Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1986.08.11Y CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 11, 1986 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Chairman Giomi on Monday, August 11, 1986 at 7:31 P.M. Rf1T.T. rAT.T. Present: Commissioners Garcia, Giomi, Jacobs, Schwalm Absent: Commissioners Graham, Leahy Staff Present: City Planner Margaret Monroe; Planner Helen Williams; City Engineer Frank Erbacher MINUTES - The minutes of the July 28, 1986 meeting were unanimously approved. AGENDA - Since four affirmative votes of the seated members are required to pass any action and only four members were seated this evening, applicants for Items 1, 3, 8 and 9 elected to continue to the meeting of August 25, 1986. Order of the agenda was then approved. ITEMS FOR ACTION 1. SIGN EXCEPTION - 1608 GILBRETH ROAD Continued to August 25, 1986. 2. VARIANCE TO DRIVEWAY WIDTH STANDARDS TO ALLOW AN EXISTING HOME TO BE REMODELED TO FOUR APARTMENTS, AT 315 EL CAMINO REAL Reference staff report, 8/11/86, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed details of the request, code requirements, staff review, applicant's letter, study meeting questions. Petition in support signed by seven neighbors and June 26, 1986 letter from SamTrans advising the proposal would not affect the operation of their buses were noted. Two conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Commission/staff comment: structure was originally a single family home, proposed remodeling will be required to meet UBC and UFC standards; location of gas meter. Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. Joe Zajc, applicant, was present. He stated it would be more costly to tear down the existing structure and build a new structure, existing house has some fine features he would like to preserve including joined hardwood floors throughout. Speaking in favor, Jeanie Dores, 1125 Laguna Avenue, who works for a security alarm company which was called in for an estimate on this property: plans indicate this would be a nice addition to the Page 2 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 1986 city, the lot could use an improvement. Erin Zajc, 1038 Paloma Avenue, spoke in favor: husband is a perfectionist; given the opportunity, this project will be a beautiful addition to the city. Commission and applicant discussed May 21, 1986 letter from Joseph Karp, adjacent property owner, expressing concern that the substandard driveway and on -coming southbound traffic on E1 Camino would be a hazard to tenants. Mr. Zajc felt the objection was personally motivated and noted a survey had shown 10" of the neighbor's driveway was on his property, applicant's letter to the neighbor had been returned unclaimed; of the eight signatures of immediate neighbors in support only one lives on Occidental; there are stop signs at each corner of this block; the adjacent property owner has an eight unit complex and only a 12' wide driveway including the applicant's 10". Applicant did not feel his request would be a hazard, he would have the same access with four units as his neighbor with eight; applicant's front setback is larger than his neighbor's; this development will benefit the property next door. Yvonne Clark, 1512 Burlingame Avenue was in favor of the project. Dick Phillips, property owner immediately behind the site, spoke in favor: structure is located in the center of the block, the safest place and it is an appropriate use of the land. There were no further audience comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Jacobs found that the granting of the variance would not affect anyone adversely, the driveway is not on a corner of El Camino Real, the project will be an improvement of the site and the neighborhood, existing foundation is still good; it will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare nor adversely affect the zoning plan of the city. Commission comment: regardless of what is put on this site there will be a need to get in and out; have heard no adverse comments from staff; CE stated garage wall will be checked. Additional finding: the portion of the driveway which is less than code standard width is located away from,El Camino Real. Noting CP has said the structure when remodeled will be required to meet code in all respects except for a small section of the driveway, C. Jacobs moved for approval of the variance request with the following conditions: (1) that the conditions of the Fire Marshal's memo of June 3, 1986 and City Engineer's memo of June 9, 1986 shall be met; and (2) that the project as built shall conform to the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped Revised July 16, 1986 and shall meet all the requirements of the Uniform Building Code and Uniform Fire Code as amended by the City of Burlingame. Second C. Schwalm; motion approved on a 4-0 roll call vote, Cers Graham and Leahy absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 3. SIGN EXCEPTIONS - 101 CALIFORNIA DRIVE Continued to August 25, 1986. Page 3 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 1986 4. SIGN EXCEPTION TO ADD THREE SIGNS AT 150 ANZA BOULEVARD WHICH EXCEED NUMBER AND AMOUNT OF SIGNS ALLOWED BY THE CODE Reference staff report, 8/11/86, with attachments. PLR Williams reviewed details of the request, code requirements, staff review, applicant's comments. One condition was suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Commission/staff discussion: could the proposed monument sign be added to the existing pole sign; applicant had wanted separate identification for the hotel and the restaurant at separate locations; visibility of signage from Anza Boulevard. Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. Paul Salisbury, representing United Suites Development Co. and Bobby McGee's (the restaurant) addressed Commission: restaurant became a lessee of the hotel following approval of the previous signage package; since the amendment to the sign permit was submitted it has occurred to the hotel and restaurant owners that it might be advantageous to combine the proposed monument sign with the Embassy Suites pole sign, placing the 4' x 11'-10" restaurant sign under the Embassy Suites sign, raising the approved pole sign and top of Embassy Suites sign to a height of 24' and retaining the proposed awning signs; hotel has given its approval of this change. CP noted the diagram presented by the applicant this evening had no dimensions and she would prefer to continue the item to give staff and Commission time to review this revised proposal. CE's only concern was that intersection requirements for visibility be adhered to. Planning staff further advised this would not be an amendment to a master sign program, there was no master sign program previously approved, just a sign program. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Further Commission/staff discussion: think this is a good compromise, would support approval this evening; staff pointed out if the proposed combination sign comes in at 24' the applicant will need another sign exception for height; Commission's usual time for review of a sign exception is two weeks, would action this evening be giving the proposal due consideration; proposal will give the restaurant signage better exposure. Applicant advised hotel plans to open the first week of September and would like to have signage up prior to that time. C. Jacobs moved to continue the item to the meeting of August 25, 1986. Motion died for lack of a second. Size, height and total square footage of the combined pole sign was discussed as well as color of the awning signs. C. Jacobs found there were exceptional circumstances applicable to this property in its location which is difficult to see from the street, the proposal will consolidate two signs, it will not be detrimental to adjacent properties. C. Jacobs moved to amend the sign exception as Page 4 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 1986 proposed with staff conditions as listed in staff report, eliminating the monument sign (Sign A) and adding a 4' x 11'-10" double faced sign (about 95 SF) to the pole sign approved in the original sign exception, raising the top of the pole sign to 24' from grade. The motion included approval of the two signs on the awning as shown in the amendment to the sign exception and approval of the location of the 24' pole sign as shown on the sign permit approved for the Embassy Suites hotel. Second C. Schwalm. Motion approved on a 4-0 roll call vote, Cers Graham and Leahy absent. Appeal procedures were advised. CP requested three copies of the proposal approved this evening be delivered to the Planning Department on Tuesday, August 12, 1986. 5. VARIANCE TO ON-SITE PARKING REQUIREMENTS TO CREATE A SEPARATE PARCEL FOR AN EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING AT 1011 CADILLAC WAY Reference staff report, 8/11/86, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed details of the request, staff review, Planning staff comment, applicant's letter, study meeting questions. Five conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Discussion: variance, if approved, will run with the land, i.e., the office parcel; reference to property owner in condition #2 is the owner of 1011 Cadillac Way (a new owner who will own the building and the land under the building); office building on this site is a nonconforming use on R-4 zoned property, this has been a long term nonconforming situation; if office building became a conforming use it would still be nonconforming in parking, it would need 18 parking spaces and there are only 10 spaces on site. Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. Joe Harvey, 2205 Adeline Drive, was present representing the previous owner of the building and present owner of the building and land both of whom were out of town. His comments: he has been involved in the overall planning of the project through his contracting business, Nicolaides & Son; lease on the 10 required additional spaces has been executed and approved by Northpark and the new purchaser, it does allow for use of the spaces for 20 years; the lease definitely sets forth guidelines which will guarantee the spaces as required; there will be no expansion of the footprint of the building, no change in the exterior other than repainting; use of the property will continue as it has been used in the past, there will be no intensification of use; title of the building has transferred, item #7 of tonight's agenda addresses transfer of the land; lease for the parking spaces is a formal agreement, with specifics, and all conditions in the staff report can be met; the previous understanding for the spaces at Northpark was informal, it was not an issue with the city at the time since the land under the office building was still owned by Northpark and it wasn't considered off -premise parking. For the record Mr. Harvey stated he became involved in this application some time ago prior to his appointment as City Treasurer and he was not speaking this evening in any capacity other than as a general contractor. Page 5 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 1986 There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Jacobs found there were exceptional circumstances in that the office building was located in the R-4 (residential) zone, in the combination of building and land, and in the 20 year lease for parking spaces; it is a property right of the owner to use his buildingand it will not be detrimental to the area, there is a definite need for more parking in the city. C. Jacobs moved for approval of the variance application and for adoption of Commission Resolution Approving Variance with the conditions in the staff report. Second C. Garcia. Following discussion on the motion C. Jacobs amended her motion to eliminate reference to 20 years in conditions #3 and #5 and to include condition #6; amended motion accepted by C. Garcia. Revised conditions of approval follow: (1) that the parcel map as filed and recorded conform to the map submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped June 30, 1986; (2) that the 10 parking spaces on site be clearly marked and designated for the use of the office building's occupants and that the property owner shall be responsible for maintaining markings and enforcing use; (3) that the property owner secure and maintain a lease to use 10 parking spaces on the adjacent Northpark Apartments site for use from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and that these parking spaces be clearly marked/posted for the office use during these times, the posting to be installed and maintained by the owner of the office building with the consent of the Northpark Apartments management; (4) that the striping of the parking spaces leased from Northpark Apartments be maintained by the owner of the office building; (5) that if Northpark should ever convert to condominium use they would make arrangements to provide eight permanent parking spaces for the office or make arrangements to allow weekday, daytime use to continue; and (6) that the variance will become null and void should access to eight additional parking spaces no longer be available, loss of the variance would affect the amount of office use on site. Comment on the motion: am comfortable with this action, it has been a long term on-going use with a unique history, do not believe it will set a precedent for off -premise parking in the city, Commission has been hesitant to grant off -premise parking; the day might come when this site would be more valuable for R-4 (residential) use; shared use of parking makes sense and is reasonable as long as uses continue as they are. Motion approved on a 4-0 roll call vote, Cers Graham and Leahy absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 6. TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP TO CREATE A SEPARATE PARCEL FOR THE BUILDING AT 1011 CADILLAC WAY (NLY PORTION OF PARCEL 1, PARCEL MAP VOL. 13/18) CE Erbacher recommended changes to the conditions in Engineering's memo of July 21, 1986 so it would reflect Planning Commission action on the variance and that the map be forwarded to Council for approval with these revised conditions. Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Page 6 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 1986 C. Schwalm moved to recommend this tentative and final parcel map to City Council for approval with the following conditions: (1) a sanitary sewer easement be provided to Parcel A for sewer line to existing building; (2) ingress and egress easement to Parcel B be granted through the driveway area of Parcel A as approved by the City Engineer; and (3) a sanitary sewer and storm drain easement be dedicated to city by owner for approximately 7' x 94' adjacent to 20' storm sewer easement at Rollins Road adjacent to'sewer pump station. Second C. Jacobs; motion approved on a 4-0 roll call vote. 7. SPECIAL PERMIT TO EXTEND THE OPERATING HOURS OF THE WALGREEN DRUG STORE AT 1420 HOWARD AVENUE Reference staff report, 8/11/86, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed details of the request, staff review, applicant's letter, study meeting questions. Two conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Zoning code regulation requiring a special permit for hours of operation outside of 7:00 A.M. to 11:00 P.M. for grocery, drug and department stores was noted. This request is to extend the operating hours to midnight seven days a week. Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. David Devencenzi, store manager, stated their main concern is to keep the pharmacy open until midnight seven days a week. Walgreen's has been experimenting with 24 hour stores, the Millbrae store is open 24 hours. Walgreen's/Burlingame plan to put in a mini -grocery and other items which people might need late at night; grocery items would include ice cream, dairy products, frozen foods, non-alcoholic beverages, canned goods; no microwave items and no food cooked on the premises for immediate consumption would be sold from the site. They feel this will provide better service to the community. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Jacobs found this would be a benefit to the community, it would not be detrimental; the 24 hour store in Millbrae appears to be a success. C. Jacobs moved for approval of the special permit and for adoption of Commission Resolution Approving Special Permits with the following conditions: (1) that the hours of operation shall be limited to 8:00 A.M. to 12:00 midnight seven days a week; and (2) that this use permit shall be reviewed for compliance in one year (August, 1987). In comment on the motion it was noted that should take-out food service develop on this site a special permit would be required, staff will be reviewing for compliance with the conditions of approval in one year's time. Motion approved on a 4-0 roll call vote, Cers Graham and Leahy absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 8. SPECIAL PERMIT TO OPERATE A GROCERY STORE 24 HOURS A DAY, SAFEWAY STORES, INC., 1450 HOWARD AVENUE Continued to August 25, 1986. Page 7 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 1986 9. SPECIAL PERMIT - 8' FENCE TO ENCLOSE PARKING - 1710 GILBRETH ROAD Continued to August 25, 1986. Recess 9:00 P.M.; reconvene 9:10 P.M. ITEMS FOR STUDY 10. SPECIAL PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A 440 SF GARAGE WITH STORAGE LOFT AT 1427 CARLOS AVENUE Requests: is 15'-6" the overall height; how large is the electrical panel, what will it service; reasons for the height of the storage area; is object in the center of the front gable a window; what will be stored in the storage area. Item set for hearing August 25, 1986. 11. VARIANCE TO SUBDIVIDE AN EXISTING LOT AT 2740 EL PRADO ROAD, LEAVING THE REAR LOT AREA WITHOUT FRONTAGE ON A PUBLIC STREET Requests: are there elevations/site plan/building pad for a future house; should soils report be required at this time; access for the new parcel; is new parcel buildable. Item set for hearing August 25, 1986. 12. SPECIAL PERMIT AMENDMENT - A CHILD'S WAY - 801 HOWARD AVENUE Requests: age of students; will the same teachers extend their hours or will there be additional teachers with split shifts. Item set for hearing August 25, 1986. 13. MASTER SIGN PROGRAM - CROSBY COMMONS - 1375 BURLINGAME AVENUE Requests: uniformity of the window and door signs; clarify signs described in the sign permit application and those shown on the plans; how will signs be combined on one window; information on size and how many windows and doors; total square footage on primary and secondary frontages; will there be a directory sign; how will interior shops be identified. Item set for hearing August 25, 1986. 14. SPECIAL PERMIT AMENDMENT TO ALLOW AN EXISTING BUILDING FORMERLY USED FOR A DAYCARE OPERATION TO BE USED FOR CHURCH RELATED ACTIVITIES AT 110 LORTON AVENUE Requests: will bingo games be one of the uses; will handicap access be required, will they require a ramp; with this increase in use, are there hours/noise restrictions in the area; Fire Department requirement for maximum occupancy of the building. Item set for hearing August 25, 1986. 15. PARKING VARIANCE - 1320-50 HOWARD AVENUE Requests: number of parking spaces needed if only the first floor were used; determination by the City Attorney, in response to the applicant's submittal, regarding the Burlingame Avenue Parking Page 8 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 1986 Assessment District regulations as they apply to this property; has building been safety checked, is it structurally sound; why is applicant proposing this combination of uses, why not uses which minimize parking demand; confirm usable space of the building; if building were torn down is there a use which could go in without providing parking; if the building had not been abandoned what uses would be allowed without providing parking. Item set for hearing September 8, 1986 at the request of the applicant. PERMIT REVIEW The following permit reviews were accepted: 1208 Donnelly Avenue (fitness center) 1504 Adeline Drive (dry cleaning agency) - staff is pursuing the problem of excessive signage on this site 1480-1510 Rollins Road (landscaping requirements) 1881 Rollins Road (parcel service) 50 and 70 Star Way (landscape and parking requirements) - staff is pursuing striping of the parking spaces 2109 Broadway (private school) PLANNER REPORTS CP Monroe reviewed Council actions at its August 4, 1986 meeting. - Specific Planning Concerns Raised by Commission for Future Action This item was continued to a future agenda. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Charles F. Schwalm Vice Chairman