall be painted to match the
dish to a color approved by the city; and (3) that the antenna be
installed at the location shown on the plans submitted to the Planning
Department and date stamped March 15, 1985 and no other equipment
associated with the antenna shall extend above the parapet of the roof.
Second C. Taylor; motion approved on a 6-0 vote, C. Graham absent.
Appeal procedures were advised.
Recess 9:12 P.M.; reconvene 9:22 P.M.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
ITEMS FOR STUDY
8. FENCE EXCEPTION - 38 DWIGHT ROAD
9. VARIANCE FOR PORTABLE POOL - 38 DWIGHT ROAD
Page 6
April 22, 1985
Requests: additional specifications on the pool area, decking; etc.;
does this type of pool come in other sizes and shapes; identify
location of neighbor's driveway; who was consulted in determining there
was no other place to locate the pool. Items set for hearing May 13,
1985.
10. SPECIAL PERMITS - TWO STORY GARAGE/STORAGE STRUCTURE -
1237 CORTEZ AVENUE
Requests: clarify "pool by others" on the plans; UBC requirements for
size of windows in second story of a secondary structure; clarify
maximum height of the second floor storage area; dimension between pool
and existing deck; what utilities will be brought up to second story of
the garage. Item set for hearing May 13, 1985.
11. AMENDMENT OF SPECIAL PERMIT TO INSTALL SECURITY BOOTH -
CHEVRON STATION - 260 EL CAMINO REAL
Requests: why not possible to add two posts to the front part of the
pay booth; could two pumps be added to inside island rather than ouside
(would give additional maneuvering area and reduce congestion at the
sidewalk); will both full serve and self serve be provided; existing
hours and number of employees, how will this change affect these
numbers. Item set for hearing May 13, 1985.
12. SIGN EXCEPTION FOR MASTER SIGN PERMIT - 1209-1217 DONNELLY AVENUE
Set for hearing May 13, 1985.
13. SPECIAL PERMIT - MEN'S CLOTHING STORE - 1199 BROADWAY
Request applicant be made aware of requirement for rear exit and
restroom access. Set for hearing May 13, 1985.
14. SPECIAL PERMIT - 3.5 METER DISH ANTENNA -866 MALCOLM ROAD
Requests: clarify dimensions and data on pedestal; how many feet in 3.5
meters. Set for hearing May 13, 1985.
PLANNER REPORT
CP Monroe reviewed Council actions at its April 15, 1985 meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:50 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Robert J. Leahy, Secretary