Loading...
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