Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1987.05.11CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 11, 1987 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Chairman Giomi on Monday, May 11, 1987 at 7:30 P.M. R OT.T. r A T.T. Present: Commissioners Ellis, Giomi, H. Graham, S. Graham, Jacobs, Leahy Absent: Commissioner Garcia Staff Present: City Planner Margaret Monroe, City Engineer Frank Erbacher, Fire Marshal Ken Musso MINUTES - The minutes of the April 27, 1987 meeting were unanimously approved. AGENDA - Order of the agenda approved. ELECTION OF OFFICERS C. Jacobs thanked Chm. Giomi for her guidance the past year and nominated her as Chairman for a second year, seconded by C. H.Graham, nominations were closed. Nannette Giomi was elected Chairman unanimously. C. H.Graham nominated Ruth Jacobs for Vice Chairman, seconded by C. S.Graham, nominations were closed. Ruth Jacobs was elected Vice Chairman unanimously. C. Jacobs nominated Harry Graham for secretary, seconded by C. Leahy, nominations were closed. Harry Graham was elected secretary unanimously. ITEMS FOR ACTION 1. VARIANCE FOR ON-SITE PARKING AND LOT COVERAGE FOR AN ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 1137 HAMILTON LANE, ZONED R-1 Reference staff report, 5/11/87, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed details of the request, staff review, Planning staff comment, applicant's letter. One condition was suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. Robert Fiorito, applicant, discussed his need to expand since he has two children and only a two bedroom home. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. It was pointed out the plans were misnumbered as to bedrooms, there is no fourth bedroom, applicant is adding a third bedroom only. Page 2 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes May 11, 1987 C. H.Graham noted maximum lot coverage is exceeded only a minimal amount; he found there were exceptional circumstances in that it would be impossible to add a second parking space without reducing the floor plan which would be a hardship upon the applicant; that the variances were necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a property right of the owner considering the size of his family and the small house; that it would not be detrimental to the public or injurious to other property owners in the area, no neighbors have complained; and it would not affect the zoning plan of the city, the site would remain R-1. C. H.Graham moved for approval of the two variances with the following condition: (1) that the project as built should conform to the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped April 24, 1987. Second C. S.Graham; motion approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Garcia absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 2. SIGN EXCEPTION TO ALLOW NUMBER OF SIGNS TO EXCEED THAT PERMITTED BY CODE AND TO ALLOW A POLE SIGN AT 1100 BROADWAY, ZONED C-1 Reference staff report, 5/11/87, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed details of the request, staff review, study meeting questions. Two conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Picture of the pole with proposed signage was distributed. Responding to a question, CP advised signs which indicate type of gas, service, etc. are not counted in signage square footage. Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. Jeff Adams, Designers Collective Incorporated, representing the applicant, clarified they were requesting a 20' pole sign, not 15'-4"; they were agreeable to the suggested conditions; they would prefer to pursue the alternative in the CE's memo of May 5, 1987 (install the sign as originally proposed with removal and relocation at a later date) rather than install the pole sign at this time to meet all code requirements based on proposed new property lines at the corner; they felt that once the street is widened the station may cease operation. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. During Commission discussion it was determined if the conditions of the CE's May 5, 1987 memo are included in approval any property owner would be required to meet them. C. Jacobs found approval would not be a grant of special privilege, the sign program is within the allowed square footage, it is not inconsistent with signage of other stations in the area. C. Jacobs moved for approval of the sign exception with the following conditions: (1) that the conditions of the Chief Building Inspector's November 24, 1986 memo and the City Engineer's May 5, 1987 memo shall be met; and (2) that the signs as described in the sign permit application shall be installed as shown on the site plan dated December 4, 1986 with the adjustment to the pole sign placement as required by the City Engineer. Second C. H.Graham; motion approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Garcia absent. Appeal procedures were advised. Page 3 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes May 11, 1987 3. SPECIAL PERMIT AMENDMENT - DRY CLEANING SERVICE - 1883 EL CAMINO REAL - ZONED C-1 Item continued to the May 26 1987 meeting (reference May 3, 1987 letter, Howard R. Hill, Holiday Cleaners). 4. SPECIAL PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR A SPECIALTY GROCERY STORE TO ALLOW TAKE-OUT FOOD SERVICE AT 346 LORTON AVENUE, ZONED C-2, SUB AREA B Reference staff report, 5/11/87, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed details of the request, staff review, applicant's letter, study meeting questions and applicant's response. CP advised all Fire Department requirements must be met prior to any cooking on site. Four conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Letters in opposition were noted from: Oscar Reyn, a tenant in the building (April 27, 1987) and Don Sabatini, owner of property on both sides of this building (May 11, 1987). Determinations: this property is in escrow, it has not closed; when originally approved in February, 1987 use of the kitchen was allowed; it was staff's suggestion that take-out be allowed only until 9:00 P.M.; there are several take-out businesses in the area; this site could not be a restaurant because it cannot meet the parking requirements. Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. Parham Noori Esfandiari, applicant, was present. He stated he has not been preparing food on site since the Fire Department required him to stop until all regulations were met; he had met all conditions of the original permit; he has a long term lease for this space; he would not object to limitation of take-out hours to 7:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M.; he understood any change in the operation of his business would require amendment of the special permit. There were no audience comments in favor. Speaking in opposition, Oscar Reyn, real estate broker and tenant of this building: applicant has three year lease and contract does not call for take-out food; building has no sprinkler system; property owner will be obligated to take care of garbage, this is not fair to a new owner; he and others are negotiating with the estate to purchase the property, escrow should close in about a month. Applicant stated he thought it would take longer than one month before the property is sold; regarding walk-in customers, Nate's across the street will attract people many of whom will walk; his present business is lunchtime walk-in trade. There were no further audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Responding to Commission question, Ken Musso, Fire Marshal, stated the basement of this building is sprinklered, none of the floors above are sprinklered; cooking is done on the first floor; Fire Department made site inspection and found serious code violations which must be rectified before applicant can continue cooking. Page 4 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes May 11, 1987 Commission/staff discussion: at the time of original approval Fire Department had no comments (a site inspection was made subsequently), at that time the Building Inspector and County Health Inspector both listed corrections that were needed; Fire Marshal commented they had no problem with the use but the Fire Code must be met. Commission concerns/comments: parking problems in the area; the fact that applicant failed to meet Fire Code requirements and started cooking on site, if there was a misunderstanding there was ample opportunity to ask city personnel to come out and check the site; applicant is entitled to what he is asking for, the same problems will continue until the city changes the situation, it is a small operation; a jump from grocery to take-out is a big jump, it would be a small jump after that from take-out to restaurant; applicant is asking for a more intense use without compliance with the initial conditions, reluctant to grant increased usage under these circumstances. With the statement the original permit was for a small grocery, this proposal would be an intensity of use, other restaurants in the area were there before this use, the area is a major concern, applicant can still have his grocery business if he complies with code, C. Jacobs moved for denial of the special permit amendment for expansion. Second C. S.Graham. Comment on the motion: doubt if this would be a more intense use than the bar which was there three years ago, if there is objection think the city should study the whole area; bar was not open early in the morning. Motion to deny was approved on a 5-1 roll call vote, C. H.Graham dissenting, C. Garcia absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 5. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW AN AUTO BODY AND AUTO REPAIR SERVICE AT 1305 NORTH CAROLAN AVENUE, ZONED M-1 Reference staff report, 5/11/87, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed details of the request, staff review, Planning staff comment, applicant's letter. Four conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. CE advised the easement at the rear has been studied and is considered adequate by staff, Building and Fire Code requirements regarding exiting need to be addressed. Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. Ray Cook, applicant and Steve Horn, representing the property owner were present. Mr. Cook stated he has been in this business for 30 years, many of them in Burlingame; he is familiar with city requirements and finds nothing he cannot comply with; he was in favor of upgrading the rear entrance and had no objections to staff's requirements. Mr. Horn stated the property owner and the two immediate neighbors were in favor of this request. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Commending the applicant on his application and noting he has a good record in Burlingame, C. S.Graham moved for approval of the special Page 5 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes May 11, 1987 permit and for adoption of Commission Resolution Approving Special Permits with the following conditions: (1) that the conditions of the City Engineer's April 13, 1987 memo, the Chief Building Inspector's April 20, 1987 memo and the Fire Marshal's April 16, 1987 memo shall be met; (2) that the on-site parking visible from the street shall be used only from 7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. daily, no cars to be worked on shall be stored in this area, and that all employees shall park inside the building; (3) that all requirements of the Uniform Fire Code and Uniform Building Code regarding this business shall be met prior to occupancy; and (4) that this use permit shall be reviewed in one year (May, 1988) and each two years thereafter. Second C. Leahy. Motion approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Garcia absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 6. SPECIAL PERMIT - CAR RENTAL OPERATION - 856 MITTEN ROAD Continued at request of applicant. 7. REVIEW OF LIGHTING PLAN FOR PUTNAM-MAZDA DEALERSHIP, 3 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-2, SUB AREA D Reference staff report, 5/11/87, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed Commission's previous review of the lighting situation on this site and its requirements to be included in the final lighting plan as well as architect's subsequent letter and plans addressing items of concern. Staff has determined a fence exception is not required for the fence to be placed on the existing railing of the parking deck. The submitted plans did not address timing of the lights; subsequently a letter was received (May 5, 1987 from Marty Putnam) regarding timing. CP discussed staff review, architect's meeting with neighbors which resolved the privacy and lighting problems, complaint by another neighbor concerning light from the service area which has also been resolved. Seven conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Commission noted redwood slat fence had been changed to aluminum slats; staff believed this material had been discussed with the concerned apartment dwellers. Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. Joe Putnam, property owner and George Avanessian, architect were present. Mr. Putnam requested illumination on California Drive be allowed until 11:00 P.M. He commented they had met personally with the neighbors and discussed their concerns, agreement had been reached to use aluminum slats rather than redwood slats for the fence, aluminum will provide a tighter weave and will be an off-white/beige color, nonreflective. Commission complimented applicants on their cooperation with neighbors and effort to resolve the concerns. Mr. Avanessian noted a possible delay in receipt of the fence in view of having to cancel the order twice due to length of the city review process, if it is not now in stock it could take longer than 30 days to install the fence (condition #4); they also requested lights be Page 6 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes May 11, 1987 allowed on until 10:00 P.M. on the deck and until 11:00 P.M. on California Drive. He explained the reason lights on California could not be tilted until the fence is constructed was because of their desire to use necessary equipment once for both jobs. It was suggested they be allowed 60 days to install the fence. Lee Correy, 16 Highland Avenue, commented the conditions generally agree with neighbors' discussions with the architect. She was assured the security lights which would be on all night would be no problem, they are located on the lower decks almost below ground. She felt the delay in installing the fence was understandable and the neighbors did not object to aluminum slats. There were no further audience comments and the public hearing was closed. C. H.Graham moved for approval of the lighting plan as submitted with the following conditions: (1) that the conditions of the Chief Building Inspector's March 16, 1987 memo shall be met; (2) that within 30 days shades shall be installed on the two light fixtures closest to the apartment building on the parking deck; (3) that within 60 days the light fixtures on the poles along California Drive shall be tilted so that the direct light stays on the 3 California Drive site; (4) that within 60 days a building permit shall be received and a 4' high chain link fence with aluminum slats shall be placed on top of the 3.5' existing solid railing along the rear 96' of the parking deck and this fence shall be maintained by the property owner at 3 California Drive; (5) that within 10 days the lights shall be placed seven days a week on the following schedule: all lights on the parking deck shall be turned off at 10:00 P.M., all lights illuminating the car sales area fronting on California Drive (pole mounted and wall mounted) shall be turned off by 11:00 P.M. or earlier if there are no customers on site, the wall lights on Peninsula Avenue shall be kept on from dusk to dawn and there shall be no other exterior lights on the site; there shall be four security lights illuminating the lower parking deck all night; (6) that any change to any aspect of this lighting plan shall require application to the Planning Department and amendment to this plan; and (7) that this plan shall be reviewed for compliance with all of its conditions in 60 days, in six months and every 18 months thereafter. Second C. Leahy. Motion was approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Garcia absent. Appeal procedures were advised. The Chair thanked all parties concerned for working together to resolve their differences. FROM THE FLOOR There were no public comments. Recess 8:50 P.M.; reconvene 9:05 P.M. Page 7 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes May 11, 1987 ITEMS FOR STUDY 8. SPECIAL PERMIT AMENDMENT TO EXPAND AN EXISTING PRIVATE SCHOOL AT ROOSEVELT SCHOOL, 2109 BROADWAY Requests: has this school reached the limits allowed in the original permit; number of employees at True Learning Center. Item set for public hearing on Tuesday, May 26, 1987. 9. SPECIAL PERMIT - GARAGE ADDITION - 926 CHULA VISTA AVENUE Requests: ceiling height in storage area; does applicant meet side and front setback requirements; why is he asking for this height; clarify City Engineer's comments; utilities/other uses in the garage. Item set for public hearing Tuesday, May 26, 1987. 10. PARKING VARIANCE - 723 CALIFORNIA DRIVE Requests: letter from applicant addressing variance requirements; when could Commissioners visit the site; is there any parking assigned to this site; history of previous uses on the site and in the building; is the landowner trust a recent estate. Item set for public hearing Tuesday, May 26, 1987. 11. TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP - 1440 COLUMBUS AVENUE Requests: average lot size in that neighborhood; is there a proposal for improvements accompanying the map. Item set for public hearing Tuesday, May 26, 1987. 12. TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP - 45 EL CAMINO REAL Request: when was this approved for apartment development. Item set for public hearing Tuesday, May 26, 1987. PLANNER REPORTS C. Mike Ellis reviewed Council actions at its May 4, 1987 regular meeting. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:32 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Robert J. Leahy, Secretary