Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1987.02.09i CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 9, 1987 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Chairman Giomi on Monday, February 9, 1987 at 7:80 P.M. Dr1T.T. r'AT.T. Present: Commissioners Garcia, Giomi, H. Graham, S. Graham, Jacobs, Schwalm Absent: Commissioner Leahy Staff Present: City Planner Margaret Monroe; City Attorney Jerome Coleman; City Engineer Frank Erbacher MINUTES - The minutes of the January 26, 1987 meeting were unanimously approved. AGENDA - Order of the agenda approved. ITEMS FOR ACTION 1. SPECIAL PERMIT - CHILDREN'S THEATER TRAINING PROGRAM - 2220 SUMMIT DRIVE, ZONED R-1 Item continued; CP advised it will be renoticed at the time it is scheduled on a future agenda. 2. TWO SPECIAL PERMITS TO ALLOW A 460 SF DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AT 2845 RIVERA DRIVE, ZONED R-1 Reference staff report, 2/9/87, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed this request to allow a detached accessory structure which would have less than the required 4' separation from the main structure and would exceed allowed amount of storage area. She discussed details of the request, staff review, Planning staff comment, applicant's letter, answers to study meeting questions, applicant's home occupation permit for his business as the Marsh Fence & Deck Co. Three conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Commissioners asked why framing is partially completed; was this job red tagged by the Building Department; will the city allow an 8' driveway (staff advised city does not consider 8' to be legal access). Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. John Marsh, applicant, was present. His comments: remeasuring had indicated the narrowest point between property line and structure was 9-1/21; he had never been red tagged; the main reason for this request is to gain a sundeck; staff's suggested conditions were acceptable including a 7' ceiling height inside the storage area. Applicant stated he would never convert Page 2 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 9, 1987 the storage area since the house will have five bedrooms and four baths. Commission/applicant discussion: existing framing is for a room addition for which he has received a building permit; when this was in process he had the contractor extend the brick walls for retaining walls for the proposed accessory structure; he keeps no lumber on the site for his fence and deck business.but buys materials every day, he does not have a truck on site at most times. Applicant noted there are trees in the next yard in front of his lot which would provide screening, the deck will be higher and look down the hill across rear yards toward the airport; entire property will be enclosed with 6' fences. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Garcia commented there have been no adverse comments from staff, no objections from neighbors, the stairwell meets code and leaves a small additional area for storage, the sundeck will enhance applicant's view. C. Garcia moved for approval of the two special permits and for adoption of Commission Resolution Approving Special Permits with the following conditions: (1) that as built the accessory structure shall conform to the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped December 30, 1986 except that the ceiling clearance inside the storage area shall not exceed 71; (2) that the 21' x 24' accessory structure shall never be used to meet the covered on-site parking requirements for this lot or for storage for equipment or materials for a home occupation; and (3) that this structure shall be built to all the applicable requirements of the Uniform Building and Uniform Fire Codes. Second C. Schwalm; motion approved 6-0 on roll call vote, C. Leahy absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 3. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW A 6' DIAMETER SATELLITE DISH ANTENNA ON THE ROOF AT 1440 CHAPIN AVENUE, ZONED C-1 Reference staff report, 2/9/87, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed details of the request, staff review, Planning staff comment, applicant's letters, study meeting questions, applicant's diagrams supporting his contention that enclosing the dish would make it more visible. Three conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Proposed location of the dish and applicant's screening diagrams were discussed. Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. Peter Pfau, Holt & Hinshaw Architects, discussed the proposal with Commission. He stated enclosing the dish would require moving it closer to the street, the enclosure would be more visible than the dish and a corner would have to be left out of the enclosure to the south for reception, the proposed location was chosen because the existing parapet and angle of view from the street screens the dish from the street and cannot be seen from the residential area behind. David Harrison, Patson Development Co., advised they propose to place the dish in front of the mechanical enclosure, this enclosure is 10' high in order to screen the equipment on the roof, the residential areas behind the building would not see the dish, from some oblique angles down the street the tip of Page 3 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 9, 1987 the dish would be visible, if the dish were enclosed one corner would have to be left open in order to allow the dish to work so it would still be visible from the street at oblique angles, the dish is fixed in place but has to rotate and angle up and down. Discussion continued regarding location of the dish for least visibility, size and height of the installation, angle of operation. Comment: a 5' enclosure around the 8' high dish except for the south side might look neater than the dish itself. There were no audience comments in favor. Mrs. Leo Paslin, 1435 Bellevue Avenue, noted it had been stated the dish would not be visible to residents behind the project and confirmed it would not block any more sunlight than would be blocked by the building itself. There were no further audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Commission discussion/comment: possibility of extending the parapet (staff advised extending the parapet would extend height of the building itself and require a height exception); it might be more offensive to enclose the dish; dish should have been built into the design of the building. C. S.Graham found this dish with 6" visibility to be preferable to those at -grade at some of the city's hotels. She then moved for approval of the special permit and for adoption of Commission Resolution Approving Special Permits with the following conditions: (1) that the 6' diameter dish mounted so that the top of the dish does not exceed 8' from the surface of the roof shall be located as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped December 31, 1986; (2) that the dish shall be painted a nonreflective matte white color and the color and nonreflective quality shall be maintained by the property owner; and (3) that this shall be the only dish antenna to be placed on the roof of this structure. Second C. H.Graham. Comment on the motion: think Commission should determine whether they wish the antenna to be seen, a fence to be seen or nothing to be seen; would rather see 6" of the tip of the dish than a bulky enclosure. Motion was approved on a 4-2 roll call vote, Cers Garcia and Jacobs dissenting, C. Leahy absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 4. SIGN EXCEPTION AMENDMENT FOR EMBASSY SUITES HOTEL, 150 ANZA BOULEVARD, ZONED C-4 Reference staff reports (Amendment to Sign Exception and Revisions to Sign Exception Amendment), 2/9/87, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed the item noting the original (January 1987) and revised (February 1987) applications. She discussed comparison with existing hotel signage in the area, staff review, Planning staff comment, applicant's justification for the request, study meeting questions. Two conditions were suggested should Commission approve the amendment proposed in January 1987, three conditions if the February 1987 proposal were approved. Commission/staff comment: CE had no concern about the directional signs since they are proposed at 5-1/2' off the ground; had thought the Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 February 9, 1987 January proposal was a need of the applicant, was confused about the February revision. Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. Don Jackel, representing Embassy Suites, was present and noted Vera Jorgenson, general manager of the hotel, was present also. His comments: evaluation of functioning of this property is still taking place, it was built initially with a restaurant as a component, the restaurant was not finalized until the hotel was partially completed and there was lack of coordination with the floor plan and parking; the site fronts on water with parking only on the two ends of the building; in revamping the January proposal they hope to more clearly delineate the two parts of the property (restaurant and lobby) and have the ability to direct traffic into the proper parking lots; Embassy Suites prefers that all the coordination of the hotel and restaurant be done well in advance, unfortunately this was not the case in this instance. Commissioners noted the confusion which exists about where to park at this hotel and location of entrances. Mr. Jackel stated part of Embassy Suites' success has been its free breakfasts and free cocktail hour, there is a problem with people coming to the restaurant from the back entrance since that is the location of free cocktails, they are trying to intelligently lead people to the right parking lot and proper entrance. Further Commission comment: will this new proposal be better or worse than the previous one; believe the February revision is a better proposal, putting a sign at the southern and northern driveways. Applicant advised there is a private sidewalk from the rear to Bobby McGee's entrance. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Further discussion: prefer the revised proposal, it clarifies the parking; have hotels been allowed to limit parking to hotel guests only (staff advised the parking requirement is one space per room for whatever is involved on the site; there are no other hotels in the city whose parking is divided this way; hotels have not been allowed to restrict parking exclusively to specific on-site uses). C. S.Graham moved for approval of the revised (February 1987) sign exception amendment with the following conditions: (1) that the conditions of the City Engineer's memo of January 21,1987 shall be met; (2) that the signage program on the primary frontage shall be changed to remove the 241, 301 SF free-standing pole sign and to place a 19'-6" high 197 SF double faced free-standing pole sign at the entrance to the south parking lot as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped February 5, 1987 and to place a 12' high, 94.6 SF double faced free-standing pole sign at the north driveway as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped February 5, 1987; and (3) that two 3 SF directional signs shall be mounted on the free-standing poles 5'-6" above grade as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped February 5, 1987. Page 5 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 9, 1987 In support of her motion C. S.Graham found this would not be a grant of special privilege, it would benefit the general public; applicants are not trying to segregate hotel versus restaurant parking, just making it somewhat more clear; there are special circumstances in that this site has two separate parking lots for the building. Motion was seconded by C. H.Graham and approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Leahy absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 5. EXTENSION OF PLANNING APPROVAL FOR TWO SPECIAL PERMITS FOR A RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY FOR THE ELDERLY AT 1221 BAYSWATER AVENUE, ZONED R-4 Reference staff report, 2/9/87, with attachment. CP Monroe reviewed her staff memo. C. Jacobs moved to approve a one year extension to January 6, 1988 of the Planning approvals for this project. Second C. S.Graham; motion approved unanimously on voice vote, C. Leahy absent. MINOR MODIFICATIONS 6. TO REMODEL AN EXISTING ATTIC BY ADDING TWO BEDROOMS AND A BATH AT 2705 ADELINE DRIVE, ZONED R-1 7. TO ALLOW A THIRD BEDROOM TO BE ADDED AT GRADE AT THE REAR OF THE HOUSE AT 1115 EASTMOOR ROAD, ZONED R-1 Neither of these items were called up for full review. FROM THE FLOOR There were no comments from the audience. ITEMS FOR STUDY 8. SIGN EXCEPTION - MILLS -PENINSULA HOSPITALS - 1783 EL CAMINO REAL Item set for public hearing February 23, 1987. 9. SPECIAL PERMIT - SELF DEFENSE CLASSES - 211 WEST LANE Requests: where will they park at 3:30 and 5:45 P.M.; is there access to this area from California Drive; what is the attendance at the 3:30 and 5:00 P.M. adult classes and the 3:30 and 5:45 P.M. children's classes; survey of existing parking at 3:45 and 5:45 P.M.; research parking assignments for all permits issued on this site; check building access to bathrooms. Item set for public hearing February 23, 1987. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Zoning Aide memo, 2/5/87, special permit review, 1369 North Carolan Avenue. City Manager memo re: Commissioner Attendance --Meetings Canceled Due to Lack of Quorum (1-22-87/2-3-87) Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 February 9, 1987 Letter (February 2, 1987) to Planning Commission Chairman from President of San Mateo County Board of Supervisors, re: Housing and Traffic Conference, Thursday, April 30, 1987. PLANNER REPORT C. Garcia reviewed Council actions at its February 2, 1987 regular meeting. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:15 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Charles F. Schwalm Vice Chairman