HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1987.02.23CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 23, 1987
CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was
called to order by Chairman Giomi on Monday, February 23, 1987 at
7:32 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Garcia, Giomi, H. Graham, S. Graham,
Jacobs, Leahy, Schwalm
Absent: None
Staff Present: City Planner Margaret Monroe; City Attorney Jerome
Coleman; City Engineer Frank Erbacher
MINUTES - The minutes of the February 9, 1987 meeting were unanimously
approved with the following correction: item 2, page 2,
second paragraph, line 9, delete "deck and".
AGENDA - Order of the agenda approved.
ITEMS FOR ACTION
1. REQUEST FOR TENTATIVE MAP EXTENSION, PORTION OF BLOCK 21,
BURLINGAME HILLS NO. 2, 2840 CANYON ROAD
Reference staff report, 2/23/87, with attachments. CE Erbacher
reviewed this request. Applicant has complied with the condition to
close the driveway at the corner and now has the required 24' backup
from the garage to the rear. Staff recommended approval of tentative
map extension to June 7, 1987 which is State Map Act maximum limit.
Vladimir Sommer, applicant, stated he had tried to comply with all
conditions, family illness had caused the delay in requesting this
extension.
C. Jacobs moved to approve tentative map extension to June 7, 1987 with
all previous conditions. Second C. H.Graham; motion approved
unanimously on voice vote.
2. SIGN EXCEPTION FOR TWO SIGNS AT PENINSULA HOSPITAL, 1783 EL CAMINO
REAL, ZONED UNCLASSIFIED
Reference staff report, 2/23/87, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed
this application to replace the face of the existing 87.5 SF double
faced 20' tall pole sign and to add a 33 SF double faced monument sign
on the E1 Camino Real frontage. She discussed details of the request,
staff review, Planning staff comment, applicant's letter and
justification for the request. Two conditions were suggested for
consideration at the public hearing. It was determined no changes have
been proposed as yet for any other signs on site.
Page 2
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 23, 1987
Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. Applicant, James DuCharme, was
present. Commission/applicant discussion: application has indicated a
plan for consolidation of signs, concern that the emergency entrance
sign on site might be removed; applicant stated this sign would not be
eliminated with the present proposal; possibility of eliminating the
pole sign and adding a more elaborate monument sign; applicant stated
hospital had not considered this, the pole sign was existing and in
good condition. There were no audience comments and the public hearing
was closed.
C. S.Graham found there were special circumstances applicable to this
property in that the new signage is necessary with the merger of the
two hospitals, there is a need to show the new logo; a monument sign
would be better than the existing multiple signs it will replace.
C. S.Graham moved for approval of the sign exception with the following
conditions: (1) that the placement of the signs as installed shall
conform to the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date
stamped January 9, 1987 and to the description in the sign permit
application date stamped January 9, 1987; and (2) that any additional
signage on this site would require an amendment to this sign permit.
Second C. Schwalm.
Additional findings: the fact that it is a hospital and has a special
community need; topography of the site with hospital on the hill as
well as the type of services offered lends itself to retaining the pole
sign in addition to the monument sign. Motion approved on a 7-0 roll
call vote. Appeal procedures were advised.
3. SPECIAL PERMITS FOR NON -AUTO RELATED USE AND CLASSROOM USE AT
211 WEST LANE, ZONED C-2, SUB -AREA D
Reference staff report, 2/23/87, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed
this request to allow self defense classes. She discussed details of
the proposal, staff review, Planning staff comment, applicant's letter,
study meeting questions. Four conditions were suggested for
consideration at the public hearing.
Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. Frank Bianchi, applicant, and
Richard Schiller, guarantor of the lease on this property, were
present. They advised their parking survey had indicated the parking
area was 3/4 full in the afternoon, in the evening when most of their
parking need is generated the area is empty, there is designated
parking in front of their door; when they moved from California Drive
to this location they were unaware of the zoning on the property and
the need for a special permit.
Responding to Commission questions, applicants had concern about
suggested condition #1 which limits the daytime adult classes on
Monday, Wednesday and Friday to five people, they did not want to limit
number of students to number of designated parking spaces (five), they
would be willing to ensure no more than five spaces were used, it would
be possible to have 15 students in a class but use only five parking
Page 3
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 23, 1987
stalls; children come to class at designated times, adults come when
they can, children are dropped off and picked up; there is one
instructor on site for each class, classes vary in size; adult classes
have 5-10 people in the afternoon; it would be difficult for the
business to stay in operation with only 2-3 students in the morning,
they would like to have 7-9 adult students in the morning and afternoon
classes. Applicants felt enforcement of parking by the instructor
could be handled without restricting the size of daytime classes, they
could encourage evening attendance, many students could ride bikes,
take buses or walk if they were working in the area. This business
left its previous site to find a location with more space, it had been
there for 10-12 years but the estate of the property owner imposed
rental rates they could not afford, they then found the proposed site
which was affordable and a few square feet larger.
Commission expressed concern about the number of students in the
Monday, Wednesday and Friday daytime adult classes, this could vary
from three to eight or 10 people; applicant's five year projection was
noted which indicated evening classes were expected to more than
double. Applicant stated most people who train also work and long term
students train in the evening; they hoped to increase the evening
classes, particularly since that appears more compatible with available
parking in the area; they were aware of the suggested condition
concerning use of the parking area and special permit expiration should
lease of the parking spaces be terminated; their lease is for two years
with a two year option and they expect during this period to consider
the present situation and possibly look for alternative space.
A Commissioner asked if it would help to change the student age from
less than 16 to less than 18; applicant explained student classes are
for 12 and under, they believe it is unsafe for 12 year olds to train
with 16 year olds. Applicants would be satisfied with a limit of 10
students for the 10:30 A.M. and 3:30 P.M. classes and respond to any
problems at the time of the six month review; regarding Saturday
classes, they had found it was necessary to separate adults and
children, there is a Saturday class restricted to children and an
advanced adult class averaging two or three people Saturday afternoon;
one instructor does work a 15 hour day but it is not continuous as
there are open time slots throughout the day.
The following members of the audience spoke in favor of the
application: Mary Ann Barrett, 1206 Lincoln Avenue; a Burlingame High
School student; Joshua Schiller, 1635 Hunt Drive; Betsy Schiller, 1635
Hunt Drive; Nancy McKay, Hillsborough; Dave Loutzenheiser, 63 Loma
Vista Drive. Their comments: have been working out at this studio for
eight years and have great respect for the school's philosophy, if it
would help would park two blocks away, there are usually advanced
students present who can help the one instructor; support the proposal
and applicant's request for classes larger than five people, parking is
not a major problem as students can carpool, take the bus or walk; have
been training for 4-1/2 years and would like to continue, this
training teaches more than self defense, it teaches a respect for
Page 4
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 23, 1987
one's self and for others; have experienced no deficiencies in parking
at the new location even with an inconsistent schedule, at 5:30 P.M.
the parking lot is empty; drive to class and carpool, sometimes with
two or three students; carpool for my children and other children and
generally do not stay downtown, this location is much easier for
drop-off than the previous one; this school presents a positive
environment and creates athletic and mental discipline. A letter in
support was read from Pam Rosenblum,,2958 Arguello Drive who felt the
school is a real opportunity for students of all ages, it teaches self-
confidence and self-esteem. There were no further audience comments
and the public hearing was closed.
Commission comment/discussion: am aware of the benefits of this type of
class but concerned about classroom use in the area because of parking,
if applicants can live with five person adult classes during the
daytime would vote to approve; believe this is the only karate school
in the city, perhaps applicant could increase number of classes to
compensate for the smaller class size; Commission confirmed with
applicant the student population is such that in order to break even
they need to have as many as 10 students in the morning and afternoon
classes, with more classes each would probably have only two students
and would not be economically feasible; instituting another class when
one class reached five students was not feasible because applicants had
found they need to be flexible in order to retain students. Applicant
added this is the only martial arts school in the city and has been for
the past 10 years, it is a value, to the community.
Additional Commission comment: support the classes, there is a need,
but have a problem with the location; applicant has said he cannot
survive if approved with the four suggested conditions; concern that
supervision of parking by the applicant is not feasible. Responding to
a question, applicants advised they could live with these conditions if
they must. The Chair noted Commission consensus seems to be this use
would be good for the community but there is a concern about parking in
the area; with review in six months time the city has control.
C. H.Graham moved to grant these special permits with the conditions
listed in the staff report; second C. Leahy.
C. Jacobs moved to amend the motion with a change in condition #1 to
increase maximum class size to eight. Second C. Schwalm; motion for
amendment was approved on a 5-2 roll call vote, Cers H.Graham and
S.Graham dissenting.
The amended motion with adoption of Commission Resolution Approving
Special Permits passed on a 5-2 roll call vote, Cers H.Graham and
S.Graham dissenting, with the following conditions: (1) that a 1,600 SF
area at 211 West Lane shall be used for self defense classes Monday,
Wednesday and Friday for adults from 10:30 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. where the
maximum class size shall not exceed eight and Monday, Wednesday and
Friday from 6:00 P.M. to 9:30 P.M. where the maximum class size shall
not exceed 15 persons over 18; (2) that classes on Tuesday and
Page 5
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 23, 1987
Thursday afternoons from 3:30 P.M. to 5:45 P.M. shall be for children
only (less than 16 years of age) and shall be limited to a maximum of
15 students, Tuesday and Thursday evening classes from 8:00 P.M. to
9:30 P.M. and Saturday classes from 11:00 A.M. to 1:00 P.M. shall be
limited to a maximum of 15 students of all ages; (3) that five spaces
of the 20 spaces leased by the property on the adjacent S.P. right-
of-way shall be designated and signed for the exclusive use of this
business; and (4) that these use permits shall be reviewed for
compliance with the conditions in six months time (August, 1987) and
every two years thereafter, and that this use permit shall expire if
the lease to the 20 parking spaces on the S.P. right-of-way is ever
terminated.
Appeal procedures were advised.
FROM THE FLOOR
There were no audience comments.
C. Schwalm was excused at 8:50 P.M.
STUDY ITEMS
4. SPECIAL PERMIT - TAKE-OUT FOOD SERVICE - 725 CALIFORNIA DRIVE
Requests: what type of curb markings are in front of this site; is
there parking behind on San Mateo Avenue; is there an entrance at the
rear; check parking at end of the building, is it on another property;
clarify exiting at the rear. Item set for public hearing March 9,
1987.
5. SPECIAL PERMIT - AUTO DETAILING - 1405 NORTH CAROLAN AVENUE
Requests: how will they handle washing of cars; on-site parking
available for this use; volume of business, number of cars per day; use
of area designated 'additional storage'. Item set for public hearing
March 9, 1987.
PLANNER REPORTS
- Special Permit review - 1450 Howard Avenue
Chm. Giomi reviewed Council actions at its February 17, 1987 regular
meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:10 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Robert J. Leahy, Secretary